[stevebrot]

I will do my best to get it right after the release, it is important for me to understand what is the likelihood that the release will be in 2020

Zero...


Steve

[leekil]

Hard to say if it would have that -- they didn't have it on the 645D, and didn't add it to the 645Z and didn't, and some of the 645 lenses are stabilized, which might imply they don't plan to offer it. It's probably somewhat harder to do so for a larger sensor, but, on the other hand, since all their other cameras have it, they might offer it if they find a way to make it technically and economically feasible.

[kaseki]

With image stabilization in the camera body, it might be necessary for our few stabilized lens assemblies to be operated with stabilization off, or vice versa. Unless the camera stabilization operated by image sensing at high bandwidth, inertial measurements and motion correction in both lens and camera might cause over reaction by the camera; that is, the correction might be twice that actually needed.

[clackers]

H Dear Pentax, I want to know, you want to release a new model of pentax 645z, and if yes, so when it will be? It's most important for me, since I'm want to buy Pentax 645z, but it's old version for me. If you schedule to release new model, I will wait. But if not, I will buy the other camera, Fuji 50s.

The Fuji 50s uses the same old sensor as the 645Z, so that can't be your reason, Grant. It's not even using Fuji's X Trans array, it uses Bayer just like the Pentax.

A big thing is that it lacks a mirror. It has no dedicated AF module. So, if I could afford medium format, there's no way with all the things I photograph I could shoot just with Contrast Detect Autofocus, it's too slow.

[grantsarichev]

The Fuji 50s uses the same old sensor as the 645Z, so that can't be your reason, Grant. It's not even using Fuji's X Trans array, it uses Bayer just like the Pentax.

A big thing is that it lacks a mirror. It has no dedicated AF module. So, if I could afford medium format, there's no way with all the things I photograph I could shoot just with Contrast Detect Autofocus, it's too slow.

Hi,man!Thanks for the answer, I see that you are well versed in the matter. I agree with you that there is nothing new in the 50s either (although there are more AF points). So I see a "SAFOX II TTL phase-matching" autofocus system in Pentax 645Z (but fewer AF points), and contrast autofocus (with a large number of points) in Fuji 50s, from the reviews I saw that Fuji has faster autofocusing, but as far as I know, phase detection autofocus is faster, so where do you think it is faster? And a global issue; I want a universal medium format camera with full frame functions (fast phase detection autofocus, image stabilization, etc.), and I see trends for this, for example Fuji GFX 100. I'm willing to pay that kind of money, but I would like to have such a Pentax and not a Fuji (although they say it's amazing not only because of megapixels, but has a divine color rendering, I would like to hear your opinion about this), and I want to understand when you can expect something like that? What advantages can you personally say for Fuji 50s and Pentax 645Z when you compare them. Thanks for the excellent answers

[clackers]

Hi,man!Thanks for the answer, I see that you are well versed in the matter. I agree with you that there is nothing new in the 50s either (although there are more AF points). So I see a "SAFOX II TTL phase-matching" autofocus system in Pentax 645Z (but fewer AF points), and contrast autofocus (with a large number of points) in Fuji 50s, from the reviews I saw that Fuji has faster autofocusing, but as far as I know, phase detection autofocus is faster, so where do you think it is faster? And a global issue; I want a universal medium format camera with full frame functions (fast phase detection autofocus, image stabilization, etc.), and I see trends for this, for example Fuji GFX 100. I'm willing to pay that kind of money, but I would like to have such a Pentax and not a Fuji (although they say it's amazing not only because of megapixels, but has a divine color rendering, I would like to hear your opinion about this), and I want to understand when you can expect something like that? What advantages can you personally say for Fuji 50s and Pentax 645Z when you compare them. Thanks for the excellent answers

If *I* was buying a medium format system, it couldn't be the Fuji with contrast detection autofocus.

The Photography Life review of the similar Hasselblad X1D-50c says:

"The AF system is simple contrast-detect only, with no phase detection sensors built on the camera’s sensor. When compared to any modern mirrorless camera with a smaller sensor, it is noticeably slow and lenses tend to hunt when there is not enough contrast – all normal behavior for contrast-detect AF systems."

Not a problem for the Pentax, it has a mirror.

*I* wouldn't want a 100Mp system either because of the loss of dynamic range and ISO performance - pixel size is king.

But you might be happy with all those things. If you've got the cash you should also consider premium Hasselblad and Phase One, the Fuji and Pentax are only entry/mid tier.

We had a guy here who went the Fuji, then back to Pentax. Apparently everything was so slow.

[acoufap]

Recently a friend, a professional photographer shooting Nikon, got three versions of the Fuji MFs (including the 100MP crop MF) and a Phase One. He invited me to also have a look at these cameras.

As for someone who tried a 645D with its optical viewfinder years ago all versions of the Fuji MFs would be a no go for me. The EVFs didn't convince me, af didn't convince me and only the expensive 100MP body I felt was one I would consider - but much heavier. The Phase One, a current model, had an optical viewfinder and felt sturdy but also heavy. The latter was offered to my friend for a reasonable price compared to a new one. These are just words from someone who never owned a MF camera. So don't take it too seriously. I'm shooting the K-1, KP and K-5 and started using Pentax ME super in (I think) 1983.

Neither Pentax 645Z was recommended by the seller, nor the Hasselblads digital MF cameras. The first because of not good enough lenses (very questionable IMO) and Hasselblad not because of experienced not sufficient professional support. If this is true I don't know.

At the moment the 645Z body is offered new for a price of 3999,- € on the German Ricoh/Pentax website. So some room to get lenses in addition until the budget of a used Phase One body is met. Maybe a good argument to go this way.

I really hope that Ricoh continues the MF line since I simply like it and the great images we can look at in the PF MF thread.

[Rondec]

I don't think it is totally clear which direction Pentax will go. Assuming they continue with medium format, I think they will either add SR to the sensor or they will go with a larger sensor. Either one of those things would "beat" Fuji and offer something that can't/don't currently. Logistically, I am not sure how easy it would be to add shake reduction to the sensor. Probably easier to simply add enough sensor movement to provide pixel shift and some stuff like that.

Either way, it certainly won't be till next year.

[grantsarichev]

If *I* was buying a medium format system, it couldn't be the Fuji with contrast detection autofocus.

The Photography Life review of the similar Hasselblad X1D-50c says:

"The AF system is simple contrast-detect only, with no phase detection sensors built on the camera’s sensor. When compared to any modern mirrorless camera with a smaller sensor, it is noticeably slow and lenses tend to hunt when there is not enough contrast – all normal behavior for contrast-detect AF systems."

Not a problem for the Pentax, it has a mirror.

*I* wouldn't want a 100Mp system either because of the loss of dynamic range and ISO performance - pixel size is king.

But you might be happy with all those things. If you've got the cash you should also consider premium Hasselblad and Phase One, the Fuji and Pentax are only entry/mid tier.

We had a guy here who went the Fuji, then back to Pentax. Apparently everything was so slow.

Thanks for the answers, advise me good medium format cameras around $ 10,000 better than 645z, but not gfx 100

---------- Post added 09-26-20 at 02:50 AM ----------

Thanks for the answers, advise me good medium format cameras around $ 10,000 better than 645z, but not gfx 100

---------- Post added 09-26-20 at 02:51 AM ----------

Recently a friend, a professional photographer shooting Nikon, got three versions of the Fuji MFs (including the 100MP crop MF) and a Phase One. He invited me to also have a look at these cameras.

As for someone who tried a 645D with its optical viewfinder years ago all versions of the Fuji MFs would be a no go for me. The EVFs didn't convince me, af didn't convince me and only the expensive 100MP body I felt was one I would consider - but much heavier. The Phase One, a current model, had an optical viewfinder and felt sturdy but also heavy. The latter was offered to my friend for a reasonable price compared to a new one. These are just words from someone who never owned a MF camera. So don't take it too seriously. I'm shooting the K-1, KP and K-5 and started using Pentax ME super in (I think) 1983.

Neither Pentax 645Z was recommended by the seller, nor the Hasselblads digital MF cameras. The first because of not good enough lenses (very questionable IMO) and Hasselblad not because of experienced not sufficient professional support. If this is true I don't know.

At the moment the 645Z body is offered new for a price of 3999,- € on the German Ricoh/Pentax website. So some room to get lenses in addition until the budget of a used Phase One body is met. Maybe a good argument to go this way.

I really hope that Ricoh continues the MF line since I simply like it and the great images we can look at in the PF MF thread.

Thanks for the answers, advise me good medium format cameras around $ 10,000 better than 645z, but not gfx 100

---------- Post added 09-26-20 at 02:53 AM ----------

Thanks for the answers, advise me good medium format cameras around $ 10,000 better than 645z, but not gfx 100

[texandrews]

And a global issue; I want a universal medium format camera with full frame functions (fast phase detection autofocus, image stabilization, etc.), and I see trends for this, for example Fuji GFX 100.

Bear in mind that Fuji lenses have been developed for current sensor sizes. Pentax lenses are mostly designed for "FF" 645 sizes (only one true exception, I think---the other is not a "true" exception.) Only Pentax, Hassy, and Phase One are "ready" for true FF 645.

I'm willing to pay that kind of money,

For Phase and Hassy you certainly will! The Phase XT is $56K usd

but I would like to have such a Pentax and not a Fuji (although they say it's amazing not only because of megapixels, but has a divine color rendering, I would like to hear your opinion about this),

My very strong opinion about this is that professionals and dedicated amateurs are either shooting raw, or are dialing in their cameras such that the ooc jpgs are to their taste. Everything else is simply a subjective evaluation and/or indicative of how that manufacturer has decided their ooc default jpgs will look. Pentax raws are neutral imo, and that is exactly how I want them! The last thing I need from a raw is something I have to fiddle with to get it to neutral. I'll make my own decisions about how my images should look, thank you very much.

and I want to understand when you can expect something like that? What advantages can you personally say for Fuji 50s and Pentax 645Z when you compare them. Thanks for the excellent answers

The Fuji advantages for the 50s are:

• that the camera is a bit more compact,
• it has an EVF(and the advantages that entails, like focus peaking through the viewfinder),
• IBIS I think,
• and all new lenses.

The disadvantages are:

• that it has an EVF (you need to check how you respond to this one---I like Sony EVF's , but really did not like the Fuji's...),
• that it's more compact (because ultimately, ergonomics are very personal),
• and that there is no real used market for its lenses (in that even the used ones are pricey)
• There is no FF 645 upgrade path with the lenses as they are today
• There is no FF backup camera available in the Fuji lineup---they have skipped FF. So, as a system I think it's worse.

The advantages of the Fuji 100 is all of the above but one, plus more mp. The disadvantages are all of the above plus that the camera looks to me like one of the more awkwardly bulky cameras on the market, although I haven't yet held one, so full judgement is reserved.


The advantages of the Z for me are:

• its fantastic OVF
• its terrific raw files with huge shadow recovery latitude---jaw dropping, in fact
• the deep and rich lens catalog, including used at incredibly low prices
• that it's part of a system whereby one can use lenses from the 6x7 lineup through a native adapter, and can use those and the 645 lenses with the FF and apsc cameras below it through native adapters---so the very capable K1/K1mkII cameras become excellent backups in the event you need one, but w/o necessitating another whole set of lenses.
• and that system includes other accessories as well, like the flashes.
• I can attest to the fact that the Z is bombproof.
• This is a small/simple but amazingly useful one in daily usage: the Z has tripod mounts on 2 sides. So, I have RRS Arca Swiss plates on each one, and can go from landscape to portrait so easily, w/o the extra bulk (and door or hatch obscurations!) of an L bracket. I use this all the time, it's the best arrangement I've ever had on any camera I've owned since the '70's. So smart!

The disadvantages are:

• no IBIS
• None of the advantages of an EVF, and there are some.
• focus peaking isn't as nicely implemented as in the Sony line---I prefer to be able to pick my peaking color---every time I use LV I am reminded of this and slap my head. So dumb!

As far as this whole "Pentax lenses aren't up to snuff" business, I'll believe that when I see some testing of Pentax lenses. Fuji lenses have been tested by someone I trust for his good methodologies, Jim Kasson. So, we know they are good! But because the Pentax lenses have not been tested that rigorously, we can't say they are worse---because there is no evidence!

I know what I see in the images from my Z and the lenses I use, and I'm shooting targets and things that might as well be (like museum didactics) along with art objects, either in the studio, isolated in the galleries, or in installation shots of whole galleries, which is essentially architectural shooting. This is not romantic portrait shooting, soft focus stuff. It all has to be crisp and dead on. My Pentax system delivers in this exacting environment. The only thing better is the best of the Phase stuff. That stuff reaches FADGI 4 in single shots. (see also here for a quick overview) . I can stack focus and get to FADGI 4 pretty easily with 3D objects, though, and for the rest I'm at FADGI 3+ easily.

[grantsarichev]

Bear in mind that Fuji lenses have been developed for current sensor sizes. Pentax lenses are mostly designed for "FF" 645 sizes (only one true exception, I think---the other is not a "true" exception.) Only Pentax, Hassy, and Phase One are "ready" for true FF 645. For Phase and Hassy you certainly will! The Phase XT is $56K usd My very strong opinion about this is that professionals and dedicated amateurs are either shooting raw, or are dialing in their cameras such that the ooc jpgs are to their taste. Everything else is simply a subjective evaluation and/or indicative of how that manufacturer has decided their ooc default jpgs will look. Pentax raws are neutral imo, and that is exactly how I want them! The last thing I need from a raw is something I have to fiddle with to get it to neutral. I'll make my own decisions about how my images should look, thank you very much. The Fuji advantages for the 50s are:

• that the camera is a bit more compact,
• it has an EVF(and the advantages that entails, like focus peaking through the viewfinder),
• IBIS I think,
• and all new lenses.

The disadvantages are:

• that it has an EVF (you need to check how you respond to this one---I like Sony EVF's , but really did not like the Fuji's...),
• that it's more compact (because ultimately, ergonomics are very personal),
• and that there is no real used market for its lenses (in that even the used ones are pricey)
• There is no FF 645 upgrade path with the lenses as they are today
• There is no FF backup camera available in the Fuji lineup---they have skipped FF. So, as a system I think it's worse.

The advantages of the Fuji 100 is all of the above but one, plus more mp. The disadvantages are all of the above plus that the camera looks to me like one of the more awkwardly bulky cameras on the market, although I haven't yet held one, so full judgement is reserved.


The advantages of the Z for me are:

• its fantastic OVF
• its terrific raw files with huge shadow recovery latitude---jaw dropping, in fact
• the deep and rich lens catalog, including used at incredibly low prices
• that it's part of a system whereby one can use lenses from the 6x7 lineup through a native adapter, and can use those and the 645 lenses with the FF and apsc cameras below it through native adapters---so the very capable K1/K1mkII cameras become excellent backups in the event you need one, but w/o necessitating another whole set of lenses.
• and that system includes other accessories as well, like the flashes.
• I can attest to the fact that the Z is bombproof.
• This is a small/simple but amazingly useful one in daily usage: the Z has tripod mounts on 2 sides. So, I have RRS Arca Swiss plates on each one, and can go from landscape to portrait so easily, w/o the extra bulk (and door or hatch obscurations!) of an L bracket. I use this all the time, it's the best arrangement I've ever had on any camera I've owned since the '70's. So smart!

The disadvantages are:

• no IBIS
• None of the advantages of an EVF, and there are some.
• focus peaking isn't as nicely implemented as in the Sony line---I prefer to be able to pick my peaking color---every time I use LV I am reminded of this and slap my head. So dumb!

As far as this whole "Pentax lenses aren't up to snuff" business, I'll believe that when I see some testing of Pentax lenses. Fuji lenses have been tested by someone I trust for his good methodologies, Jim Kasson. So, we know they are good! But because the Pentax lenses have not been tested that rigorously, we can't say they are worse---because there is no evidence!

I know what I see in the images from my Z and the lenses I use, and I'm shooting targets and things that might as well be (like museum didactics) along with art objects, either in the studio, isolated in the galleries, or in installation shots of whole galleries, which is essentially architectural shooting. This is not romantic portrait shooting, soft focus stuff. It all has to be crisp and dead on. My Pentax system delivers in this exacting environment. The only thing better is the best of the Phase stuff. That stuff reaches FADGI 4 in single shots. (see also here for a quick overview) . I can stack focus and get to FADGI 4 pretty easily with 3D objects, though, and for the rest I'm at FADGI 3+ easily.

Thanks for such a detailed answer, I have learned a lot of new things. What are the advantages of the new fuji lenses over the pentax, I heard opinions that the pentax has perfect lenses that are also perfectly suited for medium format, for example, the Pentax HD D-FA 645 90mm f / 2.8 AW ED which according to reviews is just great. The advantages of Fuji 100 include a 16-bit output file, fast phase focusing, image stabilization (100mp for a 43 matrix, I don’t know how this will affect the quality of the picture because this is a decrease in the pixel size). So which medium format would you recommend up to $ 10,000 better than 645z and 50s, is there such?

[SteveinSLC]

The Fuji lenses are nice, but vastly more expensive than most of the options for Pentax. And probably not enough better to justify the expense.

If Pentax could add IBIS, they'd likely also be able to add pixel-shift. Those two things alone would be a big upgrade. Though I'd wonder if they also would require making the body even bigger. There's only 2 stabilized lenses for Pentax, and other companies have been able to make body and lens stabilization work, so I'm not worried about that.

I'd rather see IBIS and prices hold steady or modestly increase than a big increase and 100MP sensor.

[grantsarichev]

The Fuji lenses are nice, but vastly more expensive than most of the options for Pentax. And probably not enough better to justify the expense.

If Pentax could add IBIS, they'd likely also be able to add pixel-shift. Those two things alone would be a big upgrade. Though I'd wonder if they also would require making the body even bigger. There's only 2 stabilized lenses for Pentax, and other companies have been able to make body and lens stabilization work, so I'm not worried about that.

I'd rather see IBIS and prices hold steady or modestly increase than a big increase and 100MP sensor.

yes, but as I understand from the answers, there will be no medium format update in the next 2 years

[kaseki]

In the excellent, and seemingly exhaustive (to me at least) 645Z review on this site -- thanks Adam -- there is some artwork depicting how the existing 645Z could have been made smaller. I don't want to review the details of that conjecture at the moment, but I will suggest that that "excess" volume might well do for adding IBIS. 35mm cameras with IBIS do not grow to disproportionate sizes.

[KiloHotelphoto]

I picked up the 645Z in July to give a go at landscape photography. I think I only have taken a few hand held shots with it so IBIS really hasn’t been needed.

Auto focus is just slow and not much coverage through the OVF but most of my shooting so far has been with it in live view mounted on a tripod so I don’t need the focus to match my Canons speed.

I was looking at the Fuji 50S also but this is just a second system for me and not my main interest I didn’t want to spend a ton of money. The body I got from Ricoh refurbished site for $2999 and picked up four used lenses for the price the Fuji and one lens would cost. Their are so many used Pentax 645 lenses out there you can get some great deals.