[texandrews]

I class this as just another camera. To me Photography isn't a game. Clients are only interested in results - if you can get the most out of the 645D( Or 645Z), what will this new camera bring to the table? more capital expenditure on something you don't really need?




Big deal, "modern" 50mm lenses have designs that can be traced back past 100 years.

I basically agree, posting my own comment beyond this quick reply

---------- Post added 09-22-16 at 01:42 PM ----------

Shooting twilight images with both my 645Z and A7R2 on separate tripods the OVF is clearer than the EVF of the Sony. The Sony attempting WYSIWYG means there is lots of noise and edges are difficult to see. I don't rely on the the red edge focus assist in poor light.

Well, clearer is true....but I've also had the experience of not being able to see anything out of the Z's OVF when I could at least see using the A7R's EVF....in fact in some cases the A7R's EVF was startling, like night vision.

So, now I will add my take on this. For me, the fuji looks to be a terrific camera----love the rotating EVF....but it would have been a non-starter for me due to cost. Yes, that brand new lens line up looks tasty and rational, but it would come with those new lens prices, and would have priced me right out of things.

While as with the Z, I have been able to build up the best lens group I have ever had with any camera (I don't really do any tele, full disclosure...), I think something like a dozen lenses, as well as 3 flashes and a few other accessories, for about or maybe less than $15K (although there were some trade-ins along the way...). Are all the lenses top grade, per 2016 standards? NO, but I feel like my group are performing well----the only one I've gotten rid of was the 45. Kitting up with the Fuji at that number is not possible and won't be for a long while. Being able to delve into the substantial used Pentax market in 645 and 67 is what made the whole proposition even possible for someone with shallow pockets like me. And the work I've been able to do with the camera for the last 2.5 years is the best I've ever done consistently, thanks to the Z. Sometimes the equipment can make a big difference.

No knock on Fuji, I wish them well---still have my GSW690II

---

Last edited by texandrews; 09-22-2016 at 10:53 AM. Reason: added text

[itshimitis]

I basically agree, posting my own comment beyond this quick reply

---------- Post added 09-22-16 at 01:42 PM ----------


Well, clearer is true....but I've also had the experience of not being able to see anything out of the Z's OVF when I could at least see using the A7R's EVF....in fact in some cases the A7R's EVF was startling, like night vision.

So, now I will add my take on this. For me, the fuji looks to be a terrific camera----love the rotating EVF....but it would have been a non-starter for me due to cost. Yes, that brand new lens line up looks tasty and rational, but it would come with those new lens prices, and would have priced me right out of things.

While as with the Z, I have been able to build up the best lens group I have ever had with any camera (I don't really do any tele, full disclosure...), I think something like a dozen lenses, as well as 3 flashes and a few other accessories, for about or maybe less than $15K (although there were some trade-ins along the way...). Are all the lenses top grade, per 2016 standards? NO, but I feel like my group are performing well----the only one I've gotten rid of was the 45. Kitting up with the Fuji at that number is not possible and won't be for a long while. Being able to delve into the substantial used Pentax market in 645 and 67 is what made the whole proposition even possible for someone with shallow pockets like me. And the work I've been able to do with the camera for the last 2.5 years is the best I've ever done consistently, thanks to the Z. Sometimes the equipment can make a big difference.

No knock on Fuji, I wish them well---still have my GSW690II

Indeed what you can see with the EVF is incredible, but because it is amplified, I generally find it less than useful for focussing. Easier with the lit Batis lenses of course, Personally, I hope that this news wakes Pentax out of its slumber. I think this Fuji is a bigger risk to Pentax than the Hassie, and if I did't already have the Pentax, it would be something I would be looking at. I'd be lying if I didn't say I was tempted. It's probably just as well that though I was in Cologne the day that the camera was announced at Photokina, I was busy in a meeting and unable to get there - Ironically, I have been in Cologne for the last 4 Photokina's and never able to attend - much to my wife's relief...

[rfkiii]

I have rarely seen users so excited by systems they can't hold in their hands. I understand you like the concept boys and girls.... but really? Don't you want to read a review?

1.) Wasn't there a high if not higher level of excitement about the 645D before anyone could put a hand on one?
2.) Same sensor, reviews regarding IQ will probably be similar.
2.) The high level of excitement for this camera among Pentax 645x owners might be due to the possible opportunity to cancel gym memberships.
3.) The Fugi & Hassy cams might motivate Pentax to produce their own mirrorless MF and speed up their lens development.

[copland35]

Indeed what you can see with the EVF is incredible, but because it is amplified, I generally find it less than useful for focussing. Easier with the lit Batis lenses of course, Personally, I hope that this news wakes Pentax out of its slumber. I think this Fuji is a bigger risk to Pentax than the Hassie, and if I did't already have the Pentax, it would be something I would be looking at. I'd be lying if I didn't say I was tempted. It's probably just as well that though I was in Cologne the day that the camera was announced at Photokina, I was busy in a meeting and unable to get there - Ironically, I have been in Cologne for the last 4 Photokina's and never able to attend - much to my wife's relief...

The moment is right to resurrect the K-01. The Fujifilm mirrorless body and its lenses places the rear element of each lens very close to the sensor. This creates a resolution advantage with light rays striking the sensor almost perpendicular right across the sensor. The resolution is very high and the artefacts caused by the optics will be greatly reduced.
The K-01 missed this by using SLR lenses. I saw this as a schism between the form factor being essentially a DSLR with the mirror taken out. The K-01 was not a fully fledged alternative to a K5. It didn't go far enough to be a pure alternative. The smallness that mirrorless and new lenses would have conferred was missing. The technical advantages were missing. The functionality of the k5 was missing.
A k-02 could be different. Follow the lead of Fujifilm. Give us some brand new lenses especially formulated to work close to the sensor. Give us what you learned from K1. Give its functionality. Give us fast optics, specifically primes. Then, optical adapters for DSLR lenses, legacy K- mount glass, 645, 67 and Takumar M42.
I liked the designer vision of Mark Newsom so he must be commissioned to develop the styling and ergonomics.
K-02 with an eye level EVF and tiltable touch screen would be great in the studio and the field. Sensor shift and tilt, in-body-image-stabilisation.Pixel shift. Wifi. APS-C 24mps. better follow focus...
It doesn't have to be a complete me-too camera but, it does need to be complete and something that can be used alongside K1 et al, as a professionally oriented tool. K-01 should be revisited and reimagined in the light of Fujifilm's development. Pentax have the knowledge to push into this territory decisively and use it as a springboard for exciting developments.

[robertchow999]

DxO can't test lenses in any meaningful way, their tests of camera sensors are already questionable: you would do well to ignore them. Lenstip at least keep things on the level, and are prepared to own up to their shortcomings regarding lens tests.

Photozone is an excellent resource, but sadly lacking in MF lens tests at this point.

---------- Post added 2016-09-21 at 01:48 AM ----------



AFAIK It is still available in the Japan market*, to acquire a copy you have to buy it from japan.



A lens you have no experience with? any endorsement you could offer in support of the 645Z is evidently based upon nebulous opinion rather than empirical data and therefore is suspect.

* The full 645 Format version of this lens, I am unaware of whether the DA optimized version with the reduced image circle is still in production.

I have the DA25mm 645 lens. As far as I know, the only difference between it and its DFA25mm predecessor is the shape of the lens hood built into the body of the lens. The newer DA version provides more shading to prevent flaring but will vignette more on the full frame 645.

---------- Post added 09-24-16 at 01:38 PM ----------

That is small, really small for 645 sized sensor. Thanks for sharing.

---------- Post added 09-21-16 at 12:26 PM ----------


Or better yet, come out with a 6x7 medium format with a full frame sensor in the 100+ MP range. They will own the market for a long time. I know this is pipe dreaming given the size of the market for MF cameras. I bet you if the volume was there to at least recover their investment in R&D, Pentax has plenty of know how to pull it off. After all the Fuji form factor is nothing but a modern version of 6x7 with mirrorless implementation.

As to your point on the PS on 645Z, I remember reading somewhere that they have tried to do it but they could not stop the sensor shaking fast enough to make it work. The problem is due to the fact that the sensor and the housing that hold it are too big and quite a bit heavier compared to the smaller DSLR format.

---------- Post added 09-21-16 at 12:29 PM ----------


Congrats. Lucky you. My budget was much lower so opted for the K1. I really wanted the Z. I even have three lenses for it already. I am now going to sell two of the three Z lenses.

Would you consider a used 645D? The ISO capabilities are much more limited and it doesn't have the nice tilting screen or the live view that the new CMOS sensor affords, but IQ is still top notch even at "only" 40 Mpx.

[texandrews]

I have decided that the most significant things (after "equalizing" for the fact that it is another medium format camera,) about this new camera are that it is another player in this "tiny" "niche" market, and a player with the appropriate history, and very significantly the short flange back distance. So, like the Sony FF E-mount series, once adapters hit the street there will be a wide variety of lenses available to use with the camera.

Now, I know some of you will pooh-pooh that fact (but maybe not Gavin Cato ;-} ), commenting that with the new higher resolutions those old lenses can't keep up. To that I'll say you are both right and wrong. First, some of those old lenses actually do hold up doggone well, except for the coatings, and that is something that will only affect a minority of shots (for me , a really small minority, for others a sizeable one), and secondly, there's more to lenses than the sharpness alone--although that really is important---but lens character is a real thing, and sometimes trumps pure sharpness.

Doesn't make me love my Z any less, though!

[Paul Ewins]

The Fujifilm mirrorless body and its lenses places the rear element of each lens very close to the sensor. This creates a resolution advantage with light rays striking the sensor almost perpendicular right across the sensor.

OK, I'm not a lens designer, but wouldn't this only be true if the rear element is larger than the sensor? Surely that has to be a disadvantage when designing new lenses if you are stuck with an element being a particular size and in a particular position.

[photoptimist]

OK, I'm not a lens designer, but wouldn't this only be true if the rear element is larger than the sensor? Surely that has to be a disadvantage when designing new lenses if you are stuck with an element being a particular size and in a particular position.

To be strictly true, yes, the rear element must be larger than the sensor diagonal.

But it's not so much of a disadvantageous constraint as it is an opportunity to avoid or correct more kinds of aberrations. After all, they can make that last element (or group of elements) have any front and back curvature they like, be aspheric, or use exotic materials. Such a design is technically known as a sensor-side telecentric lens.

It's mounts with narrow throats and deep spacing to the sensor that place more constraints on the lens designer although it's clear that modern lens designers have overcome those issues though increasingly complex lens designs.


One minor disadvantage of that close-to-the-sensor rear element, though, will be that dust on the back element will be more likely to be visible in the image at narrow apertures.

[Digitalis]

One minor disadvantage of that close-to-the-sensor rear element, though, will be that dust on the back element will be more likely to be visible in the image at narrow apertures.

Also issues with lens shading can occur which is why I view the Fuji announcement of a 23mm for MF with such skepticism - they may correct any shading as a hidden parameter in raw processing, but if a particular lens deviates from the norm, or the photographer uses a RAW converter that doesn't support automatic corrections then it may become visible and it can be a pain to remove manually without proper tools.

[biz-engineer]

I have rarely seen users so excited by systems they can't hold in their hands. I understand you like the concept boys and girls.... but really? Don't you want to read a review?

The specs of the Fuji MF are inferior to the 645Z, but everyone is excited about. What's the fuzz about Fuji, digital MF existed way before Fuji invented the GFX50. PhaseOne, Hasselblad and Pentax are there for years already.

[photoptimist]

The specs of the Fuji MF are inferior to the 645Z, but everyone is excited about. What's the fuzz about Fuji, digital MF existed way before Fuji invented the GFX50. PhaseOne, Hasselblad and Pentax are there for years already.

[2351HD]

The specs of the Fuji MF are inferior to the 645Z, but everyone is excited about. What's the fuzz about Fuji, digital MF existed way before Fuji invented the GFX50. PhaseOne, Hasselblad and Pentax are there for years already.

What specs are inferior?

Also, it's more about what features are in the Fuji that help us get better results that counts to me.

[clackers]

@Copland35:

"The Fujifilm mirrorless body and its lenses places the rear element of each lens very close to the sensor. This creates a resolution advantage with light rays striking the sensor almost perpendicular right across the sensor. The resolution is very high and the artefacts caused by the optics will be greatly reduced."

Other way around.

When rear elements are distant, the light is perpendicular across the frame.

When they are close, they are perpendicular only at the centre. Big problems at the edges.

[Rondec]

@Copland35:

"The Fujifilm mirrorless body and its lenses places the rear element of each lens very close to the sensor. This creates a resolution advantage with light rays striking the sensor almost perpendicular right across the sensor. The resolution is very high and the artefacts caused by the optics will be greatly reduced."

Other way around.

When rear elements are distant, the light is perpendicular across the frame.

When they are close, they are perpendicular only at the centre. Big problems at the edges.

Sony has certainly struggled with wide angles and the shorter registration distance. And you can't really say that the shorter registration distance has made Sony lenses cheap, because they are anything but cheap.

[biz-engineer]

Other way around. When rear elements are distant, the light is perpendicular across the frame.

Yes, exactly what I was thinking, although I'm not knowledgeable about lens design. I think it is marketing BS from Fiji.