In 67 when I was in Photo Arts at Ryerson Politech, all study work and product photography was done with 8x10 or 4x5 film. There were assignments where we used Pentax SLRs and there was a sign out cupboard full of Pentax lenses. Portrait studios were still shooing 4x5 or 8x10. My cousin the wedding photographer was using Hasselblads and 35mm. He used medium format and 35mm the way I use FF and APS-c. Another friend who was largely a product photographer (but also shot large trucks and automobile shots for G.M.) and graduated maybe 4 years after I did, so say 71, shot almost his whole career in 35mm. Buy the time we were working together in 94, digital was getting started. But he also did 4x5 corporate portraits for a number of organizations. By 2005 we were all Digital.
Despite the fact my first dream camera would have been a Bronica 645 system, the age of large format film was already coming to an end in the 70s. By the 90s almost all the photographers I knew were shooting 35mm for most of their work. That's my own personal perspective from my spot on the sidelines. Personally I had taken the last 2 years of my Photography program digital by 2005. FiIm was Grade 10, 11 and 12 were digital.
To me, in this day and age 645 is fine, as long as it's like the GFX 100s. Not much bigger than an FF and easily portable with DSLR FF ergonomics. But to date I can't think of a meaningful advantage to buying a 645 system as an amateur, beyond having lots of money and being able to afford whatever toys you desire. Seriously, my style is not conducive to a lack of IBIS and clunkiness. Nimble and unobtrusive is what works for me.
As for smart phones, the last wedding I shot a few years ago, the donated smart phone images from various people really enhanced the photo record of the wedding. And the couple didn't make even one print from all the submitted photos. My cousin back in the day made 2/3s of his money from prints and albums that his wife put together. Times have changed.
The need for large format is not the that cell phones take pictures, it's that these days photo albums are stored and displayed on phones, tablet and computers an TVs. And I have a 42x30" image on my wall taken with my K-3 that rivals anything I've ever taken. People vastly under-estimate the fact that you can enlarge digital without enlarging the grain. I have no film prints that in anyway rival my digital prints. Trying to work out comparisons is pretty much apples and oranges.
Is there a future for 645? Right now, my suspicion is that Fuji is eating everyone's lunch. This based on how long the Fuji system has been out, and the number of professional shots I've seen on line using it. And its hard to say if they will even make it. But because of their IQ and pricing, they have a realistic shot, offering a huge improvement over FF, where as if you have a 36 MP FF do you really need a 42 MP MF? There are a number of FFs that are higher res than that. And I'm not really clear on whether Pentax MF glass can handle 100 MP images. I suspect Pentax will not try and take their MF system beyond the niche it now fills. But who knows. Life is full of surprises. When the 645z came out Pentax had the whole lower cost market MF to themselves. Fuji has pretty much eaten their lunch. I can buy a 100 MP Fuji system for lesss than I can buy a 645z and the Fuji system has more modern glass available. The writing is on the wall for the Pentax 645 system.
Last edited by normhead; 07-30-2021 at 08:24 AM.