[Capture Lights]

Not to stir up argument which system is better or whatever, but just to look at the whole picture in terms of price.
What do you guy think? are those modern DA lens that good considering the price?

Attached Images

 

[pathdoc]

Any way you slice it, it's going to put a big hole in your wallet!

What's the crop factor on these things, for FOV comparison? That Pentax 75/2.8 looks like a steal compared to the others; are we sure there shouldn't be a 1 in front of that 696?

It's sort of scary that the 645Z isn't even the bargain price alternative it used to be. The only advantage it has (to the extent that it is one) is that expanded lens lineup.

[texandrews]

The comparison requires only consideration of new lens prices, and only if you only select particular lenses. In the case of the Pentax 25, it's such a rare bird that you are probably going to pay nearly that price even if you find one used, or else you get very lucky. The 90 will also be pricey used, but you may have an easier time getting lucky. The 55 is much more easily gotten used---that's how I have it---at half or less than half the price you use for new.

But then there's the real possibility of going with the excellent 120 in Pentax, and I got mine for less than $300.00. And so to this point: with Pentax, you do have some other options, not only because the lens selection is richer, but also because so much is available used.

That is not the case with the Fuji at all. That the Fuji could accept legacy glass through adapters mitigates that a little, but early reports are that many don't adapt well. I am not sure how the Hassy adapts older lenses.

So, I think it is both not so simple here, and also most likely cheaper (possibly much cheaper) with Pentax if you are willing to wiggle bit.

[Capture Lights]

Any way you slice it, it's going to put a big hole in your wallet!

What's the crop factor on these things, for FOV comparison? That Pentax 75/2.8 looks like a steal compared to the others; are we sure there shouldn't be a 1 in front of that 696?

It's sort of scary that the 645Z isn't even the bargain price alternative it used to be. The only advantage it has (to the extent that it is one) is that expanded lens lineup.

crop factor is .79x for all three cameras.

fa 75 2.8 being so cheap could be due to the flange distance, hence easier to produce the 75mm lens for pentax. and that it could be the standard lens bundle when you buy 645 cameras even back in the film era??

yeah, when you look at the modern da lens selections, they're just outrageously expensive no matter where you look lol.

The comparison requires only consideration of new lens prices, and only if you only select particular lenses. In the case of the Pentax 25, it's such a rare bird that you are probably going to pay nearly that price even if you find one used, or else you get very lucky. The 90 will also be pricey used, but you may have an easier time getting lucky. The 55 is much more easily gotten used---that's how I have it---at half or less than half the price you use for new.

But then there's the real possibility of going with the excellent 120 in Pentax, and I got mine for less than $300.00. And so to this point: with Pentax, you do have some other options, not only because the lens selection is richer, but also because so much is available used.

That is not the case with the Fuji at all. That the Fuji could accept legacy glass through adapters mitigates that a little, but early reports are that many don't adapt well. I am not sure how the Hassy adapts older lenses.

So, I think it is both not so simple here, and also most likely cheaper (possibly much cheaper) with Pentax if you are willing to wiggle bit.

its true, but you kinda have to compare orange with orange, and compare only the latest and most up to date lens selection from each manufacturer.

i think alot people when deciding to get the 645z will consider the fa lens, and i personally is currently on this route for fa 45-85 fa 80-160.

but when you look at the modern 25 28-45 90, it just amazes how much these lens cost.

ps, i've not used any of those lens, so idk how they perform against the others, maybe they're just that much better?

[pathdoc]

you kinda have to compare orange with orange, and compare only the latest and most up to date lens selection from each manufacturer.

No. You compare quality for quality and how it suits your purposes, and...

1) The newest lenses are not always the best.

2) The best (if best really does mean newest) is sometimes (and one could argue at this level, often) the enemy of good enough.

Remember also that if you are willing to go all-manual, you also have the wide array of Pentax 67 glass available to you.

Having the world's sharpest lens and the world's fastest AF are not going to help you if your composition skills are worthless. The equipment (still) does not make the photographer. Medium format, from everything I've heard, is a deliberate game - not a run-and-gun DSLR shooting spree.

[Capture Lights]

No. You compare quality for quality and how it suits your purposes, and...

1) The newest lenses are not always the best.

2) The best (if best really does mean newest) is sometimes (and one could argue at this level, often) the enemy of good enough.

Remember also that if you are willing to go all-manual, you also have the wide array of Pentax 67 glass available to you.

Having the world's sharpest lens and the world's fastest AF are not going to help you if your composition skills are worthless. The equipment (still) does not make the photographer. Medium format, from everything I've heard, is a deliberate game - not a run-and-gun DSLR shooting spree.

Both statement are true, and i agree having the best dost compute into most meaningful images. i do not intent to argue this point.

i'm not arguing anything in terms of what'll make you the best image... you can purchase k5ii and pentax-a lens kit for less than $500 and make better image than people who have kit that worth $15k.

i'm just saying, when you compare the most recent camera/lens selection from these three company, it make you wonder what makes these modern DA lens so much more expensive.

[btnapa]

Not to stir up argument which system is better or whatever, but just to look at the whole picture in terms of price.
What do you guy think? are those modern DA lens that good considering the price?

To me it is a system selection issue first. DSLR vs. MLC. Say you decide on Pentax, remember that $18k for the body and three pieces of glass only adds up to less than half the cost of a 40MP back from 7-8 years ago. So it is all relative. Again I will base my purchase on overall system performance and long term ROI than just a simple cost comparison. Cost wise we are comparing Audi vs. BMW here not Audi vs. Ferrari. All three systems are in the ballpark cost wise. If you can afford $14K you can stretch it to $20K if you have to.

---

Last edited by btnapa; 04-23-2017 at 06:39 AM. Reason: text

[paulster]

I will say that's a great price on the 23mm on the Fuji. That would be a great focal length to have on the 645Z.

[Fcsnt54]

Im very curious on how the gfx and 23 will be. That combo is only a few grand more then just the 25 on that sheet.

Also Its interesting looking at this comparison between the three systems. Fuji will release more glass in one year then pentax has in 7 years for their medium format cameras. Theirs are weather sealed, pentaxes lenses are not (55, 90, and 28-45 are the exception)

Lastly the list for the pentax is missing the 135mm focal length

great now im sounding like im cheering for fuji. Im going to go get my pentax camera fix.

[Silent Street]

Pathdoc makes a very salient point re glass and angling for the Pentax 67 in manual focus!

Prices vary greatly from one market to another e.g. North American prices are very different to those in the Asia/Pacific region. And different again across the EU! The 645Z does not cost $6+ here in Australia; it is commonly found at $8+ and is not finding favor.

You are also paying for the name/pedigree in any case, of which Pentax and Fujifilm have always been smaller bit-players with smaller, less commonly used formats.

So...the Hassie kit (about 30% more on those prices here) would be my choice (I have seen much higher prices than that, typically $40,000+), and has been looked at often here in Australia. I can get by perfectly with just four lenses offered (most of my present work is 45, 75 and 90mm), rather than the plethora of Pentax optics.

I am wondering about the Pentax 75/2.8; it may be an earlier/older design; the pricing there is an oddity in a sea of 6-figure tags. That f/L in the Pentax 67 range (AL elements) is 2x to 3x that price!

[2351HD]

I will say that's a great price on the 23mm on the Fuji. That would be a great focal length to have on the 645Z.

Now now, you can't be going around these parts talking about how much you really want Pentax to release a lens just like Fuji.

---------- Post added 04-22-17 at 04:55 PM ----------

Fuji will release more glass in one year then pentax has in 7 years for their medium format cameras.

I got flamed on another post for saying the same thing and expressing how jealous I am of the Fuji offerings, not the lenses but the focal lengths on offer. Be careful what you say here buddy.

In all jest, Fuji are releasing some great focal lengths and really are hitting the mark. However based on what I have seen, I feel that the Fuji lenses sit somewhere between the Pentax FA and the newer DA/DFA lenses when it comes to image quality.

The Hasselblad on the other hand I feel are all excellent and am truly envious, a step above the rest.

[surfar]

Fuji have 2new lenses...and another due later this year....they are testing their lineup sorted quickly.

[Rondec]

645Z does have the benefit of having more used lenses available -- not so much the newest DA lenses, which will be really expensive, even used -- but the older FA lenses. I am not a medium format guy and so I don't know which of the older lenses are good and which aren't, but I think you could comfortably build a decent system with the 645z for quite a bit less than is listed above. I think probably the 645z plus the 28-45 and then fill in the other focal lengths with used glass would be the way to go.

You could probably do something similar with the Fuji, assuming you know what you are looking for and have adapters for the lenses. There just won't be main really wide angle lenses available on the used market since these are all crop medium format.

[mikeSF]

This comparison presumes the buyer has nearly $20K to spend for all new gear.

A great benefit of the Pentax system, particularly for studio, landscape, still life, macro, etc (genres not dependent upon fast auto focus), is the option of building a very nice working used rig and then upgrading individual pieces as needed over time.

As such, a used 645D is around $2,800
A35 $390
A45 $160
A55 $150
A75 $175
A80-160 $175
A120 $200
A*300 $350
[this complete 40MP medium format rig ~$4,400]

Many of these older lenses are great performers, even on the Z system, and worthy of consideration if a $20K spend is not warranted at the moment.

[loveisageless]

I recently joined the MF fold with a used 645Z, and used copies of the FA 35mm f/3.5 and FA 80-160mm. I found the kit on our local Craig's List. The seller Included a set of the auto A extension tubes, 2 RRS plates and 6 Pentax batteries. I was able to find reasonably priced copies of the FA 75mm, 120mm, 200mm and the 2X teleconverter on ebay from Japanese sellers. The whole kit came to $7400 and some change. MF has been on my bucket list. Pentax made it possible to enjoy MF photography in this lifetime lol