[richandfleur]

Honest question at the moment is where is anything new from Pentax lately?

We were shown a mock up model of a new APS-C camera last year, hopefully the K-3 successor, but it's been a similar time since the 645Z was released.

5 or more years between model line upgrade releases is rather pushing it.

[texandrews]

Honest question at the moment is where is anything new from Pentax lately?

I think that mockup represents a real project, now delayed from coronavirus (along with all the other manufacturers apparently...)

We were shown a mock up model of a new APS-C camera last year, hopefully the K-3 successor, but it's been a similar time since the 645Z was released.

5 or more years between model line upgrade releases is rather pushing it.

Yes, but different animals altogether, imo. Furthermore, since 2014 we've had a lot of activity in that market, which has surprised everyone---probably Pentax as well. Pentax paved the way. But my 645Z is still performing at a very high level in a professional museum setting. The only upgrade I could make today that would be worth the cost is not something I want (the 100mp Fuji with an EVF---not an EVF hater but these aren't ready for me yet). The other option cannot afford (anything from Phase...), nor could my major museum!

I'm not interested in a consumer-style new release cycle for medium format digital.

[itshimitis]

Hopefully not.

It's not FF 645, and its crap 3:2 ratio. This would be a downgrade.

My bad. I forgot Leica do 3:2. I often crop my A7r4 images too 4:3 because I prefer the 4:3 look...

[Leumas]

My bad. I forgot Leica do 3:2. I often crop my A7r4 images too 4:3 because I prefer the 4:3 look...

Same....4:3 or 5:4. 3:2 is just a bad ratio IMO. Hope we do away with it.

[johnha]

I'm still happily using my D, so I'm still playing catch-up...

[Wasp]

This might be of interest.

Fujifilm Officially Wins Medium Format

[rdenney]

The fact that it has to be a competition with one winner annoys me endlessly. The Fuji is a fundamentally different camera-using experience that does not fit my approach, and no package of features will change that.

But in the name of all that’s holy, if Phase One justifies its decision to allow Capture One support for the Fuji on the basis that they no longer consider the 44x33 format competition, then why won’t they allow Capture One support for Pentax?

Rick “fed up with industry double standards and BS” Denney

[barondla]

But in the name of all that’s holy, if Phase One justifies its decision to allow Capture One support for the Fuji on the basis that they no longer consider the 44x33 format competition, then why won’t they allow Capture One support for Pentax?

Rick “fed up with industry double standards and BS” Denney

Fuji probably paid Phase One for compatibility. Just another way to distance themselves from other competitors.
Thanks,
barondla

[rdenney]

Fuji probably paid Phase One for compatibility. Just another way to distance themselves from other competitors.

Thanks,

barondla

Yes, probably. But Phase One said they wouldn’t do it for Pentax, even if there was consideration, because the 645z competed with their camera products.

Those competitive principles, childish as they were, were simply rationalized away in Fuji’s case, using an excuse that applies equally to Pentax. They would not say that Pentax wouldn’t pay them enough.

Rick “yup, industry double standards and BS” Denney

[texandrews]

The fact that it has to be a competition with one winner annoys me endlessly. The Fuji is a fundamentally different camera-using experience that does not fit my approach, and no package of features will change that.

But in the name of all that’s holy, if Phase One justifies its decision to allow Capture One support for the Fuji on the basis that they no longer consider the 44x33 format competition, then why won’t they allow Capture One support for Pentax?

Rick “fed up with industry double standards and BS” Denney

My thoughts exactly, since the beginning. Capture One's BS makes me have love for Adobe.

Furthermore, while PetaPixel isn't exactly fake news, it does tend towards breathlessness often, and who is this writer and what is their credibility? The identification doesn't inspire my confidence in this writer's ability to make this assessment definitively.


So, let's do some facts:


The Phase camera is niche is because it cost so much---prohibitively expensive for the vast majority of pros and organizations (like museums, where they could be the most use). It will stay that way----if FF medium format sensors cascade down in price, I don't think Phase will be able to compete.

Fuji is going to continue to thrive with smaller sensor sizes, and they are a large company with resources to do it. But they have committed to that through their lenses, so they are locked in without producing a new line.


Pentax is a small "company"---division or department, really---of a large company that may or may not decide to support it better than it is now. But Pentax has the advantage of a lens lineup that with only one real exception could immediately jump to FF medium format.

So, if I had to bet based on these facts, if an "affordable" FF medium format camera is going to come into existence, it's more likely to be a Pentax (affordable here means body AND lenses....).

I believe this race is still being run.....

[barondla]

Is the 645Z a true ff body with smaller sensor inside or would it have to be even larger to accommodate ff? Would be interesting to see a new ff model that goes into crop mode with DA lenses, just like the k-1 does for APS-C.

Pentax will probably discontinue mf or bring out a new 645 any day now, since I invested in the system. Hope they choose to release a new model.
Thanks,
barondla

[kaseki]

Is the 645Z a true ff body with smaller sensor inside or would it have to be even larger to accommodate ff? Would be interesting to see a new ff model that goes into crop mode with DA lenses, just like the k-1 does for APS-C.
...

Well, the body fits nominal 4.5 x 6 film. The Z might have added parts or structures inside that obstruct the field of view that the film camera doesn't have, but I have never read any mention of such. It is clear from the optical finder reticle designs that the boundary of the Z image is within the reticle boundary, whereas the film image gets to the edge of the reticle boundary, from which I conclude that at least the mirror light path is clear for FF.

The DA will vignette (as far as I have read), but the DFAs and FAs will be FF.

[Alex645]

Well, the body fits nominal 4.5 x 6 film.

60x45mm nominal yes, but reality with the Pentax 645/N/Nii was 56 × 41.5mm, and even then on some lenses like the 35mm, there is significant vignetting.

With the Pentax 645D/Z the sensors are approx. 44 x 33mm and the "FF MF" sensors are approx. 54 × 40mm which is still smaller than the original film size.

In other words, I don't see any issues with the current 645 lens system if Pentax produced a 645Zii with the larger MF sensor.

The big question: Is there a greater demand for 100MP because 50MP is not enough?

Ricoh would make my day if they just cut the list price in half with the Z.

[johnha]

Well, the body fits nominal 4.5 x 6 film. The Z might have added parts or structures inside that obstruct the field of view that the film camera doesn't have, but I have never read any mention of such. It is clear from the optical finder reticle designs that the boundary of the Z image is within the reticle boundary, whereas the film image gets to the edge of the reticle boundary, from which I conclude that at least the mirror light path is clear for FF.

Looking at my D I can't tell about the finder optics (might need a bigger prism), but 645N focussing screens apparently fit (looks like there's a mask around the screen). The mirror may need to be bigger but it's carrier is wider than the mirror itself. I can't compare it to a 645N, but the only obvious limits to the light path is the aperture stop down lever and where the AF screw drive is (both must be in the same place as a 645N).

[itshimitis]

I have the Phase One for Sony, but I never use it as I can't get on with it. Lightroom is far superior for cataloging...