[revdocjim]

I'm absolutely loving the abundance of extremely experienced photographers on this site and particularly in this thread. I need some educated opinions because I confess to being sort of mesmerized by the 645Z and have even entertained thoughts of selling my entire APS-C kit and getting the 645Z in its place. I guess I need someone to help me see my folly or encourage me. Here is a quick summary of my photographic background.

I've never been a working photographer and pursue it purely for fun and artistic expression. I started with the Sony A100 about 10 years ago, then the A700 and now the A77. I have gathered a very nice collection of Minolta lenses (35/1.4, 85/1.4, 100/2.8M, 135 STF, 200/2.8, 300/2.8 and 80-200/2.8) and they all get a lot of use. I enjoy landscape and nature, birds, macro flowers and bugs, sports (3 athletic kids and an athletic wife) etc. If I stay with the A-mount I'll probably go to FF before too long. My kids have also picked up a significant interest in photography and use A-mount bodies. I only print about 10% of my photos and the rest stay in the digital world. I'm an active member of a local photography club and we have exhibitions once a year. The rest of my prints are for home decoration and gifts to friends.

About 5-6 years ago I also developed a serious interest in film photography, mostly medium format. I amassed a huge collection of cheaply acquired, used MF cameras and last year finally whittled it down to four keepers that I absolutely love; Pentax 67ii, Pentax 645N, Fuji GF670 and Mamiya 6 and good lens collections for all. I've shot several hundred rolls of 120 film, using color slide film for landscape stuff and B&W negative film for lots of handheld work; city scenes, etc. I send my color film to a lab for processing and develop the B&W at home. I don't have a darkroom and scan all my negatives for printing or digital display. I've never done much studio work. I also have dabbled in 4x5 work but probably less than 40 sheets and I've only scratched the surface with tilt & shift work.

I love my 645N and have a good set of A-series lenses (35mm, 55mm, 75mm, 120mm, 150mm, 200mm and 300mm). I was never interested in the 645D though just because it seemed too specialized and way out of my price range. But with the improvements of the 645Z it could come close to replacing my DSLR in function and purpose other than birds and sports probably. But then again, if I actually got it I would probably look into replacing some of my A-series lenses with FA equivalents.

I intend to continue using my film cameras since I love the whole mindset and process of film photography.

I also seriously question the wisdom of parting with all my beloved Minolta lenses because they really are superb and I love using them.

Is it foolish to consider giving up on the alpha-mount and doing all my digital work with the 645Z? (I would definitely keep an old NEX 5 that I use as a pocket camera for very casual FaceBook type stuff).
As intrigued as I am by the 645Z, I'm also very keen on what Sony will hopefully be introducing in the FF realm in the near future and can see myself thoroughly enjoying something like that too with all the lenses I already have.

The 645Z would be a huge stretch for me financially, but maybe, just maybe possible if I sell all the alpha mount stuff. There is absolutely no way I could keep that stuff and get the 645Z so it is sort of an all or nothing deal as far as my digital photography is concerned. Other than the outlandish price (by my standards) my only gripe with the 645Z is the cropped sensor.

So am I crazy? Should I just give up on the 645Z dream or keep feeding the fire?

All comments welcome.

[DSims]

No big deal giving up your A-mount bodies, but your lenses? I'm not so sure.

You could probably get away with it for what you're doing. But you're ready to give up a 300/2.8? 135 STF? Those f/1.4 lenses? BTW, are these AF lenses (aside from the STF)? The A77 II looks attractive, as would a new FF model. Would your kids forgive you?


As I said, you still could. But why would you want to give up valuable lenses for a body that will be worth relatively little in 5 years? I know you said the 645D doesn't interest you, but a "fire-sale" price on a new or used one seems like the only thing that would make sense here - at least until you see how you like digital in the 645 format.


If you told me you were selling the A-mount lenses to get 645 FA lenses I'd say OK, because you could always buy back the same/similar Minolta/Sony lenses. But throwing the money away on an expensive body? Probably not.

[Silent Street]

"...I've never been a working photographer and pursue it purely for fun and artistic expression."

That alone is a very powerful and persuasive statement to make do, and merry, with what you have. You've got a lot more equipment than many professional, successful landscape and scenic photographers who make their bread-and-butter with large format or medium format, a selection of lenses, their chosen film and importantly, a lot of skill, experience, aptitude and visual panache. Without all those the fanciest camera on earth will not make you a photographer. At its worst, it will only slow down the process because it is the camera doing all the thinking and decision making for you.

"I intend to continue using my film cameras since I love the whole mindset and process of film photography."

More power to you!

So am I crazy? Should I just give up on the 645Z dream or keep feeding the fire?

How, and why, would a digital MF costing as much as a small car improve your work? And what consideration has been given to perpetuity of the digital image?

"The 645Z would be a huge stretch for me financially, but maybe, just maybe possible if I sell all the alpha mount stuff."

It's not as if you have rung the danger bell already, let alone say this!
Oh God. A lot of people successful in analogue photography (landscape, scenic, fine art, alternatypes and the like) are struck dumb by people salivating over a camera costing this much, for many, they'd mortgage their house or their car to get it, going hell for leather to be first on the block with bragging rights. To what end? Nothing financial that I can see unless they are very successful working photographers who can easily wrangle a novated lease, much like they do for their car.

If you're not a professional, if you do not earn $240,000, have staff to support, deadlines and a proven, highly refined workflow ... forget about it. Dreams are cheap. The reality of folly can be devastating.

[revdocjim]

Ah... The voice of sober reason seems to prevail so far. But the dreaming is so much fun... Almost narcotic like. I should add that I don't really have any expectations that the 645Z will make my photography any better. It just sounds and looks like it would be so much fun to use. But I totally get the point about not giving up good glass that holds its value for a quickly depreciating body.

[Nuff]

I stand with Silent Street, save the money and get a tripod instead I like my MF gear, but no way I'm going digital. Also I prefer the look of film and I don't snap at every random thing I see or do test shots. With the money I'm saving I will get myself a beat up Leica M3 and some ancient Leica lenses which I find have very interesting and not super sterile boring (aka modern) rendering.

But I'm more into following interesting photographers and their photos, not the latest marketing pamphlets from companies, telling me that I need something which I didn't need a week ago.

What will make me happier is if I can take photos like this ones:

https://www.flickr.com/photos/junku-newcleus/tags/summarit/

Something for you to think about. What is it that you want to achieve and can you do it with your existing gear?

[tuco]

What will make me happier is if I can take photos like this ones:

You can if you're talking about the post processing. Crush the crap out of your blacks in the image editor for a start. And for the uneven development just don't agitate the film very well when you develop it. And to blow the highlights, push your film.

[gofour3]

I’m with “Silent Street” & “Nuff”, pass on the 645Z. How quickly the 645D has depreciated over the short time it has been on the market is frightening. Getting an expensive new digital MF camera only makes sense if you have a business that you can write off these loses or are very rich.

Stick to your MF film cameras and for the time being just enjoy reading about the 645Z. In five years when they are worth $3k then you’ll be patting yourself on the back.

Phil.

[JinDesu]

Did the 645D depreciate that quickly? It had a MSRP of $10k right? I remember it staying at about $8k-9k used until just last year, and considering it came out in 2010 that's not so bad. Even right now, it's at about $6k used - which sounds about right for the depreciation for any camera. The closest similar camera I could search for would be the D3s (2009), which had a MSRP of $5200 and is now around $2200.

[DSims]

Did the 645D depreciate that quickly? It had a MSRP of $10k right? I remember it staying at about $8k-9k used until just last year, and considering it came out in 2010 that's not so bad. Even right now, it's at about $6k used - which sounds about right for the depreciation for any camera. The closest similar camera I could search for would be the D3s (2009), which had a MSRP of $5200 and is now around $2200.

I agree - it's done pretty well so far. I expect this may look different after the 645Z comes out, however.

But 5 years is a lot of time to not be able to use a camera, so if he really wants or needs it, waiting could be wasteful too ...

[gofour3]

Did the 645D depreciate that quickly? It had a MSRP of $10k right? I remember it staying at about $8k-9k used until just last year, and considering it came out in 2010 that's not so bad. Even right now, it's at about $6k used - which sounds about right for the depreciation for any camera. The closest similar camera I could search for would be the D3s (2009), which had a MSRP of $5200 and is now around $2200.

I agree - it's done pretty well so far. I expect this may look different after the 645Z comes out, however.

But 5 years is a lot of time to not be able to use a camera, so if he really wants or needs it, waiting could be wasteful too ...

See this thread, the used price for a 645D is now close to $3K in Japan.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/48-pentax-645d-medium-format/262159-price...gins-645d.html

Phil.

[Nuff]

You can if you're talking about the post processing. Crush the crap out of your blacks in the image editor for a start. And for the uneven development just don't agitate the film very well when you develop it. And to blow the highlights, push your film.

Or I could skip the process and shoot with an imperfect lens which flares high lights, Leica summarit 50/1.5. And follow his developing and printing advice. No need for any photoshop...

http://junkunishimura.com/info.html

And from his times with super prodol (which I do use for neopan), it doesn't look like he over develops. He shoots at iso1600 and does 2 stop push. It's actually nice to see someone who earns his living from photography reveal his darkroom process.

As for depreciation, I already went through with it with K5. I paid AU$1600 for it, now it's around $400 and I have to spend money on it to fix the mirror flapping issue. I prefer to invest the money into shares etc and use the a bit at a time to purchase film instead. And everyone and then a classic camera which truly takes different and unique photos. Just look at a camera like Norita 66 with it's 80mm f2 lens on Flickr. Now that is different.

Personally I'm bit pissed with all the marketing and sales people telling us to get in debt and live beyond our means because it will make us more happy. Instead it puts people under financial stress and when the economy hits the crapper, they can end up on the street.

Instead of spending the $6-9k on a camera, use the money to take an overseas holiday and use your existing cameras to photograph the beauty this world offers. I think great photographs are better than great camera. The world is amazing place! Cameras are not.

[Hakusan]

I'm absolutely loving the abundance of extremely experienced photographers on this site and particularly in this thread. I need some educated opinions because I confess to being sort of mesmerized by the 645Z and have even entertained thoughts of selling my entire APS-C kit and getting the 645Z in its place. I guess I need someone to help me see my folly or encourage me. Here is a quick summary of my photographic background.

I've never been a working photographer and pursue it purely for fun and artistic expression. I started with the Sony A100 about 10 years ago, then the A700 and now the A77. I have gathered a very nice collection of Minolta lenses (35/1.4, 85/1.4, 100/2.8M, 135 STF, 200/2.8, 300/2.8 and 80-200/2.8) and they all get a lot of use. I enjoy landscape and nature, birds, macro flowers and bugs, sports (3 athletic kids and an athletic wife) etc. If I stay with the A-mount I'll probably go to FF before too long. My kids have also picked up a significant interest in photography and use A-mount bodies. I only print about 10% of my photos and the rest stay in the digital world. I'm an active member of a local photography club and we have exhibitions once a year. The rest of my prints are for home decoration and gifts to friends.

About 5-6 years ago I also developed a serious interest in film photography, mostly medium format. I amassed a huge collection of cheaply acquired, used MF cameras and last year finally whittled it down to four keepers that I absolutely love; Pentax 67ii, Pentax 645N, Fuji GF670 and Mamiya 6 and good lens collections for all. I've shot several hundred rolls of 120 film, using color slide film for landscape stuff and B&W negative film for lots of handheld work; city scenes, etc. I send my color film to a lab for processing and develop the B&W at home. I don't have a darkroom and scan all my negatives for printing or digital display. I've never done much studio work. I also have dabbled in 4x5 work but probably less than 40 sheets and I've only scratched the surface with tilt & shift work.

I love my 645N and have a good set of A-series lenses (35mm, 55mm, 75mm, 120mm, 150mm, 200mm and 300mm). I was never interested in the 645D though just because it seemed too specialized and way out of my price range. But with the improvements of the 645Z it could come close to replacing my DSLR in function and purpose other than birds and sports probably. But then again, if I actually got it I would probably look into replacing some of my A-series lenses with FA equivalents.

I intend to continue using my film cameras since I love the whole mindset and process of film photography.

I also seriously question the wisdom of parting with all my beloved Minolta lenses because they really are superb and I love using them.

Is it foolish to consider giving up on the alpha-mount and doing all my digital work with the 645Z? (I would definitely keep an old NEX 5 that I use as a pocket camera for very casual FaceBook type stuff).
As intrigued as I am by the 645Z, I'm also very keen on what Sony will hopefully be introducing in the FF realm in the near future and can see myself thoroughly enjoying something like that too with all the lenses I already have.

The 645Z would be a huge stretch for me financially, but maybe, just maybe possible if I sell all the alpha mount stuff. There is absolutely no way I could keep that stuff and get the 645Z so it is sort of an all or nothing deal as far as my digital photography is concerned. Other than the outlandish price (by my standards) my only gripe with the 645Z is the cropped sensor.

So am I crazy? Should I just give up on the 645Z dream or keep feeding the fire?

All comments welcome.

Well, it seems like you love medium-format cameras. Sony has been making FF cameras for sometime, but you have never jumped? It seems logical to get a 645Z. You get to share the lenses for your 645N film body. That seems practical.

The question is what would you miss by the change? I had some really great cameras before I bought a 645D. Sold them off and never looked back. I am also doing a lot more work--the money I saved in the first year shooting the 645D in film and processing costs paid for the camera. As far as depreciation? These are cameras, not financial instruments. If you want an investment, I suggest stocks and bonds. I am still shooting my 645D and I do not intend to stop doing that for some time.

Sure, the camera does not make the photographer, but it is interesting how great photographers have great cameras. I tend to shoot more and do better with equipment I enjoy using. Could I do good work with cheap equipment? Sure. But why do I have to? A good camera is going to complement your work, rather than detract from it.

The 645Z does not have a crop sensor no more than the 645N is a "crop" film camera. The 645Z is a 44x33mm format. BTW, it will put your 645N images to shame.

I would also factor in to a purchase a budget for hard drives--the files are going to be larger than your old camera.

I would also ask yourself if you work better in 3:2 or 4:3 aspect ratios. If you like the 3:2, a FF will be better. And if you want fast lenses, FF will be better as well.

But honestly, no one can answer the question but you.

[JinDesu]

See this thread, the used price for a 645D is now close to $3K in Japan.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/48-pentax-645d-medium-format/262159-price...gins-645d.html

Phil.

MSRP in Japan was 850k yen. Fujiya's lowest second hand body currently is 338k yen. For reference, the MSRP of the D3s was 598k yen, and it is selling on Fujiya for 255k yen. The difference is comparable - and the 645D only started dropping when the 645Z was announced.

If you are afraid of depreciation, no higher end camera is going to be reasonable for that. My k-x was was $650 new and I can get a used one now for $200-250. The 645D held a value of about $8000 for about 3 years. That's pretty good in my opinion.

Instead of spending the $6-9k on a camera, use the money to take an overseas holiday and use your existing cameras to photograph the beauty this world offers. I think great photographs are better than great camera. The world is amazing place! Cameras are not.

But that's for you, no? If I could afford to spend 9k on a camera and 9k on going on vacation, I'd certainly do both. I can't so that's why I own a k-3 instead. And that's why my vacations are in the 500-1000 dollar ranges. But I don't feel unhappy about that.

[tuco]

And from his times with super prodol (which I do use for neopan), it doesn't look like he over develops. He shoots at iso1600 and does 2 stop push.t.

A two stop push is over developing. That's what produces the poor tonal scale and crushed blacks. The uneven development, if intentional, then whatever floats a persons boat. And, it appears, he is just goes with whatever his meter says.

That style has been around for a very long time. It is not unique. Perhaps even a cliché. Having spent a life time trying to get more tonal scale in my negatives I can say, IMHO, it is harder to get more tonal scale than to get less. I'm not knocking that style but it's not that hard to do.

[revdocjim]

Thanks haikusan. Finally a voice from the other side to complicate the issue. And you make several good points. The cropped sensor isn't such a huge deal for me, but in as much as I would be using my 645 A-series lenses, it would feel like a cropped sensor process. The other medium format frame sizes each have their own lenses so it's a little different. Also, as you say, the 645 format is already a cropped or half format, as we are always reminded here in Japan where it is regularly referred to as "semi-ban" (semi-format). Now the digital version is cropped even more so it's a valid question to ask whether this can even be called a medium format camera. But these aren't points worth arguing or worrying about in my book. It is what it is and I find the concept really fascinating.