[RICHARD L.]

The 45 has next to no fans at all

was so unimpressed with the 45's as to avoid it.

Funny that the A 45 mm f/2.8 gets such badmouthing everywhere. I also have a copy that performs superbly and has never shown the problems many attribute to this lens (flare, soft corners, etc) ...

[SFTphotography]

I'd be careful of that "viable future" bit. Fuji corporate has been saying some alarming alarming things about their imaging division.

True

My worry comes from reliability. A photographer who I trust immensely cited concerns about one he was loaned.

De centred lenses came up and the fact the camera would give repeated error messages with lenses attached. He said it was so worrisome he had to keep his Canon R series stuff with him as half the time the camera wouldn't respond. This was a GFX100.

There's reported issues of shutter failures and tripod mounts failing on GFX100s bodies - and probably will be on the 50sII. The original 50s, 50r and 100 use a different shutter and more robust chassis. They've been cost cutting.

I alas don't see the 645z line being continued - it's long over due more modern 45-85 and 80-160 zooms (akin to the GF zooms) with weather sealing etc. Like the 55, 28-45 and 90.

[w2ck]

You both would love the Z.

Hi,

Says Tex The Salesman. Or, he ought to be a Pentax salesman. He sold me on the D in the first place.

Actually, I have been eyeballing the used market for both a 645Z and a GFX 50s mk-I.

Pentax can help me here. Release a new 645 with the 100 MP imager. Or, better yet, the physically larger 150 MP one. That'd give Pentax something Fuji can't do.

And make all y'all (an actual Southern US term) put your 645Z units up for sale and give me a nice market to buy my own upgrade from.

And this brigs up a question.The Fuji Fiftys use microlenses atop the sensor which I am not all that fond of. And, so, does the 645Z as well? Toppings on a sensor can easily be different for different customers. And, I can't say as I've ever heard anything regarding the microlenses on the Z....


Stan

[kaseki]

For future visitors to the southeastern USA:

South of roughly the Mason-Dixon line (northern boundary of the state of Maryland), the standard English personal pronoun (singular/plural) you/you becomes you/y'all. In certain areas in or near the state of Georgia, the usage is y'all/all y'all. And when a waitress calls you 'honey' it is not an invitation to a romantic encounter.

With those linguistic deviations in mind, have a nice visit.

[SFTphotography]

Hi,



And this brigs up a question.The Fuji Fiftys use microlenses atop the sensor which I am not all that fond of. And, so, does the 645Z as well? Toppings on a sensor can easily be different for different customers. And, I can't say as I've ever heard anything regarding the microlenses on the Z....


Stan

They don't use micro lenses on top the sensor. The plus is that keeps the Fuji sensor clearer of visible sensor dust than the Pentax - the downside is slight image softening.

[barondla]

The Fuji GFX 50R body shape allows wilder lens adaptions. The grips can get in the way on their other cameras. If I were looking at a Fuji, this would be a consideration. Grips aren't required for great ergonomics. My Leica M film cameras are some of the most comfortable to hold. The Pentax 6x7 isn't bad either. But, the Pentax 645Z is great, with a grip.

Thanks,
barondla

[texandrews]

Hi,

Says Tex The Salesman. Or, he ought to be a Pentax salesman. He sold me on the D in the first place.

Actually, I have been eyeballing the used market for both a 645Z and a GFX 50s mk-I.

Pentax can help me here. Release a new 645 with the 100 MP imager. Or, better yet, the physically larger 150 MP one. That'd give Pentax something Fuji can't do.

And make all y'all (an actual Southern US term) put your 645Z units up for sale and give me a nice market to buy my own upgrade from.

And this brigs up a question.The Fuji Fiftys use microlenses atop the sensor which I am not all that fond of. And, so, does the 645Z as well? Toppings on a sensor can easily be different for different customers. And, I can't say as I've ever heard anything regarding the microlenses on the Z....


Stan

IIRC, microlenses are a mirrorless thing, mainly to offset the short flange back distance.


Also, I want to underscore a point I've made before, but will do a little differently now. It's 2022, and I have been using my Z for 8 years this coming month. My K1 (converted to a K1mkII via the board replacement offer) for more than 5. These are the kind of numbers that were common in film days, but all that changed with early digital. I purchased my first digital camera in 2001, and 8 cameras after that one until I bought my Z. After the Z, just one, the K1---mostly as an insurance backup camera with which I could use my Z lenses if I wished, although it found its own usefulness in my pro work (I'm not sure I've ever used it for my personal work).


Using the Z professionally( and I just got a new gig today with an embassy) and for my own personal work I can say w/o equivocation that it continues to perform beautifully and gives me superb results in some challenging low light situations. As does my K1. These past 8 years have not been spent looking over my shoulder wondering about an upgrade. In this century in photography, that's been liberating.

Not sure how old you are, but I'm 66 this year. I'm glad I made the Z purchase when I did, and I'd do it again with a light heart, not worrying at my age whether there is a new one coming (which we've heard rumors that there may just be one). And all of my lenses I've had for it have performed beautifully except 2---the FA 45 and the FA 35, neither of which were dogs, but which weren't as good as other options. And Pentax offered me the rich used lens market that Fuji still doesn't have, and won't for a while.

---

Last edited by texandrews; 03-31-2022 at 01:32 PM.

[TDvN57]

I fail to see the advantages of the Fuji 50 mpx cameras over the 645z with the same sensor. Perhaps the physical size is a thing. When it comes to lenses then how many lenses do you really need?

I'm only just discovering the charm of the planar lenses, which to my knowledge is based upon the double Gauss design. Quite a few of the 645 lenses have similar designs and most of the 6x7 are as well. And the ones I have do in fact have the same charm and sharpness too.

I often see justification for the Fuji as an affordable medium format with a future development path. But what is it? Their current format can't go to 645 full frame. The Fuji 100mpx is basically the end of their medium format growth path.

So what is the advantage of having a medium format kit? There are only two points I can think of, these being (1) shallower depth of field to enable for a 3D visual effect in the correct(?) composition, (2) to have enough pixels to print big, really big in high resolution.

Please note I'm saying advantages, not reasons. Reasons to own a medium format kit will be different for each person.

Getting back to (#1) above, the larger the sensor the easier it is to create a 3D effect. More pixels do not necessarily contribute much. It's about composition and compression of the image.

If someone makes a 6x7 150mpx camera with manual focus, one frame per second and a range of planar lenses (P67 for example) I will switch to that in a heartbeat. And I'll be happy to use it for wildlife and sports as well.

Like many others on this forum I did weddings with my Pentax 6x7, changed film every some 10 frames and never had a customer complain.

So what exactly is the future growth path of Fuji that outshines the 645z?

Both manufacturers are reluctant to commit to a MF strategy in public. Fuji is openly dampening expectations. Pentax is just absent from the conversation. PhaseOne is overcharging and is selling the MF sizzle left right and centre to whomever appears to have 50k in spare change and Hasselblad is maintaining their MF range as a loss-leader whilst paying the bills with branding mobile phone and consumer grade drone cameras.

Your thoughts?

[stubyles]

Smashing shots of the West Pier. Beautiful! Did you find it hard to avoid the wind farms in the distance, or did positioning yourself somewhat to the west and looking in a more southeastly direction make it easy to avoid them? Haven't been there for a few years!

I must say, I always had good results with the 35A - but was so unimpressed with the 45's as to avoid it. These days, both focal lengths are covered by the 28-45...

Yes, shot from slightly west of the pier so as to avoid the wind farm.

[w2ck]

Hi,

I'm 61 this year. And, yes, the film days saw a camera last for quite a while. Well, maybe not my original MF. an Ansco box, nor my original 135, an Argus rangefinder. :P

But, with 1979 I bought a Nikon FE. Then a used F2, mainly for all those Pre-AI lenses it came with. In 1983, a new FA. But, then the F2 left with some lenses. Others were converted to AI. Then in 1988 (IIRC) a F4. And the FE, FA and F4 are still here in the FWIW dept. And a couple large bags full of AI'd, AI. AI-S, and AF lenses. All fitting those three film bodies.

Now, I was exposed (pun intended, not sorry) to digital by way of working with Kodak when I was still George in my dept at IBM. And they had this digital-ized Canon F1 by way of a demo of their sensors. I was hooked then. Later, I got to help with the DSU for the first DCS. I was more hooked then. But too poor to pony up $30k for a camera.

Come 1999, Nikon popped out the D1. And, suddenly older E2 and E3 Nikons and 4xx series Kodaks popped up used for prices I could then afford. I was a higher level engineer at Ericsson by then. More money, you see. And I bought a E2 and then an E3 and then a 460 and, finally in 2000, a D1. There begins the trend of buying and selling digital cameras. A D1H, a D1X, a Canon 1D and a 1DS, a Kodak 520c and a 560c, Kodak 620x and 660c and 660m, and finally a Kodak 720x and 760c and a ProBack for a Contax 645. That brings us to 2003.

Then, I settled out until 2018. So, I stopped rather early on from riding that Digital camera merry-go-round. Until I finally decided that Nikon was never going to drop the price of the Df and so bought one 135 format camera to replace the three long-term Kodaks. And, for printing my usual 8x10 or 8x12 prints that was a Grand Idea,

Until I wanted larger for the Lighthouse series. And my research into What's Good for that led me to the P645D and those amazingly low used prices. And, it has worked out very well, I might add. With the advent of the Fuji 100s, though, I began thinking about upgrading the 645D. And, since I shoot on a tripod in manual focus with medium format I could get a 50s mk-I. Or a 645Z.


And, honestly, the 645Z has a bit more appeal to me given the Pentax 645 and few 67 lenses I already have. And, I think I'd prefer no microlenses.


So, now someone tell me more about something I read somewhere. The 645Z has a mode where it can sit there and integrate shots to remove things which move from the final image? Like people between the camera and, say, a lighthouse... Does that all happen inside the camera and the final result is a Raw file?


Stan

[TDvN57]

Hi,

So, now someone tell me more about something I read somewhere. The 645Z has a mode where it can sit there and integrate shots to remove things which move from the final image? Like people between the camera and, say, a lighthouse... Does that all happen inside the camera and the final result is a Raw file?


Stan

Hi Stan, Yes there is indeed the setting you ask about. I am sure other brands also have this feature, although my wife could not find it on her Nikons. Perhaps just hidden away...

Here are six pictures in a sequence of 20 and a picture of the setting on the camera. Merged frames 1 through 5 and frame 20.

I took 20 pictures in my sequences because the light was changing fast and I did not want to experiment for the ideal number, so I went the cautious way and selected 20. In the editing I mostly selected either the first frame, because I liked the dramatic effect of the waves, in others I selected frame 5 or 6 and hardly ever higher than frame 10. So in this particular instance 20 was way too many. Fortunately you have the option to "Save Process" which means it will save the result after merging each frame. Without that option you are stuck with the end result.

I also found that some static details started to deteriorate after frame 10 because of atmospheric "movements". You will also see in frame 20 the sky formed very artificially and not as well as a long exposure would have been. But up to frame 5 or 6 the sky still looks OK, which effect can be softened with a blurring brush in ACR.

Regarding details, you will see in frame #1 there are some surfers and two boats approaching the harbour inlet. The surfers are removed in frame #2 but the boats take up to frame #5 to be removed.

And to your question: yes the results are all in RAW.

Comments and critique always welcome...

[Ed Hurst]

Three days ago, I decided that I wanted to pop back down to Port Kembla and get some more shots of the steelworks while it's still there. My earlier trip, a few weeks ago, made with my two young sons in tow, had only whetted my appetite and, pretty amenable as they are, I wanted the freedom to roam and spend time in ways they just wouldn't have allowed. It's less than two hours from home, so not too difficult to do...

These taken with GFX100S and the following lenses: Pentax 645 90mm DFA, 645 150mm FA, 67 200mm f4 late and 67 300mm f4 EDIF

[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]
[IMG][/IMG]

And this one with GFX100S and the Pentax 645 28-45 lens
[IMG][/IMG]

[w2ck]

Hi Stan, Yes there is indeed the setting you ask about. I am sure other brands also have this feature, although my wife could not find it on her Nikons. Perhaps just hidden away...

Here are six pictures in a sequence of 20 and a picture of the setting on the camera. Merged frames 1 through 5 and frame 20.

I took 20 pictures in my sequences because the light was changing fast and I did not want to experiment for the ideal number, so I went the cautious way and selected 20. In the editing I mostly selected either the first frame, because I liked the dramatic effect of the waves, in others I selected frame 5 or 6 and hardly ever higher than frame 10. So in this particular instance 20 was way too many. Fortunately you have the option to "Save Process" which means it will save the result after merging each frame. Without that option you are stuck with the end result.

I also found that some static details started to deteriorate after frame 10 because of atmospheric "movements". You will also see in frame 20 the sky formed very artificially and not as well as a long exposure would have been. But up to frame 5 or 6 the sky still looks OK, which effect can be softened with a blurring brush in ACR.

Regarding details, you will see in frame #1 there are some surfers and two boats approaching the harbour inlet. The surfers are removed in frame #2 but the boats take up to frame #5 to be removed.

And to your question: yes the results are all in RAW.

Comments and critique always welcome...

Hi,

Yep. That'll work. I like it. I have not seen a Nikon (or Nikon based as it turns out) camera that does that. Not that I've had all of them. Not by a long shot. The only one I can think of which did this is the Kodak 14n aka SLR/n once they fixed the issues with the 14n. It was known as ISO 6 on that unit.

It's easy to see what I want it for. Removing people walking around a lighthouse.

Thanks for the wonderful example of how that mode works. BTW, I have not heard that the GFX has this. Maybe it does, but the Z having it pretty much makes my mind up.

Stan

[TDvN57]

Hi,

Yep. That'll work. I like it. I have not seen a Nikon (or Nikon based as it turns out) camera that does that. Not that I've had all of them. Not by a long shot. The only one I can think of which did this is the Kodak 14n aka SLR/n once they fixed the issues with the 14n. It was known as ISO 6 on that unit.

It's easy to see what I want it for. Removing people walking around a lighthouse.

Thanks for the wonderful example of how that mode works. BTW, I have not heard that the GFX has this. Maybe it does, but the Z having it pretty much makes my mind up.

Stan

I'm in Bonn today walking around a market square and tested it for removing people. I was somewhat successful and changed the composite mode to "Average". It was too cold to try out for better settings but after two tries I got it fairly close. You need to play with the delay between frames as well. If there is much traffic you may have to select two and manually blend them.

The accumulating brights keeps a shadow of people walking through the frame for much longer. The Average setting seems to create a "dip" in exposure at the spot of the person then lightens it out again as they walk away.

With some experimenting and patience I think you'll be able to refine it to a fire art.

There might be software that will do the same. I remember one of my older Samsung Note phones had a function that would remove people walking through the frame by blending two or three frames. My current phone does not seem to have it anymore.

EDIT: after looking at the pictures on the computer, I think the best option for the composite mode is "Brights" and not "Average".

[TDvN57]

Market Square in Bonn with farmer's produce for sale. Terribly cold day for someone like me not used to it and badly dressed for the weather. The wind was ice cold and cutting through my clothes. The locals are drinking beer and chatting away, a totally normal day for them.

645z + P67 55-100