645z vs K1 Mk II difficult choice

biz-engineer · 05-21-2021, 08:57 AM

645z used are getting cheaper, but quite a bit more expensive than even a Pentax K1 Mk II new. Full frame high resolution (think for instance Pentax K1 mk III @ 60Mp) or 645z, is a tricky choice.
Pentax K1 has IBIS, 645z doesn't. Pentax K1 has pixel shift, 645z doesn't. Pentax k1 pixel shift files beat 645z files. K1 II new sells for <$2000, 645z used sells for more than $3800. K1 lenses cover FL from 15mm to 450, such range of modern AF lenses isn't available for 645z. Moreover, the K1 body is smaller and lighter than the 645z body. Is it still worth the money getting a 645z kit in 2021, I'm not so sure.

Last edited by biz-engineer; 05-21-2021 at 09:18 AM.

**SelrahCharleS** · 05-21-2021, 09:18 AM - **2 Likes**

K1 is certainly the more flexible camera. Pixel shift is great when you can use it, but it does require a pretty static scene.

Doesn't stop me from wanting a 645(D or Z) though. Fortunately for my wallet the 645 cameras are still well outside my budget once I start adding in the cost of lenses too

**UncleVanya** · 05-21-2021, 09:21 AM - **1 Like**

Everyone talks about, “Total Light” in medium format. I’m unclear if that rings true. I do know I’ve seen pictures comparing other brand’s super resolution (pixel shift) files vs medium format and they fell far short of native mf digital. Those are big fat pixels but the sensor is aging.

If a refresh came in that line I’d love to see the accelerator technology added and IBIS and pixel shift. But I’m not clear if the image circle of the digital 645 lenses would work with IBIS/Pixel shift.

**SteveinSLC** · 05-21-2021, 09:46 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by biz-engineer

645z used are getting cheaper, but quite a bit more expensive than even a Pentax K1 Mk II new. Full frame high resolution (think for instance Pentax K1 mk III @ 60Mp) or 645z, is a tricky choice.
Pentax K1 has IBIS, 645z doesn't. Pentax K1 has pixel shift, 645z doesn't. Pentax k1 pixel shift files beat 645z files. K1 II new sells for <$2000, 645z used sells for more than $3800. K1 lenses cover FL from 15mm to 450, such range of modern AF lenses isn't available for 645z. Moreover, the K1 body is smaller and lighter than the 645z body. Is it still worth the money getting a 645z kit in 2021, I'm not so sure.

While I didn't have a K-1 Mk2, I did have a Mk1, and now have a 645Z. I'm not so sure I'd say that the pixel shift files beat the 645Z files. For one, there's the static scene limitation. I did mostly landscape work with both, and there's just scenes where pixel shift ended up with annoying artifacts, due to a small amount of wind ruffling leaves in the foreground.

Plus if you're doing landscape(or product/archival work), the camera is mostly on a tripod and IBIS doesn't matter. Sometimes that's true of studio work too.

OTOH, if you're looking for a more all around camera, I'm with you, the K-1 is probably a better choice.

**BarryE** · 05-21-2021, 09:55 AM - **1 Like**

I'm guessing many will have considered this. I suppose it all depends on what your intended output is and the balance of weight and features against this output. There will, no doubt, be owners of the 645z that will praise it as well as others who will say the difference is small in many cases and the K-1 is very nearly its equal in IQ.

My limited usage of the 645z did indeed show a small benefit in post processing, in some images, but surprisingly few. Usability, for me would be a problem with the 645z. The K-1 does still have exceptionally good IQ for a 35mm sensor and lots of flexibility. There will be a few, specialised usages of the 645z where it will be better than the K-1, but in the majority of cases probably not. Yes, this is subjective view, and it does not take into account of the lovely feel of the 645Z and the sense of it being a real camera, but it's a beast to handle and expensive. Medium frame (this cropped version of MF) is being challenged by Fuji. The 645z probably needs a refresh to keep up.

I've been tempted, again and again, but decided to stay with K-1. Two bodies and various FF lenses give me much more flexibility for marginal loss as compared with the 645z. My opinion. Others will disagree ...

stevebrot · 05-21-2021, 09:57 AM - **5 Likes**

Originally posted by biz-engineer

Is it still worth the money getting a 645z kit in 2021, I'm not so sure.

The answer is simple! Get a K-1ii and a K-3iii for same amount of money!

Case solved...

Steve

texandrews · 05-21-2021, 10:08 AM - **3 Likes**

I bought my Z first in 2014, and the K1 in 2016-ish as my backup camera, then converted it with the board replacement program to a mkII. Wish they'd do something similar with the Z....

Originally posted by biz-engineer

645z used are getting cheaper, but quite a bit more expensive than even a Pentax K1 Mk II new. Full frame high resolution (think for instance Pentax K1 mk III @ 60Mp) or 645z, is a tricky choice.

Well, for some, sure. Not for me. If I had to choose, it's the Z all the way.

Quote:

Pentax K1 has IBIS, 645z doesn't. Pentax K1 has pixel shift, 645z doesn't.

IBIS is handy! And it enables P/S and composition adjustment, so very nice indeed. Wish the Z had all of that. It doesn't----but it's still the Z for me.

Quote:

Pentax k1 pixel shift files beat 645z files.

As a user of both, I question that.

Quote:

K1 II new sells for <$2000, 645z used sells for more than $3800. K1 lenses cover FL from 15mm to 450, such range of modern AF lenses isn't available for 645z.

True about the range. Especially if you need UWA. I have the 25, and I only use it in tight quarters. It "feels" too wide for the 4:3 aspect ratio, but that's obviously also personal. But that aspect ratio OOC makes scenes look very different than the 3:2 OOC coming out of FF cameras. And I'm getting less enamored of wide and UWA shots---although with FF I will go wider than I do on the Z. As far as "modern" goes, I've had few problems with any of my 645 lenses---I have 14 of them now (although one is a 3rd party shift). I had another 5 that I sold/upgraded for. Only 2 were disappointing.

Quote:

Moreover, the K1 body is smaller and lighter than the 645z body.

Well, um , obviously. I use the K1mkII when I need to be quicker (documentation) or when I absolutely must have 15mm. The Z is a tripod camera, although I've shot plenty with handheld. The Z is generally a slower-use camera.

Quote:

Is it still worth the money getting a 645z kit in 2021, I'm not so sure.

Because that's your assessment of your use-case. Maybe not. I will add one more thing---looooove the files from the Z, the most malleable files I've ever worked with. FF seems "brittle" in comparison---and the files from the K1mkII are great. The only thing you have to watch with the Z is clipping at the high end---easily adjusted for. I routinely underexpose with the Z with zero penalty. You can google up (or search here) some astonishing examples of shadow lifting with the Z. DXO's rating for the Z's sensor is still one of the highest they've measured.

**Bob 256** · 05-21-2021, 11:00 AM - **2 Likes**

I can't speak for the MF but the K-1 does incredible work. Another thing to consider beyond the cost of the camera (and you kind of alluded to that) is the cost of any additional lenses you want to put on your camera. Not only is a MF camera more costly, but so are the lenses (and then the other point of availability which you pointed out). Get into telephoto or extreme wide angle lenses and the cost factor becomes that much greater if you can even get the MF equivalent you're after. If I had the money, I would be into MF but.................

**mikesbike** · 05-21-2021, 12:48 PM - **1 Like**

Depends largely on the usages.

My K-1 II and KP both meet my needs admirably.

C_Jones · 05-21-2021, 01:43 PM - **1 Like**

To me it would be matter of usage also, and what format the user desires, medium format or full frame format.

I have a Pentax K-1 II and the images/resolution are amazing. It is an excellent camera.

**blackcloudbrew** · 05-21-2021, 03:54 PM - **2 Likes**

Just get both and be done with it.

chrism888 · 05-22-2021, 12:09 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by blackcloudbrew

Just get both and be done with it.

Did that a few years ago, they are both different animals for different reasons and both are superb, used for totally different subjects and they'll last me out for sure

Billking · 05-22-2021, 12:54 AM

Everyone needs an APS-C, a FF and a MF body.

You can use the same lenses on an APS-C and FF body. You need dedicated lenses for MF. So finances probably dictate that the MF body comes last. ATM I just have a K1 and a TG5. The K3iii probably comes next. That said, there is something magic about MF images.

zapp · 05-22-2021, 04:00 AM

If you need MF, go for it. It makes no sense to compare camera size and weight here. 35mm FF will see more updates in the future and reach the same pixel count as in 645z sooner than later.

**ProfessorBuzz** · 05-22-2021, 04:30 AM - **1 Like**

I have the 645Z, K1, and 645D. The Z gets the most use - landscapes and product shots. The bulk is a non-issue as I use a tripod for almost everything. If I had to keep just one, it would be the Z. One bonus is that the Pentax 645 lenses are avaiable for a great price on the used market if you can find them, and there are very few duds. The D is a backup and frankly the Z and K1 are so much more responsive it doesn't get used.

The viewfinder on the Z is superb.
If you're doing action shots or touristing, then go with a K1 II.

05-21-2021, 08:57 AM	#1
biz-engineer Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2015 Photos: Gallery Posts: 12,231	645z vs K1 Mk II difficult choice 645z used are getting cheaper, but quite a bit more expensive than even a Pentax K1 Mk II new. Full frame high resolution (think for instance Pentax K1 mk III @ 60Mp) or 645z, is a tricky choice. Pentax K1 has IBIS, 645z doesn't. Pentax K1 has pixel shift, 645z doesn't. Pentax k1 pixel shift files beat 645z files. K1 II new sells for <$2000, 645z used sells for more than $3800. K1 lenses cover FL from 15mm to 450, such range of modern AF lenses isn't available for 645z. Moreover, the K1 body is smaller and lighter than the 645z body. Is it still worth the money getting a 645z kit in 2021, I'm not so sure. Last edited by biz-engineer; 05-21-2021 at 09:18 AM.

05-21-2021, 10:08 AM - 3 Likes	#7
texandrews Moderator Join Date: Apr 2014 Location: Baltimore Photos: Albums Posts: 3,390	I have both cameras I bought my Z first in 2014, and the K1 in 2016-ish as my backup camera, then converted it with the board replacement program to a mkII. Wish they'd do something similar with the Z.... Originally posted by biz-engineer 645z used are getting cheaper, but quite a bit more expensive than even a Pentax K1 Mk II new. Full frame high resolution (think for instance Pentax K1 mk III @ 60Mp) or 645z, is a tricky choice. Well, for some, sure. Not for me. If I had to choose, it's the Z all the way. Quote: Pentax K1 has IBIS, 645z doesn't. Pentax K1 has pixel shift, 645z doesn't. IBIS is handy! And it enables P/S and composition adjustment, so very nice indeed. Wish the Z had all of that. It doesn't----but it's still the Z for me. Quote: Pentax k1 pixel shift files beat 645z files. As a user of both, I question that. Quote: K1 II new sells for <$2000, 645z used sells for more than $3800. K1 lenses cover FL from 15mm to 450, such range of modern AF lenses isn't available for 645z. True about the range. Especially if you need UWA. I have the 25, and I only use it in tight quarters. It "feels" too wide for the 4:3 aspect ratio, but that's obviously also personal. But that aspect ratio OOC makes scenes look very different than the 3:2 OOC coming out of FF cameras. And I'm getting less enamored of wide and UWA shots---although with FF I will go wider than I do on the Z. As far as "modern" goes, I've had few problems with any of my 645 lenses---I have 14 of them now (although one is a 3rd party shift). I had another 5 that I sold/upgraded for. Only 2 were disappointing. Quote: Moreover, the K1 body is smaller and lighter than the 645z body. Well, um , obviously. I use the K1mkII when I need to be quicker (documentation) or when I absolutely must have 15mm. The Z is a tripod camera, although I've shot plenty with handheld. The Z is generally a slower-use camera. Quote: Is it still worth the money getting a 645z kit in 2021, I'm not so sure. Because that's your assessment of your use-case. Maybe not. I will add one more thing---looooove the files from the Z, the most malleable files I've ever worked with. FF seems "brittle" in comparison---and the files from the K1mkII are great. The only thing you have to watch with the Z is clipping at the high end---easily adjusted for. I routinely underexpose with the Z with zero penalty. You can google up (or search here) some astonishing examples of shadow lifting with the Z. DXO's rating for the Z's sensor is still one of the highest they've measured.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
The difficult choice of the two lenses kit	biz-engineer	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	38	03-11-2020 12:55 PM
Upgrade Question - Upcoming ASP-C Flagship or K1 Mk ii ?	5shot	Pentax DSLR Discussion	43	08-10-2019 08:40 PM
Comparing Canon 5D mk iii to the mk iv	sean_ks	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	2	08-31-2018 07:18 AM
K-5 vs MZ-S vs LX vs PZ-1p vs ist*D vs K10D vs K20D vs K-7 vs.......	Steelski	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	2	06-28-2017 04:59 PM
Comparison of the K-5 Mk II and the 5D Mk III	Docrwm	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	9	09-24-2012 07:40 PM

05-21-2021, 09:18 AM - 2 Likes	#2
SelrahCharleS Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Wisconsin, USA Posts: 935	K1 is certainly the more flexible camera. Pixel shift is great when you can use it, but it does require a pretty static scene. Doesn't stop me from wanting a 645(D or Z) though. Fortunately for my wallet the 645 cameras are still well outside my budget once I start adding in the cost of lenses too

05-21-2021, 09:21 AM - 1 Like	#3
UncleVanya Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 28,400	Everyone talks about, “Total Light” in medium format. I’m unclear if that rings true. I do know I’ve seen pictures comparing other brand’s super resolution (pixel shift) files vs medium format and they fell far short of native mf digital. Those are big fat pixels but the sensor is aging. If a refresh came in that line I’d love to see the accelerator technology added and IBIS and pixel shift. But I’m not clear if the image circle of the digital 645 lenses would work with IBIS/Pixel shift.

05-21-2021, 09:46 AM - 1 Like	#4
SteveinSLC Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2017 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 568	Originally posted by biz-engineer 645z used are getting cheaper, but quite a bit more expensive than even a Pentax K1 Mk II new. Full frame high resolution (think for instance Pentax K1 mk III @ 60Mp) or 645z, is a tricky choice. Pentax K1 has IBIS, 645z doesn't. Pentax K1 has pixel shift, 645z doesn't. Pentax k1 pixel shift files beat 645z files. K1 II new sells for <$2000, 645z used sells for more than $3800. K1 lenses cover FL from 15mm to 450, such range of modern AF lenses isn't available for 645z. Moreover, the K1 body is smaller and lighter than the 645z body. Is it still worth the money getting a 645z kit in 2021, I'm not so sure. While I didn't have a K-1 Mk2, I did have a Mk1, and now have a 645Z. I'm not so sure I'd say that the pixel shift files beat the 645Z files. For one, there's the static scene limitation. I did mostly landscape work with both, and there's just scenes where pixel shift ended up with annoying artifacts, due to a small amount of wind ruffling leaves in the foreground. Plus if you're doing landscape(or product/archival work), the camera is mostly on a tripod and IBIS doesn't matter. Sometimes that's true of studio work too. OTOH, if you're looking for a more all around camera, I'm with you, the K-1 is probably a better choice.

05-21-2021, 09:55 AM - 1 Like	#5
BarryE Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Hampshire, UK Posts: 1,653	I'm guessing many will have considered this. I suppose it all depends on what your intended output is and the balance of weight and features against this output. There will, no doubt, be owners of the 645z that will praise it as well as others who will say the difference is small in many cases and the K-1 is very nearly its equal in IQ. My limited usage of the 645z did indeed show a small benefit in post processing, in some images, but surprisingly few. Usability, for me would be a problem with the 645z. The K-1 does still have exceptionally good IQ for a 35mm sensor and lots of flexibility. There will be a few, specialised usages of the 645z where it will be better than the K-1, but in the majority of cases probably not. Yes, this is subjective view, and it does not take into account of the lovely feel of the 645Z and the sense of it being a real camera, but it's a beast to handle and expensive. Medium frame (this cropped version of MF) is being challenged by Fuji. The 645z probably needs a refresh to keep up. I've been tempted, again and again, but decided to stay with K-1. Two bodies and various FF lenses give me much more flexibility for marginal loss as compared with the 645z. My opinion. Others will disagree ...

05-21-2021, 09:57 AM - 5 Likes	#6
stevebrot Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Vancouver (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 42,007	Originally posted by biz-engineer Is it still worth the money getting a 645z kit in 2021, I'm not so sure. The answer is simple! Get a K-1ii and a K-3iii for same amount of money! Case solved... Steve

05-21-2021, 11:00 AM - 2 Likes	#8
Bob 256 Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Idaho Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,375	I can't speak for the MF but the K-1 does incredible work. Another thing to consider beyond the cost of the camera (and you kind of alluded to that) is the cost of any additional lenses you want to put on your camera. Not only is a MF camera more costly, but so are the lenses (and then the other point of availability which you pointed out). Get into telephoto or extreme wide angle lenses and the cost factor becomes that much greater if you can even get the MF equivalent you're after. If I had the money, I would be into MF but.................

05-21-2021, 12:48 PM - 1 Like	#9
mikesbike Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2016 Location: Southeastern Michigan Posts: 4,549	Depends largely on the usages. My K-1 II and KP both meet my needs admirably.

05-21-2021, 01:43 PM - 1 Like	#10
C_Jones Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: NY Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,084	To me it would be matter of usage also, and what format the user desires, medium format or full frame format. I have a Pentax K-1 II and the images/resolution are amazing. It is an excellent camera.

05-21-2021, 03:54 PM - 2 Likes	#11
blackcloudbrew Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Cotati, California USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,460	Just get both and be done with it.

05-22-2021, 12:09 AM - 1 Like	#12
chrism888 Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Posts: 178	Originally posted by blackcloudbrew Just get both and be done with it. Did that a few years ago, they are both different animals for different reasons and both are superb, used for totally different subjects and they'll last me out for sure

05-22-2021, 12:54 AM	#13
Billking Forum Member Join Date: May 2021 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Posts: 72	Everyone needs an APS-C, a FF and a MF body. You can use the same lenses on an APS-C and FF body. You need dedicated lenses for MF. So finances probably dictate that the MF body comes last. ATM I just have a K1 and a TG5. The K3iii probably comes next. That said, there is something magic about MF images.

05-22-2021, 04:00 AM	#14
zapp Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 2,385	If you need MF, go for it. It makes no sense to compare camera size and weight here. 35mm FF will see more updates in the future and reach the same pixel count as in 645z sooner than later.

05-22-2021, 04:30 AM - 1 Like	#15
ProfessorBuzz Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2018 Posts: 1,903	I have the 645Z, K1, and 645D. The Z gets the most use - landscapes and product shots. The bulk is a non-issue as I use a tripod for almost everything. If I had to keep just one, it would be the Z. One bonus is that the Pentax 645 lenses are avaiable for a great price on the used market if you can find them, and there are very few duds. The D is a backup and frankly the Z and K1 are so much more responsive it doesn't get used. The viewfinder on the Z is superb. If you're doing action shots or touristing, then go with a K1 II.