Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-07-2010, 04:48 PM   #16
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,073
QuoteOriginally posted by mark_au Quote
Guys,

Can I ask if anyone has any specific links saying the digital sensor will be 39MP and not say 30MP.

I have seen prototype pictures showing the back sensor as detachable from the body. Does anyone know if this is still likely in the final production model.

Regards
Mark
Pentax said that the sensor wiill be more than 31mp. It is 39~40mp.
The sensor has never been detachable.

01-08-2010, 02:59 PM   #17
Forum Member




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Irvine
Posts: 53
Rumor has it that it is the same sensor as in the Hassy H200, 39 mp. Size of the sensor is 36.7 x 49.0 mm.
01-15-2010, 11:32 PM   #18
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Posts: 6
What alarms me from prototype photos

PENTAX 645 DIGITAL(‰¼¸Ģ)

is that the digital back seems to be mounted to the camera body via some hinge mechanism. This concerns me in regards to tolerances being maintained over time with wear.

I'm a bit surprised they instead haven't just allowed the back to be attached onto the rear of the camera body manually and removed again by the user like other medium format systems, allowing the back to be used on view cameras (Alpa, Rm3D etc..).

I'm assuming this wouldn't increase the cost of production.
01-16-2010, 08:39 AM   #19
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,181
QuoteOriginally posted by mark_au Quote
What alarms me from prototype photos

PENTAX 645 DIGITAL(‰¼¸Ģ)

is that the digital back seems to be mounted to the camera body via some hinge mechanism. This concerns me in regards to tolerances being maintained over time with wear.

I'm a bit surprised they instead haven't just allowed the back to be attached onto the rear of the camera body manually and removed again by the user like other medium format systems, allowing the back to be used on view cameras (Alpa, Rm3D etc..).

I'm assuming this wouldn't increase the cost of production.
How often would one actually open the back? Perhaps the body is designed for a sensor upgrade like was originally planned for computers and their processors.

01-16-2010, 02:20 PM   #20
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Melbourne, Victoria
Posts: 6
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
How often would one actually open the back? Perhaps the body is designed for a sensor upgrade like was originally planned for computers and their processors.
Probably when you needed to clean the sensor. Certainly this would make cleaning of the sensor much easier than for example the Leica S2.

Maybe because the back still 'clips' onto the rear of the camera body there won't be any displacement changes over time.

From my reading of other forums, the tolerances of the whole camera system are very small and errors in alignment and displacements in camera system components away from factory calibrations (a back that isn't perfectly parallel to the camera body, small displacements in the mounting of the camera back, a viewfinder screen not parallel, etc..) particularly when your dealing with a 40Megapixel sensor, can have an impact on accurate focussing and maybe even increase the frequency and strength of chromatic aberration effects.

It is dissapointing though that it removes the IQ and tilt/shift benefits of view camera systems. I hope maybe they can release a tilt/shift lens in the future if the back does remain fixed to the camera body.
01-19-2010, 01:27 AM   #21
Forum Member
ARCASIA's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Baguio, Benguet
Posts: 91
Hi Mark,

I am not too worried about the hinge system and tolerances...the film cartrige system has worked for 25 years in my 645 with countless film changes. What would really be sad is if the sensor is hinged, and thus removable, but not upgradable.

There have been very significant improvements in the sensors used in the Nikon line over the last few years, leading to quality images at very high ISO's, reduced sensor blooming and chromatic aberration, increased dynamic range due to a reduction in the noise floor, and reduced vignetting. Similar advances will be incorporated into competing brands, if they have not been already. And further advances will doubtless follow. For a camera in this price range, with all of the lovely pentax 645, Pentax 67, and Pentacon 6 mount lenses available, an upgrade path for the sensor could make this camera leader in the field.

Best, Alan


QuoteOriginally posted by mark_au Quote
What alarms me from prototype photos

PENTAX 645 DIGITAL(‰¼¸Ģ)

is that the digital back seems to be mounted to the camera body via some hinge mechanism. This concerns me in regards to tolerances being maintained over time with wear.

I'm a bit surprised they instead haven't just allowed the back to be attached onto the rear of the camera body manually and removed again by the user like other medium format systems, allowing the back to be used on view cameras (Alpa, Rm3D etc..).

I'm assuming this wouldn't increase the cost of production.
01-25-2010, 02:18 PM   #22
Forum Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Ventana Wilderness, CA
Posts: 83
Interchangeable sensor...

... seems highly unlikely.

If there's an efficiency leap to be gained with the next generation CCD or CMOS sensor, likely the data bus and the buffers and other chips will all need re-engineered or swapped out too. But I'd expect the sensor and the electronics of the camera are so integrated to one another in a design like this that they're monolithic with half of those circuits deep inside the body for space considerations. So no, end-user sensor upgrape swapping isn't going to happen.

Worth remembering is that Pentax was one of the few holdouts (if not the last one) in medium format that didn't accept any interchangeable digital backs. This occurred in the years when there was yet a pro dealer pipeline, high prices (and, presumably, high profit margins) common to the format. That ship has already sailed. The camera themselves became commodities; matter of fact, the whole market for high end MF digital is pretty much in the commode recently.

A large reason why is that none of the interchangeable back MF system cameras feature the level of ergonomics and integration with the body that non-swappable 35mm DSLRs all commonly feature. (The promise of such integration is exactly what makes the prospect of the 645D so intriguing).
01-25-2010, 02:49 PM   #23
Pentaxian
redrockcoulee's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Medicine Hat
Posts: 2,105
Pentax's design did not allow for interchangeable film backs which is the most likely reason that it did not allow interchangeable with a digital back. Just because prices for MF digital were high does not mean that they were profitable as the R&D is spread over much fewer units and the level of customer support has to be higher. It might be more profitable or not just do not assume that the companies charged high prices and made big profits. Some manufacturers of MFD have had difficult times and think some gone under but there has been quite a few new backs introduced to the market in the last 12 months and following a few other forums there are people looking to enter MFD. If the system and the price are good Pentax could have a good return. It is not too late to bring out the camera.

Ivan not sure what is meant by lack of intregration on MFD systems, especially on the ones designed for digital from the get go? Perhaps an elaboration would be helpful. Do agree that if the 645D is more user friendly for hand holding than its competetion it would win over many users.

Interchangeable back makes no sense unless Pentax also produces film backs for it but with the low cost of a film 645 who would need to buy a new one. A single unit makes more sense, would be more compact and most likely less expensive. The other companies needed to make their backs able to go onto existing cameras. Older Mamiya 645 for examples cannot do it either howeber all the newer ones do.

Do any of the MF sensors perform well at high ISO? That is not there strength as far as I have read.

01-25-2010, 09:15 PM   #24
Forum Member
ARCASIA's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Baguio, Benguet
Posts: 91
Hi Ivan,

“highly unlikely”…perhaps so. But given that digital backs are available for MF film cameras, it is indeed possible. The sensor in the 645D is purported to be around 36mmx49mm in size. The film size in the 645 series is about 42mmx56mm, which makes the 645D similar what APC sized sensors are to 35mm film. It is likely the pixel pitch will be on the order of 6.8mm, indicating the possibility of reasonable high ISO performance, though there is no guarantee of it.

I don’t know about the view of others on this forum, but it would be sad and unfortunate if I spent USD 6,000 to 10,000 on a non-upgradable 645D, only to find in a few years that the next generation 645D had a “full-sized” sensor with proven high ISO performance. The price makes it an entirely different matter from that of the evolution of reduced size 35mm digital cameras, where one could participate by purchasing relatively inexpensive succession of cameras such as the Nikon D70 and D200 while waiting for the technology to mature, as it has, with the advent of the 35mm sized D700 and D3s.

Though I must admit, the 645D, even without upgradability, does sound intriguing…

Best, Alan


QuoteOriginally posted by Ivan J. Eberle Quote
... seems highly unlikely.

If there's an efficiency leap to be gained with the next generation CCD or CMOS sensor, likely the data bus and the buffers and other chips will all need re-engineered or swapped out too. But I'd expect the sensor and the electronics of the camera are so integrated to one another in a design like this that they're monolithic with half of those circuits deep inside the body for space considerations. So no, end-user sensor upgrape swapping isn't going to happen.

Worth remembering is that Pentax was one of the few holdouts (if not the last one) in medium format that didn't accept any interchangeable digital backs. This occurred in the years when there was yet a pro dealer pipeline, high prices (and, presumably, high profit margins) common to the format. That ship has already sailed. The camera themselves became commodities; matter of fact, the whole market for high end MF digital is pretty much in the commode recently.

A large reason why is that none of the interchangeable back MF system cameras feature the level of ergonomics and integration with the body that non-swappable 35mm DSLRs all commonly feature. (The promise of such integration is exactly what makes the prospect of the 645D so intriguing).
01-26-2010, 12:48 AM   #25
Damn Brit
Guest




QuoteOriginally posted by ARCASIA Quote
I don’t know about the view of others on this forum, but it would be sad and unfortunate if I spent USD 6,000 to 10,000 on a non-upgradable 645D, only to find in a few years that the next generation 645D had a “full-sized” sensor with proven high ISO performance.
I'm not sure High ISO is going to be such an issue with MF Alan. The shooting style is so different compared to DSLR and people will be using MF mainly for the increased file size and resolution. Studios with light's, landscapes with tripods aren't usually areas where high ISO is needed.

As for the cropped vs full-sized sensor, it still remains to be seen whether that would be an issue. It's not going to be a huge difference (as in the comparison between APS-C and FF) and might even be irrelevant.
01-26-2010, 02:47 AM   #26
Veteran Member
ghelary's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 617
QuoteOriginally posted by Damn Brit Quote
I'm not sure High ISO is going to be such an issue with MF Alan. The shooting style is so different compared to DSLR and people will be using MF mainly for the increased file size and resolution. Studios with light's, landscapes with tripods aren't usually areas where high ISO is needed.

As for the cropped vs full-sized sensor, it still remains to be seen whether that would be an issue. It's not going to be a huge difference (as in the comparison between APS-C and FF) and might even be irrelevant.
To add up to this, true 16 bits color depth and design to be resistant to overheating (for long exposures) it much more important.
01-26-2010, 10:54 AM   #27
Forum Member




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Irvine
Posts: 53
>>Pentax's design did not allow for interchangeable film backs which is the most likely reason that it did not allow interchangeable with a digital back. Just because prices for MF digital were high does not mean that they were profitable as the R&D is spread over much fewer units and the level of customer support has to be higher. It might be more profitable or not just do not assume that the companies charged high prices and made big profits. Some manufacturers of MFD have had difficult times and think some gone under but there has been quite a few new backs introduced to the market in the last 12 months and following a few other forums there are people looking to enter MFD. If the system and the price are good Pentax could have a good return. It is not too late to bring out the camera. <<
Pentax did a redesignof the entire body so they could have allowed for interchangeable backs. But I think a long while ago I read that the sensor and electronic modules could be changed (probably factory only knowing Pentax).
01-26-2010, 11:18 AM   #28
Forum Member
ARCASIA's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Baguio, Benguet
Posts: 91
Hi Gary,

I agree that “studios with light's”, and “landscapes with tripods aren't usually areas where high ISO is needed”. And I think that these are applications for which MF film is particularly well suited, in large part, on account of the resolution that this medium already offers, together with the minimal demands placed upon film sensitivity. But if comparable resolution, along with a more efficient work flow and instant review, are largely what MF digital has to offer, I am not that interested and would rather stay with film.

The possibility, however, of medium format photography at high ISO, opens up new worlds of photography that have, in large part, remained outside of the domain of MF film. Imagine a MF digital camera that could produce acceptable image quality at ISO 3200: a photo taken at a shutter speed of 1/500 sec would be comparable to that obtained with ISO 100 film at 1/15 sec, assuming constant aperture. Sports, wildlife and low light photography, to name a few, become viable; and reliance on the tripod is lessened. For me, it is precisely the ability obtain photos at high ISO that makes MF digital interesting; otherwise, it remains merely an expensive curiosity.


Best, Alan

QuoteOriginally posted by Damn Brit Quote
I'm not sure High ISO is going to be such an issue with MF Alan. The shooting style is so different compared to DSLR and people will be using MF mainly for the increased file size and resolution. Studios with light's, landscapes with tripods aren't usually areas where high ISO is needed.
01-26-2010, 12:13 PM   #29
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Washington DC, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 549
That is my wish, that the 645D is outside of the box and has high quality, high ISO ability - even sacrificing megapixels for this. If that is the case, I could do away with my 35mm based digital system and solely concentrate on a Pentax 645 kit film and digital.

QuoteOriginally posted by ARCASIA Quote
--snipped-- For me, it is precisely the ability obtain photos at high ISO that makes MF digital interesting; otherwise, it remains merely an expensive curiosity.

Best, Alan
01-26-2010, 09:54 PM   #30
Pentaxian
er1kksen's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Staten Island, NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,672
If I'm not mistaken, the latest phase back (the P60, I believe) has a "pixel-binning" high ISO mode which, at least according to Michael Reichmann, yields results about on par with the Nikon D700. Whether such technology will be available in the 645D is a bit dubious.
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, lenses, medium format, medium-format, months, montreal, mp, pentax, s2
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Samsung NX10 previewed, K-mount adapter TBA jpzk Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 3 01-04-2010 08:59 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:19 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