Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-22-2014, 02:37 PM   #16
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 17
You're not thinking of replacing a D4 with a 645Z for sports, are you?

04-22-2014, 04:25 PM   #17
New Member




Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 14
Original Poster
At 3fps and unknown autofocus capability I wouldn't expect it to be suitable for sports :-)
04-22-2014, 06:18 PM   #18
Pentaxian
Uluru's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,400
Indeed it can be used in sports, delivering far better results than an FF, and is a camera of choice for some sports photographers.
It is a matter of technique and brains, not of mere machine gun power or of the number of AF dots.

To dismiss MF for sports would be same as to dismiss all fine fishing techniques apart from large scale nets or throwing a dynamite in the lake because latter two "provide more grabs".

For example, this educational video:


Last edited by Uluru; 04-22-2014 at 06:43 PM.
04-23-2014, 06:18 AM   #19
Veteran Member
revdocjim's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Mt. Akagi, Gunma Prefecture
Posts: 374
Uluru, you really are quite the evangelist! But I think you need to check your facts. The Pentax 645Z is most definitely not the "camera of choice for some sports photographers" since it hasn't even been released yet.
Also your xerox copy vs. oil painting comparison was surreal at best.

04-23-2014, 09:51 AM   #20
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: italy
Posts: 411
QuoteOriginally posted by Ryan Tischer Quote
I think this depends on your subjects and shooting style more than anything else. I shoot landscapes and almost never any portraits and rarely wildlife... I do huge prints and don't usually need fast lenses, so the MF makes great sense for me.


If you're shooting a lot of sports, wildlife, or low light then I'd stick with the Nikon since you're so invested already. The 645Z will have much better ISO capabilities, so you can probably just crank that up to make up for some of the 'slowness' of the MF lenses. DOF will probably be similar due to the larger sensor size.


You aren't going to be able to cover an equivalent of 14mm-200mm in three zooms, I can tell you that now! You'll need the 25mm (or wait for the new rumored zoom), 33-55mm, 55-110mm and/or 45-85mm and 80-160mm, and 150-300mm, which would be a near back breaking load of lenses! The 35mm, 45-85mm, 80-160mm can all be had for quite reasonable prices, but the 25mm is at best $3500 used +...I'd guess 6K plus for the new wide angle zoom if and when that is released.

---------- Post added 04-22-14 at 11:10 AM ----------

That being said I have the 25, 35, 45-85, 75, 120, 80-160, 200, 300 and they are ALL VERY SHARP, so much that compared to my old canon L series glass the Pentax blows them out of the water. I also love using the manual focus 35mm...so easy and bright to focus and simple!

i agree ..have all those lenses...and apart sharpness they are amazing in terms of control od distortion, ca and coma.
personally the only results corner to corner that i hav seen from a d800e comparable to those i obtain with my 645d as far as color and clarity are those with otus. personally i d like to see the cmos sensor. for me the ccd has just that better acuity that create the magic like foveon. the files in addiction are perfect out of the camera , much more than those i obtain by cmos sony pentax k5.
but if you need fast glass for low light or sport i suggest to keep nikon. the 645d in some aspects produce better files and is all around but for specific needs like sport or wildlife the nikon is more rounded system.
04-23-2014, 03:55 PM   #21
Veteran Member
revdocjim's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Mt. Akagi, Gunma Prefecture
Posts: 374
The video link above is pretty fascinating! Although technically speaking I wouldn't call that sports shooting, but rather fashion shooting with a sports theme. All shots are staged and can be shot over and over again, unlike a real sporting event.
04-23-2014, 05:27 PM   #22
Pentaxian
Uluru's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,400
QuoteOriginally posted by revdocjim Quote
The video link above is pretty fascinating! Although technically speaking I wouldn't call that sports shooting, but rather fashion shooting with a sports theme. All shots are staged and can be shot over and over again, unlike a real sporting event.
In top sports everything is always staged for best shots. Always.
The NBA, NFL, Olympics, races, etc. Nikon's and Canon's cameras are installed carefully along finishing lines, along tracks, goals, poles, underwater, triggered by IR beams, radio controlled, etc. It does not differ much from this MF use — not at all.

Hunting with a long zoom and Continuous AF for some scarce shot from somewhere in the crowd, is what amateurs are left with and what they believe top sports photography is all about — if they are even allowed to enter the playground with such an equipment at all.
04-23-2014, 05:48 PM   #23
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 17
Here are some amateur sports photographers (they shoot for this low-circulation, unknown magazine called "Sports Illustrated") discussing their tools.

Super Bowl Photographers Damian Strohmeyer and Peter Read Miller from Adorama Learning Center

04-23-2014, 09:46 PM - 1 Like   #24
Veteran Member
revdocjim's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Mt. Akagi, Gunma Prefecture
Posts: 374
QuoteOriginally posted by Uluru Quote
In top sports everything is always staged for best shots. Always.
The NBA, NFL, Olympics, races, etc. Nikon's and Canon's cameras are installed carefully along finishing lines, along tracks, goals, poles, underwater, triggered by IR beams, radio controlled, etc. It does not differ much from this MF use not at all.

Hunting with a long zoom and Continuous AF for some scarce shot from somewhere in the crowd, is what amateurs are left with and what they believe top sports photography is all about if they are even allowed to enter the playground with such an equipment at all.
Not even vaguely similar. A pro photog at an NBA game will use half a dozen remotely triggered cameras shooting 11fps and come away with thousands of frames from one game. Then the editor goes to work and selects the keepers. Maybe one out of 500 or 1000 makes the cut. And the real money makers are even rarer than that. There is only one game winning buzzer beater shot and it most certainly isn't staged, and it definitely can't be reshot! That's the whole point of prepositioned and remotely controlled cameras... Just trying to increase the odds. If you are a pro shooting sports and you have to get the shots that count then you use the equipment that works best. If you are shooting a sporting event but with more artistically oriented goals, then something like the 645 might be great. If you're doing a catalogue shoot like the guy in the video with ample opportunity to do multiple retakes and the goal is to create a specific look then the camera he chose works to his advantage. But it really shouldn't be confused with what is normally referred to as sports photography.

As for your comments about amateurs in the stands, maybe you've had that experience but I'm not sure how it relates to this discussion...
04-23-2014, 10:07 PM   #25
Pentaxian
Jonathan Mac's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Madrid, Spain
Posts: 3,920
As has been said, f/2.8 is considered fast for medium format. The fastest MF lens made was the Mamiya 80mm f/1.9. On film, my 75/2.8 gives me the same depth of field as a 75/1.8 would on FF, but with the image quality you would expect from using a lens at f/2.8. On the 645D/Z this will be less because the sensor is smaller than 645 film, but still quite nice.
04-24-2014, 06:47 AM   #26
Veteran Member
revdocjim's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Mt. Akagi, Gunma Prefecture
Posts: 374
QuoteOriginally posted by Jonathan Mac Quote
As has been said, f/2.8 is considered fast for medium format. The fastest MF lens made was the Mamiya 80mm f/1.9. On film, my 75/2.8 gives me the same depth of field as a 75/1.8 would on FF, but with the image quality you would expect from using a lens at f/2.8. On the 645D/Z this will be less because the sensor is smaller than 645 film, but still quite nice.
Agreed. The 645D offers some incredible images that are qualitatively different from anything a 35mm camera produces. At the same time, in the video you see the photog shooting the snowboarder on the far side of the halfpipe with what appears to be the FA 300/5.6 and talking about how 35mm simply can't touch the shallow DOF and quality of fall off he's getting. And yet I'm not really seeing it in the photos he's taking, and by the numbers I think it's pretty obvious that you can get much shallower DOF at that FOV with a 35mm than what he's getting at 300/5.6 on the cropped 645 frame. Having said all of that I still loved the video and think 645 is awesome. I just shot two rolls today with my newly acquired A-series 300/4. Can't wait to see the results!
04-26-2014, 07:29 AM   #27
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 110
Pentax and 3rd party lenses

QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
One thing to note is that there are only 3 modern 645 lenses out there: the 25mm, the 55mm, and the 90mm. All the other "new lenses" are from the film era and as such the coatings/AF mechanisms are older.


I own a full kit of both Nikon and Canon equipment. See profile if curious. The Nikon equipment featuring the D800E and D3x, the 14-24G & 24-70G and five Zeiss ZF lenses is my "critical IQ" landscape tool kit. I am seriously considering replacing the Nikon kit with the 645Z and appropriate lenses but I've experienced an information bottleneck on lenses for the Pentax 645 system via Google searches.


Thanks for the clarification regarding the Pentax lens lineup. It's simple to understand and goes straight to one of the points I was looking for. Considering that only a few new lenses have been released optimized for digital, it appears that Pentax is confident that their older lenses can perform well on digital (modern coatings used on Ver 2 releases of various Canon L lenses have made a great difference - coatings are nothing to dismiss lightl)y.


In another thread, someone mentioned Pentax Zeiss and Schneider lenses on the 645Z. So here is my question: Is there any consolidated hub of information for lenses appropriate for the 645 digital system, Pentax brand or compatible-mount 3rd party brands and alternate lenses from 3rd parties that can be mounted via adapter?
04-26-2014, 08:01 AM   #28
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,892
There aren't third party lenses (that I'm aware of) for Pentax 645 that will AF/AE etc. You can use manual adapters as long as the registration distance is longer, of course. Don't know if your style will allow that or not.
04-26-2014, 09:01 AM   #29
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 110
Adapted lenses

QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
There aren't third party lenses (that I'm aware of) for Pentax 645 that will AF/AE etc. You can use manual adapters as long as the registration distance is longer, of course. Don't know if your style will allow that or not.


I assumed lenses from Zeiss & Schneider would most likely be manual focus. So, it sounds like adapted lenses is the only alternative options. If there isn't a consolidated source for adapted lenses of other brands for Pentax 645 system modeled like Pebbleplace & 16-9.net for Canon EOS, can you or anyone talk about lenses you've adapted to the Pentax system?
04-26-2014, 04:17 PM   #30
Veteran Member
revdocjim's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Mt. Akagi, Gunma Prefecture
Posts: 374
Good point Rick! The lens database has a section for third party lenses but it doesn't have a separate subsection for 645.
But a quick search here at PF yielded the following: link
The article says it is part II but I couldn't find part 1. This one seems to be about T&S lenses.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
200mm, 645z, angle, board, camera, equivalent, f/1.4, ff, film, focus, format, hand, lens, lenses, medium format, mf, nikon, pentax, pentax lenses, quality of pentax, results, smc, system, wide-angle
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Coming from Nikon world desiboston Welcomes and Introductions 20 04-04-2014 07:52 AM
Quality of available Pentax compatible lenses 6BQ5 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 49 06-08-2013 03:04 PM
Cost of lenses equals quality? BikerInCincy Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 12 10-02-2012 01:58 PM
Considering coming from Nikon...Please help! rsolti13 Pentax K-5 52 01-16-2011 05:20 AM
Build quality of Pentax Limited lenses? ducdao Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 22 05-16-2010 06:31 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:14 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top