[interested_observer]

As you may already know, we recently posted a handful of real-world gallery images shot straight from Yokohama, Japan, as well as took a closer look at the camera's image quality based on this gallery shots. But now, we've been able to get the camera under controlled settings and photograph with it throughout its full range of ISO sensitivities, from expanded ISO 50 all the way to a whopping 102,400. As always, we have both straight-out-of-camera JPEGs and their corresponding RAW files (in uncompressed format) for your assessment, at both default noise reduction processing level and the lowest possible setting (files ending in "NR1" in this case).

• Fujifilm GFX Review: Now Shooting!

• Fuji GFX First Shots: The best lab images we’ve ever seen

[Tas]

The comparison is better undertaken with the full size images than the excerpts in the review. At ISO100 the Fuji looks smoother and darker: Digital Cameras, Fujifilm GFX 50S Digital Camera Test Image than the 645Z: Digital Cameras, Pentax 645Z Digital Camera Test Image

Looking at the images side by side suggests there's little to pick between the two though I wonder why there's dust visible all over the Z image but not the GFX. Did they clean it or is it the camera?

Where the GFX is good is at the mentioned ISO 6400: Digital Cameras, Fujifilm GFX 50S Digital Camera Test Image vs the Auto NR setting of the 645Z: Digital Cameras, Pentax 645Z Digital Camera Test Image

I hope Ricoh Pentax has something up their sleeve as this is a formidable piece of kit it seems.

Tas

[mee]

I don't see Pentax moving to mirrorless anytime soon. With that in mind, the only way they'll compete is on price (further cuts) or on sensor size. These are all cropped MF size sensors. Pentax could get back in the game with a larger (less cropped) MF sensor (not just in pixel count but in physical size of the sensor). That might make up for the large size of the body..

[photoptimist]

I don't see Pentax moving to mirrorless anytime soon. With that in mind, the only way they'll compete is on price (further cuts) or on sensor size. These are all cropped MF size sensors. Pentax could get back in the game with a larger (less cropped) MF sensor (not just in pixel count but in physical size of the sensor). That might make up for the large size of the body..

Exactly! Mirrorless is the worst choice because it would produce lower sales for Pentax (splitting mirrorless MF sales with Fuji & Hasselblad) and require the highest up-front investment (an entirely new body and portfolio of lenses). Me-too-mirrorless is pointless.

I see a range of possible upgrades to the 645Z (with increasing upfront costs) that differentiate it from the Fuji/Hasselblad options:

1. pixel-shift (very short-stroke IBIS system that moves only a few pixels and can stabilize shutter shock, simulate anti-aliasing, etc.)
2. full IBIS (multi-stop stabilization, composition adjustment, horizon leveling, astrotracer)
3. Full frame MF
4. digital 6x7

Naturally, there's also the option of adapting the K-1's expanded AF system to the 645 and adding the faster AF algorithms and image processing accelerator from the KP.

[Winder]

Exactly! Mirrorless is the worst choice because it would produce lower sales for Pentax (splitting mirrorless MF sales with Fuji & Hasselblad) and require the highest up-front investment (an entirely new body and portfolio of lenses). Me-too-mirrorless is pointless.

I see a range of possible upgrades to the 645Z (with increasing upfront costs) that differentiate it from the Fuji/Hasselblad options:

1. pixel-shift (very short-stroke IBIS system that moves only a few pixels and can stabilize shutter shock, simulate anti-aliasing, etc.)
2. full IBIS (multi-stop stabilization, composition adjustment, horizon leveling, astrotracer)
3. Full frame MF
4. digital 6x7

Naturally, there's also the option of adapting the K-1's expanded AF system to the 645 and adding the faster AF algorithms and image processing accelerator from the KP.

Sony has a 100MP MF crop sensor coming. If Ricoh adds pixel shift to the 645z line with that sensor it would be hard to bead for still life. Of course a true full frame 645 sensor with pixel shift would be even more impressive.

[interested_observer]

I read the articles as I stumble across them - rather than going out and looking for them. It is interesting that the articles that I have read really only talk about the new Fuji and the Hassy. This is the first article that really compares the Fuji with the Pentax. It is almost as if Pentax doesn't exist or has been written off.

The Phase One XF 100MP has a 100MP sensor and didn't come from apparently Sony?

[normhead]

I'd be interested in the damage I could cause with a 645z and SMC A*600mm ƒ5.6 or even a Pentax SMC FA 400mm F5.6 IF&ED Lens.. I'm not seeing anything in the Fuji line that interests me at all. But I'm sure there are studio guys who will want this system.

[surfar]

I read that they've sold 8500, so must have been a few pre-orders world wide!


And if you have lenses from other systems Fotodiox have produced 10 adapters, including Pentax 645 & 67.

[normhead]

I read that they've sold 8500, so must have been a few pre-orders world wide!


And if you have lenses from other systems Fotodiox have produced 10 adapters, including Pentax 645 & 67.

I am amazed at how many folks will buy into such a stop gap solution.

I regularly crank out 300 images in a session. I shudder to think how that would drop messing around with adapters. But hey, each to their own.

[Fcsnt54]

I am amazed at how many folks will buy into such a stop gap solution.

I regularly crank out 300 images in a session. I shudder to think how that would drop messing around with adapters. But hey, each to their own.

I cant think it would be much different. Quite often you see people attach 67 lenses on their 645 system. Id think they have an idea of how they would want to frame a picture and leave the adapter on the lens.

[normhead]

I've never even seen a 645 system in the wild so, no I don't see that.

I've even see a few guys shooting 4x5 film, so it's not like I don't see any large format. Where do you see these guys?

[mecrox]

Exactly! Mirrorless is the worst choice because it would produce lower sales for Pentax (splitting mirrorless MF sales with Fuji & Hasselblad) and require the highest up-front investment (an entirely new body and portfolio of lenses). Me-too-mirrorless is pointless.

I see a range of possible upgrades to the 645Z (with increasing upfront costs) that differentiate it from the Fuji/Hasselblad options:

1. pixel-shift (very short-stroke IBIS system that moves only a few pixels and can stabilize shutter shock, simulate anti-aliasing, etc.)
2. full IBIS (multi-stop stabilization, composition adjustment, horizon leveling, astrotracer)
3. Full frame MF
4. digital 6x7

Naturally, there's also the option of adapting the K-1's expanded AF system to the 645 and adding the faster AF algorithms and image processing accelerator from the KP.

These are all technical solutions, but I would guess that a lot of folks looking to invest this amount money will be looking at other things as much as or more than pure IQ. These are the system (lenses, accessories, third-party integration), support in the form of decent retailers and pro service packages and workflow in the sense of no-hassle tethering and integration with industry-standard software. The winners are going to be those who can score well on all three assuming the tech side and cost of ownership is at least reasonably similar. So the challenge here at this rarified level is only partly technical. If Fuji have lined up their ducks, and I bet they have, then this new camera system should do very well.

[normhead]

These are the system (lenses, accessories, third-party integration), support in the form of decent retailers and pro service packages and workflow in the sense of no-hassle tethering and integration with industry-standard software.

I get tired of those always talking up the systems they don't have, and ignoring the benefits of what they have. The duplicity is boring.

[mecrox]

I get tired of those always talking up the systems they don't have, and ignoring the benefits of what they have. The duplicity is boring.

Lol, then go ahead and spend 10,000 bucks and more on a medium-format solution without even considering system, support and workflow. Better still, why not choose a completely unsupported set-up preferably not even available in the country you live in but only obtainable by international courier. Then come back and tell us all about it and how your clients are happy jobs are five weeks late while you wait for a spare part from Outer Mongolia. But oh dear, the rudeness and tendency to start trolling the off-brand part of the forum.

[Rondec]

I looked at the images and truthfully the difference between 645Z and Fuji GFX is minimal. Real world differences will come down to presence/absence of desired lenses, need for functionality in those lenses (auto focus/metering), ergonomics (very photographer specific), and photographer preference for EVF or OVF. Basically, you have two cars with exactly the same engine, but very different body styles and feature sets. Some would gravitate toward one and some towards the other, but I don't suppose there is a wrong answer here.