Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-07-2016, 11:00 PM   #31
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,770
No 4k? Meh.....

04-08-2016, 06:26 AM   #32
New Member
Namibchris's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2015
Location: Central Namibia
Posts: 17
QuoteOriginally posted by kenspo Quote
And if you still dont know what a Pentax Ambassador is; I have signed contract with Ricoh. They give me all the gear i need to do my job. I deliver pics they can use in promotion, i do lectures, i do also test gear for them, and the most important part is that I'm seen in both the public and on social medias
out of curiosity did you ask them or did they ask you?
04-08-2016, 06:35 AM   #33
Site Supporter
kenspo's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Oslo
Posts: 1,955
QuoteOriginally posted by Namibchris Quote
out of curiosity did you ask them or did they ask you?
They asked me They wanted a different kind of ambassador compared to others..
04-08-2016, 10:07 AM   #34
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 219
QuoteOriginally posted by Ed Hurst Quote
Both Phase and 'blad have a range of current lens designs that cover full frame 645. That is a significant difference to Pentax's position...
Um, please do enlighten us with an explanation or are you not familiar with Pentax 645 system lenses?

04-08-2016, 01:23 PM   #35
Veteran Member
Kolor-Pikker's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 341
QuoteOriginally posted by Sperdynamite Quote
Um, please do enlighten us with an explanation or are you not familiar with Pentax 645 system lenses?
He's implying that most of the current line of full-frame Pentax lenses aren't up to the task of satisfying a sensor of that size and resolution, something I agree with.

Talking about just the new lenses, if we ignore the discontinued 25mm and the crop-format 28-45mm, we have the 35, 55 and 90mm lenses. I have no experience with the 35mm (the word is it's very good), but the 55mm has fairly big amounts of field curvature from about 60% of the image outwards and would become only more severe on a sensor with a larger image field, even if the sharpness is decent. The 90mm, being a macro, is pretty much a given to provide excellent detail across the image field.

As far as the old stock is concerned, the 120 and 150/2.8 are both pretty good, especially stopped down, although stopping down isn't the answer really, and the old lenses also have a lot of CA regardless. The Pentax system just doesn't have any standard lenses that would come close to making use of the sensor's full resolution wide open or even one stop down, which is something that's becoming increasingly common with small format cameras. What's the point of an f/2.8 lens if it's barely usable at that aperture?

By comparison, Phase and Hass both have full lineups of lenses that are both digital-optimized and are designed to cover full-frame 645. Pick any one of the Phase-SK lenses and you're in for a good time, no matter what back you put behind them. Can't quite say the same for the Pentax. In the end, there really should be more new product, the existing line has made it very easy and "inexpensive" to get into the system, but there needs to be an upgrade path and I would rather invest in glass than more pixels that aren't getting any sharper, just farther out to the corners.
04-08-2016, 03:02 PM   #36
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Texas
Posts: 121
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Kolor-Pikker Quote
In the end, there really should be more new product, the existing line has made it very easy and "inexpensive" to get into the system, but there needs to be an upgrade path and I would rather invest in glass than more pixels that aren't getting any sharper, just farther out to the corners.


My take on this chicken or the egg dilemma is I would prefer to see steady upgrades in both sensor and lens resolution. I believe this is case anyway although the speed of upgrades may make it seem like Pentax is not improving lenses fast enough.


When I posted this thread, I was thinking that Pentax would put 100 MPs on the current crop sensor. I went back and looked at my original post and the article it linked to and I see it WAS referring to FF 645. My bad. Will 100 MPs on a FF 645 sensor really increase capture resolution all that much? Sure, you'll be able to print billboards (please note hyperbole). 100 MPs on the current crop sensor could do a lot more good IMO if noise can be handled (which shouldn't be a problem since they are using Sony sensors). All Pentax has to do is improve corner/edge aberrations out to the dimensions of the crop sensor on their FF lens upgrades which should make it cheaper to do.


The former consensus of this forum was that Pentax is dedicated to the crop sensor. This new information changes that. I am afraid if Pentax rides off into the sunset with a FF cam, I'll be waving buh bye. Most likely, it will be too expensive for me. However, I think the evidence points in the direction of a crop sensor being supported alongside any FF development since several of the newer lenses have been released with a crop image circle.
04-08-2016, 08:33 PM   #37
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2010
Location: Sydney
Posts: 503
QuoteOriginally posted by Sperdynamite Quote
Um, please do enlighten us with an explanation or are you not familiar with Pentax 645 system lenses?
Is it really necessary to enter into discussions about the subject we all love in such a testy, sarcastic and disrespectful tone? You will find that I am very familiar with the system's lenses, principally because I own and use so many of them to make pictures.

Most of the lens designs pre-date digital so, of the designs that are contemporary with digi, the only ones in production that cover full frame are the DFA 35, the DFA 55 and the DFA 90. All the others are either discontinued, only cover cropped 645 or are older designs (many of which do pretty well, it should be said).

I do feel a really credible full frame solution needs to have a larger number of full frame lenses that are made in truly modern flavours.

You could have got that answer without the unnecessary tone. Just because we are online, it's not necessary to act this way. Or would you talk to people like that in person?
04-08-2016, 10:28 PM   #38
Site Supporter
gavincato's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: NSW, Australia
Posts: 247
it's not just resolution though. The portrait guys will get a benefit from the (less) DoF on the larger chip.

I don't think they should wait to bring out sharper lenses. I'd get a benefit from a larger chip right now. If they don't in 12 months, I'll get a H6.

04-09-2016, 04:12 AM - 2 Likes   #39
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2011
Location: All over the place
Posts: 2,579
QuoteOriginally posted by Sperdynamite Quote
Um, please do enlighten us with an explanation or are you not familiar with Pentax 645 system lenses?
Before you go around insulting posters it might be prudent to have a look at their posting history lest you look like an ignorant fool. Too late for you in this instance. Perhaps others will learn from your folly.
04-09-2016, 09:37 AM   #40
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 219
QuoteOriginally posted by itshimitis Quote
Before you go around insulting posters it might be prudent to have a look at their posting history lest you look like an ignorant fool. Too late for you in this instance. Perhaps others will learn from your folly.
Where exactly is the insult in my question? Calm down.

QuoteQuote:
He's implying that most of the current line of full-frame Pentax lenses aren't up to the task of satisfying a sensor of that size and resolution, something I agree with.

Talking about just the new lenses, if we ignore the discontinued 25mm and the crop-format 28-45mm, we have the 35, 55 and 90mm lenses. I have no experience with the 35mm (the word is it's very good), but the 55mm has fairly big amounts of field curvature from about 60% of the image outwards and would become only more severe on a sensor with a larger image field, even if the sharpness is decent. The 90mm, being a macro, is pretty much a given to provide excellent detail across the image field.

As far as the old stock is concerned, the 120 and 150/2.8 are both pretty good, especially stopped down, although stopping down isn't the answer really, and the old lenses also have a lot of CA regardless. The Pentax system just doesn't have any standard lenses that would come close to making use of the sensor's full resolution wide open or even one stop down, which is something that's becoming increasingly common with small format cameras. What's the point of an f/2.8 lens if it's barely usable at that aperture?

By comparison, Phase and Hass both have full lineups of lenses that are both digital-optimized and are designed to cover full-frame 645. Pick any one of the Phase-SK lenses and you're in for a good time, no matter what back you put behind them. Can't quite say the same for the Pentax. In the end, there really should be more new product, the existing line has made it very easy and "inexpensive" to get into the system, but there needs to be an upgrade path and I would rather invest in glass than more pixels that aren't getting any sharper, just farther out to the corners.
I just find this a bogus argument. Lets look at the FF compatible glass that's modern. You have the 35, 55, & 90 macro. Medium format isn't like 35mm where people build up large collections of glass. I don't know what I would do with more lenses than those three honestly. They would need a new FF 'normal' but otherwise, I'm good. If you can find me an image that was ruined by the 55/2.8s field curvature I'd love to see it. Because unless you're pixel peeping a brick wall, that lens is fantastic. Photographers who actually make pictures that are enjoyable to look at, don't have problems with the 55/2.8. Pentax is not a brand that plays in the test-chart-olympics. If that kind of stuff is important to you, seriously go buy an A7RII and the 3 Otus lenses and start posting in forums about how medium format is dying. You'll be happier.

The DFA lenses will be useable in crop mode. Problem solved. Plus I bet that the 28-45 starts to cover at 35mm.

Then you have the classic FA glass. It's a mixed bag to be sure, but people don't seem hampered by the various choices if you actually look at images being made. If you're not a pixel peeper, you can do some amazing things. The telephotos appear to be pretty fantastic. I've seen some killer wildlife images made with them.

Then you have the 67 lenses, they're manual focus, but lots of them are killer. And before you start about chromatic aberration, lets remember that LR exists and so chromatic aberration is no-longer a problem.

Lots of Hasselblad owners have been using Phase One backs and now CFV backs on their traditional V system cameras for years. The P45+ on the 503CW was THE TOOL back in my early days of studio work. We weren't complaining about the old Zeiss glass. The H glass is pixel peeper better but it's not like the Zeiss designs are suddenly garbage. Well guess what, a $50 dollar adapter puts all that sweet Zeiss glass on your Pentax camera and you can bet it sings on FF 645. AND it's actually easier to use on a Pentax because of focus confirmation and a competent live view. Legendary lenses like the 100 Planar, the 110/2, the 40 Distagaon, the underrated 60mm Distagon are all still just as amazing as they were on Velvia as they are on 100mp. Pixel peep them you might find something, but again if you're an image maker, you're in heaven.

If you're a portrait person like me, you can do what Gavin did and get mods from the Bokeh Factory and have some really unique glass. Gavin went with the legendary Contax 80/2 Planar (a lens that pixel peepers hate but talented photographers world over love), but I just saw that TBF is now adapting the old M 90/2 Summicron and it as full aperture control. Both cover FF 645 and will be amazing for portraits.

So already you have the most lenses available for any medium format system, and I'm not even counting the old A glass.

Are the line ups for H and Phase cameras more modern and probably better for pixel peeping? Sure. But we're talking about camera systems that require $20-30k+ plus investments w/o considering the glass. And if you actually USE those systems you'll know that they're not actually that fun to use on location like the 645z. They are without a doubt the in-studio tethered champs, but they can't go where the 645z can go. Different horses for different courses.

Basically the TL;DR of my post is that you don't actually need lenses 'designed for digital' and pixel peeper sharp to get out there are start shooting. Telling Pentax to ignore what they other two players have done and to stay crop is why professionals abandoned Pentax when they could't release a FF under Hoya. The K1 is the most buzz generating Pentax since the 645D and Z were released. They'll continue to slowly put out new lenses I'm sure, but in the mean time they'll put out what are in my mind the finest cameras on the planet with their 645D, Z, and 'X'. I'll use the 75/2,8 FA on it just like I do on my 645N, and it'll still be a great little lens.

Honestly anyone unsatisfied with the gift that Pentax has given us considering the price of the Z should put their literal money where their mouth is and pick up a Phase One XF and an IQ3 100 back. Brick walls and test charts await! :-)

---------- Post added 04-09-16 at 05:17 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by gavincato Quote
it's not just resolution though. The portrait guys will get a benefit from the (less) DoF on the larger chip.

I don't think they should wait to bring out sharper lenses. I'd get a benefit from a larger chip right now. If they don't in 12 months, I'll get a H6.
You will honestly get an H6D100 for 30+ grand just to avoid waiting a year for the extra real estate? I really don't think the Z is holding you back man, and keep in mind the Z has multi point AF while the H system is still only single point. The 645X is most likely going to have the K1s AF and that'll be a big freaking deal for wedding people like us. That 80/2 would indeed be amazing on FF but I think a little more patience and you'll get it and more. You'll also be losing 1/4000th of a second which is nice to have when shooting wide open in daylight. Like if your business is shifting to tethered work I understand but I have a lot of experience with the H system. It's strengths are amazing but it's weakness in a wedding and portrait world are pretty glaring. Especially when you consider the cost. YMMV of course! Happy to keep seeing your work no matter what you shoot!

Last edited by Sperdynamite; 04-09-2016 at 10:17 AM.
04-10-2016, 03:08 AM - 2 Likes   #41
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2010
Location: Sydney
Posts: 503
If you can't see that the sarcasm of the phrase "please do enlighten us", followed by suggesting that someone putting forward a view you don't agree with is likely to infer a lack of knowledge on their part, is rude, then I am not sure that any further explanation will help. Take the feedback or not as you wish, but I offer it to you as a gift.

On your substantive point, I am not sure that a differing view / set of needs from you own qualifies as "bogus" merely a different (and potentially equally valid) perspective. The lenses I have (and frequently use) on my 645Z (and before them on the D) are:
645: 25mm DA, 28-45mm DA, 35mm A, 45-85mm FA, 55mm DFA, 90mm DFA, 120mm A, 150mm FA and 600mm A; 6x7 55mm f4, 75mm f2.8AL, 90mm f2.8, 105mm f2.4, 135mm f4, 150mm f2.8, 165mm f2.8, 200mm f4, 300mm f4 EDIF and 400mm f4 EDIF.

All of these see frequent use, except where the duplication of focal lengths reduces it (which occurred due to being a long-term Pentax user who started with the 6x7 system), though some duplicated lenses still get used for their differing character.

Now I am no pixel peeper (in the sense of being a theoretical tester), but a working photographer who judges the value of things from photographic results. For that reason, I am happy to use lenses that are not perfect in some purist sense if they give me what I need. However, it is clear to me that the 645Z reveals shortcomings to the critical eye of many of the older lenses, though a lot of them stand up remarkably well (the same points apply to the third party lenses you refer to, and others you do not). Nothing wrong with having high standards and a critical eye - and that doesn't stop you being a photographer, whatever you may with to insinuate. A full frame 645 100MP camera, I believe, would reveal these issues even more. The issues do not render the lenses unusable - far from it - and I am reasonably content with results. But the 90mm DFA and 28-45mm DA are superlative and, I believe (from a photographer's, not a pixel peeper's, viewpoint) this sort of quality should be available throughout the range - or at least in a wider range of lenses than is currently the case. Crop mode is all very well, but if I buy a full frame camera, I want the lenses to match. And the fact that the 28-45 becomes possible to use without vignetting from around 35mm onwards also does not negate this - I want the full focal length range of the lens, and I want full quality to the edges throughout, not merely having something that will provide the image circle but without the superlative quality into the corners.

Don't get me wrong, i love the legacy glass and use it a lot - which I why I have so much of it and carry it around with me (which refutes your point that people don't do that with medium format lenses). But a 100MP 645FF? Rapid progress is needed to my mind. Of course it is true that one expects compromises and limitations compared to the more expensive Phase and 'blad ranges. Agree. But I think there should still be more modern, FF glass even allowing for that.

As for your false dichotomies that one either agrees with your view that the current lenses are enough or is a pixel peeping brick-wall shooter, I think its follies are sufficiently self-evident as to require no further refutation from me.

Last edited by Ed Hurst; 04-10-2016 at 03:16 AM.
04-10-2016, 05:39 AM   #42
Veteran Member
Kolor-Pikker's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 341


QuoteQuote:
Lots of Hasselblad owners have been using Phase One backs and now CFV backs on their traditional V system cameras for years. The P45+ on the 503CW was THE TOOL back in my early days of studio work. We weren't complaining about the old Zeiss glass.
The V-mount lenses were in a class of their own and hold up well today, that I won't argue, I myself would really like to adapt the 110/2 someday... however, it's more of the exception than the rule.

I'm not a pixel-peeper either, but as someone who makes big prints on a 44" Epson, there's no such thing as too much sharpness or resolution. I can tell when shooting an architectural subject that the field curvature is a problem on the 55mm, and that the green/magenta CA on the 150mm is so intense you can spot it on details that aren't even bright or specular - it's not nearly as bad as it was on the 85/1.2 on my Canon for sure, but can still be distracting. The 150mm also loses a lot of contrast shooting in backlight and even seems to lose sharpness... it's a great lens from f/5.6 down, but could really use updating.

Overall the image quality is immeasurably better than what I used to have before, but I can tell that there's more yet to be gotten, it's just that the current lenses don't particularly fit my needs. The 28-45mm is said to be amazing, but I would have been just as fine being off with a smaller/lighter/cheaper 45mm f/2 lens, and the 90mm could have very well not been a macro and gotten more mileage out of the IS module, which would have become at least four stops effective instead of two; it also could very well have been an f/2 lens.
04-11-2016, 05:50 AM   #43
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 219
QuoteOriginally posted by Ed Hurst Quote

Don't get me wrong, i love the legacy glass and use it a lot - which I why I have so much of it and carry it around with me (which refutes your point that people don't do that with medium format lenses). But a 100MP 645FF? Rapid progress is needed to my mind. Of course it is true that one expects compromises and limitations compared to the more expensive Phase and 'blad ranges. Agree. But I think there should still be more modern, FF glass even allowing for that.

As for your false dichotomies that one either agrees with your view that the current lenses are enough or is a pixel peeping brick-wall shooter, I think its follies are sufficiently self-evident as to require no further refutation from me.
So your point seems to be hinged on the premise that Pentax cannot produce new lenses concurrently with a new camera. News to me. Did Pentax announce that they've suspended development of new lenses for 645? They still have a roadmap. The two lenses on the roadmap are replacements for the 24-85 and 80-160, which I would argue should be low priority next to an F2 lens in the 75-85mm range and leaf versions of the 55 and 90mm. But I will concede that people use zooms so maybe there is a big market for them.

However, what if they CAN keep on releasing new lenses AND a FF 645 camera at the same time??? Because if they spent two or three years releasing a bunch of DFA lenses w/o taking advantage of a new sensor I can tell you what people would be saying... "Pentax won't go FF again, why won't Pentax go FF??" I can pretty much guarantee you that will release a FF 645 with maybe one of the planned zooms, or both, and that over the next few years you'll see maybe 1 new 645 lens per year. Exactly as it should be.

---------- Post added 04-11-16 at 01:03 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Kolor-Pikker Quote


The V-mount lenses were in a class of their own and hold up well today, that I won't argue, I myself would really like to adapt the 110/2 someday... however, it's more of the exception than the rule.

I'm not a pixel-peeper either, but as someone who makes big prints on a 44" Epson, there's no such thing as too much sharpness or resolution. I can tell when shooting an architectural subject that the field curvature is a problem on the 55mm, and that the green/magenta CA on the 150mm is so intense you can spot it on details that aren't even bright or specular - it's not nearly as bad as it was on the 85/1.2 on my Canon for sure, but can still be distracting. The 150mm also loses a lot of contrast shooting in backlight and even seems to lose sharpness... it's a great lens from f/5.6 down, but could really use updating.

Overall the image quality is immeasurably better than what I used to have before, but I can tell that there's more yet to be gotten, it's just that the current lenses don't particularly fit my needs. The 28-45mm is said to be amazing, but I would have been just as fine being off with a smaller/lighter/cheaper 45mm f/2 lens, and the 90mm could have very well not been a macro and gotten more mileage out of the IS module, which would have become at least four stops effective instead of two; it also could very well have been an f/2 lens.
And I would 100% agree with you that there should be new developments in these lenses. A new 150/2.8 with SDM and WR would be welcome. I'm only arguing that Pentax should not suspend camera development, and that there are more than enough lenses to get going until that happens. I really want to pick up that 110 f2 as well, but the adapted 90/2 Summicron seems a bit cheaper so I'll probably go that route.
04-11-2016, 06:20 AM   #44
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2010
Location: Sydney
Posts: 503
Nope. My point is they have not done so yet, and had better do it concurrently with any such new camera whereas the other two manufacturers already have such lenses (and more than a couple of zooms).
04-11-2016, 07:50 AM   #45
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2011
Location: All over the place
Posts: 2,579
QuoteOriginally posted by Sperdynamite Quote
So your point seems to be hinged on the premise that Pentax cannot produce new lenses concurrently with a new camera. News to me. Did Pentax announce that they've suspended development of new lenses for 645? They still have a roadmap. The two lenses on the roadmap are replacements for the 24-85 and 80-160, which I would argue should be low priority next to an F2 lens in the 75-85mm range and leaf versions of the 55 and 90mm. But I will concede that people use zooms so maybe there is a big market for them.

However, what if they CAN keep on releasing new lenses AND a FF 645 camera at the same time??? Because if they spent two or three years releasing a bunch of DFA lenses w/o taking advantage of a new sensor I can tell you what people would be saying... "Pentax won't go FF again, why won't Pentax go FF??" I can pretty much guarantee you that will release a FF 645 with maybe one of the planned zooms, or both, and that over the next few years you'll see maybe 1 new 645 lens per year. Exactly as it should be.

---------- Post added 04-11-16 at 01:03 PM ----------



And I would 100% agree with you that there should be new developments in these lenses. A new 150/2.8 with SDM and WR would be welcome. I'm only arguing that Pentax should not suspend camera development, and that there are more than enough lenses to get going until that happens. I really want to pick up that 110 f2 as well, but the adapted 90/2 Summicron seems a bit cheaper so I'll probably go that route.
what 24 - 85? There is no such lens for 645 or else I would own that one. I think seeking f/2 lenses for 645 is a pipe dream. They will be horrendously expensive and very heavy.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
645d, 645z, ambassador, applications, camera, cameras, crop, ff, field, glass, image, images, lens, lenses, medium format, otus, pentax, people, pixel, sensor, sony, struggle, system
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A New 645 next yr.? Ricoh sensor patent 22codfish Pentax News and Rumors 10 02-07-2016 02:59 PM
Fuji will launch a Medium Format camera with the Sony 50MP sensor this summer! jogiba Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 49 01-29-2016 12:09 PM
What will Sony put their 1" sensor in next? Bridge superzoom? Unsinkable II Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 7 07-16-2012 10:40 AM
A Pentax Model you most likely do not have! Tom S. General Talk 8 03-13-2012 02:36 PM
Does the K10 have a sony sensor or not? slip Pentax DSLR Discussion 2 11-23-2006 02:49 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:12 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top