|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
06-04-2011, 05:24 PM
|
| |
How about an adapter and a Planar 100/3.5? Distortion is nil..
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
05-24-2011, 01:55 PM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
03-13-2011, 02:35 PM
|
| |
Besides some Visoflex lenses, all macro lenses for SLRs with FL longer than 70-75mm and designed for bellows could be employed for the relatively compact sensor size of the 645D, after all the sensor diagonal is not that large as to fall out of the illumination circle of general 35mm lenses longer than 70-75mm; whereas for the actual 645 (film) diagonal they fall short. Promptly the Macro-Elmar 100/4 for Leica-R or 105/4 Micro-Nikkor for Nikon SLRs come to mind; probably users of Canon or Pentax SLRs might suggest some additional ones.
The issue with those lenses could be their design characteristics, optimized for close ranges. However 135 Tele-Elmar or 90 Summicron are known to maintain their virtues along their whole focus range. By the way, Sergiolov, I think you will be more pleased if you try the Summicron between f4 to 11, as it is way sharper than the Tele-Elmar.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
03-12-2011, 12:25 PM
|
| |
Sergiolov,
If you are using 16464 focusing helicoid, then the first 90/2.8 Elmarit head would work too. Or with a 16462 you can use 90/2 Summicron or 135/2.8 Elmarit heads as well.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
12-06-2010, 02:02 PM
|
| |
After the rush of the tide, it seems that Japan is enjoying some stabilized prices for the 645D and accessories. For example at Amazon Japan the body costs $9.236 and the 55mm lens $1.089, with the currency rate of today. Most probably by mid-2011 the street price in the States inclusive the lens would be not higher than $10K.
Enjoy:
Amazon.co.jp: pentax 645
Regards,
Bob
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
10-22-2010, 07:03 PM
|
| |
According to DxO Labs, the scores for the 645D sensor were consistently higher than those of the Leaf Aptus 75S, H3DII 39 & 50, Phase One P45 Plus. Actually the D645 together with the Phase One 40 Plus lead the pack... even for the higher ISO capability.
Let's wait for more samples....
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
07-27-2010, 10:33 AM
|
| |
As far as the 645 series is concerned, here's my two cents why I preferred it over any MF:
- Comperatively low cost for lenses, sometimes lower than the ones for the 35mm format.
- A spare body (manual) costs less than the repair cost.
- Less vibration compared to many MF SLR, great asset for handheld shooting.
- Almost all 645 lenses deliver top IQ and fine bokeh.
- Switch to the 645D and still use all your lenses. The samples shown so far exhibited that the existing 645 lenses work great with the 645D (probably better than any other Pentax MF lenses).
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
07-16-2010, 04:50 PM
|
| |
Nesster, some digital manufacturers, for example the m43 series Olympus, have tried to introduce some in-camera conversion functions under the name of Art Filters, one function being Grainy Film however to provide only high-contrast grainy look with washed-out mid-tones. The most important contribution came from the Silver Efex, offering emulation for more than a dozen popular B&W films and the Flickr.com are full of samples; however they still are a far cry from actual film. BTW, I have found a few looking exactly like film and when I looked at the tags accompanying, I noticed they actually were shot on film however after scanning processed with the Silver Efex.
IMHO, DR is the key and at the present state film will continue to rule. There still seems a long way to digitally express of what easily available through physics and a little bit of chemistry.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
07-16-2010, 10:49 AM
|
| |
Pioneer, thank you for the comparison samples. Especially in the second set you have demonstrated the typical shortcomings of digital such as shifted gray-scala and limited gradation of tonalities. You can go ahead and try further with PP; for example by matching the whites first then you will note the mid-grays will be shifted and highlight details will be lost... or by matching the blacks and dark greys first (which is easier) then the light grays will turn comperatively darker. I mean it is almost impossible to match the overall tonalities of digital to resemble the "look" of film. I think it has a lot to do with the inherent DR characteristic of film.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
07-15-2010, 10:12 AM
|
| |
Assuming you have afforded or been granted to own the new 645D (or any MF digital camera of your choice), my inquiry is:
As far as only B&W photography is concerned (no color) do you think that switching to digital would bring any improvement to the quality of your photography? Kindly note that I am not inquiring about the convenience of processing, not about the operational cost, the higher resolution or prompt results; my inquiry is only on the aesthetical and artistic merits of the final picture. I am sure you all have a rough or sound idea of how digital B&W pictures look compared to your own film ones.
Your answers, in cumulative, will be a sound indication of the reference state for B&W photography in our time as well as where digital stands compared to analog we used so far.
Regards,
Bob Yildiran |
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
05-30-2010, 08:49 AM
|
| |
Although it would rather be premature to talk about the general imaging characteristics of the sensor used on the 645D on a comparative basis (say against the S2, for example), the few images we have seen so far with the since-long-available lenses are worth any praise. We are not talking about a normal lens costing some $4.500 or a 120mm macro one costing another $6.500; I for one, have bought a series of the 645 lenses from 35FA, 45A, 55A, 75A, 120A, 150FA, plus a 200A, all in excellent+ condition for less than what half of the S2 normal lens costs.
Further, the studio shots taken with a certain bandwidth of the spectrum of halogen or strobes may look quite different than those shot under the daylight conditions. Remember how the majority of us were not much impressed when we saw the very first S2 samples at the DPReview; they surely were looking inferior to the ones taken in controlled studio environment. How much they differ? Very much... Please compare the 5DII shots on the above link to the one taken by Ron Purdy, again with a 5DII however under his studio lights:
http://www.afashionshooter.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/img_0159.jpg
Let's be patient a little more until the 645Ds began to reach to the hands of professionals as well as of some picky amateurs. The sensor used is the same as the one on the Mamiya DM40 or Hasselblad HD4-40 and as far as IQ is concerned, I am yet to hear anybody claiming the S2 being much better than the HD4-40, for example.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
05-27-2010, 10:52 PM
|
| |
Thank you for the leads.
Third series could suffice to put an end to all discussions claiming digital FF-35mm being very close to MF quality. To my eyes there is a world of difference; check the acutance and microcontrast of the 645D shots against the 5DII, not only the resolution. IMHO, CCD sensor with no (or weak) AA filter has its own characteristics to be not duplicated with any CMOS combination. Even the color rendition is different...
As if the 645D shots began to look more and more like the Leica M9 offered in MF format... :)
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
05-23-2010, 10:06 AM
|
| |
The remarkable side of these pictures is that they were shot with the existing lenses and none of them shows any CA. Probably due to the quality of the existing lenses or the reduced image size of 44x33mm compared to 60x45mm for which they were designed for. Under all conditions, this means the owners of the existings lenses would not need to replace them to use on the 645D.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
03-25-2010, 10:33 PM
|
| |
Hi bensonga,
Great tonality and gradations.. would you advise what scanner you used please? Thank you.
|
|
Forum: Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom
03-25-2010, 10:28 PM
|
| |
Thank you artobest, much appreciated.
FYI, I have posted the same in the DPReview, Pro Digital Talk forum and received 26 responses. Quite interesting discussions... The majority of the posters prefer ink jet printing due to several reasons...
Kind regards,
Bob
|
|
Forum: Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom
03-18-2010, 09:34 AM
|
| |
I would like to hear about the comments by those who have wet printing experience or reach to a darkroom: How do the prints of your B&W negatives printed in darkroom compare to the same ones scanned and then printed on ink-jet printers? What kind of differences in overall IQ you notice?
This is only for the B&W prints, only about the IQ and not about the convenience. Your insightful comments would be highly appreciated. Thank you.
Kind regards,
Bob |
|
Forum: Pentax Medium Format
03-15-2010, 05:53 PM
|
| |
Greetings,
I am a new member and have a few comments on the new 645D. (Apologies for the longish post and my broken English.)
- IMHO, the KAF-40000 sensor (44x33mm) seems to be an excellent choice; the same as the one on the Mamiya DM40, quite comparable to the KAF-39000 (46x38mm) used on the latest H3DII-39 and probably better than the one on the Leica S2 (KAF-37500, 45x30mm). No need to mind much about the 14/16 bit DA conversion since these all boast around 11.5-12 f-stops dynamic range; DR is the key, not how they achieved it.
- CMOS to CCD comparison: We will have to wait until some CMOS sensors are introduced in the MF format for insightful comparisons, however nothing yet in sight from Kodak or Dalsa. Some professionals talk about some advantages of CCD over CMOS especially for the color rendition at lower ISO’s and a certain Ronnie Gaubert believes in the same even in the APS-C format.
- Cost comparison: Suppose you would like to build a system around the 645D with the available lenses, manual or AF, from the former 645 series (as they are so convenient to buy these days). Estimate the total cost and then try to do the same again with the manual or AF lenses around a pro 35mm format camera like the D3x or 1DsIII. Shortly, a system built on the 645D is even comparable to the 35mm pro systems, as far as the cost is concerned. (Please no flames, this comparison is for the sake of cost only, not the field of use.)
- Image quality: This is the most debatable issue for many who are waiting for the next generation of 35mm CMOS sensors with resolving power close to or over 30MPs and dreaming to achieve the same IQ as the DMF format delivering today. However those of us coming from film know well to put 35mm images apart the ones from the MF, no matter how similarly sharp they seem to be. The factors defining IQ other than resolution, like tonality, extended gradation, color accuracy, clarity, smooth and “creamy” look, etc., seem to be overlooked by many digital aficionados. Such characteristics of the MF format sometimes strike our eyes even in the small sizes confined to the pages of magazines or books; leave aside the large screens of our computers or poster size prints. The pictures by Graham Mitchell at the GetDpi forum, taken with an e54LV having only 22MP are good examples to compare to the ones shot with the top FF sensors of today.
It surely is not for the masses, only very few will be able to afford for it. But still kudos to Pentax, for accomplishing in bringing the DMF quality closer to us than what the other brands could do so far; not unlike the 645s in our hands did once compared to the Hasselblads, Rolleis and Mamiyas.
Kind regards,
Bob |
