[willeisner]

My dream camera would be a Pentax 67 iii
with auto focus, and a new fitting, bayonet flange with the best possible
to use all MF lenses available in the market.

[johnmflores]

A year off to ride a motorcycle around the world.

[monochrome]

I want the bio-mechanical eagle eye to be human-implantable. What camera?

[texandrews]

It would have to be a digital medium format "rangefinder style" camera, like the old Fuji's or the Mamiya 7's. I might prefer a fixed zoom lens on it like some of the Fuji 645's had. That's a camera I really would take everywhere with me.

[2351HD]

My dream camera is the half depth 645z that Adam showed on his review, with an electronic first curtain shutter, EVF attachment with pivot.

Also a 30mm (24mm eq) f4 OS 645 prime lens, 45mm (35mm eq) f4 OS lens and a 90-180mm f5.6 OS zoom lens.

Perfect kit.

[plooksta]

My dream camera is the half depth 645z that Adam showed on his review, with an electronic first curtain shutter, EVF attachment with pivot.

Also a 30mm (24mm eq) f4 OS 645 prime lens, 45mm (35mm eq) f4 OS lens and a 90-180mm f5.6 OS zoom lens.

Perfect kit.

What "half-depth 645z"? what review?

[Sandy Hancock]

A full frame 36x24 DSLR the size of the K10D with the button placement of the K-3.
Properly big optical viewfinder.
24 megapixels (I would accept 36 max, but under sufferance).
Decent predictive AF.
Great high ISO performance.
Big buffer.
Video optional.
JPEG engine optional.
Switching drive mode, WB, etc can't happen without look-away confirmation.

[monochrome]

What are you telling us?

A full frame 36x24 DSLR the size of the K10D with the button placement of the K-3.
Properly big optical viewfinder.
24 megapixels (I would accept 36 max, but under sufferance).
Decent predictive AF.
Great high ISO performance.
Big buffer.
Video optional.
JPEG engine optional.
Switching drive mode, WB, etc can't happen without look-away confirmation.

[Don Fischer]

Mamiya 617. Imagine a Mamiya 617 digital camera!

[bobbotron]

It would have to be a digital medium format "rangefinder style" camera, like the old Fuji's or the Mamiya 7's. I might prefer a fixed zoom lens on it like some of the Fuji 645's had. That's a camera I really would take everywhere with me.

A digital rangefinder (that's not a $$$$$ Leica) would be AMAZING, I'd also love one.

I think it could be a game changer to be able to swap out sensors easily. It'd be cool if the bodies still split in two like film cameras, for easy cleaning. The two features together would be great - flip open the camera, unplug the sensor, pop in a new one. Fovean (sp?) - check! IR un-flitered - check! Seriously, it would be great.

Tbh, I think if I could get a digital K1000, that'd be pretty sweet. With the old silver body and everything. Throw in a changable sensor or at least easy access for converting to and from full spectrum would be great.

[Kolor-Pikker]

What "half-depth 645z"? what review?

I don't remember which review it was exactly, but I remember that picture.
Basically the author photoshopped an image of the 645Z to be much shorter than it is now, based in the fact that the 645Z actually has a whole lot of empty space inside.

If you look at the top of the 645Z there is a Ф symbol on top which displays where the sensor plane is located inside of the camera - from that symbol to the hinge of the LCD display is mostly dead space that houses the electronics. The actual electronics are even stacked across multiple PCBs with risers and mezzanine connectors because it's cheaper to do so than design compact circuits because of all the room available, and even then they don't take up half the available space.

This is really strange because this camera body is far from having film roots, but is still big enough in the rear to theoretically stuff a roll of film inside.

The same goes for the mirror box - while the flange distance can't be reduced for lens compatibility reasons, everything else could have been reduced where appropriate. It's like Pentax is intentionally keeping these proportions to prevent themselves having to retool their assembly lines should they ever decide to utilize a full 645 sensor. Although even if they do eventually pull it off, it still doesn't justify the fact that the back of the camera is mostly empty, they can either compress the front of the camera further into the body for better balance, or push the LCD display further into the camera for nose room.

[2351HD]

This is the page with the half size body.

Pentax 645Z Review - Construction and Handling | PentaxForums.com Reviews

[Sandy Hancock]

What are you telling us?

I know nothing.

[plooksta]

I don't remember which review it was exactly, but I remember that picture.
Basically the author photoshopped an image of the 645Z to be much shorter than it is now, based in the fact that the 645Z actually has a whole lot of empty space inside.

If you look at the top of the 645Z there is a Ф symbol on top which displays where the sensor plane is located inside of the camera - from that symbol to the hinge of the LCD display is mostly dead space that houses the electronics. The actual electronics are even stacked across multiple PCBs with risers and mezzanine connectors because it's cheaper to do so than design compact circuits because of all the room available, and even then they don't take up half the available space.

This is really strange because this camera body is far from having film roots, but is still big enough in the rear to theoretically stuff a roll of film inside.

The same goes for the mirror box - while the flange distance can't be reduced for lens compatibility reasons, everything else could have been reduced where appropriate. It's like Pentax is intentionally keeping these proportions to prevent themselves having to retool their assembly lines should they ever decide to utilize a full 645 sensor. Although even if they do eventually pull it off, it still doesn't justify the fact that the back of the camera is mostly empty, they can either compress the front of the camera further into the body for better balance, or push the LCD display further into the camera for nose room.

Ah, I see. I have noticed the same things on DSLRs. I was just comparing the K5 yesterday with some old pentax film cameras I have lying around. Digitals are much deeper than the film cameras and I happen to know that silicon wafers are not that much thicker than film! It would be nice if they could rearrange things to make them slimmer.

---------- Post added 08-07-15 at 03:17 AM ----------

This is the page with the half size body.

Pentax 645Z Review - Construction and Handling | PentaxForums.com Reviews

Thanks. Makes a heck of a lot of sense. However I would like to see a full 645. If Pentax could steal a march on that one, they'd corner a new market.

---------- Post added 08-07-15 at 03:19 AM ----------

It would have to be a digital medium format "rangefinder style" camera, like the old Fuji's or the Mamiya 7's. I might prefer a fixed zoom lens on it like some of the Fuji 645's had. That's a camera I really would take everywhere with me.

Yup, and you're not alone on that one. Funny the market hasn't really picked up on that concept --- yet.

[texandrews]

Isn't the problem the flange-back distance? None of the legacy lenses (probably none of the lenses) would work without adapters, making the lanes longer and throwing the balance off. That's a problem with the Sony A7 series, and the lenses are mostly much smaller. It wouldn't be great with some of the big/heavy 645 zooms...