[2351HD]

I would tend to agree with those here regarding the D, I would take an ISO 100 shot from the D over the D800 sensor.

The only reason I got the Z was to get live view because my eyes are crap and it helps with accurate focusing using live view.

Mike has a point, I would rent both the D and Z and make my choice from there.

The D files even have an amazing amount of shadow recovery at base ISO, in my experience. I have taken long exposures that I screwed up that were grossly underexposed and still pushed them back up and they printed astonishingly well.

Proof is in real world application.

[itshimitis]

I would tend to agree with those here regarding the D, I would take an ISO 100 shot from the D over the D800 sensor.

The only reason I got the Z was to get live view because my eyes are crap and it helps with accurate focusing using live view.

Mike has a point, I would rent both the D and Z and make my choice from there.

The D files even have an amazing amount of shadow recovery at base ISO, in my experience. I have taken long exposures that I screwed up that were grossly underexposed and still pushed them back up and they printed astonishingly well.

Proof is in real world application.

Likewise.

[filoxophy]

1/4000th FLASH SYNC ON 645Z WITH PRIOLITE They must have updated it since it was first announced. IIRC it was many thousands of dollars originally, but this starts under $300.

Just to be clear, that price is for the controller only. The strobes are $1500++ apiece.

[skytomorrownow]

The D files even have an amazing amount of shadow recovery at base ISO, in my experience. I have taken long exposures that I screwed up that were grossly underexposed and still pushed them back up and they printed astonishingly well.

I was like OP and had a tough time swallowing the upgrade to a Z from my old FF kit. But, when I found out about the D being so affordable (in a professional sense) I took the plunge.

While it lacks the bells and whistles of the Z and the shooting process is a bit slower, the image quality is fantastic. You can absolutely pull several stops out of the blacks and still be just fine. I only ever worry about highlights. I know that I can pull those blacks pretty hard.

The D might be the slow cousin from the back woods compared to the Z, but for that leap from FF to MF it absolutely is not a pretender.

[osv]

Of course it makes it theoretical for you. You don't own the 645Z and I'm not sure you even own the A7RII, though you rave about Sony's products all the time. I speak from a practical basis, and own both cameras. 90% of what I shoot is with the Pentax. I'd love to have electric front curtain and IBIS in the 645Z, sure,

you post a ton of a7rii pics, because it's your travel camera, so i'm not seeing how your "90% of what I shoot is with the Pentax" claim could be true: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/76-non-pentax-cameras-canon-nikon-etc/243...thread-73.html

wrt efcs, as you well know i own an a7r, so i'm quite familiar with shutter shake, that's why the next camera i get will have fully functional efcs... not some crippled dslr version of efcs, but real efcs that works under all shooting condtions, which can only be had with mirrorless cameras... the next version of the 645z will not have that full capability, because of the mirror.

i suspect that if people in this thread had actually evaluated the resolution losses associated with shutter shake and mirror flap on their cameras, they'd have a better appreciation for efcs.

Where you are missing the point is that choice of aspect ratio is not a post shoot decision, it is a pre shoot decision.

what you are missing is that the overwhelmingly dominant display format for photos these days is based on rectangular formats; 16:9 for tv's, phones, computers, etc... about the only place a squarish aspect ratio is useful is with certain print sizes.

if you are having problems visualizing how to frame square in a rectangular world, i'd suggest putting some gaffer tape on the sides of the lcd... it's not like you'll need a few lost pixels for portraits, women in particular like a softer look.

as for the idea that 645d is somehow comparable to a d810, actual d.r. MEASUREMENTS tell a different story:

[itshimitis]

you post a ton of a7rii pics, because it's your travel camera, so i'm not seeing how your "90% of what I shoot is with the Pentax" claim could be true: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/76-non-pentax-cameras-canon-nikon-etc/243...thread-73.html

wrt efcs, as you well know i own an a7r, so i'm quite familiar with shutter shake, that's why the next camera i get will have fully functional efcs... not some crippled dslr version of efcs, but real efcs that works under all shooting condtions, which can only be had with mirrorless cameras... the next version of the 645z will not have that full capability, because of the mirror.

i suspect that if people in this thread had actually evaluated the resolution losses associated with shutter shake and mirror flap on their cameras, they'd have a better appreciation for efcs.



what you are missing is that the overwhelmingly dominant display format for photos these days is based on rectangular formats; 16:9 for tv's, phones, computers, etc... about the only place a squarish aspect ratio is useful is with certain print sizes.

if you are having problems visualizing how to frame square in a rectangular world, i'd suggest putting some gaffer tape on the sides of the lcd... it's not like you'll need a few lost pixels for portraits, women in particular like a softer look.

as for the idea that 645d is somehow comparable to a d810, actual d.r. MEASUREMENTS tell a different story:

Do you think I post everything I shoot? I have an exhibition in Hungary at the moment. It moves to M Gallery in Vienna in a few weeks (it would have already been there but they had a pipe burst and the gallery flooded). 23 images are in the exhibition. Most are 645Z images Some are D800/E images one is a mobile phone image a few are Sony images. I supplied 40 images and the gallery chose the ones they thought best and that is also the balance of what was chosen.

It has also all been printed. If you want to just look over images on a screen then there is little point having a camera with ultra high resolution. Shoot with a 10mp camera and great lenses instead. If you want to print then you aren't bound to screen aspect ratios. I don't do pixel peeping. I also don't do resolution charts that's for gear heads not photographers.

There are techniques to minimise shutter shock. With the Z I use live view for critical focus switch off LV then switch to manual focus to hold the focus where I have aimed it and then use mirror up. I find biggest shutter shock is when live view is used. This also minimises battery use.

Too many gear heads think too hard. I try to use feelings and emotion in what I shoot. I don't always succeed but I keep trying anyway.

As for dynamic range, I wouldn't want it to get too much better as there does need to be some contrast in shots to give them some definition. That's the mistake many people make when they do HDR. They get rid of the shadows.

How a photograph works is more than just about dynamic range. It is about tones too. 645D may not have the dynamic range of the 810 but for tones it knocks the 810 out of the park. When you come to print you won't have all those 15 stops anyway.

[D1N0]

Theory vs Practice. I Love it!

[itshimitis]

Theory vs Practice. I Love it!

Indeed. I like gear as much as anyone, but I buy it to use it. My ultimate aim is to print photographs not simply display images. That is also the aim of the OP who is who we are meant to be trying to help.

OSV

Which do you think is most important? Tones or dynamic range? In my view the answer begins with a T. You need good DR to help with it, but it's not all about the DR.

[osv]

lets be clear on one thing: i post sensor MEASUREMENTS, that's not theory it's fact.

it looks to me like the 645d has the same measured tonal curve as the d810? Nikon D810 vs Pentax 645D

roughly speaking, dr~=file latitude~=highlight/shadow recovery?? so it's important for processing in post... you need all of that you can get, regardless of how the photo is viewed.

if money was no object, would i like to own a 645z, even tho it's not mirrorless? absolutely :-) the dpr comparison tool proves how clean the iso noise artifacting is, my a7r can't touch that, it'll show up in real-world use, just like gavincato said.

i just don't see it being a practical alternative for the o.p., in terms of the r.o.i. against the d810 that he already owns.

[itshimitis]

Pass me the Tylenol. Charts give me a headache.

Stop comparing specs start shooting and printing. Or else downgrade to a D40 and learn to expose correctly.

[mikeSF]

lets be clear on one thing: i post sensor MEASUREMENTS, that's not theory it's fact.

it looks to me like the 645d has the same measured tonal curve as the d810? Nikon D810 vs Pentax 645D

roughly speaking, dr~=file latitude~=highlight/shadow recovery?? so it's important for processing in post... you need all of that you can get, regardless of how the photo is viewed.

if money was no object, would i like to own a 645z, even tho it's not mirrorless? absolutely :-) the dpr comparison tool proves how clean the iso noise artifacting is, my a7r can't touch that, it'll show up in real-world use, just like gavincato said.

i just don't see it being a practical alternative for the o.p., in terms of the r.o.i. against the d810 that he already owns.

wow man you went off the deep end and for some reason are still showing dynamic range charts. Now let's get back to my point that in pure IQ (resolution, color tones), the 645D makes better pictures. 810D falls short of the detail resolved by the 645D. I originally said if dynamic range performance is important, there are better choices than the D. But you seem to keep missing that.
Thanks for playing.

[jonohake28]

Yes I think 4:3 ratio whilst composing is pretty darn useful, especially as taping the viewfinder isn't really that easy.

To crop D810 you get down to about 32MP vs 50mp for the Pentax 645z. I guess I'm not sure how much of a difference I will notice, or to rephrase at what point size print will the differences be noticeable. It is of course hard to say, and probably best to test.

I guess I was interested in hearing people's accounts who had perhaps had d810 and moved over to Pentax. In my mind id have to keep both, but could get buy with just the Pentax perhaps to sell the other gear to afford it.

[itshimitis]

Yes I think 4:3 ratio whilst composing is pretty darn useful, especially as taping the viewfinder isn't really that easy.

To crop D810 you get down to about 32MP vs 50mp for the Pentax 645z. I guess I'm not sure how much of a difference I will notice, or to rephrase at what point size print will the differences be noticeable. It is of course hard to say, and probably best to test.

I guess I was interested in hearing people's accounts who had perhaps had d810 and moved over to Pentax. In my mind id have to keep both, but could get buy with just the Pentax perhaps to sell the other gear to afford it.

Not only would you lose resolution, but to get the same amount of space around a model (I hope I am making myself clear enough here) you would need to stand further back and shoot a little wider as a native 4x3 gives more width in portrait orientation and more height in landscape orientation. Having a 4 x 3 native would mean you could be a little closer than you presently are with the D810.

In your position, I would definitely investigate borrowing a D and a Z and seeing which you prefer. They are similar and you can get similar tones with the Z, but it will need a little more work in post. The CCD 'pop' will also come at a cheaper price too.

[gavincato]

i just don't see it being a practical alternative for the o.p., in terms of the r.o.i. against the d810 that he already owns.

well, thats you. I was in a relatively similar position to OP - being mostly a people shooting sort of guy. I had (still do) a Canon rig with pretty much every lens worth owning. Went to the 645z fully intending to sell it if I didn't see a significant difference. Was pretty doubtful that I'd see much of a difference over the canon slr with the best lenses canon make. Guess what has now become my primary rig.

[itshimitis]

Yes I think 4:3 ratio whilst composing is pretty darn useful, especially as taping the viewfinder isn't really that easy.

To crop D810 you get down to about 32MP vs 50mp for the Pentax 645z. I guess I'm not sure how much of a difference I will notice, or to rephrase at what point size print will the differences be noticeable. It is of course hard to say, and probably best to test.

I guess I was interested in hearing people's accounts who had perhaps had d810 and moved over to Pentax. In my mind id have to keep both, but could get buy with just the Pentax perhaps to sell the other gear to afford it.

I would keep both as Gavincato has done with his Canon rig. You could sell the lenses that aren't essential to help fund the Z, but do make sure you have a back up system. The weak link in the chain is the service end. If you are UK based, you will be at the mercy of Johnson's Photopia. They took 3 months to even quote me a repair estimate on a damaged lens. When my D went in for repair due to a dodgy shoulder strap (never buy sun sniper) it took them nearly 5 months to fix it. Under Ricoh they say they are addressing it, but it pays to have a back up. I had a sensor go faulty with the D. The camera went to Tokyo and it took a month on that occasion, but that was with the assistance of the MD of Pentax UK at the time. I no longer have these contacts unfortunately. Mind you, if you get the Z you could at some point look at getting low shutter count D second hand as a back up/second body.

---------- Post added 03-12-16 at 03:13 PM ----------

lets be clear on one thing: i post sensor MEASUREMENTS, that's not theory it's fact.

it looks to me like the 645d has the same measured tonal curve as the d810? Nikon D810 vs Pentax 645D

roughly speaking, dr~=file latitude~=highlight/shadow recovery?? so it's important for processing in post... you need all of that you can get, regardless of how the photo is viewed.

if money was no object, would i like to own a 645z, even tho it's not mirrorless? absolutely :-) the dpr comparison tool proves how clean the iso noise artifacting is, my a7r can't touch that, it'll show up in real-world use, just like gavincato said.

i just don't see it being a practical alternative for the o.p., in terms of the r.o.i. against the d810 that he already owns.

The problem with looking at spec sheets and charts is that you don't see real world results. I usually get on fine with you (and there's no hard feelings on my part) but you need to get past what is good on paper. Has there every been an art gallery that has put up an exhibition of resolution and DR charts? I somehow don't think so. Photography isn't about what our cameras ca do, it's what we can get from our cameras. The modern obsession with specs and charts and pixel peeping bores me rigid, and has little to do with art. if it had all been about DR, Velvia would never have been as famous as it is.