Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-07-2009, 09:56 AM   #1
Veteran Member
Gooshin's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Toronto, the one in Canada.
Posts: 5,611
what have i done

Last week i swiped Andy Lo's 645N, preloded with film and the FA75 f2.8 lens..

now its on my desk

all i need now is 6 batteries and i'm ready to roll (damn this thing is heavy)

08-07-2009, 11:09 AM   #2
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,915
what batteries does it eat?
once you go medium format, it's hard to go back to puny film
08-07-2009, 11:15 AM   #3
Veteran Member
Gooshin's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Toronto, the one in Canada.
Posts: 5,611
Original Poster
6 double a's

it weight around 4 pounds with the lens before the batteries.
08-07-2009, 02:14 PM   #4
Banned




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H.
Posts: 5,979
what you have done is purchased a medium format film camera. enjoy!

08-07-2009, 02:45 PM   #5
Veteran Member
Gooshin's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Toronto, the one in Canada.
Posts: 5,611
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by séamuis Quote
what you have done is purchased a medium format film camera. enjoy!
yes, but, the question i always trouble myself is, why?

as i have mentioned in other posts, i do not see film as being superior to digital.

higher dynamic range? sure, but with the current bracket/blending softwares, digital can surpass any film in that regard

format issues? again, APS-C is good enough, with plenty of lenses.

Depth of Field? that is perhaps the only attribute i am after, however, perhaps i am fooling myself, as my F1.2 55 lens is currently in a box and not used.

plus the sheer size of this think, yuck!

anyway i'll shoot some and figure this out... good or bad...
08-07-2009, 02:52 PM   #6
Pentaxian
fs999's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Luxembourg
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,673
One word : detail...
08-07-2009, 02:53 PM   #7
Banned




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H.
Posts: 5,979
I had no real idea why I purchased my 6x7. still dont. I wont really get into the format war, as I dont know enough to really debate it. but I will say that the beast is sure fun to use from time to time. is the 645 heavier than the 6x7?
08-07-2009, 03:00 PM   #8
Damn Brit
Guest




Go on a hike with it.

08-07-2009, 03:02 PM   #9
Veteran Member
Gooshin's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Toronto, the one in Canada.
Posts: 5,611
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by séamuis Quote
I had no real idea why I purchased my 6x7. still dont. I wont really get into the format war, as I dont know enough to really debate it. but I will say that the beast is sure fun to use from time to time. is the 645 heavier than the 6x7?
edit:

my bathroom scale says around 4-4.5 pounds with the batteries and the FA75 lens (which is plastic)
08-07-2009, 03:10 PM   #10
Pentaxian
fs999's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Luxembourg
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,673
I walked two days in Paris with my 645N + Arsat Fisheye (2.5 Kg), my *ist and my K20D...

Wonderful days...


645N + Arsat 30mm fisheye
08-07-2009, 03:13 PM   #11
Banned




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H.
Posts: 5,979
QuoteOriginally posted by Gooshin Quote
edit:

my bathroom scale says around 4-4.5 pounds with the batteries and the FA75 lens (which is plastic)
then im going to assume a 6x7 MLU with waist level finder and Takumar 90mm 2.8 is likely heavier. even more so if I go with the metered-prism. though I don't actually know the weight. the 645 always looks like this unwieldy monster in photographs though. maybe its just because of the shape of the body? then again I always thought a hasselblad was a big thing until I used one.
08-07-2009, 06:08 PM   #12
Site Supporter
Avenger's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Toronto
Photos: Albums
Posts: 56
I'm waiting for a couple rolls to come back from the lab that I shot with my 6x7II. Hopefully there is a shot worth posting. Is it just convenience to shoot digital, instant gratification! Why can't Pentax make a digital back for the 645. :-) Wish mine hadn't died!
08-08-2009, 01:06 AM   #13
Veteran Member
Andi Lo's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,925
QuoteOriginally posted by Avenger Quote
I'm waiting for a couple rolls to come back from the lab that I shot with my 6x7II. Hopefully there is a shot worth posting. Is it just convenience to shoot digital, instant gratification! Why can't Pentax make a digital back for the 645. :-) Wish mine hadn't died!
I wonder if in the end the digital back can be attached to the 645N body...

I had fun when I had this camera and really enjoyed the results. I think that's what it boils down too right? fun?

Last edited by Andi Lo; 08-08-2009 at 01:29 AM.
08-08-2009, 10:28 AM   #14
Veteran Member
troyz's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 389
QuoteOriginally posted by Gooshin Quote
higher dynamic range? sure, but with the current bracket/blending softwares, digital can surpass any film in that regard
Especially Velvia!
QuoteOriginally posted by Gooshin Quote
format issues? again, APS-C is good enough, with plenty of lenses.
There are too many K-mount lenses! Medium format is much less prone to inducing LBA because you run out of useful lenses (and room in your bag) quickly!

QuoteOriginally posted by Gooshin Quote
Depth of Field? that is perhaps the only attribute i am after, however, perhaps i am fooling myself, as my F1.2 55 lens is currently in a box and not used.
I wouldn't choose medium format over 35 (or 35 over APS-C) solely for increased shallowness of field, because I don't need it. . . but medium format (in general) provides a more useful viewfinder and (in my experience) is easier to focus, especially for parts of the image outside the center-of-frame focus aid. . .
QuoteOriginally posted by Gooshin Quote
plus the sheer size of this think, yuck!
If film makes you happy, bigger film will make you happier!

Seriously, I think it depends on whether you use a tripod. On tripod the size of the camera isn't a big issue (as long as the tripod is stable enough for the camera/lens/exposure time you're using). Off tripod you'll probably wish for a smaller camera.

Scanning, however, will drive you nuts. If your lab offers scanning at time-of-development, get it!

Last edited by troyz; 08-08-2009 at 10:34 AM.
08-08-2009, 12:11 PM   #15
Veteran Member
Gooshin's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Toronto, the one in Canada.
Posts: 5,611
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by troyz Quote

Scanning, however, will drive you nuts. If your lab offers scanning at time-of-development, get it!
i enjoy scanning though, scanned all of my europe photos last week ago, 400 of them
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!
camera, medium format
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:25 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