[LightBug]

If one gets rid of the depth of film holder in 645 film camera and add thickness of LCD and sensor, it may be possible to shave some depth from a 645 digital camera? It may still not be as slim as X1D, but less bulky nonetheless.

[Fogel70]

It would also need a redesign of the optics of the OVF.

Here you can see how 645Z looks inside.
Pentax 645Z Cut in Half - CP+ 2015 | PentaxForums.com

[BigMackCam]

Personally, I think the next big development on Pentax medium format would more-than-likely be mirrorless. Hasselblad's X1D and, soon, Fujifilm's GFX50S are leading the charge in that direction...

[pathdoc]

Aren't the Pentax engineers doctrinally opposed to mirrorless until such time as they are happy with OVF technology?

[BigMackCam]

Aren't the Pentax engineers doctrinally opposed to mirrorless until such time as they are happy with OVF technology?

My guess (and based on recent history, you may want to bet against it for a quick profit ) is that the market will push them towards mirrorless and EVF for medium format, simply because of what the X1D and the upcoming Fujifilm camera offer. Either that, or the pricing of the 645Z and any replacement model will have to be even more competitive than it currently is, bearing in mind the price point of the Hassy.

I tried the X1D at the last photography show I visited earlier this year. It's ridiculously nice, but more importantly, it's so very, very manageable compared to the 645D I tried a few years back. If I had that kind of money to spend on my hobby, I would buy one right now, today, along with the entire lens range. Unfortunately, that's the fly in the ointment - the lens line-up is, currently, very much in its infancy (although I think you can adapt other Hasselblad lenses)...

[photoptimist]

I've always seen mirrorless as expanding the medium format market rather than changing it. Some people prefer OVF, some prefer EVF, some people like the lightest camera possible, some people (or clients) even like "big" cameras.

No doubt, the price of the Fuji will affect the sustainable market price of the 645Z. But whether Pentax would actually profit from the non-negligible costs of creating yet another camera body format (different mount & register distance) and the portfolio of lenses needed for a new mirrorless mount seems unlikely to me.

Instead, I would expect Pentax to look into a "full-frame" 645 or even 6x7 as one response to these crop-645 mirrorless cameras. Neither the Fuji nor the Hassy can handle a full-frame-645 sensor but the Pentax conceivably could. And a new 6x7 digital body would offer almost 2.6X the sensor area of the 645-crop frame. Why copy the competition when one can leap over them?

[BigMackCam]

I've always seen mirrorless as expanding the medium format market rather than changing it. Some people prefer OVF, some prefer EVF, some people like the lightest camera possible, some people (or clients) even like "big" cameras.

No doubt, the price of the Fuji will affect the sustainable market price of the 645Z. But whether Pentax would actually profit from the non-negligible costs of creating yet another camera body format (different mount & register distance) and the portfolio of lenses needed for a new mirrorless mount seems unlikely to me.

Instead, I would expect Pentax to look into a "full-frame" 645 or even 6x7 as one response to these crop-645 mirrorless cameras. Neither the Fuji nor the Hassy can handle a full-frame-645 sensor but the Pentax conceivably could. And a new 6x7 digital body would offer almost 2.6X the sensor area of the 645-crop frame. Why copy the competition when one can leap over them?

Interesting view. I hadn't thought of that, but it makes good sense... quite a differentiator. It would fit in nicely with Ricoh's comments around keeping Pentax as a "premium" camera line, too.

[texandrews]

I've shot FF in both mirror less and standard, plus 4/3 and apsc. Pentax could certainly go mirror less....they would have to do a new lens line, but it could be backwards compatible via adapters as well. Such an adapter (as I used on my A7R) kind of defeats the depth "savings", and can make a lens/cam combo a bit font heavy (not really a huge problem..)

There are other plusses and minuses. None of it is deal maker/buster for me really, having used both. The real revolution happens when you can get a digital medium format down to the size of the old Fuji 645's (film). The new Fuji body is impressive----about the same size as a standard FF dslr, smaller than some. Similar to the K1 I'd say. But the lenses aren't so small.....so the combo doesn't seem to me to be a great advantage (until they can come out with several small primes)

[672]

+1 for bigger sensor.

[SylvainB]

I've shot FF in both mirror less and standard, plus 4/3 and apsc. Pentax could certainly go mirror less....they would have to do a new lens line, but it could be backwards compatible via adapters as well. Such an adapter (as I used on my A7R) kind of defeats the depth "savings", and can make a lens/cam combo a bit font heavy (not really a huge problem..)

There are other plusses and minuses. None of it is deal maker/buster for me really, having used both. The real revolution happens when you can get a digital medium format down to the size of the old Fuji 645's (film). The new Fuji body is impressive----about the same size as a standard FF dslr, smaller than some. Similar to the K1 I'd say. But the lenses aren't so small.....so the combo doesn't seem to me to be a great advantage (until they can come out with several small primes)

The Fuji is not so small in the flesh, in particular it is very deep, much more than what you would expect. And I agree on the lenses, they are rather big, so the combination is far from small. The Hasselblad X1D, on the other hand, is compact.

[2351HD]

I've shot FF in both mirror less and standard, plus 4/3 and apsc. Pentax could certainly go mirror less....they would have to do a new lens line, but it could be backwards compatible via adapters as well. Such an adapter

That will never happen because if it could, they would already have it for the K1, but the DFA lenses have no aperture ring and they can not manufacture an adapter that can control the lever on the lens.

Also, we are still waiting on lenses for the 645z. Do you really think they are capable of adding a new lens line, very highly unlikely.

They can make it smaller, Adam has an example photo he mocked up in his 645z review and it would be nice.

They won't go EVF because too many Pentaxians loooooove to be a "purist" and OVF helps them remember the scene as they saw it, or some similar bull excuse.

I love my 645z but will most likely sell up when the Fuji arrives. Pentax are just too slow and to secretive to hold onto us customers. I would rather not leave Pentax though.

[Kolor-Pikker]

Based on the distance from the sensor plane mark on the camera you can tell there's quite a bit of distance to the back, not even counting the LCD. That's where majority of the bulk can be saved, because everything from there to the mount is set in stone, you can't shorten the flange distance in any meaningful way unless you essentially create a new camera system and mount the lenses via adapter.
Shortening the back also wouldn't have any impact on the camera's ability to potentially support a bigger sensor.

I love my 645z but will most likely sell up when the Fuji arrives. Pentax are just too slow and to secretive to hold onto us customers. I would rather not leave Pentax though.

While I remain skeptical of how well the Fuji will perform in practice, the proposed lens line seems much more in line with my needs, and if modern performance is guaranteed at any aperture, it'll be a no-brainer. Lenses before bodies and all.

[Digitalis]

Hasselblad's X1D and, soon, Fujifilm's GFX50S are leading the charge in that direction...

oh yes, lets all jump on that bandwagon...as if that is going to solve everything.

Shortening the back also wouldn't have any impact on the camera's ability to potentially support a bigger sensor.

But it would reduce the amount of space for the all important AD converters, frame buffer memory and critical circuitry, as well as the space needed to reduce and control the heat coming from such a large sensor.

[BigMackCam]

oh yes, lets all jump on that bandwagon...

By all means disagree with me, but we can keep the discussion friendly, I'm sure

[LFLee]

This?