[itshimitis]

Thanks for all the input everyone, I really appreciate it.

I had a look at the link for the 645z at Misfuds and it is tempting, although given the price, might be safer to buy new and have warranty etc. for the sake of a couple of hundred quid.

It definitely sounds like the support for getting things replaced if the need arose, would be difficult, hence the benefit of having a backup body like the d810, canon 5d3 or similar.

The recommendation to score the screen was a little extreme for me, but I can see how it would be helpful. I think it really is an issue whilst taking the shot you want to work in the format that you intend to print at. Modern dslr's are almost exclusively 2:3 ratio, which I find way too wide, very difficult to use. Ideally I'd have a mam7 that was digital, basic camera with basic function, super sharp lenses but with a legit sensor, this is pure dreaming of course - I don't think that many people are after this sort of thing.

Inside this forum that is most people's dream camera! If Fuji want to make a fixed lens or mirrorless 7 or even 6 x 7 there will be lots of buyers here!

[jonohake28]

Yeah it would be ideal, not sure how likely though. I guess so far I have been waiting and wondering about the prices of MF digital being within reach and the 645z has come closest to the features required at a price that is possible.

If it wasn't for the style that I often shoot (blending exposures) then I would probably stick to film for now.

[skytomorrownow]

Inside this forum that is most people's dream camera! If Fuji want to make a fixed lens or mirrorless 7 or even 6 x 7 there will be lots of buyers here!

A digital Fuji RZ67... I just got shivers. That would be so sweet.

[One3rdEV]

No problem, was just a suggestion. In the film days that was part of what made working with the square format Hasselblad so wonderful- having the focusing screen marked for the final print format in both horizontal & vertical orientation required no time or hassle to rotate the camera and reorient the flash, or to flip the tripod head. Just quickly recompose without guesswork.

[antono yuwono]

@itshimitis,

I totally agree with you regarding arguments between 645z and A7R2, as I also own and use both camera,
The difference in actual result is still quite a lot, and the way we can maximise raw files from the Z is fantastic.

I have a friend who think that the DR in Z is overated, but I just don't want to go into debate with him.

People must see for themselves how much better a medium format really is compared to lower sensor size.
That is also the way I instantly converted to medium format advantages..when a friend bring a Z and show me what kind of pictures it can take. After I saw the result, it only takes a minute for me to decide this is the best I have seen (at that time).

After I buy and use the Z for about a year, I compare it to phase one XF iq3 50, and the phase one is better still, although the price difference is huge.

When the A7R2 released, I buy it also, and use it for shooting my family pictures when we are having holidays (last winter we spent 1 month in Italy), as just like Itshimitis said that, the Z is still better that the A7R2, that is also my findings.

I mostly shoot landscapes,city scapes, and mostly stitching panoramic images. I want to share the panoramic shots that I take, but do not how to post it in our thread.

So, that is my experiences with both camera, and if you ever compared the actual camera in real life, than you can finally judge which one is better for you

Regards

[osv]

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.

you apparently don't know that canon sensors are weak, see these real-world test photos of the latitude differences between your canon ff camera and the a7r: Sony A7R teams up with Canon glass

so of course you saw a big difference with canon ff vs. 645z, because canon ff doesn't belong in a discussion about d810 vs. 645z, it's not comparable at all.

look at the 5ds/5dsr sensorgen link i posted a few pages back, notice how poorly that 50mp camera compares? don't lump all ff cameras under the same umbrella.

---------- Post added 03-17-16 at 01:43 PM ----------

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.

wrong, i said *tonal range*, dr and tonal range are not the same thing, and if you think that the 645d offers more in the way of color tones, i'd suggest that you compare the color sensitivity curves, the 645d is never better than the d810 anywhere in the graph:
"Color sensitivity is the number of reliably distinguishable colors up to noise."
Nikon D810 vs Pentax 645D

"3. Dynamic Range
Dynamic range is defined as the ratio between the highest and lowest gray luminance a sensor can capture. However, the lowest gray luminance makes sense only if it is not drowned by noise, thus this lower boundary is defined as the gray luminance for which the SNR is larger than 1. The dynamic range is a ratio of gray luminance; it has no defined unit per se, but it can be expressed in Ev, or f-stops.
4. Tonal Range
Tonal range is the effective number of gray levels the system can produce. This measure has to take noise into account (indeed, a very thin gray-level quantization is irrelevant if the quantization step is much smaller than noise). The standard deviation of noise can be viewed as the smallest difference between two distinguishable gray levels. The expression of the tonal range is
.
Since tonal range is a number with no unit, one can consider instead , which represents the number of bits necessary to encode all distinguishable gray levels." Noise - DxOMark

[itshimitis]

you apparently don't know that canon sensors are weak, see these real-world test photos of the latitude differences between your canon ff camera and the a7r: Sony A7R teams up with Canon glass

so of course you saw a big difference with canon ff vs. 645z, because canon ff doesn't belong in a discussion about d810 vs. 645z, it's not comparable at all.

look at the 5ds/5dsr sensorgen link i posted a few pages back, notice how poorly that 50mp camera compares? don't lump all ff cameras under the same umbrella.

---------- Post added 03-17-16 at 01:43 PM ----------



wrong, i said *tonal range*, dr and tonal range are not the same thing, and if you think that the 645d offers more in the way of color tones, i'd suggest that you compare the color sensitivity curves, the 645d is never better than the d810 anywhere in the graph:
"Color sensitivity is the number of reliably distinguishable colors up to noise."
Nikon D810 vs Pentax 645D

"3. Dynamic Range
Dynamic range is defined as the ratio between the highest and lowest gray luminance a sensor can capture. However, the lowest gray luminance makes sense only if it is not drowned by noise, thus this lower boundary is defined as the gray luminance for which the SNR is larger than 1. The dynamic range is a ratio of gray luminance; it has no defined unit per se, but it can be expressed in Ev, or f-stops.
4. Tonal Range
Tonal range is the effective number of gray levels the system can produce. This measure has to take noise into account (indeed, a very thin gray-level quantization is irrelevant if the quantization step is much smaller than noise). The standard deviation of noise can be viewed as the smallest difference between two distinguishable gray levels. The expression of the tonal range is
.
Since tonal range is a number with no unit, one can consider instead , which represents the number of bits necessary to encode all distinguishable gray levels." Noise - DxOMark

I'll assume those are still more charts. They don't get printed and framed in galleries. How often do you print images?

[osv]

645D maybe a dino but the output in certain situations is still amazing.

Please show me a Full Frame camera than can output a file this good(This is JPEG out of camera not RAW)

*40mp link*
https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4119/4763388515_81888bd015_o.jpg

good? in what sense? eye detail? o.k., 24mp a7: http://www.letsgodigital.org/images/producten/3428/review/sony-a7.jpg

---------- Post added 03-17-16 at 03:29 PM ----------

I'll assume those are still more charts. They don't get printed and framed in galleries. How often do you print images?

i can see that some people don't understand factual information... fine, so where are the comparison pics, 645z vs. ff?

[gavincato]

you apparently don't know that canon sensors are weak, see these real-world test photos of the latitude differences between your canon ff camera and the a7r: Sony A7R teams up with Canon glass

so of course you saw a big difference with canon ff vs. 645z, because canon ff doesn't belong in a discussion about d810 vs. 645z, it's not comparable at all.

look at the 5ds/5dsr sensorgen link i posted a few pages back, notice how poorly that 50mp camera compares? don't lump all ff cameras under the same umbrella.

---------- Post added 03-17-16 at 01:43 PM ----------



wrong, i said *tonal range*, dr and tonal range are not the same thing, and if you think that the 645d offers more in the way of color tones, i'd suggest that you compare the color sensitivity curves, the 645d is never better than the d810 anywhere in the graph:
"Color sensitivity is the number of reliably distinguishable colors up to noise."
Nikon D810 vs Pentax 645D

"3. Dynamic Range
Dynamic range is defined as the ratio between the highest and lowest gray luminance a sensor can capture. However, the lowest gray luminance makes sense only if it is not drowned by noise, thus this lower boundary is defined as the gray luminance for which the SNR is larger than 1. The dynamic range is a ratio of gray luminance; it has no defined unit per se, but it can be expressed in Ev, or f-stops.
4. Tonal Range
Tonal range is the effective number of gray levels the system can produce. This measure has to take noise into account (indeed, a very thin gray-level quantization is irrelevant if the quantization step is much smaller than noise). The standard deviation of noise can be viewed as the smallest difference between two distinguishable gray levels. The expression of the tonal range is
.
Since tonal range is a number with no unit, one can consider instead , which represents the number of bits necessary to encode all distinguishable gray levels." Noise - DxOMark

well, you certainly seems like someone who values charts a lot.

I value the end result.

You assume a lot about what I have used based on a quick paragraph. I had a d810 here for a fortnight. I've used a a7r2. A 5dsr. I own a 1dx currently.

It's not just about straight DR & charts - though the 645z obviously does well there. It's about the overall look that MF gives. Since building up a pentax lens kit I prefer the look of the glass over the 35 stuff. I'm not saying theres anything wrong with the 35 stuff - but I get a heck of a lot more enjoyment out of the MF lenses. Please note I'm not just talking pentax specific lenses, but also hasselblad and contax glass adapted which just has a magical look about it that no 35 glass I have ever seen has produced.

Enjoy your charts & website analysis. I'll enjoy my MF gear in real life with real paying customers.

[itshimitis]

good? in what sense? eye detail? o.k., 24mp a7: http://www.letsgodigital.org/images/producten/3428/review/sony-a7.jpg

---------- Post added 03-17-16 at 03:29 PM ----------



i can see that some people don't understand factual information... fine, so where are the comparison pics, 645z vs. ff?

I'm sorry. You seem more of a gear head than a photographer. When do you see images as anything other than pixels? One of the reasons I like photography is that it is not wholly empirical. It is something that can be emotional. Pixel peepers and chart fanatics are artistic killjoys in my book. Stop thinking start feeling and print things rather than get square eyes from looking at computer screens all the time.

[mikeSF]

[/COLOR]

wrong, i said *tonal range*, d...[/url]

sorry, i'm not interested in reading dxomark charts. I have actual practical experience with both cameras and know which makes nicer images for my purposes. I shared that with the OP and have little interest in a senseless debate.

[itshimitis]

good? in what sense? eye detail? o.k., 24mp a7: http://www.letsgodigital.org/images/producten/3428/review/sony-a7.jpg

---------- Post added 03-17-16 at 03:29 PM ----------



i can see that some people don't understand factual information... fine, so where are the comparison pics, 645z vs. ff?

Oh and quit the patronising tone. It doesn't aid your point one jot. Just because charts bore me, doesn't mean I don't understand them. I have no interest in them that's all. Like most photographers in my experience.

[filoxophy]

Some people don't know to quit when they're behind.

[osv]

Oh and quit the patronising tone. It doesn't aid your point one jot. Just because charts bore me, doesn't mean I don't understand them. I have no interest in them that's all. Like most photographers in my experience.

that wasn't directed at you specifically.

i provided test results for the o.p. because no one was able to post photos that quantified the sensor differences for 645z vs. d810.

[rfkiii]

I’m a current Nikon D810 owner, struggling over whether I should purchase a Pentax 645z or not? - Hint I definitely want to, the camera ticks all the boxes, but I’m not sure if I am being ridiculous or not.

What do I shoot? I shoot portraits, fine art, documentary and studio mainly. I’m not professionally shooting, but I am extremely ambitious about creating serious long term work. Photography is my passion, but I also hope to make it commercially viable in the future.

I have had brief love affairs with Medium Format film, but kept selling and reverting back to digital due to cost of film, the extra time needed to scan film and archive it + tinker with the colours in post processing. The idea of MF digital has always been what I have been waiting out for, but have consistently put it out of my mind due to the cost being too prohibitive. 645Z is actually possible albeit a big stretch.


Points in favour of the Pentax 645z:

- I’m not a fan of 2:3 ratio of the Nikon D810 and almost always crop to 4:3 ratio - I’m drawn to the idea of a viewfinder that shows me 4:3, so that I don’t have to imagine how a crop will look.

- If I do crop the image of the D810, it takes the sensor size approx 36-32 meg pixels - vs the Pentax 645z

- A thing that always runs through my mind is; if I start shooting a project on my D810, will I always regret it eventually that I didn’t shoot it on a larger format in the future. I think investing all that time and money into a project, will you then feel like you should’ve shot it on something that will stand the test of time - be able to print massive if the need arises.

- Weather sealed with 55m - very cool

- medium format vs full frame


Points against the Pentax 645z:

- Relatively high cost £6000 for Pentax 645z and 55mm 2.8 lens offer at the moment - that would pay for a mamiya 7ii and 80mm lens, with about 3,704 shots of film (process and scan) - although it’s very expensive and difficult in the UK. In other words - digital would only be cheaper after the point of taking 3,700 medium format film shots.

- Would have to keep the D810 probably for video work and more ‘run and gun situations’ or as a backup? Thus adding to the cost.


In conclusion: The 645z seems to tick a lot of boxes for me: digital, potential huge prints, 4:3 ratio, Medium format. I want the camera quite badly, but am quite honestly still scared at the price and whether I am making a ‘poor’ decision, in terms of what it will gain me over the D810 or similar DSLR.

I keep thinking I will buy the 645z in the future, but seems like projects undertaken not with D810 won’t compare.

I highly recommend keeping the D810. You'll have access to lenses with focal lengths you can only dream about with a 645z. The 645z IQ (DR & resolution) is better than the D810. Otherwise, the D810 beats the 645z in almost every feature category (many of which I do not use but you may). Here is a side by side comparison:


Side by Side Comparison: Digital Photography Review