Why not more interest on the 645Z?

Ilovemypentax · 05-23-2014, 10:45 AM

I would think there would be more interest here in the Z.

I may be interested in moving up from the 645D if the high ISO is in order in the Z. The low ISO of the D was always a hardship for me when shooing in dim light. But the sensor in the D gives some pretty painterly images that I wonder may be missing in the Z.

Are you considering purchasing a Z?

**Rondec** · 05-23-2014, 10:49 AM

I think the issue is the cost. I would love a 645z, but for a hobbyist like myself, the funds just aren't there...

VoiceOfReason · 05-23-2014, 10:51 AM

Originally posted by Ilovemypentax

I would think there would be more interest here in the Z.

I may be interested in moving up from the 645D if the high ISO is in order in the Z. The low ISO of the D was always a hardship for me when shooing in dim light. But the sensor in the D gives some pretty painterly images that I wonder may be missing in the Z.

Are you considering purchasing a Z?

If I were somehow able to win the lottery I'd do it. Unfortunately, while I was be ecstatic to own one and various lenses to go with it, due to financial constraints I am not able to join the medium format club.

cali92rs · 05-23-2014, 11:02 AM

Originally posted by Ilovemypentax

I would think there would be more interest here in the Z.

I may be interested in moving up from the 645D if the high ISO is in order in the Z. The low ISO of the D was always a hardship for me when shooing in dim light. But the sensor in the D gives some pretty painterly images that I wonder may be missing in the Z.

Are you considering purchasing a Z?

It's like when McLaren releases one of their supercars.
I appreciate the engineering, and read up on it...but I know I will never own one, so the excitement doesnt go beyond curiosity.

texandrews · 05-23-2014, 11:12 AM

Originally posted by Ilovemypentax

I would think there would be more interest here in the Z.

I may be interested in moving up from the 645D if the high ISO is in order in the Z. The low ISO of the D was always a hardship for me when shooing in dim light. But the sensor in the D gives some pretty painterly images that I wonder may be missing in the Z.

Are you considering purchasing a Z?

I think there's a lot of interest! I have been pleasantly surprised here and elsewhere. Yes, I am strongly considering a purchase. Yes, it's "expensive" for me, although in another way it's not: it probably means the practical end of my upgrade path for quite a while. And I'm set with lenses for it. Thus while it would be a big reach in one way, I'd shed a fair amount of gear I've got and so things would also get simpler, and I'd recoup some of the costs, instead of solely adding costs.

BackWithPentax · 05-23-2014, 11:19 AM

Originally posted by texandrews

I think there's a lot of interest! I have been pleasantly surprised here and elsewhere. Yes, I am strongly considering a purchase. Yes, it's "expensive" for me, although in another way it's not: it probably means the practical end of my upgrade path for quite a while. And I'm set with lenses for it. Thus while it would be a big reach in one way, I'd shed a fair amount of gear I've got and so things would also get simpler, and I'd recoup some of the costs, instead of solely adding costs.

I feel exactly the same way. "A lot of interest" is a rather relative term in this instance. There is a huge range of choice for the consumer with camera phones to Google glasses and beyond, yet each consumer has a rather finite amount of $$$ to spend on such.....

It's all good.

6BQ5 · 05-23-2014, 11:36 AM

I am interested in the 645Z but I am more interested in what technology trickles in/out of that design into others. The IQ from the 645Z is stellar but I'm happy with my K-30. I am also deep into the K-mount system and I'm starting to get into the Q mount. Even if I had the money for a 645Z I would not see myself building up another system. For the medium format experience I stick with film.

DSims · 05-23-2014, 11:40 AM

Originally posted by texandrews

I think there's a lot of interest! I have been pleasantly surprised here and elsewhere. Yes, I am strongly considering a purchase. Yes, it's "expensive" for me, although in another way it's not: it probably means the practical end of my upgrade path for quite a while. And I'm set with lenses for it. Thus while it would be a big reach in one way, I'd shed a fair amount of gear I've got and so things would also get simpler, and I'd recoup some of the costs, instead of solely adding costs.

I think you need to simplify. Two digital platforms max.

I'm sure there could be artistic reasons for all of it, and there is some great glass like the Sony CZ 16-35, but even that is replaceable. When I get too spread out like that (and I rather enjoy the journey) it hampers me. I usually give myself too many options. I could probably cut my lens collection in half, but at least they're all one mount so it's still simple to me.

It doesn't looked like you have specialized needs such as sports photography, so sell a bunch of that (mostly commonly available) gear, get the new camera, chose a new 645 lens for it (I'm sure there's one you still need), and enjoy the process.

normhead · 05-23-2014, 11:51 AM

It's all about the money. I bought a 645 film camera, just to see if I would use it. I actually don't take it with me anywhere, have shot two rolls of film in a year. And every time I've owned an MF camera, that is what it has come down to. It seems, I'll carry an APS_c system, not an FF system or and MF system. Why buy a system you'll hardly ever use? I know I'll get pillared for this, but when I was shooting MF and 35mm in film, many times there really wasn't much difference in the image. There was rarely (but not never) a time when I thought, I couldn't have taken this with a 35mm camera when looking at MF pictures.

So the issue for me is, how much can I pay for something that I might use 10% of the time. I'm not going to leave my K-3 home to take it, and I'm not going to carry two bodies, so, on landscape nights, sunsets, where that's all I'm planning on doing it would come as my main camera. The rest of the time, as in a chance for wildlife, candid or macro images, it would probably get left home. I'd be really happy to have one, but I'd be really unhappy to have paid that much money for something I rarely used. That's the thing.

So for me it's not that I'm not interested. It's that the cost benefit analysis isn't making economic sense.

jonojono · 05-23-2014, 12:18 PM

For new users, I see the attractiveness of MF presented to those who can't afford your IQ250 or P1 backs but want to try digital instead of film. I am one example because I love to take landscape photos with higher resolution. I appreciate the new technology because it does go well with my work flow and will complement my M. Rather than pay for FF, I rather go up to MF to see and have that wider advantage.

For those who have a D800e or 645D, I guess its ROI. W hy upgrade when you are happy already?

**NZ_Ross** · 05-23-2014, 12:33 PM

I like what the 645Z brings in terms of technology, weather sealing etc, and it is a very good addition to the Pentax line up.

What concerns me is the lack of an interchangeable back - in MF it is still an area of technology that is moving fast enough. MF is expensive relative to 35mm, and with the 645 I get concerned that there is risks with the investment due to lack of modularity - particularly with the back.

On the positive side - same menus and tech as the K3, so very little learning curve in terms of driving the camera.

I have just been reading and absorbing information on the 645Z and thinking. Not a lack of interest, more interest at what the 645Z offers verses the competition.

FrankC · 05-23-2014, 12:35 PM

As a 645D owner, I'll admit it took me a while to save up for it. So I can't justify spending an additional $8,600 for a replacement that doesn't appear to be a huge increase in image quality.
Sure the Z has a flappy screen and ultra-high ISO, but I rarely ever shoot above ISO100. I don't need video and the 25% increase in pixels isn't something that I need either.
At this point I would rather see Pentax come out with a 645 with an even larger sensor so my wide angle lenses would become even wider as opposed to any video, articulated screen or increase in pixels or ISO sensitivity. Because for me, all I need is a viewfinder, a shutter release and control over the focusing, aperture and shutter - everything else is gravy.

cali92rs · 05-23-2014, 12:40 PM

Originally posted by jonojono

For new users, I see the attractiveness of MF presented to those who can't afford your IQ250 or P1 backs but want to try digital instead of film.

Are there many (any?) new users that would jump right into digital medium format?

**NZ_Ross** · 05-23-2014, 12:41 PM

Originally posted by FrankC

At this point I would rather see Pentax come out with a 645 with an even larger sensor so my wide angle lenses would become even wider as opposed to any video, articulated screen or increase in pixels or ISO sensitivity. Because for me, all I need is a viewfinder, a shutter release and control over the focusing, aperture and shutter - everything else is gravy.

Frank, that is a really useful comment to me - I have been looking at MF for more options for landscapes, so anticipating mostly low ISO. I had wondered if a 645D wasn't the way to go when people started to unload them to trade up to the 645Z, and the body prices drop as a result.

CDW · 05-23-2014, 01:01 PM

There has been quite a lot of interest in the 645Z on various forums, especially getDPI | Photography at its best, which is geared predominantly towards high end medium format shooting. I think at this point most people are waiting for it to be released and there really isn't too much more to speculate about until that time. I'm not planning to sell my 645D to move up. A small gain in resolution does not make it worthwhile and the ISO improvement is not a need for me as I shoot 100-400 typically. If I need higher ISO for a specialized purpose I use my K3. If I want outstanding video I use a GH4 or Oly ZX1 when I need a P&S to carry in the car for some unknown opportunity. It's pretty difficult to find one camera system that covers all needs or wants.

05-23-2014, 10:45 AM	#1
Ilovemypentax Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 121	Why not more interest on the 645Z? I would think there would be more interest here in the Z. I may be interested in moving up from the 645D if the high ISO is in order in the Z. The low ISO of the D was always a hardship for me when shooing in dim light. But the sensor in the D gives some pretty painterly images that I wonder may be missing in the Z. Are you considering purchasing a Z?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Trapezoid prism viewfinder, not pentaprism on 645Z. Soon on COMPACT APC or FF?	grahame	Pentax DSLR Discussion	5	04-15-2014 07:17 PM
Why oh why is the 15mm Limited lens not fully weather sealed?	Diego	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	10	08-10-2013 07:20 AM
Why are there not more weather-sealed Pentax lenses?	Diego	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	17	03-06-2013 05:59 PM
K-5 IIs featured on pentax.jp - why not for the rest of the world?	Madaboutpix	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	5	10-19-2012 01:36 AM
Do you have to make EXIF data public on flickr? Why, why not?	Banitess	Photographic Technique	8	09-24-2010 04:09 AM

05-23-2014, 10:49 AM	#2
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,652	I think the issue is the cost. I would love a 645z, but for a hobbyist like myself, the funds just aren't there...

05-23-2014, 10:51 AM	#3
VoiceOfReason Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Mishawaka IN area Photos: Albums Posts: 6,124	Originally posted by Ilovemypentax I would think there would be more interest here in the Z. I may be interested in moving up from the 645D if the high ISO is in order in the Z. The low ISO of the D was always a hardship for me when shooing in dim light. But the sensor in the D gives some pretty painterly images that I wonder may be missing in the Z. Are you considering purchasing a Z? If I were somehow able to win the lottery I'd do it. Unfortunately, while I was be ecstatic to own one and various lenses to go with it, due to financial constraints I am not able to join the medium format club.

05-23-2014, 11:02 AM	#4
cali92rs Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 3,354	Originally posted by Ilovemypentax I would think there would be more interest here in the Z. I may be interested in moving up from the 645D if the high ISO is in order in the Z. The low ISO of the D was always a hardship for me when shooing in dim light. But the sensor in the D gives some pretty painterly images that I wonder may be missing in the Z. Are you considering purchasing a Z? It's like when McLaren releases one of their supercars. I appreciate the engineering, and read up on it...but I know I will never own one, so the excitement doesnt go beyond curiosity.

05-23-2014, 11:12 AM	#5
texandrews Moderator Join Date: Apr 2014 Location: Baltimore Photos: Albums Posts: 3,390	Originally posted by Ilovemypentax I would think there would be more interest here in the Z. I may be interested in moving up from the 645D if the high ISO is in order in the Z. The low ISO of the D was always a hardship for me when shooing in dim light. But the sensor in the D gives some pretty painterly images that I wonder may be missing in the Z. Are you considering purchasing a Z? I think there's a lot of interest! I have been pleasantly surprised here and elsewhere. Yes, I am strongly considering a purchase. Yes, it's "expensive" for me, although in another way it's not: it probably means the practical end of my upgrade path for quite a while. And I'm set with lenses for it. Thus while it would be a big reach in one way, I'd shed a fair amount of gear I've got and so things would also get simpler, and I'd recoup some of the costs, instead of solely adding costs.

05-23-2014, 11:19 AM	#6
BackWithPentax New Member Join Date: May 2014 Posts: 11	Originally posted by texandrews I think there's a lot of interest! I have been pleasantly surprised here and elsewhere. Yes, I am strongly considering a purchase. Yes, it's "expensive" for me, although in another way it's not: it probably means the practical end of my upgrade path for quite a while. And I'm set with lenses for it. Thus while it would be a big reach in one way, I'd shed a fair amount of gear I've got and so things would also get simpler, and I'd recoup some of the costs, instead of solely adding costs. I feel exactly the same way. "A lot of interest" is a rather relative term in this instance. There is a huge range of choice for the consumer with camera phones to Google glasses and beyond, yet each consumer has a rather finite amount of $$$ to spend on such..... It's all good.

05-23-2014, 11:36 AM	#7
6BQ5 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Nevada, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,348	I am interested in the 645Z but I am more interested in what technology trickles in/out of that design into others. The IQ from the 645Z is stellar but I'm happy with my K-30. I am also deep into the K-mount system and I'm starting to get into the Q mount. Even if I had the money for a 645Z I would not see myself building up another system. For the medium format experience I stick with film.

05-23-2014, 11:40 AM	#8
DSims Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,236	Originally posted by texandrews I think there's a lot of interest! I have been pleasantly surprised here and elsewhere. Yes, I am strongly considering a purchase. Yes, it's "expensive" for me, although in another way it's not: it probably means the practical end of my upgrade path for quite a while. And I'm set with lenses for it. Thus while it would be a big reach in one way, I'd shed a fair amount of gear I've got and so things would also get simpler, and I'd recoup some of the costs, instead of solely adding costs. I think you need to simplify. Two digital platforms max. I'm sure there could be artistic reasons for all of it, and there is some great glass like the Sony CZ 16-35, but even that is replaceable. When I get too spread out like that (and I rather enjoy the journey) it hampers me. I usually give myself too many options. I could probably cut my lens collection in half, but at least they're all one mount so it's still simple to me. It doesn't looked like you have specialized needs such as sports photography, so sell a bunch of that (mostly commonly available) gear, get the new camera, chose a new 645 lens for it (I'm sure there's one you still need), and enjoy the process.

05-23-2014, 11:51 AM	#9
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	It's all about the money. I bought a 645 film camera, just to see if I would use it. I actually don't take it with me anywhere, have shot two rolls of film in a year. And every time I've owned an MF camera, that is what it has come down to. It seems, I'll carry an APS_c system, not an FF system or and MF system. Why buy a system you'll hardly ever use? I know I'll get pillared for this, but when I was shooting MF and 35mm in film, many times there really wasn't much difference in the image. There was rarely (but not never) a time when I thought, I couldn't have taken this with a 35mm camera when looking at MF pictures. So the issue for me is, how much can I pay for something that I might use 10% of the time. I'm not going to leave my K-3 home to take it, and I'm not going to carry two bodies, so, on landscape nights, sunsets, where that's all I'm planning on doing it would come as my main camera. The rest of the time, as in a chance for wildlife, candid or macro images, it would probably get left home. I'd be really happy to have one, but I'd be really unhappy to have paid that much money for something I rarely used. That's the thing. So for me it's not that I'm not interested. It's that the cost benefit analysis isn't making economic sense.

05-23-2014, 12:18 PM	#10
jonojono Forum Member Join Date: May 2014 Posts: 81	For new users, I see the attractiveness of MF presented to those who can't afford your IQ250 or P1 backs but want to try digital instead of film. I am one example because I love to take landscape photos with higher resolution. I appreciate the new technology because it does go well with my work flow and will complement my M. Rather than pay for FF, I rather go up to MF to see and have that wider advantage. For those who have a D800e or 645D, I guess its ROI. W hy upgrade when you are happy already?

05-23-2014, 12:33 PM	#11
NZ_Ross Kiwi Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Timaru Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,225	I like what the 645Z brings in terms of technology, weather sealing etc, and it is a very good addition to the Pentax line up. What concerns me is the lack of an interchangeable back - in MF it is still an area of technology that is moving fast enough. MF is expensive relative to 35mm, and with the 645 I get concerned that there is risks with the investment due to lack of modularity - particularly with the back. On the positive side - same menus and tech as the K3, so very little learning curve in terms of driving the camera. I have just been reading and absorbing information on the 645Z and thinking. Not a lack of interest, more interest at what the 645Z offers verses the competition.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-23-2014, 12:35 PM	#12
FrankC Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Photos: Gallery Posts: 322	As a 645D owner, I'll admit it took me a while to save up for it. So I can't justify spending an additional $8,600 for a replacement that doesn't appear to be a huge increase in image quality. Sure the Z has a flappy screen and ultra-high ISO, but I rarely ever shoot above ISO100. I don't need video and the 25% increase in pixels isn't something that I need either. At this point I would rather see Pentax come out with a 645 with an even larger sensor so my wide angle lenses would become even wider as opposed to any video, articulated screen or increase in pixels or ISO sensitivity. Because for me, all I need is a viewfinder, a shutter release and control over the focusing, aperture and shutter - everything else is gravy.

05-23-2014, 12:40 PM	#13
cali92rs Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 3,354	Originally posted by jonojono For new users, I see the attractiveness of MF presented to those who can't afford your IQ250 or P1 backs but want to try digital instead of film. Are there many (any?) new users that would jump right into digital medium format?

05-23-2014, 12:41 PM	#14
NZ_Ross Kiwi Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Timaru Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,225	Originally posted by FrankC At this point I would rather see Pentax come out with a 645 with an even larger sensor so my wide angle lenses would become even wider as opposed to any video, articulated screen or increase in pixels or ISO sensitivity. Because for me, all I need is a viewfinder, a shutter release and control over the focusing, aperture and shutter - everything else is gravy. Frank, that is a really useful comment to me - I have been looking at MF for more options for landscapes, so anticipating mostly low ISO. I had wondered if a 645D wasn't the way to go when people started to unload them to trade up to the 645Z, and the body prices drop as a result.

05-23-2014, 01:01 PM	#15
CDW Site Supporter Join Date: May 2011 Location: Big Island, Hawaii & Utah Posts: 457	There has been quite a lot of interest in the 645Z on various forums, especially getDPI \| Photography at its best, which is geared predominantly towards high end medium format shooting. I think at this point most people are waiting for it to be released and there really isn't too much more to speculate about until that time. I'm not planning to sell my 645D to move up. A small gain in resolution does not make it worthwhile and the ISO improvement is not a need for me as I shoot 100-400 typically. If I need higher ISO for a specialized purpose I use my K3. If I want outstanding video I use a GH4 or Oly ZX1 when I need a P&S to carry in the car for some unknown opportunity. It's pretty difficult to find one camera system that covers all needs or wants.