Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-16-2021, 04:34 PM - 1 Like   #16
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Baltimore
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,378
QuoteOriginally posted by Wasp Quote
I don't think a full frame Pentax 645 will ever happen. Those things are just too expensive at $30K+ and the market must be tiny. Only Hasselblad and Phase One are currently playing there - big fish in a small pond.
Since they have the market to themselves, it's not at all clear that they aren't hosing their customers. Remember, those cameras were the cost of a small house when they were crop frame, and then Pentax came out with one for $10K---and then 4 years later for $8.5K, a much more capable camera.


QuoteQuote:
The Pentax 645 lens mount might be full frame ready but the electronics will have to be re-engineered completely.
Please elaborate.
QuoteQuote:
The R&D costs would be significant, with the ROI outlook very uncertain.
we don't know whether there's been work done on the system since 2013/14, when the Z came out.
QuoteQuote:
As risk averse as Ricoh has proven themselves to be, we know what that means.
Please elaborate. Seems like they've been willing to take some risks to me....

08-16-2021, 05:02 PM - 10 Likes   #17
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 740
Next 645 camera in developing.
08-16-2021, 05:03 PM - 1 Like   #18
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2016
Location: East Coast
Posts: 2,904
QuoteOriginally posted by OoKU Quote
Next 645 camera in developing.
I am not a 645 user, but this intrigues me. Can you say more? Your history is very good.
08-17-2021, 08:02 AM   #19
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2017
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,137
QuoteOriginally posted by TDvN57 Quote
What about the 100mpx FF sensor used in Hasselblad H6D? Seems a like lot less intensive number crunching.
I would argue that 100 Mpix in FF gets one the same size pixels and wells used on the z and hence the same great ISO noise performance. The field angles return to the film capability. To make the rest equal the memory write time [xxx speed] has to double and the processing bandwidth has to double. This should be technologically straightforward after all this time, but actually getting parts delivery and/or having bespoke silicon developed may be very difficult in the present economic disaster.


Last edited by kaseki; 10-15-2021 at 11:14 AM.
08-17-2021, 06:21 PM   #20
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
TDvN57's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Berlin
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,136
QuoteOriginally posted by kaseki Quote
I would argue that 100 Mpix in FF gets one the same size pixels and wells used on the z and hence the same great ISO noise performance. The field angles return to the film capability. To make the rest equal the memory write time has to double and the processing bandwidth has to double. This should be technologically straightforward after all this time, but actually getting parts delivery and/or having bespoke silicon developed may be very difficult in the present economic disaster.
If Hasselblad is using it in a production camera H6D 100 & 400, it cannot be bespoke anymore. But yes any electronic chip will be scarce for the next couple of years.
08-17-2021, 10:49 PM   #21
Junior Member




Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 30
QuoteOriginally posted by Ryan Tischer Quote
Yeah, but the only modern full frame MF lens is the 25mm D FA (less common version vs. DA), so I highly doubt they'd go FF either, due to needing an almost entirely new [modern] lens line-up.
I am testing my A, FA, DA, DFA 645 lenses on the Fuji GFX 100s. To make a short summary: None of A or FA lenses can be used wide open without (huge) hesitation, at least if you are a demanding photographer. At their best aperture they are mostly as good as gold. The D are much better and can be used wide open as well. I will publish sample pictures in the future.

A crop 645 100MP sensor needs a full new range of lenses, only the focal lengths of the new lenses work.

I doubt that a non crop 100MP sensor will give a much better result, but that is just a guess.

lenses tested: A 120 Macro, A 35, FA 75, FA 150, FA 200, FA 400, FA 45-85, DFA 55, DA 28-45
08-17-2021, 11:36 PM   #22
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Ed Hurst's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,653
Interesting stuff! It is what one might have expected but good to see it confirmed.

08-17-2021, 11:40 PM   #23
Junior Member




Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 30
Samples of FA 150 on GFX 100s wide open and at good aperture. 100% screeshots.

The head shot is "good aperture", all the rest is wide open

I forgot: E-Shutter and IBIS allows the best quality I every achieved with any of the mentioned lenses! Shutter Shock and Mirror Slap had a tremendous influence on image quality! I never got such results on a 645Z (regardless the MP).
Attached Images
         

Last edited by mazwick; 08-17-2021 at 11:51 PM.
08-21-2021, 10:30 PM   #24
Forum Member




Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 84
QuoteOriginally posted by mazwick Quote
I am testing my A, FA, DA, DFA 645 lenses on the Fuji GFX 100s. To make a short summary: None of A or FA lenses can be used wide open without (huge) hesitation, at least if you are a demanding photographer. At their best aperture they are mostly as good as gold. The D are much better and can be used wide open as well. I will publish sample pictures in the future.
A crop 645 100MP sensor needs a full new range of lenses, only the focal lengths of the new lenses work.
I doubt that a non crop 100MP sensor will give a much better result, but that is just a guess.
lenses tested: A 120 Macro, A 35, FA 75, FA 150, FA 200, FA 400, FA 45-85, DFA 55, DA 28-45
Don't have GFX 100, but have GFX 50R, and 645z, two cameras with identical sensor. After testing a few P645 lenses on 645z and GF lenses on the 50R at large apertures, I would say that I am totally not surprised by what you found. I can't be excited by a 100MP crop sensor from Pentax, unless Pentax also drastically revamp its lenses for 645.
10-13-2021, 06:30 PM - 1 Like   #25
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: NoVA
Posts: 635
QuoteOriginally posted by whwang Quote
Don't have GFX 100, but have GFX 50R, and 645z, two cameras with identical sensor. After testing a few P645 lenses on 645z and GF lenses on the 50R at large apertures, I would say that I am totally not surprised by what you found. I can't be excited by a 100MP crop sensor from Pentax, unless Pentax also drastically revamp its lenses for 645.
Edit: went back and tried again to understand what was being shown.

I agree with Mazwick's assessment, but I do not expect lenses used wide open to be sharp for a viewer who is close to what is an extract of an image 15 feet wide (assuming it's being shown at 100% on a typical monitor). I never use lenses wide open, unless I'm particularly interested in razor-thin depth of field, which I'm usually not. For prints in the 10-foot range intended to display a sense of unending detail when viewed up close, I would find the 645 format to be a difficult challenge, requiring that I spend many thousands for each lens. Traditionally, photographers brought their 8x10 cameras for such images--not even 4x5 would do. And those lenses are specified to be use at no wider than f/16 or f/22. At that degree of enlargement (70x), a lens would have to be used wide open to avoid diffraction being the main limitation.


I can't imagine a 10-foot print made at a wide-open aperture that provides only a few millimeters of depth of field--it would be extraordinarily difficult to get a sense of what the print is a picture of when viewed closely.


For me, 70x of enlargement demands compromises--either stop it down so that the lens works (at least as much a diffraction will allow it to), or make the viewer pace back and forth to find the part of the image that is actually in focus to even get a sense of it. If the viewing distance is far enough to avoid that, then looking at it at 100% on a display is unrealistic.


That 150 was never the sharpest lens in the line, being primarily a portrait lens, and used for making prints in the 16x20" size class for commercial portraits. I've had pretty few portrait clients that would tolerate more sharpness than that lens displays even at a wider aperture. I know that Mazwick considered other lenses, but that means I don't want to draw sweeping conclusions about these particular examples, and I certainly want to consider the use case being described here, and whether it is realistic. If I made prints that big, I'd get a full-frame back for a high-dollar digital-ready view camera, but even that would be challenged for prints that big viewed up close.

For a more reasonable 20x of enlargement, which is already a lot, prints will be 25x35--two feet by three feet--and these lenses will not require nearly the same compromises to produce high quality results. But I still would find very few subjects that would be served by f/2.8 on a 150mm lens. Most of these lenses were designed for enlargements up to that point, and that's already beyond what most people actually do with these cameras beyond showing off 100% crops to each other on forums (concerning which I'm as guilty as anyone).

Rick "whose scans of 4x5 negatives look fabulous at 4x enlargements, but who would want to use an 8x10 camera with laser-scanned film for a 10-foot print viewed up close" Denney

Last edited by rdenney; 10-13-2021 at 07:05 PM.
10-14-2021, 09:36 AM   #26
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Baltimore
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,378
QuoteOriginally posted by rdenney Quote
Edit: went back and tried again to understand what was being shown.

I agree with Mazwick's assessment, but I do not expect lenses used wide open to be sharp for a viewer who is close to what is an extract of an image 15 feet wide (assuming it's being shown at 100% on a typical monitor). I never use lenses wide open, unless I'm particularly interested in razor-thin depth of field, which I'm usually not. For prints in the 10-foot range intended to display a sense of unending detail when viewed up close, I would find the 645 format to be a difficult challenge, requiring that I spend many thousands for each lens. Traditionally, photographers brought their 8x10 cameras for such images--not even 4x5 would do. And those lenses are specified to be use at no wider than f/16 or f/22. At that degree of enlargement (70x), a lens would have to be used wide open to avoid diffraction being the main limitation.


I can't imagine a 10-foot print made at a wide-open aperture that provides only a few millimeters of depth of field--it would be extraordinarily difficult to get a sense of what the print is a picture of when viewed closely.


For me, 70x of enlargement demands compromises--either stop it down so that the lens works (at least as much a diffraction will allow it to), or make the viewer pace back and forth to find the part of the image that is actually in focus to even get a sense of it. If the viewing distance is far enough to avoid that, then looking at it at 100% on a display is unrealistic.


That 150 was never the sharpest lens in the line, being primarily a portrait lens, and used for making prints in the 16x20" size class for commercial portraits. I've had pretty few portrait clients that would tolerate more sharpness than that lens displays even at a wider aperture. I know that Mazwick considered other lenses, but that means I don't want to draw sweeping conclusions about these particular examples, and I certainly want to consider the use case being described here, and whether it is realistic. If I made prints that big, I'd get a full-frame back for a high-dollar digital-ready view camera, but even that would be challenged for prints that big viewed up close.

For a more reasonable 20x of enlargement, which is already a lot, prints will be 25x35--two feet by three feet--and these lenses will not require nearly the same compromises to produce high quality results. But I still would find very few subjects that would be served by f/2.8 on a 150mm lens. Most of these lenses were designed for enlargements up to that point, and that's already beyond what most people actually do with these cameras beyond showing off 100% crops to each other on forums (concerning which I'm as guilty as anyone).

Rick "whose scans of 4x5 negatives look fabulous at 4x enlargements, but who would want to use an 8x10 camera with laser-scanned film for a 10-foot print viewed up close" Denney
Basically agree with Rick, here. But I think it is very subject dependent as well. Some subjects will draw viewers in, some will push them back. As for huge portraits, go and re-read Swift's description of Gulliver's trip to Brobdingnagia for some insights into why those aren't such a great Idea...
10-17-2021, 07:31 AM   #27
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 12,145
Pentax might be done with medium format, and I might be done with digital , end of my digital journey being the K1 digital system. The reason? Well, digital is good for quick photography, but not cost effective for making large prints (unless when stitching is a viable option). My next new "investment" is likely to be for a 4x5" or 8x10" view camera. The only excuse I can make for upgrading from FF to medium format digital (to get only 25% more resolution and IQ) would be if I restrict my lenses to 2 lenses, in which case the cost of an MFD kit would similar to full frame with many lenses, otherwise I feel like digital MF is just too expensive.

Last edited by biz-engineer; 10-17-2021 at 07:37 AM.
10-17-2021, 08:14 AM - 1 Like   #28
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by Ryan Tischer Quote
I've been shooting with the Pentax 645D, then the 645Z exclusively since 2012, but I'm looking very hard at the Fuji GFX 100S for the extra MP, better wide angle options, smaller footprint, and the likelihood of continuing to upgrade their MF mirrorless camera systems. And YES I print very large, sometimes 10'+ and I'm a professional landscape photographer, so it makes sense for me.

Before divorcing all my Pentax camera gear, are we all pretty sure Pentax is done with upgrading their medium format cameras? It would be a shame, because they make some excellent lenses and user-friendly cameras.
While I can't answer the question definitively, I've always favoured Pentax gear when competitive, but were I in your position today I'd go with Fuji. The Pentax system is not going to catch up with where Fuji is now. And the Fuji mirrorless for landscape mean the GFX100s is still a size I could manage, hiking and canoeing.

The cost is such that I probably would never consider actually buying one, but currently, I don't many from my photography, so the pay back on new camera, like when I've actually sold enough to pay for my gear would be an infinite amount of time. Personally I'd never spend that amount of money for my own amusement. YOu're in different situation if I understand things correctly.

The first time I posted this sentiment some people came aback with some technical issues people are experiencing with the Fuji MF. It's impossible to know how real, or how likely they are to occur if they are real, and it's not likely I'll ever pay enough attention to know. But it might be worth finding oe of the sites where these things are discussed before committing to a change. Pentax gear has always been noted for it's ruggedness. Others, not so much. A consideration for me since so much of my landscape is in remote location is how the gear will hold up to being carried kilometersin hard or soft cases. I don't think the Fujis have been round long enough to get good read on that.
11-30-2021, 06:51 AM   #29
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2014
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 206
I tend to agree with a lot of the sentiment regarding lenses, but perhaps it's a case of what the intended use of the lens is to be able to judge whether it's going to be capable for any sort of upgrade.

Pentax using the full 645 100Mpx sensor would seem like the obvious route to go if they wish to level the playing field with the GFX100 regarding resolution and desirability ( not only retaining their current user base, but also gaining new users? ), but whether these sensors are still available or economically viable compared with the cropped 100Mpx sensor is unknown to me. Even that sensor is getting older, and I don't believe it's BSI, so any advantage it has with pixel size may not be as significant as hoped. However, I think the lenses would make a pretty good show of handling that resolution; but not wide open. This may keep much of the user-base happy, but by the looks of some of the previous replies it would be unsuited for other users.

I have spent some time shooting with a medium format digital back coupled with some "legacy" Mamiya lenses, which hold up very well for landscape use if they are stopped down. The main weaknesses are with the wide angle lenses, as the 55mm has to be stopped down past f11 and the 35mm is never perfectly crisp even at that aperture or beyond, and has reasonably heavy CA in high contrast areas ( we don't talk about the 45mm . . . . from either Pentax or Mamiya! ). However if Pentax did come out with a full 645 100Mpx sensor for a reasonable price, I certainly would be interested. From what I've seen of the Mamiya lenses and their equivalence in reputation with their Pentax counterparts, I would probably be happy with the results for my landscape work.

But what would a revamped lens line-up look like for a full-sized 645 sensor? I had some time up my sleeve recently to browse one of the larger camera shops in our city whilst my K-1 sensor was being cleaned, and I browsed the display of GFX cameras. I was actually quite taken-aback at the size of the lenses - very surprised! I guess you need a lot of glass to handle 100Mpx at such fine pixel densities and wide-open performance, but the lenses ( in a relative sense ) are similar size ( or maybe a bit larger ) than the Mamiya lenses I use. In balance with this, some of the the GF lenses are likely to have a bigger equivalent aperture, but scaling up in size I would hate to think how big a heavily-corrected full-frame 645 lens would need to be!

In contrast, I suppose there's the Pentax DF-A 645 90mm, which I would expect would perform admirably on a full-sized sensor ( but how big is it? I've never actually seen one ). Also of note are the modern blue-ring Phase One lenses, which seem to share a similar size and format to their Mamiya predecessors, and seem to ( mostly ) handle the 150Mpx sensor well. I don't know how many of them were optically redesigned to be able to do so - and they are eye-wateringly expensive.

And for a bit of disclosure, the digital back that I have been using is a Leaf Aptus, with the 80Mpx CCD sensor, full sized ( well, close enough to ). It's a different type of shooting experience to get used to, and an interesting journey so far; but if Pentax came out with a 645 with the 80Mpx CCD sensor I would also be interested in that, if it were cheaper than the GFX100 ( unlikely ). I have read posts on GetDPI forums from people who have used both the GFX100 and digital backs with the 80Mpx sensor and have remarked that the IQ is very similar from a resolution standpoint.
11-30-2021, 10:46 AM   #30
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Baltimore
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,378
QuoteOriginally posted by Focusrite Quote
I tend to agree with a lot of the sentiment regarding lenses, but perhaps it's a case of what the intended use of the lens is to be able to judge whether it's going to be capable for any sort of upgrade.

Pentax using the full 645 100Mpx sensor would seem like the obvious route to go if they wish to level the playing field with the GFX100 regarding resolution and desirability ( not only retaining their current user base, but also gaining new users? ), but whether these sensors are still available or economically viable compared with the cropped 100Mpx sensor is unknown to me. Even that sensor is getting older, and I don't believe it's BSI, so any advantage it has with pixel size may not be as significant as hoped. However, I think the lenses would make a pretty good show of handling that resolution; but not wide open. This may keep much of the user-base happy, but by the looks of some of the previous replies it would be unsuited for other users.

I have spent some time shooting with a medium format digital back coupled with some "legacy" Mamiya lenses, which hold up very well for landscape use if they are stopped down. The main weaknesses are with the wide angle lenses, as the 55mm has to be stopped down past f11 and the 35mm is never perfectly crisp even at that aperture or beyond, and has reasonably heavy CA in high contrast areas ( we don't talk about the 45mm . . . . from either Pentax or Mamiya! ). However if Pentax did come out with a full 645 100Mpx sensor for a reasonable price, I certainly would be interested. From what I've seen of the Mamiya lenses and their equivalence in reputation with their Pentax counterparts, I would probably be happy with the results for my landscape work.

But what would a revamped lens line-up look like for a full-sized 645 sensor? I had some time up my sleeve recently to browse one of the larger camera shops in our city whilst my K-1 sensor was being cleaned, and I browsed the display of GFX cameras. I was actually quite taken-aback at the size of the lenses - very surprised! I guess you need a lot of glass to handle 100Mpx at such fine pixel densities and wide-open performance, but the lenses ( in a relative sense ) are similar size ( or maybe a bit larger ) than the Mamiya lenses I use. In balance with this, some of the the GF lenses are likely to have a bigger equivalent aperture, but scaling up in size I would hate to think how big a heavily-corrected full-frame 645 lens would need to be!

In contrast, I suppose there's the Pentax DF-A 645 90mm, which I would expect would perform admirably on a full-sized sensor ( but how big is it? I've never actually seen one ). Also of note are the modern blue-ring Phase One lenses, which seem to share a similar size and format to their Mamiya predecessors, and seem to ( mostly ) handle the 150Mpx sensor well. I don't know how many of them were optically redesigned to be able to do so - and they are eye-wateringly expensive.

And for a bit of disclosure, the digital back that I have been using is a Leaf Aptus, with the 80Mpx CCD sensor, full sized ( well, close enough to ). It's a different type of shooting experience to get used to, and an interesting journey so far; but if Pentax came out with a 645 with the 80Mpx CCD sensor I would also be interested in that, if it were cheaper than the GFX100 ( unlikely ). I have read posts on GetDPI forums from people who have used both the GFX100 and digital backs with the 80Mpx sensor and have remarked that the IQ is very similar from a resolution standpoint.
Well, again, we just don't know how the Pentax lenses would perform. We in fact don't have many (any?) bench tests for the current lineup. So it's all a guess at this point.

I have my guesses....but not having new lenses for a new FF 645 body would not dissuade me from purchasing said body.
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, australia, buildings, camera, cameras, company, format, fwiw, k-1, lenses, life, medium, medium format, pentax, people, photography, pictures, post, purposes, results, road, sydney, thieves, video, wildlife
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Do any Pentax K mount lenses cover crop digital medium format? barondla Pentax Medium Format 11 01-09-2021 06:41 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
Pentax medium format 2021 grantsarichev Pentax Medium Format 16 10-20-2020 08:21 AM
The Indian Himalayas on Pentax medium format Kosmo Foto Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras 7 03-29-2020 10:31 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:33 PM. | 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