645D- how low will it go? ...

normhead · 09-02-2013, 12:01 PM

When the 645D came out, it was over 10k, now it's down to 7... how low will it go? The new one hasn't been announced yet, this one should go even lower when it is. You think they'll ever dump these at less than half the original price, like a K-01? I'm in the mood for a little idle speculation, on something other than a full frame. Also, since a 645 is supposed to be 64.5 mm, how is this not called a 440?

Adam · 09-02-2013, 12:26 PM

Originally posted by normhead

Also, since a 645 is supposed to be 64.5 mm, how is this not called a 440?

Lol. I bet it will fall to the 3-4k range if/when a successor comes out.

RonHendriks1966 · 09-02-2013, 12:40 PM

I noticed today that overhere the price is down from 9.999 euro to 5.999 euro. So that is a good price and competative to some other camera systems (D800 to name).

I have not the idea that this is dumping, I think Ricoh still can earn money with this price. The 645D is a big box with all the electronics from the K-7 and a wonderfull sensor inside. The costs for this aren't that big to my knowledge (and all R&D expensis are earnt back allready).

This 645D coult be for some while in the market and maybe there is room for a 645D II.

Giklab · 09-02-2013, 12:56 PM

> Also, since a 645 is supposed to be 64.5 mm

I've always thought it was 6cm by 4,5cm.

desertscape · 09-02-2013, 04:31 PM

Most 645 frames are 41.5mm X 56mm.

normhead · 09-02-2013, 05:38 PM

Originally posted by Giklab

> Also, since a 645 is supposed to be 64.5 mm

I've always thought it was 6cm by 4,5cm.

That would make sense 645 = 6x4.5

56 and 41.5 makes sense also, that would leave room for borders.... I still think they should cal it the 440 instead of the 645. Truth in advertising I say....

Quote:

Lol. I bet it will fall to the 3-4k range if/when a successor comes out.

I hope you're right Adam. I'd grab one at that price over a D800 any day.

pinholecam · 09-02-2013, 06:44 PM

Come to think of it, when the new 645DII is out and if the old one can be maintained at $4k in the market as a lower end model, it might spawn a renewed lease of life to MF and give 135 format a run for the money.

tuco · 09-02-2013, 09:18 PM

Originally posted by normhead

...
56 and 41.5 makes sense also, that would leave room for borders.... I still think they should cal it the 440 instead of the 645. Truth in advertising I say....

They really only need to leave room on the boarders on 6 cm dimension. But the 4.5 cm could actually be 4.5 cm except for consideration of the number of frames per roll. Each camera manufacture has slightly different actual frames sizes, it seems. My Mamiya 7II (a 6x7) has a slightly larger actual image size than my Pentax 6x7, for example.

fuent104 · 09-02-2013, 10:34 PM

Originally posted by RonHendriks1966

maybe there is room for a 645D II.

If it could shoot video, the image would be SOOOOOOO BEAUTIFUL......................................

(as long as it was implemented better than it has been in their current cameras, and included manual control over exposure)

Giklab · 09-02-2013, 11:13 PM

Pentax 645D - Foto Beseni?ar, fotospecialist, prodaja foto opreme

atlnq9 · 09-03-2013, 10:57 AM

Originally posted by normhead

I still think they should cal it the 440 instead of the 645. Truth in advertising I say....

Yes, and what was it with all of these 35mm marketed cropped sensors (apss, apsh, etc.) from Nikon, Canon, Sony, etc? I think they should have called the 18mm cameras or whatever. Then confused people even more and told them they had to buy 35mm xbrand mount lenses to go on the 18mm body...

Perhaps you should complain about the naming of the Hassy and Phase/Leaf back names as well. That would really complete the argument.

Or mess with peoples minds and go back all the way to film era Hasselblad Xpan marketed as a 35mm rangefinder taking 24mm x 65mm negatives. After all 35mm doesn't even measure the height of the film but the width that most cameras used...

revdocjim · 09-03-2013, 06:39 PM

At my shop here in Tokyo the 645D is 588,000 yen, so about $1,000 less than the price quoted in this thread.
As for the naming, while "645" was always a bit of a misnomer since it really wasn't quite 6cm x 4.5cm, nevertheless I've always thought it was a bit underhanded to call the largely cropped sensors "645" since they aren't even close. With the smaller cameras at least you have a name like "APS-C" to let people know that it isn't really a 35mm frame size.

**ramseybuckeye** · 09-03-2013, 07:05 PM

I assumed they called it 645 since it had the same mount as the film version, not to dupe anybody. Of course I don't think many people would have forked over 10 grand without knowing what they were getting.

drougge · 09-04-2013, 10:45 AM

Originally posted by atlnq9

Or mess with peoples minds and go back all the way to film era Hasselblad Xpan marketed as a 35mm rangefinder taking 24mm x 65mm negatives. After all 35mm doesn't even measure the height of the film but the width that most cameras used...

But it is 35mm. That's the width (or as you called it, height) of the film strip. There are only 24mm usable because of the perforations, but it is 35mm in total. (And the nominal "full frame" is 36mm in the other dimension, not 35mm.) So that one seems perfectly reasonable.

revdocjim · 09-13-2013, 07:31 AM

Today I saw a used 645D in excellent condition for 477,750 yen, which is about US$4,800.

09-02-2013, 12:01 PM	#1
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	645D- how low will it go? ... When the 645D came out, it was over 10k, now it's down to 7... how low will it go? The new one hasn't been announced yet, this one should go even lower when it is. You think they'll ever dump these at less than half the original price, like a K-01? I'm in the mood for a little idle speculation, on something other than a full frame. Also, since a 645 is supposed to be 64.5 mm, how is this not called a 440?

09-02-2013, 12:26 PM	#2
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,594	Originally posted by normhead Also, since a 645 is supposed to be 64.5 mm, how is this not called a 440? Lol. I bet it will fall to the 3-4k range if/when a successor comes out. Adam PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide \| Site Help \| My Photography) PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

09-03-2013, 10:57 AM	#11
atlnq9 Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Location: Arizona Photos: Albums Posts: 330	Originally posted by normhead I still think they should cal it the 440 instead of the 645. Truth in advertising I say.... Yes, and what was it with all of these 35mm marketed cropped sensors (apss, apsh, etc.) from Nikon, Canon, Sony, etc? I think they should have called the 18mm cameras or whatever. Then confused people even more and told them they had to buy 35mm xbrand mount lenses to go on the 18mm body... Perhaps you should complain about the naming of the Hassy and Phase/Leaf back names as well. That would really complete the argument. Or mess with peoples minds and go back all the way to film era Hasselblad Xpan marketed as a 35mm rangefinder taking 24mm x 65mm negatives. After all 35mm doesn't even measure the height of the film but the width that most cameras used... Last edited by atlnq9; 09-03-2013 at 11:03 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Highlighting low/high lights - please make it go away...	Bigolac	Pentax K-01	5	04-10-2013 09:08 PM
K-5: How low can it go?	Docrwm	Pentax DSLR Discussion	11	08-10-2012 04:35 AM
How Low will the K5 Go?	bonaprof	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	13	06-03-2012 08:01 PM
How low can hand held go? Not ready for Vogue.	Mark K5	Pentax DSLR Discussion	15	05-12-2012 08:55 AM
How low can you go?	graphicgr8s	General Talk	158	02-03-2010 03:57 PM

09-02-2013, 12:40 PM	#3
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	I noticed today that overhere the price is down from 9.999 euro to 5.999 euro. So that is a good price and competative to some other camera systems (D800 to name). I have not the idea that this is dumping, I think Ricoh still can earn money with this price. The 645D is a big box with all the electronics from the K-7 and a wonderfull sensor inside. The costs for this aren't that big to my knowledge (and all R&D expensis are earnt back allready). This 645D coult be for some while in the market and maybe there is room for a 645D II.

09-02-2013, 12:56 PM	#4
Giklab Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Slovenia Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,182	> Also, since a 645 is supposed to be 64.5 mm I've always thought it was 6cm by 4,5cm.

09-02-2013, 04:31 PM	#5
desertscape Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Arizona Posts: 1,272	Most 645 frames are 41.5mm X 56mm.

09-02-2013, 05:38 PM	#6
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451 Original Poster	Originally posted by Giklab > Also, since a 645 is supposed to be 64.5 mm I've always thought it was 6cm by 4,5cm. That would make sense 645 = 6x4.5 56 and 41.5 makes sense also, that would leave room for borders.... I still think they should cal it the 440 instead of the 645. Truth in advertising I say.... Quote: Lol. I bet it will fall to the 3-4k range if/when a successor comes out. I hope you're right Adam. I'd grab one at that price over a D800 any day.

09-02-2013, 06:44 PM	#7
pinholecam Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2009 Location: North Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,706	Come to think of it, when the new 645DII is out and if the old one can be maintained at $4k in the market as a lower end model, it might spawn a renewed lease of life to MF and give 135 format a run for the money.

09-02-2013, 09:18 PM	#8
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,026	Originally posted by normhead ... 56 and 41.5 makes sense also, that would leave room for borders.... I still think they should cal it the 440 instead of the 645. Truth in advertising I say.... They really only need to leave room on the boarders on 6 cm dimension. But the 4.5 cm could actually be 4.5 cm except for consideration of the number of frames per roll. Each camera manufacture has slightly different actual frames sizes, it seems. My Mamiya 7II (a 6x7) has a slightly larger actual image size than my Pentax 6x7, for example.

09-02-2013, 10:34 PM	#9
fuent104 Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: California Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,356	Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 maybe there is room for a 645D II. If it could shoot video, the image would be SOOOOOOO BEAUTIFUL...................................... (as long as it was implemented better than it has been in their current cameras, and included manual control over exposure)

09-02-2013, 11:13 PM	#10
Giklab Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Slovenia Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,182	Pentax 645D - Foto Beseni?ar, fotospecialist, prodaja foto opreme

09-03-2013, 06:39 PM	#12
revdocjim Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Mt. Akagi, Gunma Prefecture Posts: 374	At my shop here in Tokyo the 645D is 588,000 yen, so about $1,000 less than the price quoted in this thread. As for the naming, while "645" was always a bit of a misnomer since it really wasn't quite 6cm x 4.5cm, nevertheless I've always thought it was a bit underhanded to call the largely cropped sensors "645" since they aren't even close. With the smaller cameras at least you have a name like "APS-C" to let people know that it isn't really a 35mm frame size.

09-03-2013, 07:05 PM	#13
ramseybuckeye Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Hampstead, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 17,291	I assumed they called it 645 since it had the same mount as the film version, not to dupe anybody. Of course I don't think many people would have forked over 10 grand without knowing what they were getting.

09-04-2013, 10:45 AM	#14
drougge Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Malmö Photos: Gallery Posts: 787	Originally posted by atlnq9 Or mess with peoples minds and go back all the way to film era Hasselblad Xpan marketed as a 35mm rangefinder taking 24mm x 65mm negatives. After all 35mm doesn't even measure the height of the film but the width that most cameras used... But it is 35mm. That's the width (or as you called it, height) of the film strip. There are only 24mm usable because of the perforations, but it is 35mm in total. (And the nominal "full frame" is 36mm in the other dimension, not 35mm.) So that one seems perfectly reasonable.

09-13-2013, 07:31 AM	#15
revdocjim Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Mt. Akagi, Gunma Prefecture Posts: 374	Today I saw a used 645D in excellent condition for 477,750 yen, which is about US$4,800.