Serious thinking of the Pentax 645 or shall wait? Locked

Started May 4, 2014 | Discussions thread
Shop cameras & lenses ▾
This thread is locked.
Forum ProPosts: 10,350Gear list
Re: More can be better
In reply to The Davinator, May 5, 2014

Dave Luttmann wrote:

qianp2k wrote:

Dave Luttmann wrote:

qianp2k wrote:

Mako2011 wrote:

qianp2k wrote:

Mako2011 wrote:

qianp2k wrote:

Mako2011 wrote:

qianp2k wrote:

nvlass wrote:

Hans Kruse wrote:

I looked at your photos and although there are a few good ones, I would recommend to you to improve your photography rather than buying new gear. What you have is plentiful for making awesome photos.

-- hide signature --

Kind regards,
Hans Kruse
Home Page --,,
Workshops --
Facebook Photography
Workshop Newsletter signup

I would be happy if you give me some advice, if you have, than a general improve my photography.

I am learning fast ....


Still believe A7R is a much cheaper solution for your case that you can see DR and resolution improvements right away while still can use EF lenses as seen by Fred Miranda (and by myself).

Remember though, DR really is of little use as you pointed out...

True, in 95% of time I don't need to push shadows and found Canon DR is sufficient. In 5% of photos I see difference. The main difference is still read-noise not DR actually such as in evening sky where I prefer to use A7R. I need more clean shadow than extreme shadow pushing. "The only way to leverage 14-stop DR ... is by severe ETTL (expose on left) is by exposing on highlight and then pull deep dark shadows many stops back....But by doing so there are severe consequences...lost details and excessive noise/grain in original shadow areas and possible color tonality damaged. Serious photographers don't do this way.

Nice to see something emerge from the cocoon. Sony has a tendency to do that and 5% is often much larger (relative) we before it's not an option. Perception often changes with experience

Never deny Sony sensors do noticeably better in 5% of those highly contrast scenes.

Certainly not a perfect transformation but still nice to see the slight move to improve. Improvements in IQ due to sensor technology can be a slow thing to realize. Some may be slower still to take advantage of it when it's right there to be used. Future bold well though. I like your optimism on the potential next gen high MP offering from Sony and such. Should be good for all.

Just a note that I don't need 54mp personally so will not upgrade to 54mp A7R II until I own a 8K monitor one day. I am more interested in future A7 II, likely still 24mp but much improved AF as we saw in A6000. Then with rumored FE 16-35/4.0 OSS (Sony has not officially announced but likely true) and if it's good (as good as Nikon 16-35/4.0 VR), then together with FE 35/55, FE 70-200 (or still Canon 70-200L/4.0 IS) and complement to and together with A7R, I could build up a high quality light/small FF traveling kit. Will only use Canon gear in action related photos. But also keep an eye on future 6D II and hope Canon has better sensor then. To me at this moment, weight/size and DR (or more accurately read-noise) are more important than resolution which my demand would increase when I have a 4K or 8K monitor in future. 36mp would be sufficient for 4K monitor but not 8K monitor.

4k is only 8mp...and 8k is 33mp. Thus, both monitor technologies are currently exceeded by todays DSLR sensors.

Well, usually you don't show full size photos on monitors as they are not the best but 50% crop the most and peak in IQ.

4K monitor is 4096 pixel wide that already exceeds 50% crop in A7R resolution 7360 x 4912.

8K monitor is 8192 pixel wide while 51mp in 645Z only has 8256 x 6192 resolution that almost close to its full-size. On my 50% crop displaying standard, 51mp is not enough for 8K monitor.

8k is 7680 wide and 4320 high...thus 33mp. Not sure why you would want to reduce to 50%.

4k is 3840 wide.

They are cinematic 4K/8K resolution on TV screen but not for true 4K/8K computer monitor resolutions.

Full 4K = 4 x 1024 = 4096

Full 8K = 8 x 1024 =8192

I don't care what eq MP but X and Y displaying resolution. As I said people usually don't display full-size photos on monitors as simply not best quality but only 50% and no more than 60% of crop in my taste. That's why I said in my last post, please read carefully.

A true 4K monitor is like this one

Currently my 22mp 5760 x 3840 resolution 5DIII is sufficient for my 26" monitor with 2560x1440 resolution. Therefore I export to 2500-pixel wide by default now. But 22mp will not be sufficient for a 4K monitor as 4096-pixel wide is already pretty close to 5760 max resolution from 5D III.

-- hide signature --

My opinions are my own and not those of DPR or its administration. They carry no 'special' value (except to me and Lacie of course)

 qianp2k's gear list:qianp2k's gear list
Sony RX100 Canon EOS-1D Mark III Canon EOS 5D Mark II Canon EOS 5D Mark III Sony Alpha 7R +20 more
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow