Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-27-2014, 09:58 AM - 4 Likes   #5461
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Wiltshire/Hampshire
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,723
QuoteOriginally posted by texandrews Quote
Rob, I'm not rich. I traded a bunch of gear in to get the price down, and am using all used lenses. But there are some other ways to look at this: we all prioritize our spending. For instance, I see you live in London, one of the world's most expensive cities. I live in a cheap city and in a cheap neighborhood. My vehicle is a 2003 truck I bought used, do some of the work on myself and drive infrequently, and my wife's is a very economical car. We don't do a lot of things others do, and when we travel we go cheap (which is better and more interesting, imo). I know people who have very expensive hobbies, like fishing from boats. & etc. Expensive lifestyles. We feel the outsider-ness of our existence sometimes, but I remind myself of our priorities. So I prioritized my spending and wound up with this (surprise) purchase. It was partly serendipitous, but I also feel like I have moved to the top of the upgrade path, and shedding all that gear (3 bodies, 8 lenses, plus accessories...) really cleared my head. In a very real way this expenditure may wind up being cheaper for me than thrashing around the way I have been with gear. I feel like it has helped clarify a lot of things, including where I am going in the next few years with photography (only part of my work as an artist). So, that's my story, for what it's worth.

I relate this because I've seen more than a few comments on the price of this camera being out of reach, but it's really not, if it's what you need, compared to ramping up in other systems. And we should remember what many FF cameras used to cost just a few short years ago---pretty much close to the Z.
Only joking! I know its about where one chooses to spend their hard-earned.

Here's another Provia shot:


P67II
Tak 105/2.4
1/125th wide-open
Provia 100F

07-27-2014, 10:28 AM   #5462
New Member




Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 4
no

first macro
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX 645Z  Photo 
07-28-2014, 05:45 AM - 1 Like   #5463
Forum Member




Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 52
https://flic.kr/p/ou828f

A portrait from the Pentax 67, 165 2.8.

Have a few more ill post later and a roll of velvia I'm dropping off today.


Last edited by Pete_the_Irish_Guy; 07-28-2014 at 05:52 PM.
07-28-2014, 07:52 AM   #5464
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Newcastle, AU!
Posts: 258
Wow Ed, great shots. Its a modern day velvia saturation fest! Theres been some stunning light of late when the suns low around here, glad you are out there with the new beast to make the most of it!

07-28-2014, 08:38 AM   #5465
Pentaxian
LFLee's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Western MA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,258
QuoteOriginally posted by gofour3 Quote
I only shoot film and 90% of that is slide film. (Colour & b+w)

The “look” you can get with slide film is unique and can’t be created in digital.

Save your money and enjoy what you have. I have ZERO interest in any Pentax 645 digital body and will happily continue to use my Pentax 35mm & 6x7 film bodies. I only dream of Kodachrome coming back and not owning a 645Z.

Phil.
what if.... Pentax 645 can provide a "kodachrome" preset that you can use in-camera...

I know what you mean by that "look". But I also long for the day digital camera can re-create those film-look in camera.
07-28-2014, 05:35 PM   #5466
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 828
QuoteOriginally posted by LFLee Quote
what if.... Pentax 645 can provide a "kodachrome" preset that you can use in-camera...

I know what you mean by that "look". But I also long for the day digital camera can re-create those film-look in camera.
I use a lot of those old x-equals and vsco film presets and some of them are pretty nice. But none of them touch the real thing (imo). Also, the idea of doing that in-camera seems kinda crazy to me: I'd always want the rawest RAW and do all my processing in post. I've never understood the in-camera settings (let alone used them).

If money was no object I'd totally own a 645Z, but I'd also own a brand new Rolleiflex 2.8.
07-28-2014, 05:47 PM - 2 Likes   #5467
Forum Member




Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 52


---------- Post added 07-28-14 at 07:56 PM ----------





Still Pentax 67 165mm 2.8












Not sure if these look good. Had the girl in these photos pick up the photos from the camera store and I downloaded them off her facebook so the quality might be lower than the scanned image.

Don't know what film I used, just recall it was 400 iso black and white.

Last edited by Pete_the_Irish_Guy; 07-28-2014 at 06:18 PM.
07-28-2014, 06:25 PM   #5468
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Sydney
Posts: 671
Pete, I like the last photo, I think it's by far the best one.

07-28-2014, 09:31 PM   #5469
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 7,017
QuoteOriginally posted by Pete_the_Irish_Guy Quote

Not sure if these look good.
Perhaps consider converting these images to grayscale. On my monitor, I'm seeing blotchy pink patches and streaks on the images. Is this chromogenic film?
07-28-2014, 10:00 PM   #5470
Forum Member




Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 52
No its black and white film. My girlfriend got it developed and scanned. I haven't gotten ahold of the scans yet, just ripped these off Facebook via my phone.
07-29-2014, 04:27 AM   #5471
Veteran Member
Duplo's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Copenhagen
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 916
QuoteOriginally posted by Pete_the_Irish_Guy Quote
[COLOR="Silver"]

Not sure if these look good. Had the girl in these photos pick up the photos from the camera store and I downloaded them off her facebook so the quality might be lower than the scanned image.

Don't know what film I used, just recall it was 400 iso black and white.
Reminds me of the concept from "dancers among us" by Jordan Matter if I recall correctly - just in black and white.

I like her pose in photo number 3 a lot.
07-29-2014, 09:07 AM   #5472
Site Supporter
gofour3's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 5,191
QuoteOriginally posted by rob1234 Quote
Only joking! I know its about where one chooses to spend their hard-earned.

Here's another Provia shot:


P67II
Tak 105/2.4
1/125th wide-open
Provia 100F
Beautiful, that’s exactly why I shoot colour slide film and not digital!

Phil.
07-29-2014, 11:29 AM - 1 Like   #5473
Forum Member




Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 90
When I shot film, I would often spend $25,000-$50,000 a year on slide film and processing. When the first high-res digital Canon and Nikon bodies came out, they were $8,000, but that was A LOT less expensive than buying film and processing - the savings were huge of digital vs. film. Then I moved up to eventually shooting with the 80mp phase back, Alpa tech cam, German lenses, and had 80-grand in my camera bag. But all of that was still less expensive than buying film and processing every year. When the 645D came out with all those cheap lenses available, it was like sale day at Wal Mart - a 40mp medium format camera for about the same price as a 12mp Canon 1Ds? And I liked the files a lot better than the sterile ones I was getting from the tech cam system.

Adjusted for inflation, $8,500 today for a camera is peanuts compared to what I used to spend for film and processing each month alone. For someone who shoots very much at all, digital is a great deal cheaper than film and processing, and the Pentax 645z is not only better, but a fraction of the price of any other digital medium-format system. So it is all relative - for someone who shoots very much, digital - on any level - is a lot cheaper than shooting film, thank goodness!
07-29-2014, 12:57 PM   #5474
Site Supporter
gofour3's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 5,191
QuoteOriginally posted by jwoodland Quote
When I shot film, I would often spend $25,000-$50,000 a year on slide film and processing
You shot 1250 to 2500 rolls of film a year; you must have had a business? (3 – 6 rolls every day of the year)
That's about how much film I have shot in my life, after 40 plus years of being into photography.
I only average 1 roll a week, or about 50 rolls a year. So for me film is way cheaper, as the 35mm/6x7 cameras are peanuts compared to the cost of a 645D/Z, which will only last five – seven years at best. The film 35mm/645/6x7 bodies will last decades. At my pace I can shoot film for about 9 years for the cost of a 645Z.

Phil.
.
07-29-2014, 01:22 PM   #5475
Pentaxian
LFLee's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Western MA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,258
QuoteOriginally posted by jwoodland Quote
When I shot film, I would often spend $25,000-$50,000 a year on slide film and processing. When the first high-res digital Canon and Nikon bodies came out, they were $8,000, but that was A LOT less expensive than buying film and processing - the savings were huge of digital vs. film. Then I moved up to eventually shooting with the 80mp phase back, Alpa tech cam, German lenses, and had 80-grand in my camera bag. But all of that was still less expensive than buying film and processing every year. When the 645D came out with all those cheap lenses available, it was like sale day at Wal Mart - a 40mp medium format camera for about the same price as a 12mp Canon 1Ds? And I liked the files a lot better than the sterile ones I was getting from the tech cam system.

Adjusted for inflation, $8,500 today for a camera is peanuts compared to what I used to spend for film and processing each month alone. For someone who shoots very much at all, digital is a great deal cheaper than film and processing, and the Pentax 645z is not only better, but a fraction of the price of any other digital medium-format system. So it is all relative - for someone who shoots very much, digital - on any level - is a lot cheaper than shooting film, thank goodness!
I tried to convince myself with this math too....
But then new camera show up few years later and I would want to "upgrade"...

Anyway.... the $8500 645Z is really competitive for sure.
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, camera, cameras, cheapo, drive, efex, film, flickr, format, frame, fujifilm, holes, lens, lomo, medium, medium format, p67ii, pentax 67, portra, post, road, roll, scanner, shot, shots, silver, software, strait, takumar 90mm
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
First Medium Format straightshooter Pentax Medium Format 3 08-24-2010 07:10 AM
Medium format... D4rknezz Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 9 04-06-2010 03:59 PM
Medium Format Soon? k100d Pentax News and Rumors 0 03-04-2009 12:09 PM
Medium Format Buffy Pentax Medium Format 5 03-19-2008 12:04 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:25 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