[chrism888]

One bonus is that the Pentax 645 lenses are available for a great price on the used market if you can find them

Defiantly agree, Japan and the USA are good places to look for s/h 645 lenses, although I purchased mine before Brexit so that may hinder things slightly

[blackcloudbrew]

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

Me too, hence the suggestion.

[biz-engineer]

Just get both and be done with it.

Wooo that's tempting. It's only that I need to find a way not to feel ashamed looking at the stack of Pentax boxes, that is looking more and more like an Egyptian pyramid. I was on the edge of a GAS attack, it's only thanks to focusing on controlling my breath that I managed to avoid pulling the trigger .

---------- Post added 25-05-21 at 19:40 ----------

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

645z is more like a full frame with a 4:3 aspect ratio, and a large camera body to make sure no other photographer around has one.

[blackcloudbrew]

Wooo that's tempting. It's only that I need to find a way not to feel ashamed looking at the stack of Pentax boxes, that is looking more and more like an Egyptian pyramid. I was on the edge of a GAS attack, it's only thanks to focusing on controlling my breath that I managed to avoid pulling the trigger .

Wow, Egyptian pyramid! Looking at my stacks of boxes, I can form all three pyramids of Giza with them...LBA hit a long time ago.

[VSTAR]

First question- what type of photography do you want to use the camera for..? And scale, studio, action, sports, wedding, portraits, macro?

Second question-what lenses fo you require for your camera usage?

Third- what are you doing with the final images? Viewing on screen? Printing smaller prints or poster size, or larger?

That should narrow the decision a little .

[Hayashi]

K-1ii with the pixel shift could challenge the 646 system in terms of details, and that is it.

I think the differences between MF and FF is still there, just like that of FF and APSC.

There is a barrier that APSC cannot overcome when comparing to FF.

There is also a barrier that FF cannot overcome when comparing to MF.

[jslifoaw]

The 645D/Z demand patience and technique. I've had SR-enabled bodies for 15 years, and it was expensive to replicate that with 645 since only two newer generation lenses support in lens SR (the 28-45 and 90 macro). If you're lucky, you can get decent pricing. Used, my 645Z + 90 macro + 28-45 were probably about C$8000. Not as far off from a K-1 with a couple of premium lenses as you might think. Of course, there are plenty of MF and AF 645/67 lenses that are $100-400. 33-55 + 45-85 + 80-160 can be had for around $1000 combined.

There's not much point if shots are ruined by shaky hands - I find myself having to follow a 1 / (2 * FL) formula for reasonably successful shooting unless I'm carrying a tripod.

Only the 645Z has live view which helps for critical focus. It's also noticeably faster to operate.

However, when everything lines up, the shots turn out beautifully. I have printed up to about 3' wide and am very happy with the results. On the other hand, you can more or less do that with a K-1 with a good lens too (I think the difference horizontally is about 1000 pixels).

[BarryE]

K-1ii with the pixel shift could challenge the 645 system in terms of details, and that is it.

Shame we can't use pixel shift with flash. 645Z probably pulls well ahead of K-1 if pixel shift is taken out of the equation for flash situations.

However, if, say, shooting objects/products under artificial light, the photographer shouldn't have to pull/push images in post as the lighting should have filled in all the shadows (as required). And the difference in resolution is becoming irrelevant with the new AI enlargement tools Adobe have released. So probably little actual difference between the systems for this type of work in reality.

[biz-engineer]

First question- what type of photography do you want to use the camera for..? And scale, studio, action, sports, wedding, portraits, macro?

Non moving subjects.

Second question-what lenses fo you require for your camera usage?

20mm to about 120mm FF equ.

Third- what are you doing with the final images? Viewing on screen? Printing smaller prints or poster size, or larger?

For multiple reasons, vertical prints (portrait orientation) 30" to 50" size, avoiding 3:2 and 16:9 vertically, 1:1, 5:4 and 4:3 preferred.

Reality is, what I photograph changed over time. If used to go a sport events and wildlife, using 450mm - 630mm a lot, taking thousands of exposures in one day, but I got bored with it, and I don't do any of this anymore. Then I started to spend more time on printing, framing under glass, and something new emerged, the appreciation of front lit square or vertical images (unlike looking at them on an 16:9 LCD monitor / TV). The vast majority of my prints are cropped to 4:3, 5:4 and 1:1. because of the different impression it makes compared to electronic displays and because the angle of view of the human eyes is narrower vertically, 3:2 doesn't do as well as 4:3 for portrait oriented prints.