Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-18-2021, 04:26 PM - 1 Like   #76
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,309
QuoteOriginally posted by awscreo Quote
Never tried the Q line, so it's a genuine question - what was unique about it?
A major extension of the depth of field, relative to all the other interchangeable lens systems, which have started from MFT upwards. Combined with the small size of the bodies. The historical precedent, on a different scale, was the Ur-Leica, but now that "miniature" format has become the norm against which we measure other systems (e.g., in using "full frame equivalent" focal lengths and apertures), and Leica has become more or less a boutique brand, that comparison may not be meaningful to a lot of people any more.

The other unique feature of the Q system, at least in present day terms, is the use of leaf shutters in all the high-end lenses, to give jello-free exposures. Because of their symmetrical action (as opposed to a focal plane shutter moving in one direction, or the flipping of an SLR mirror), you can get away with hand held shots down to very low shutter speeds.

All of this, and the sometimes unfortunate but often convenient fact that almost everybody regards them as a toy, means that they are the ideal "stealth" camera for use in concerts, temples, and other such locations.

Unfortunately, not all of the possibilities of the Q system were realized. One that bugs me is that Pentax never released the high-end telephoto macro lens (09), even though it reached the stage of working prototypes getting into the hands of some privileged users. This lens would have opened up a whole new photographic genre of action macro, which you obviously cannot do with focus stacking. As a kludge, you can use regular macro lenses on the K to Q adapter, but that setup will only work if you are able to anticipate and pre-focus on the action. The 09 would have offered autofocus, which works very effectively in the Q system. The Q's are the only cameras where I have never felt the need to second-guess the autofocus.

In terms of image quality, I would say that the Q matches 35 mm slide film from the 1970s, so good enough for the classic 10" x 8" or A4 size without any special technique or effort.

Since we're in an MF thread, let me summarize the Q system by saying that, relative to APS or FF, it expands your possibilities in the opposite direction to what you get with MF.

07-18-2021, 04:42 PM   #77
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2016
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,722
QuoteOriginally posted by lytrytyr Quote
A major extension of the depth of field, relative to all the other interchangeable lens systems, which have started from MFT upwards. Combined with the small size of the bodies. The historical precedent, on a different scale, was the Ur-Leica, but now that "miniature" format has become the norm against which we measure other systems (e.g., in using "full frame equivalent" focal lengths and apertures), and Leica has become more or less a boutique brand, that comparison may not be meaningful to a lot of people any more.

The other unique feature of the Q system, at least in present day terms, is the use of leaf shutters in all the high-end lenses, to give jello-free exposures. Because of their symmetrical action (as opposed to a focal plane shutter moving in one direction, or the flipping of an SLR mirror), you can get away with hand held shots down to very low shutter speeds.

All of this, and the sometimes unfortunate but often convenient fact that almost everybody regards them as a toy, means that they are the ideal "stealth" camera for use in concerts, temples, and other such locations.

Unfortunately, not all of the possibilities of the Q system were realized. One that bugs me is that Pentax never released the high-end telephoto macro lens (09), even though it reached the stage of working prototypes getting into the hands of some privileged users. This lens would have opened up a whole new photographic genre of action macro, which you obviously cannot do with focus stacking. As a kludge, you can use regular macro lenses on the K to Q adapter, but that setup will only work if you are able to anticipate and pre-focus on the action. The 09 would have offered autofocus, which works very effectively in the Q system. The Q's are the only cameras where I have never felt the need to second-guess the autofocus.

In terms of image quality, I would say that the Q matches 35 mm slide film from the 1970s, so good enough for the classic 10" x 8" or A4 size without any special technique or effort.

Since we're in an MF thread, let me summarize the Q system by saying that, relative to APS or FF, it expands your possibilities in the opposite direction to what you get with MF.
OK, thank you for the explanation. Interesting system, and I do like the numerical naming convention, that's pretty unique too) I guess if Ricoh was as rich as Sony in terms of R&D, the line would keep going. Although, given that many people want more shallow depth of field to differentiate from the smartphone images (although that's going away pretty quickly with advent of the fake blur technology), at least the ones that upgrade from phone to a camera, it's probably better aimed at being a second camera of an experienced photographer that can take advantage of the unique qualities of the system.

Ps: I absolutely love the leaf shutter on in my GRIII
07-19-2021, 09:23 AM   #78
Junior Member




Join Date: Dec 2019
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 41
the pentax MF line would not survive such a spinoff. As it stands, I suspect the 645 line is a loss-leader "halo product" for the cheaper consumer pentax gear.
07-19-2021, 09:49 AM   #79
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
pres589's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Wichita, KS
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,506
I can't imagine they lose money on 645 and would really want to see numbers on that to support that assumption. My own assumption is that it is basically a break-even situation; they don't invest in anything new, they make a bit of margin on everything sold, but they have to maintain support and supply aspects which have costs associated with them.

I imagine there's a noticeable percentage of Pentax shooters that have never thought about or encountered their 645 products.

Not sure if it's been mentioned yet but supposedly Fuji's upcoming GFX 50S mk2 is coming with a rumored $4k USD price tag. IBIS is supposed to be part of the package and it shares a body with the GFX 100R. This puts it within spitting distance of the Pentax K-1 from a size and weight aspect. How could Ricoh convince people to come over to the 645Z if they're not already in that ecosystem?

07-19-2021, 10:19 AM   #80
Junior Member




Join Date: Dec 2019
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 41
QuoteOriginally posted by pres589 Quote
I can't imagine they lose money on 645 and would really want to see numbers on that to support that assumption. My own assumption is that it is basically a break-even situation; they don't invest in anything new, they make a bit of margin on everything sold, but they have to maintain support and supply aspects which have costs associated with them.

I imagine there's a noticeable percentage of Pentax shooters that have never thought about or encountered their 645 products.

Not sure if it's been mentioned yet but supposedly Fuji's upcoming GFX 50S mk2 is coming with a rumored $4k USD price tag. IBIS is supposed to be part of the package and it shares a body with the GFX 100R. This puts it within spitting distance of the Pentax K-1 from a size and weight aspect. How could Ricoh convince people to come over to the 645Z if they're not already in that ecosystem?
to Ricoh's credit, they have at least identified a "Unique Selling Proposition" for their hardware; in a time where all other manufacturers are moving to mirrorless, they're doubling down on pentaprism SLRs. Their only competition in Medium Format DSLRs are Hasselblad and Leica, both of which are an order of magnitude more pricey, so there's certainly something there. I'm not sure I'd want to tie MY company to the mast of "the pentaprism is essential to who we are", but it seems preferable to drifting aimlessly, which is what it felt like they were doing before this.

It remains to be seen if there's enough market demand for SLRs to keep Pentax relevant. I'm not super optimistic, Mirrorless systems offer a lot of advantages and the various issues people have with them (e.g. jelly-shutter, lag, battery life) seem likely to improve significantly in the next 10 years, and the things they already do better than SLRs seem likely to advance even further. But I could be wrong! Also, there is something unquantifiable, which mostly doesn't show up in the end result, to be said for the experience of looking through a lens yourself, optically, rather than mediated by a sensor. Who knows, maybe the smartphone market really will cream the mirrorless industry and DSLRs will come out on top (in the market of "specialty non-phone cameras"; if phones swallowed mirrorless cameras I'd obviously expect them to be a much larger market than DSLRs, because "everyone needs a phone")
07-19-2021, 02:29 PM   #81
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2021
Location: Scotland
Posts: 291
I find the DSLR form infintely more attractive to use than the mirrorless. So much so I bought 2 new 645z's end 2020 and start 2021. I also sourced a 5dsr to secure another 50mp DSLR. 50mp gives you easy 8k images which given 8k is going to become a screen standard is an important resolution to be able to sell at. 16k will never come.


I digress though, they need to come with some more modern weather sealed lenses for the system. Probably a 45-100 zoom and a 100-250 zoom and pedal it heavily as the ultimate landscape solution and go big on the OVF and weather sealing. I was with my 645z at the coast the other day and no way would a diddly little Sony camera manage to get so wet and work afterwards. I used the 5dsr and the 100-400 L is amazing on it, the lens felt ace but the body is a plastic toy compared to a 645z. I think more would buy them if they didn't shop online and could feel them in the hands, they are just the most wonderful camera body and Pentax need to get that message accross.


Although a K1 with 61mp and top level glass would be a brutal match for a 645z, particularly at base ISO.


Most working photographers I know seem less enarmoured with the mirrorless set ups and plenty are running battered old D810's 5d4s, D850's etc rather than take a new mirrorless rig.
07-19-2021, 04:09 PM   #82
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
TDvN57's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Berlin
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,137
The game changer for Pentax will be 645 FF. Then they only have two competitors in MF.

07-19-2021, 11:41 PM   #83
Junior Member




Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Nordrhein Westfalen
Posts: 47
QuoteOriginally posted by TDvN57 Quote
The game changer for Pentax will be 645 FF. Then they only have two competitors in MF.
Is there a single lens in the Pentax line-up that can operate a, let's say, 150MP 645 FF sensor 100 percent?
07-20-2021, 03:56 AM - 1 Like   #84
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
TDvN57's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Berlin
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,137
QuoteOriginally posted by pixiac Quote
Is there a single lens in the Pentax line-up that can operate a, let's say, 150MP 645 FF sensor 100 percent?
Yes, all of them, except the DA lenses. I only know of two the DA 28-45 and the old DA 25. The rest will function as good or as bad as they are now and as they did on film.
07-20-2021, 04:14 AM   #85
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Ed Hurst's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,654
If the question is slightly different, i.e. 'which of the DFA/FA/A lenses would perform well enough, right into the corners, to make the most of a 150MP 645 FF sensor even when used wide open?', the answer might be more nuanced. But, you know, I'd still want such a sensor because I mostly use my lenses stopped down to somewhere between f8 and f11 and I believe such a sensor would deliver great results under those conditions. Of course, some of the lenses are better technically than others. I'd bet the DFA90, the 120mm (both A and FA), the 6x7 75mm f2.8AL, the 6x7 300mm f4 EDIF, the 6x7 55mm f4 (late) and others would shine on such a sensor, while others might just be as good as they look on the current sensor (but little better). But overall, it would be a good proposition IMHO.

A 100MP 645FF sensor might be a good compromise.
07-20-2021, 05:08 AM   #86
Junior Member




Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Nordrhein Westfalen
Posts: 47
Well, you both answered as photographers, not as pixelpeeper, I see.
I know, that there are a lot of lenses they fit the Pentax 645 mount, whatever the sensor size is.
Today A and FA lenses perform very well on the "small" 51MP sensor. I really love the results of my old A 120 macro on my 645z!
But I'm really not sure, how they would perform on a larger sensor with a potentially smaller pixel pitch.
In my opinion it could be a bad turn for Pentax, if Pentax only would have a new medium format flag ship camera without well performing new DFA 645 lenses.
07-20-2021, 07:04 AM - 1 Like   #87
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
TDvN57's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Berlin
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,137
QuoteOriginally posted by pixiac Quote
Well, you both answered as photographers, not as pixelpeeper, I see.
I know, that there are a lot of lenses they fit the Pentax 645 mount, whatever the sensor size is.
Today A and FA lenses perform very well on the "small" 51MP sensor. I really love the results of my old A 120 macro on my 645z!
But I'm really not sure, how they would perform on a larger sensor with a potentially smaller pixel pitch.
In my opinion it could be a bad turn for Pentax, if Pentax only would have a new medium format flag ship camera without well performing new DFA 645 lenses.

Did you know that fine grain film such as Provia has a finer resolution than the 150mpx sensor?

Did you know that the 150mpx sensor image is smaller than a 645 film frame?
07-20-2021, 11:31 AM   #88
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,711
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by pixiac Quote
Well, you both answered as photographers, not as pixelpeeper, I see.
I know, that there are a lot of lenses they fit the Pentax 645 mount, whatever the sensor size is.
Today A and FA lenses perform very well on the "small" 51MP sensor. I really love the results of my old A 120 macro on my 645z!
But I'm really not sure, how they would perform on a larger sensor with a potentially smaller pixel pitch.
In my opinion it could be a bad turn for Pentax, if Pentax only would have a new medium format flag ship camera without well performing new DFA 645 lenses.
Heard these same arguments before. Remember all the nay sayers ( especially looking at you Olympus) saying film lenses wouldn't hold up to digital? Pentax was told by measurebatoring pixel peepers that a FF 35 camera would fail due to the lack of lenses. Didn't happen. Not even close. Luckily many photographers aren't obsessed with test charts and pixel peeping. Look at all the 100mp MF Fuji users adapting our lenses and horror of horrors, Canon EF lenses. If Pentax goes ff 645, and can keep it under $15k, buyers will respond. Pentax can use their inexpensive used lens glut to fuel MF FF. There's more to medium format than just sharpness.

Thanks,
barondla
07-20-2021, 02:38 PM   #89
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2021
Location: Scotland
Posts: 291
QuoteOriginally posted by barondla Quote
Heard these same arguments before. Remember all the nay sayers ( especially looking at you Olympus) saying film lenses wouldn't hold up to digital? Pentax was told by measurebatoring pixel peepers that a FF 35 camera would fail due to the lack of lenses. Didn't happen. Not even close. Luckily many photographers aren't obsessed with test charts and pixel peeping. Look at all the 100mp MF Fuji users adapting our lenses and horror of horrors, Canon EF lenses. If Pentax goes ff 645, and can keep it under $15k, buyers will respond. Pentax can use their inexpensive used lens glut to fuel MF FF. There's more to medium format than just sharpness.

Thanks,
barondla
Modern Canon EF lenses are very good - and quite a few were designed to cope with the Pixel pitch of the 5ds (anything released for 2014 onwards).


Some of the GF lenses aren't that great and I recall a thread where the OP said the Canon 100-400 performed as well on the body than the native 100-200 - except for vingetting which would be a crop and/or aspect ratio change away. And 100-400 costs less new, and covers a lot more focal length.

Look through this

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4471411


If I were a GF shooter I'd have no issue with using any of my 645 lenses on the body optical quality wise - but I would be concered for my pet hate - dust bunnies. Older 645 lenses aren't weather sealed - and after two outings I have twelve in for the 45-85. I had all but 3 gone so nine got in within 2 shoots. That's bad. With the GF bodies there isn't even a mirror in the way so there will be some real dust pumping going on.


In processing I spend more time dealing with dust bunnies than I do setting tone curves, sharpness, saturation etc. The 28-45 doesn't seem to let them in so bad. If they could make an adapter that would allow the Fuji camera to operate the AF of this lens, it would be a great carry over as I feel it is optical superior to any 32-64 sample images I've encoutered - and a more useful focal length range.

Last edited by SFTphotography; 07-20-2021 at 02:52 PM.
07-20-2021, 04:03 PM - 1 Like   #90
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,711
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by SFTphotography Quote
Modern Canon EF lenses are very good - and quite a few were designed to cope with the Pixel pitch of the 5ds (anything released for 2014 onwards).


Some of the GF lenses aren't that great and I recall a thread where the OP said the Canon 100-400 performed as well on the body than the native 100-200 - except for vingetting which would be a crop and/or aspect ratio change away. And 100-400 costs less new, and covers a lot more focal length.

Look through this

Senja Norway with Fuji GFX 100: Medium Format Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review


If I were a GF shooter I'd have no issue with using any of my 645 lenses on the body optical quality wise - but I would be concered for my pet hate - dust bunnies. Older 645 lenses aren't weather sealed - and after two outings I have twelve in for the 45-85. I had all but 3 gone so nine got in within 2 shoots. That's bad. With the GF bodies there isn't even a mirror in the way so there will be some real dust pumping going on.


In processing I spend more time dealing with dust bunnies than I do setting tone curves, sharpness, saturation etc. The 28-45 doesn't seem to let them in so bad. If they could make an adapter that would allow the Fuji camera to operate the AF of this lens, it would be a great carry over as I feel it is optical superior to any 32-64 sample images I've encoutered - and a more useful focal length range.
Yes, there are great EF lenses. My point was GFX owners are happily using them on a larger format than they were designed for. I've seen them using EF tilt & shift lenses that weren't designed for digital. This tells me Pentax users would buy FF 645 cameras and use the lenses already available. Then Pentax could design some new lenses. No different than what they've done with FF 35.

Thanks,
barondla
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
645d, 645z, a1, benefit, business, camera, corner, diffraction, dof, focus, frame, fuji, landscape, lens, lenses, medium format, pentax, pixels, print, ricoh sells to sony, sell mf division, sensor, sharpness, size, splitting off mf, subject
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Vecnos - A new Ricoh spin-off brand for 360 cameras JPT Pentax News and Rumors 93 03-19-2022 12:51 AM
Post your non-pentax medium-format and large-format pictures DenisG Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands 26 12-07-2020 08:02 PM
Should they stay or should they go? Some of my lenses that is. jboyde Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 07-30-2009 01:21 PM
Keep-alive-message from Gernany kozlowsky Welcomes and Introductions 3 01-30-2009 03:30 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:59 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top