[deadwolfbones]

But with the 645D you have the choice. You can downsize to get a better image. Or keep the shot at the original size and get more coverage. Either way, that's a win.

Sure, sure... I was just pointing out that the phrasing of the sentence makes no sense. It's not at all surprising that the downsampled 645D image looks sharper/more detailed than the D3X at its native resolution. It's exactly what you should expect.

[Aboudd]

Oh Steve, I have to toss my three cents back into this one. I bought my 645D after selling my D3x a few months back. Since then I have accumulated 7 beautiful 645 lenses from members here, on Get Dpi and yes, even the dreaded eBay. They are all in excellent shape, are sharp and have great performers. More importantly, the most expensive of these lenses was only $800 ( the FAs) and a couple less than $150.00. One doesn't have to have the newest glass to produce great images. So far I have found no issues with the lenses' resolving power with the 645D sensor. I also use several 20 & 30 year old lenses on my Nikon D3s like the 25-50 F4 zoom, the 28 and 35 PC lenses and even a 135 3.5, again, with fine results. As to the slow release of the new lenses, talk to a Leica S2 owner to measure real frustration.

The Nikon D3x is a fine camera. Certainly quicker in the field and has an enviable arsenal of lenses. To make a comparison of these two cameras, past image quality, is really silly as they are two entirely different beasts with distinct purpose. If one could afford both - well why not? Haven't many of us over the years had multiple formats? If not, the type of the photography one shoots should determine what gear one needs and owns.

If buying a 645D fits ones shooting style, spending $10K might make some sense. The risk factor is how Ricoh supports the system.

[ogl]

From where? B&H only shows the 55 avail.

B&H is not the world biggest lens shop.
I've already said that you can order FA645 in Japan.

[Anvh]

The Nikon D3x is a fine camera. Certainly quicker in the field and has an enviable arsenal of lenses. To make a comparison of these two cameras, past image quality, is really silly as they are two entirely different beasts with distinct purpose. If one could afford both - well why not? Haven't many of us over the years had multiple formats? If not, the type of the photography one shoots should determine what gear one needs and owns.

They will only need to do 2 maybe 3 things to the 645D to make it more competitive.
- faster CPU
- new AF sensor, not the one out of the K5
- UHS sd card slots

If they do that they would have nailed down most of the short comings.
While they are add it they can put the procssor also in the K5 succersor because you feel that the CPU is holding the camera back.

[ricm]

The Hasselblad 28mm is about $4,700 at B&H and the Mamiya is $4,900. A Rodenstock digital 24mm or 28mm lens is $6,000-$7,000. How is the Pentax pricing so much more expensive?

>> I stated a "USED" Arca and R'stock/Schneider lens - about $4200. I also was referring to the Mamiya/Blad 25s on the used market.

You don't hang out in the medium-format section of these forums. A 645D users have posted long exposure images with the 645D up to 30 minutes. I would ask. Also, the Pentax does not suffer from reciprocity law failure and so you will not need 5-10 minute exposures to achieve the same results as a film that does.

>> You're right I don't hang out in this forum but if you read my post - I did ask. Can you send me a few jpegs created with a 5-10 minute exposure or direct me to a few online? 30 minute exposures are one thing but if sensor heat was a limiting issue in incorporating live picture then I would like to see how much noise is present. And reciprocity aside, I use long exposures for not only extremely low light but for the creative potential that it affords.

[steve perry]

Oh Steve, I have to toss my three cents back into this one. I bought my 645D after selling my D3x a few months back. Since then I have accumulated 7 beautiful 645 lenses from members here, on Get Dpi and yes, even the dreaded eBay. They are all in excellent shape, are sharp and have great performers. More importantly, the most expensive of these lenses was only $800 ( the FAs) and a couple less than $150.00. One doesn't have to have the newest glass to produce great images. So far I have found no issues with the lenses' resolving power with the 645D sensor. I also use several 20 & 30 year old lenses on my Nikon D3s like the 25-50 F4 zoom, the 28 and 35 PC lenses and even a 135 3.5, again, with fine results. As to the slow release of the new lenses, talk to a Leica S2 owner to measure real frustration.

The Nikon D3x is a fine camera. Certainly quicker in the field and has an enviable arsenal of lenses. To make a comparison of these two cameras, past image quality, is really silly as they are two entirely different beasts with distinct purpose. If one could afford both - well why not? Haven't many of us over the years had multiple formats? If not, the type of the photography one shoots should determine what gear one needs and owns.

If buying a 645D fits ones shooting style, spending $10K might make some sense. The risk factor is how Ricoh supports the system.

Yeah, I guess I'm not real worried about the optics of the lenses, just the availability. I don't like to be in a spot where I need a lens and can't find one - or the only thing I can find is possibly some beat up lens. I know there are nice copies out there, but I have seen a fair share of abused samples out there as well. That, and the older lenses aren't weather sealed. Just about a week ago I was literally covered by a 20 foot wave as I shot along the shoreline of L. Superior. I only got the top of it, but it nearly knocked me over. The camera and lens were drenched - and kept right on working! I know the 645 is weather sealed, but I would have needed to replace an older lens for sure - and I worry how long that could take if it's a hard-to-get item. (I get drenched more than I'd like to admit )

Plus, I think the whole duel system thing is what I've been trying to avoid. Doing landscapes, I'm often hiking or backpacking to locations, and carrying multiple systems is not a real appealing thought. However, it might be the way to go down the road if I could talk myself into it, I usually have a pretty good idea of what type of gear I'll need before I start a hike or overnight trip. Hmm...

And that whole Ricoh thing does have me a bit concerned. I think they'll either do really good OR really bad. Time will tell.

I think for now, I'm going to stay on the sidelines and see what happens. I do thank you for your insight.

[Adam]

Glad to hear so much positive feedback on the review! I'm happy to say that this is one of our most-read reviews to date! Many thanks for to Ole for lots of hard work on putting it together.

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

[Ole]

And thanks for your various corrections which we have worked into the review. I was happy to read from ogl and others that the lens situation is better than we thought, at least in some markets!

[Aboudd]

Steve, one final thought for you. The 645D weighs just a few ounces more than the D3x. The weight and size of Nikons zooms, like the 24-70 and 70-200 are equal to the Pentax zooms. They all use the 77MM front end as well, so the overall sizes of the system are about the same. The primes for the Pentax, like the 35, 55, 75 and 150 are all small, light lenses.

What I am suggesting is that the gear isn't the issue, it is how you use it that is. Certainly, if you need weather proofing, the current Pentax lens line up is inadequate.

Now that I better understand what you are doing I think the Nikon D3x is the right path for you. While the IQ on the Pentax is somewhat better, unless you are making huge prints, you don't need to change anything. Many of the prints in my exhibit are 36" and were made with the D3x and hold resolution beautifully.

For the time being, you should keep your money in your pocket and wait to see it Ricoh supports the camera and introduces the glass you need.

[Tord]

The first and foremost reason for buying a 645D (for me) would be to use it in a studio, and that's what troubles me a bit, as it isn't optimized for studio work: It can't be used tethered, but is weather-sealed (definitely not needed in most studios), it hasn't got live view, which could be very helpful in a studio environment, and so on! And if it was supposed to be used outdoorin a harsh environment, the weather-sealing is nice, but then anti-shake would be essential, alas, it hasn't got that.

So slightly flawed design, but surely a golden base to build on!

[CDW]

There has never been a Pentax manufactured that was optimized for studio use. The 67 and prior 645 variants were all designed as field cameras and they were successful in that role due to their ruggedness and available optics. The 645D is really not any different in execution or intended use. I recall that Pentax announced it as a field camera for serious amateur and professional landscape work but the reality is that is being used for far more than just field and landscape work. And somehow, amateurs and professionals alike, survived without live view during the days of film. I wouldn't call the design flawed, simply classic.

[Aboudd]

+1 to CDW. There are plenty of choices for studio cameras. Pentax MFs have always been field cameras. I remember the 67 I had back in the 70's. It was a bear but made fantastic negatives. I believe it was called the Texas Leica in those days. As to features like live view and tethering, sure it would be nice, but the thing I would like most, as I do shoot handheld with my "D", is a vertical release button - and of course - a faster processor. When lamenting the minimal feature set on the "D," consider its price. The Mamiya RZ digital body is over $17K, Hasselblad H4D-40 with the 80MM at almost $20K and the Pentax 645D body, with the best ergonomics of the group, is only $10K.

[Ole]

The first and foremost reason for buying a 645D (for me) would be to use it in a studio, and that's what troubles me a bit, as it isn't optimized for studio work: It can't be used tethered, but is weather-sealed (definitely not needed in most studios), it hasn't got live view, which could be very helpful in a studio environment, and so on! And if it was supposed to be used outdoorin a harsh environment, the weather-sealing is nice, but then anti-shake would be essential, alas, it hasn't got that.

So slightly flawed design, but surely a golden base to build on!

Alas, I do not have access to a 645D anymore , but I would think that the HDMI output capability would be a good alternative to actual tethering in the studio. Granted, you'd have to operate the camera on the camera, but "digital previews", as Pentax calls it, could be shown on a nice, big monitor for the model, and anyone else, to see.

[bull drinkwater]

i decided not to wait for or drop $1100 or$1900 for one their new lenses.i went to keh and picked up 3 lenses and a converter that cover all my needs.only the 75mm f2.8 in an auto focus.
after 2 extensive outings, i am very happy with my choices. read the pentax / phase one side by side review,the in camera adjustments can level the playing field.

[bull drinkwater]

why didn't you coimpare the 645d to a hasse or mamiya?