[Pål Jensen]

The Phase One back with the same sensor is going to sell for 34k. I think we are all dreaming if we think this will be 10k. I would bet it will be 20k. .

Phase one makes their living from selling a few hundreds items a year. Pentax sell over 1 000 000. My guess is that the sensor is in fact cheaper than the previous one as it is based on "old" tech long paid for by smaller sensors and made by a manufacturers that makes millions of sensors a year. My guess is that the 645DII will cost $10 000.

[atlnq9]

Phase one makes their living from selling a few hundreds items a year. Pentax sell over 1 000 000. My guess is that the sensor is in fact cheaper than the previous one as it is based on "old" tech long paid for by smaller sensors and made by a manufacturers that makes millions of sensors a year. My guess is that the 645DII will cost $10 000.

Which is where my earlier comment came from:

I just want to know how cheap Pentax can sell it for. Will Ricoh play a similar game as Hoya did on the first 645D? That is skimp on a few features and bring the camera to market with the intent of making money from selling larger quantities at lower profits or will they stick like the others and seller fewer at higher profits each? If the cards are played right it could mean the same profits and bringing more customers in to buy lenses. Just hope they don't skimp too much because the AF could use a big improvement along with processing speed. I didn't need those, but it was needed to really complete the kit.

It depends on if they redesign the systems for the new 645D and fix some of the issues with the current one or if it is just a hack in from a k3 like the current one with a hack in from the k7... And don't forget just because the back is 34k it is at least 40k for a body and back combo... I think 50% off is a good guess for now. If they did bring everything in from the k3 maybe 15k.

Seeing Ricoh pricing particularly on the 560mm 5.6 cropped sensor 35mm lens I am not sure Ricoh is moving in the direction of lower quality and higher volumes...

[CDW]

Usable image vs full potential of the sensor are two different things. From my usage I am not happy with anything over 400 and that it is full utilisation of the capability. ISO's over that cannot print to the same size as ISO's less than that, aka not utilising the full potential of the 40mp... Also shadow noise goes up a lot higher due to less dynamic range. I guess it would depend on what your subject. I personally seldom shoot subjects with the same exposure throughout.

I wouldn't waist my time handholding for landscapes just to use ISO 1600 on the 645D. If I am going to all that effort I will put it on a tripod and use ISO 200. If there is no choice but to handhold there are better options.

Consider for example a image taken handheld at ISO 1600 on a Pentax 645D. The same image could be captured cleaner on a D800 with the improved dynamic range and image stabilised lenses at say ISO 800... Or ISO 200 on a tripod.

All I said was the new sensor is a huge benefit in those circumstances...

I can't disagree in a perfect world. But I always keep two things in mind when out on a shoot.

1. The best camera is the one you have with you.

2. At a Fuji seminar I attended about 20 years ago, one of the instructors reinforced the importance of image content as well as quality. He made his point by suggesting that if a photographer caught Elvis filling his car at a Shell station at 3AM, and had to shoot at ISO 3200 to get the shot, it would be worth a million dollars regardless of technical quality.

My point was based on my own personal experience at Zion National Park when I had an unexpected opportunity to use ISO 800 on my 645D with a 300mm lens to shoot desert big horns. The situation didn't lend itself to tripod use and I didn't have my DSLR with me. I did have the 645D and 300mm, and I got a shot that was better than usable.

[itshimitis]

I printed this one pretty big - 24 x 16 and I'm really happy with it. Was shot at ISO 1600 and wide open, and I had to fetch more detail out too:




Am really happy with how 645D gets detail at 1600. Having said that, if the mk II is a good price I will get it. Heck if it's a little above a good price I will probably still get it.

[noser]

So there is a little door on the bottom left, says DC IN and HDMI.

Is that enough to assume video (including the mic/speaker holes)? Or is that only a LV thing?

I'm asking because I didn't see a door for audio in/out jacks... yet.

[FrankC]

With just a modest 25% increase in resolution, I'm wondering if Pentax is going to discontinue the 645D or keep it available as a less-expensive option in their lineup. I'm doubtful that they would do so, but that would allow them to have a $6,999 body and then sell the 645D 2014 at a premium. History shows that the new models typically sell for less than the previous models. So I can't see the 2014 having a higher MAP than the current 645D unless they keep it on the books. Once they discontinue it, then I'd expect a price reduction.




Also, what is the new body and ultra-wide zoom lens going to do to Nikon D800E sales? Probably not much, but for years there has been a lot of talk among 645D users who need a ultra-wide angle solution and saw the D800E/14-24 package as a viable option to buying the similarly priced FA 25mm. Now that Pentax is introducing the ultra-wide zoom, they could potentially have an impact on D800E sales, especially if they price the 645D 2014 and the new zoom right. Hasselblad's widest zoom is the $8000 35-90 (24-70 in FF equiv) which is hardly "ultra wide." Neither Hasselblad or Phase One have an ultra-wide solution either - which probably due to the fact that they market their bodies as studio cameras where ultra-wide angle isn't useful.


Nonetheless, the game has taken a major shift and the playing field is even. With the old 645D, it had a different sensor than H or P1. Now the image quality of the bodies are theoretically exactly the same (with the only difference being in the processing of the RAW data). Pentax is in a perfect position with the right pricing for both the body and the new lens - it could be game, set and match for Hasselblad.

[hsteeves]

while I think that prices for the 645dII and the new zoom will be lower than the Hasellblad/Phase equivalents, I do not expect them to be in the low price range that many here seem to think. I think the lens will be in the $7-9k range and the body kit to be around $15k. This will still be much lower than their competitors prices. And while some compare this and other less expensive MF options to the D800, I do not and yes, I have them both.

[atlnq9]

I can't disagree in a perfect world. But I always keep two things in mind when out on a shoot.

1. The best camera is the one you have with you.

2. At a Fuji seminar I attended about 20 years ago, one of the instructors reinforced the importance of image content as well as quality. He made his point by suggesting that if a photographer caught Elvis filling his car at a Shell station at 3AM, and had to shoot at ISO 3200 to get the shot, it would be worth a million dollars regardless of technical quality.

My point was based on my own personal experience at Zion National Park when I had an unexpected opportunity to use ISO 800 on my 645D with a 300mm lens to shoot desert big horns. The situation didn't lend itself to tripod use and I didn't have my DSLR with me. I did have the 645D and 300mm, and I got a shot that was better than usable.

Not sure what you are arguing. I guess you are disagreeing with my comment about the new sensor not being of any benefit to pushing ISO higher and being able to handhold it.

All I was saying is it is hard to handhold it in low light or when you push above f16 for landscape and be confident your image had just as much detail and clean/clear of noise as if you had it on a tripod at ISO 200. And in my opinion the new sensor improves it.

There is no doubt the best camera is the one you have with you. But there is no doubt also that there is nothing like being prepared for any situation. Never had the opportunity to use my 645D when I couldn't use a tripod or support it on something; rock climbing hanging off a cliff, working on foot 20m from elephants, using it from a vehicle. Well there is the times I use it for aerial photography but I have a gyro for those cases.

Edit: I am quantifying big as 40"x60"

[CDW]

As others here have suggested, it would seem to make good business sense for Ricoh/Pentax to make the pre-digital 645 manual and AF lenses available in the US market. Tightening up QC specs and updating the coatings could make them affordable and enticing options for a lot of potential Pentax digital MF buyers. Also, if Samyang/Rokinon were to announce two or three manual focus primes, including an ultra-wide, that at least equalled their popular FF primes in overall performance, they would likely get a lot of buyers. All that said, I've found the legacy P 645 lenses work well with the 645D and in many landscape situations, stitching several frames with the 645 35mm delivers large files for the mural size prints that sell in my market.

---------- Post added 02-08-14 at 12:07 PM ----------

Not sure what you are arguing. I guess you are disagreeing with my comment about the new sensor not being of any benefit to pushing ISO higher and being able to handhold it.

All I was saying is it is hard to handhold it in low light or when you push above f16 for landscape and be confident your image had just as much detail and clean/clear of noise as if you had it on a tripod at ISO 200. And in my opinion the new sensor improves it.

There is no doubt the best camera is the one you have with you. But there is no doubt also that there is nothing like being prepared for any situation. Never had the opportunity to use my 645D when I couldn't use a tripod or support it on something; rock climbing hanging off a cliff, working on foot 20m from elephants, using it from a vehicle. Well there is the times I use it for aerial photography but I have a gyro for those cases.

Edit: I am quantifying big as 40"x60"

There is no doubt the new sensor will offer some S/N benefit over CCD sensors. When I shoot wildlife, which is rare, or some types of landscapes, I typically shoot at F8 or 11. If I need extreme depth of field I sometimes shoot multiple frames at F8 or so, using Helicon Focus to stitch. I would definitely agree with you that it would be difficult to handhold at F16. In the situation in Zion I spoke of, I was on an extremely steep slope. I was able to use rocks to brace myself in lieu of a tripod.

[atlnq9]

As others here have suggested, it would seem to make good business sense for Ricoh/Pentax to make the pre-digital 645 manual and AF lenses available in the US market. Tightening up QC specs and updating the coatings could make them affordable and enticing options for a lot of potential Pentax digital MF buyers. Also, if Samyang/Rokinon were to announce two or three manual focus primes, including an ultra-wide, that at least equalled their popular FF primes in overall performance, they would likely get a lot of buyers. All that said, I've found the legacy P 645 lenses work well with the 645D and in many landscape situations, stitching several frames with the 645 35mm delivers large files for the mural size prints that sell in my market.

---------- Post added 02-08-14 at 12:07 PM ----------


There is no doubt the new sensor will offer some S/N benefit over CCD sensors. When I shoot wildlife, which is rare, or some types of landscapes, I typically shoot at F8 or 11. If I need extreme depth of field I sometimes shoot multiple frames at F8 or so, using Helicon Focus to stitch. I would definitely agree with you that it would be difficult to handhold at F16. In the situation in Zion I spoke of, I was on an extremely steep slope. I was able to use rocks to brace myself in lieu of a tripod.

Great, we agree. Just speaking in different ways.

Been nothing but happy with the MF and AF lenses I have. You have to pick and choose what you are using and what for. Some are stronger in certain areas than others. I don't know how many sales they would get in the North America for the older lenses though. There is a large stock of used glass available here. They are available new in other markets though (Japan and Europe come to mind) but they fetch high prices, about double to triple the used value in North America.

I will be very interested in the wide angle zoom if it is in the range of 30-50mm. Especially if it is image stabilised and costs around 6k. Been looking at the 90mm for some time, if it was a weather sealed, image stabilised 120mm macro I would have bought it already... One of my most used lenses.

[Lacunapratum]

Agree with the previous two posters. Many of the lenses in the FA 645 line-up are as good as the "digital only" lenses of other manufacturers. Adding new coating and reducing sample variation would seal the deal. 300mm/4, 400mm/5.6, 150mm/2.8, and 35mm come to mind, perhaps a 600mm with autofocus and the line-up would be complete. Also for me, a longer focal length macro would be much appreciated, for example a 150mm, 180mm or 200mm. For my taste, 90mm is too short, and 120mm is just adequate, but a premier design.