645D vs. A7R

normhead · 11-07-2013, 08:01 AM

Quote:

The primary argument for full frame is that, for me, it costs less than APS-C and provides better quality.

Anyone else share this opinion?

ElJamoquio · 11-07-2013, 08:04 AM

Now I can't even say 'for me it works better'. Thanks.

Pentikonian · 11-07-2013, 08:07 AM - **1 Like**

I never have really understood these arguments anyways. Different formats have some different features/ properties between them - those differences may or may not be an issue, or may be a benefit. Claiming one is the same or as good as another is silly IMHO. And why question/ criticize what others shoot? It's their choice, their money.

IMHO... If you're a pro - use what you need to use to satisfy client expectations. If you're an amateur or hobbyist - shoot what you can afford/ want. Either way, be happy others are spending money on camera gear - keeps the manufacturers in business and making new gear, and kinda keeps prices a bit in-check. As a hobbyist, I'm happy we have so many choices and so many people enjoy the activity.

Andi Lo · 11-07-2013, 11:20 AM

Originally posted by normhead

Anyone else share this opinion?

Norm for some people it's cheaper, I think we discussed this alot already.

I had a long reply but edited it out. I feel dirty talking FF in 645 thread, especially after the poster below me posted

(thanks for the post)

Last edited by Andi Lo; 11-07-2013 at 12:24 PM. Reason: I feel dirty

Iksobarg · 11-07-2013, 12:21 PM

You guys keep it up. This thread really delivers

Seriously.

tuco · 11-07-2013, 01:11 PM

Originally posted by repaap

... Looking at MF pictures at here, from Tuco, MIKE SF, Jonny...ect..

I don't have a MFD camera. I wish I did though. My medium format is film. I wouldn't say its up to the level of the 645D though. I feel the results I get from it are roughly comparable to my FF DSLR for a 6x7 negative size. But I can get way more dynamic range in BW film in a single exposure than my digital.

With a true 4000dpi optical scan, I get files around 10,000 x 8,000 pixels, 48-bit color and 16-bit BW in the ProPhoto RGB color space. But I don't get all the density that is recorded on negative often. Need a drum scanner for that.

ElrondElensar · 11-07-2013, 01:16 PM

Originally posted by repaap

I think A7r is with toomany artefacts. Fine detail of fabric is way better with 645. Way. and detail also. Too much prosessing with Sony...sorry. MF is better.

I don't see artifacts. A7R is just sharper
A7r
Digital Cameras, Sony Alpha A7R Digital Camera Test Image

645D
Digital Cameras, Pentax 645D Digital Camera Test Image

especially on the scale, right side of the image.

Given $6000 price difference between the two cameras, I would say 645D needs a newer sensor. Otherwise it's totally dead

repaap · 11-07-2013, 01:19 PM

Originally posted by tuco

I don't have a MFD camera. I wish I did though. My medium format is film. I wouldn't say its up to the level of the 645D though. I feel the results I get from it are roughly comparable to my FF DSLR for a 6x7 negative size.

With a true 4000dpi optical scan, I get files around 10,000 x 8,000 pixels, 48-bit color and 16-bit BW in the ProPhoto RGB color space. But I don't get all the density that is recorded on negative often. Need a drum scanner for that.

Well I have seen your FF shots too here at forums(I do look at images from FF tread too). I did not mean to say that FF is bad. But MF has so much different look and density. You guys do it so well with film, and others with Digital.

FF has different look, almost like APS-C, but not like MF. That is my opinion. Now what is right or wrong, bad or good, tasty or tasteless. We all have opinions of that.

repaap · 11-07-2013, 01:29 PM

Originally posted by ElrondElensar

I don't see artifacts. A7R is just sharper
A7r
Digital Cameras, Sony Alpha A7R Digital Camera Test Image

645D
Digital Cameras, Pentax 645D Digital Camera Test Image

especially on the scale, right side of the image.

Given $6000 price difference between the two cameras, I would say 645D needs a newer sensor. Otherwise it's totally dead

Well, given that other is still few years old it is really good for what it is.

About details.

We might have different perseiving of things, but I prefer that when I look at fabricks I can see clearly treads/ lines in fabrick from 645, while in A7r you can't. You can see figures, but not individual lines and shadows between them. Other stuff is also over sharpened with sony. So, in my eyes older is still better in tha way.

ElrondElensar · 11-07-2013, 01:54 PM

Originally posted by repaap

Well, given that other is still few years old it is really good for what it is.

About details.

We might have different perseiving of things, but I prefer that when I look at fabricks I can see clearly treads/ lines in fabrick from 645, while in A7r you can't. You can see figures, but not individual lines and shadows between them. Other stuff is also over sharpened with sony. So, in my eyes older is still better in tha way.

Try zooming in both by 200% and you will see A7R maintains its sharpness better.

Upscaling A7R to 40 MP probably will eliminate any fabric difference that you can see, while maintaining same sharpness as 645D.

tuco · 11-07-2013, 02:02 PM

Originally posted by repaap

... But MF has so much different look and density. You guys do it so well with film ...

Why thanks. It's a different medium and you are using different focal lengths for the same FOV with MF film so I guess subtle differences would be noticeable.

ElrondElensar · 11-07-2013, 02:11 PM

Here is upscaled A7R to 40 MP (same as 645D)

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5510/10731456566_f9d84a5f8e_o.jpg

and the original 645D
Digital Cameras, Pentax 645D Digital Camera Test Image

ElJamoquio · 11-07-2013, 03:00 PM

Originally posted by ElrondElensar

Here is upscaled A7R to 40 MP (same as 645D)

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5510/10731456566_f9d84a5f8e_o.jpg

and the original 645D
Digital Cameras, Pentax 645D Digital Camera Test Image

Thanks... but I get this when I click on your first link:

http://l.yimg.com/g/images/photo_unavailable.gif

ElrondElensar · 11-08-2013, 12:09 AM

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

Thanks... but I get this when I click on your first link:

http://l.yimg.com/g/images/photo_unavailable.gif

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7kbeA6whDvNTUlEcXpyb1RZLWM/edit?usp=sharing

jonny1986 · 11-08-2013, 04:58 AM - **2 Likes**

it's clear that people tha compare this sense to 645d has never seen the 645d output in real world, with subtle tonality, difficult light.
i repeat..i have never seen a photo from d800 e that can approach the combo 645d a35 in a landscape shot for example.
but it's better people not buy the 645d. price will fall down soon and i can grab another steal second 645d.
in addiction while most of the 35 ff lenses suffer with 36 million pixel , the 40 million pixel and lenses are not even near the limit. i'm pretty sure the 645lenses can deal easily with 60 and 80 for sure.

11-07-2013, 01:11 PM	#36
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,023	Originally posted by repaap ... Looking at MF pictures at here, from Tuco, MIKE SF, Jonny...ect.. I don't have a MFD camera. I wish I did though. My medium format is film. I wouldn't say its up to the level of the 645D though. I feel the results I get from it are roughly comparable to my FF DSLR for a 6x7 negative size. But I can get way more dynamic range in BW film in a single exposure than my digital. With a true 4000dpi optical scan, I get files around 10,000 x 8,000 pixels, 48-bit color and 16-bit BW in the ProPhoto RGB color space. But I don't get all the density that is recorded on negative often. Need a drum scanner for that. Last edited by tuco; 11-07-2013 at 01:17 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
The A7r preorder thread	Christine Tham	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	59	01-26-2014 05:28 PM
The A7r hate thread	Christine Tham	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	131	10-23-2013 12:49 AM
Nikon D800E vs Pentax 645D	larkis	Pentax Medium Format	148	12-17-2012 01:10 PM
D800 vs 645D	jogiba	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	84	04-22-2012 06:00 AM
Pentax 645D vs Nikon vs Canon	yurihuta	Pentax Medium Format	4	04-23-2010 03:44 PM

11-07-2013, 08:01 AM	#31
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Quote: The primary argument for full frame is that, for me, it costs less than APS-C and provides better quality. Anyone else share this opinion?

11-07-2013, 08:04 AM	#32
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Now I can't even say 'for me it works better'. Thanks.

11-07-2013, 08:07 AM - 1 Like	#33
Pentikonian Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Arizona Posts: 780	I never have really understood these arguments anyways. Different formats have some different features/ properties between them - those differences may or may not be an issue, or may be a benefit. Claiming one is the same or as good as another is silly IMHO. And why question/ criticize what others shoot? It's their choice, their money. IMHO... If you're a pro - use what you need to use to satisfy client expectations. If you're an amateur or hobbyist - shoot what you can afford/ want. Either way, be happy others are spending money on camera gear - keeps the manufacturers in business and making new gear, and kinda keeps prices a bit in-check. As a hobbyist, I'm happy we have so many choices and so many people enjoy the activity.

11-07-2013, 11:20 AM	#34
Andi Lo Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia Posts: 2,924	Originally posted by normhead Anyone else share this opinion? Norm for some people it's cheaper, I think we discussed this alot already. I had a long reply but edited it out. I feel dirty talking FF in 645 thread, especially after the poster below me posted (thanks for the post) Last edited by Andi Lo; 11-07-2013 at 12:24 PM. Reason: I feel dirty

11-07-2013, 12:21 PM	#35
Iksobarg Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 208	You guys keep it up. This thread really delivers Seriously.

11-07-2013, 01:16 PM	#37
ElrondElensar Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 43	Originally posted by repaap I think A7r is with toomany artefacts. Fine detail of fabric is way better with 645. Way. and detail also. Too much prosessing with Sony...sorry. MF is better. I don't see artifacts. A7R is just sharper A7r Digital Cameras, Sony Alpha A7R Digital Camera Test Image 645D Digital Cameras, Pentax 645D Digital Camera Test Image especially on the scale, right side of the image. Given $6000 price difference between the two cameras, I would say 645D needs a newer sensor. Otherwise it's totally dead

11-07-2013, 01:19 PM	#38
repaap Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,242	Originally posted by tuco I don't have a MFD camera. I wish I did though. My medium format is film. I wouldn't say its up to the level of the 645D though. I feel the results I get from it are roughly comparable to my FF DSLR for a 6x7 negative size. With a true 4000dpi optical scan, I get files around 10,000 x 8,000 pixels, 48-bit color and 16-bit BW in the ProPhoto RGB color space. But I don't get all the density that is recorded on negative often. Need a drum scanner for that. Well I have seen your FF shots too here at forums(I do look at images from FF tread too). I did not mean to say that FF is bad. But MF has so much different look and density. You guys do it so well with film, and others with Digital. FF has different look, almost like APS-C, but not like MF. That is my opinion. Now what is right or wrong, bad or good, tasty or tasteless. We all have opinions of that.

11-07-2013, 01:29 PM	#39
repaap Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,242	Originally posted by ElrondElensar I don't see artifacts. A7R is just sharper A7r Digital Cameras, Sony Alpha A7R Digital Camera Test Image 645D Digital Cameras, Pentax 645D Digital Camera Test Image especially on the scale, right side of the image. Given $6000 price difference between the two cameras, I would say 645D needs a newer sensor. Otherwise it's totally dead Well, given that other is still few years old it is really good for what it is. About details. We might have different perseiving of things, but I prefer that when I look at fabricks I can see clearly treads/ lines in fabrick from 645, while in A7r you can't. You can see figures, but not individual lines and shadows between them. Other stuff is also over sharpened with sony. So, in my eyes older is still better in tha way.

11-07-2013, 01:54 PM	#40
ElrondElensar Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 43	Originally posted by repaap Well, given that other is still few years old it is really good for what it is. About details. We might have different perseiving of things, but I prefer that when I look at fabricks I can see clearly treads/ lines in fabrick from 645, while in A7r you can't. You can see figures, but not individual lines and shadows between them. Other stuff is also over sharpened with sony. So, in my eyes older is still better in tha way. Try zooming in both by 200% and you will see A7R maintains its sharpness better. Upscaling A7R to 40 MP probably will eliminate any fabric difference that you can see, while maintaining same sharpness as 645D.

11-07-2013, 02:02 PM	#41
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,023	Originally posted by repaap ... But MF has so much different look and density. You guys do it so well with film ... Why thanks. It's a different medium and you are using different focal lengths for the same FOV with MF film so I guess subtle differences would be noticeable.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-07-2013, 02:11 PM	#42
ElrondElensar Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 43	Here is upscaled A7R to 40 MP (same as 645D) http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5510/10731456566_f9d84a5f8e_o.jpg and the original 645D Digital Cameras, Pentax 645D Digital Camera Test Image

11-07-2013, 03:00 PM	#43
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Originally posted by ElrondElensar Here is upscaled A7R to 40 MP (same as 645D) http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5510/10731456566_f9d84a5f8e_o.jpg and the original 645D Digital Cameras, Pentax 645D Digital Camera Test Image Thanks... but I get this when I click on your first link: http://l.yimg.com/g/images/photo_unavailable.gif

11-08-2013, 12:09 AM	#44
ElrondElensar Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 43	Originally posted by ElJamoquio Thanks... but I get this when I click on your first link: http://l.yimg.com/g/images/photo_unavailable.gif https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7kbeA6whDvNTUlEcXpyb1RZLWM/edit?usp=sharing

11-08-2013, 04:58 AM - 2 Likes	#45
jonny1986 Inactive Account Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: italy Posts: 411	it's clear that people tha compare this sense to 645d has never seen the 645d output in real world, with subtle tonality, difficult light. i repeat..i have never seen a photo from d800 e that can approach the combo 645d a35 in a landscape shot for example. but it's better people not buy the 645d. price will fall down soon and i can grab another steal second 645d. in addiction while most of the 35 ff lenses suffer with 36 million pixel , the 40 million pixel and lenses are not even near the limit. i'm pretty sure the 645lenses can deal easily with 60 and 80 for sure.