[Mapkos13]

Thought I’d add my two cents. Shooting with a Nikon D850 and just went a bought a 1,000 click 645z with a nice lens package. I just had to scratch that Pentax itch you could say. I shoot commercial advertising and a lot of product photography so I’m looking forward to seeing what this camera can do. Thinking the 120 or 150 macro would be a good add? Have the 90 macro coming along with the 28-45 and the 55 2.8

Oh, the purpose of this post. As an ex-Ricoh marketing guy I called a still Ricoh buddy and asked to check and see what he could tell me about the roadmap for an upgrade to the 645z. Sorry, no names but he spoke to the marketing person over in imaging and she stated there is nothing in the pipeline and for me to go ahead and buy if I wanted one now.

So I guess you can do with it what you want, but I don’t think this is really going to surprise anyone on here.

[ffking]

she stated there is nothing in the pipeline and for me to go ahead and buy if I wanted one now.

It will be a good test of Ricoh's information security, anyway - enjoy your Z - I've never used one, but the bigger pixels should really shine over the D850 (which I believe to be a great camera in all the ways physics permits)

[2351HD]

Sorry, no names but he spoke to the marketing person over in imaging and she stated there is nothing in the pipeline and for me to go ahead and buy if I wanted one now.

Well ain’t that just a peach, simply shite.

Looks like FF is where it’s at for Pentax users from now on in.

[texandrews]

Thought I’d add my two cents. Shooting with a Nikon D850 and just went a bought a 1,000 click 645z with a nice lens package. I just had to scratch that Pentax itch you could say. I shoot commercial advertising and a lot of product photography so I’m looking forward to seeing what this camera can do. Thinking the 120 or 150 macro would be a good add? Have the 90 macro coming along with the 28-45 and the 55 2.8

Well, with those lenses that was quite an itch you had. By all means get the 150, although it's not a macro, but you can probably skip the 120, unless it's the FL you need. It's great, but you already have the 90 as a sharp macro. among other things I shoot fine arts repro (so, a hybrid of product photography) and have found the Z fantastic for this. I'd get the 45-85, it's excellent, and the 80-160, very good and handy. Both can be gotten used at quite modest prices. Also look into the f2.8 75, very good lens, and then there's its leaf shutter cousin that can be found used along with the excellent 135 LS.

Oh, the purpose of this post. As an ex-Ricoh marketing guy I called a still Ricoh buddy and asked to check and see what he could tell me about the roadmap for an upgrade to the 645z. Sorry, no names but he spoke to the marketing person over in imaging and she stated there is nothing in the pipeline and for me to go ahead and buy if I wanted one now.

So I guess you can do with it what you want, but I don’t think this is really going to surprise anyone on here.

Well, no, not a surprise, but then again Pentax/Ricoh's sales/marketing isn't stellar at all, and is not helped by those up the chain of command from them.

[Mapkos13]

Thanks for the well wishes and advice. I’ll tell you, I picked that baby up today with the 28-45 and holy crap, you knew you were holding something quite different. From the size, to the layout to the shutter sound, I fell a little bit in love after looking after them for so long. The downside was I didn’t have a chance to do anything with it today. Need to finish my other assignments first and the. I’m jumping in and going to do some of my own rudimentary comparisons for my own ettification mostly just to get a feel for it.

But seriously, that thing sitting in the shelve with my others looks like daddy came home and the kids were all just standing around.

Look forward to learning more about it.

[loveisageless]

Could they go full frame in the 645Z body, yes sure, but then what about all the 28-45mm lenses that we have all purchased for crop body only?

The K-1 has a cropped option. Couldn't a full frame 645Z body have a crop mode as well? If they went with the 100 megapixel sensor, even cropped, it would still have great image quality and existing 645 DA lenses could still be used.

[rangercarp]

I think FF 645 would be a good way to differentiate from Fuji. I would love to see a slightly improved 645zII that could be sold for around the current z price, and at the same time a new 645FF at a higher price point. As mentioned above, there would need to be a crop mode for the two DA lenses.

[texandrews]

I think FF 645 would be a good way to differentiate from Fuji.

Yes.

I would love to see a slightly improved 645zII that could be sold for around the current z price, and at the same time a new 645FF at a higher price point.

A winning strategy IMO. Best of all possible worlds, still allowing for the backwards compatibility, and most likely slotting the FF645 underneath the other FF645 options price-wise. Pentax would be perfectly positioned in this market. Add another new FF prime or 2, update the 2 main zooms (45-85, 80-160) with new coatings, and/or a tweak, and it's a great line-up. The crop frame camera's body should be fine for the FF, so not a massive re-tooling there, and the crop frame body could be used as a platform for some other improvements, like IBIS, pixel-shift, and video

As mentioned above, there would need to be a crop mode for the two DA lenses.

Maybe, maybe not

[SylvainB]

Regarding lenses, if the need of OP is real macro lens, then the 120mm could be a good choice, it does 1:1, whereas the 90mm (a really excellent lens !) does only 1:2 reproduction ratio. The 90mm is more versatile (stabilization, faster aperture, all weather, better bokeh IMHO), but less efficient in macro use.




Regarding the next sensors... 100MP in 44x33mm or any 54x40mm sensor could be really expensive by comparison with what we know with current 645Z, so I don't know if Pentax would sell a lot. Fuji is already leaking that the price of future GFX100S would be much higher than the GFX50S one. No idea if it is true, of course.

[credos4u]

the follow-up should have a bigger sensor... most photographers would be happy if it would be original 645 size (6cmx4.5cm) 4k video with 30p would be nice.

[Fcsnt54]

the follow-up should have a bigger sensor... most photographers would be happy if it would be original 645 size (6cmx4.5cm) 4k video with 30p would be nice.

Id be curious on the picture quality, especially allowing for a wider fov for the current lens line up.

[Robert9]

There was an article that there should be a cheaper Fuji some month ago.
Maybe they will bring all a more expensive one to attack Phase One and a cheaper one to get more people in the own brand?
I have no Fuji and no Pentax, but more and more lenses for 67 and 465, so maybe i will get a Pentax someday, when they are more usable like my Sony.

[credos4u]

There was an article that there should be a cheaper Fuji some month ago.
Maybe they will bring all a more expensive one to attack Phase One and a cheaper one to get more people in the own brand?
I have no Fuji and no Pentax, but more and more lenses for 67 and 465, so maybe i will get a Pentax someday, when they are more usable like my Sony.

I would be interested where you see a problem with usability?
It handles just like a K-3... did you ever shot some photos with any PENTAX medium format body? digital or analog?
IMHO its a breeze, professional, handles like a charm, AF is better than on Hassy etc...

only thing is the lack of "AF-leaf-shutter-lenses", but since there are a lot of solutions now to wirelessly force Hi-Speed Sync...
---
(PRIOLITE flashes, CACTUS V6II, altering the timing and triggering via a flash mounted on an ACON... )
the only thing the other "new medium formats" have over the PENTAX is the sensor size...

I think it is the best and most professional system,
you can get for your money right now when it comes to IQ+handling....

Hassy, Phase, etc. live through the money-fame-factor....

those cameras are like one of those first iphone-apps that just showed a ruby spinning around on the display... that app did cost 500 dollars i think...(and yes some people paid for it...)





And, Fcsnt54>>
since all the lenses seem to do very good on film ... why should they not do any good on a bigger sensor thats the same size?(or a bit smaller)
AFAIK there are only 2 lenses that could have slight problems on a bigger sensor....

I dont own the two 645 "DA"s ... so if somebody has them in reach, it would be nice if
you hold or place them at app. Flange focal distance...on a translucent surface, shoot light through it with a desk-lamp, mark the image circle, measure it with a ruler and tell us peeps in here,
what the deal is with those two lenses...

[kaseki]

And, Fcsnt54>> since all the lenses seem to do very good on film ... why should they not do any good on a bigger sensor thats the same size?(or a bit smaller)
AFAIK there are only 2 lenses that could have slight problems on a bigger sensor....

I don't own the two 645 "DA"s ... so if somebody has them in reach, it would be nice if you hold or place them at app. Flange focal distance...on a translucent surface, shoot light through it with a desk-lamp, mark the image circle, measure it with a ruler and tell us peeps in here, what the deal is with those two lenses...

This test would only be the most rudimentary means of indicating limits to useful focal plane size. The properties that might deteriorate significantly beyond the limits of the digital cameras' focal plane sizes, even though light from the desk lamp might be present, include:

• contrast transfer function (e.g., off-axis USAF-1951 test chart results)
• chromatic aberration correction
• illuminance uniformity (fall off in effective f/number)

Testing the DA lenses with suitable far-field targets using a 645 film body might provide insight into behavior in the "corners." Measurements using test equipment such as a Nikon auto collimator could provide more quantitative results. I have neither DA lenses or Nikon auto collimator to play with, but fear that the imaged lamp spot size test might lead to over estimating the effective focal plane sizes of the DA lenses.

[Fcsnt54]

I would be interested where you see a problem with usability?
It handles just like a K-3... did you ever shot some photos with any PENTAX medium format body? digital or analog?
IMHO its a breeze, professional, handles like a charm, AF is better than on Hassy etc...

only thing is the lack of "AF-leaf-shutter-lenses", but since there are a lot of solutions now to wirelessly force Hi-Speed Sync...
---
(PRIOLITE flashes, CACTUS V6II, altering the timing and triggering via a flash mounted on an ACON... )
the only thing the other "new medium formats" have over the PENTAX is the sensor size...

I think it is the best and most professional system,
you can get for your money right now when it comes to IQ+handling....

Hassy, Phase, etc. live through the money-fame-factor....

those cameras are like one of those first iphone-apps that just showed a ruby spinning around on the display... that app did cost 500 dollars i think...(and yes some people paid for it...)





And, Fcsnt54>>
since all the lenses seem to do very good on film ... why should they not do any good on a bigger sensor thats the same size?(or a bit smaller)
AFAIK there are only 2 lenses that could have slight problems on a bigger sensor....

I dont own the two 645 "DA"s ... so if somebody has them in reach, it would be nice if
you hold or place them at app. Flange focal distance...on a translucent surface, shoot light through it with a desk-lamp, mark the image circle, measure it with a ruler and tell us peeps in here,
what the deal is with those two lenses...

You miss interpreted what i wrote. The image quality is of the newer sensor, and should perform very well. Only issue id see is resolving power, but it should be decent.

As far as the fov, i havent shot medium format film, only with the current 645z sensor so im not accustomed to the full 645 fov. It was more of a comment on curiousity on what the fov looks like with the fa35, saying id like something wider then the 35 but dont want to go the 28-45 route