martinj68: Can someone please explain why we need QHD displays on a phone screen?My Galaxy S5 has full 1080 and impossible to see the pixels with the naked eye, so why are manufactures wanting to go beyond this already high res for such a small screen?
Because we can!
plevyadophy: Have all the Pentax fans actually considered the fact that this thing is NOT really medium format; it's not true medium format in sensor size nor is it digital medium format.
It's more like the medium format equivalent of a Leica M8 or Canon 1D with their APS-H sized sensors, and some have even gone as far as referring to this new Pentax's sensor size as Medium Format DX.
Really, in my view, things only matter when the diagonal of the sensor/film roughlydoubles/halves. So going from micro Four Thirds to 35mm,and then from 35mm to 645 or 6 x 6, and then up to 10 x 8 all make a significant difference. For those going from Pentax APS-C sensor cams to this Pentax 645Z there's gonna be a MASSIVE difference but I don't think it's worth bothering with if you already own say a Nikon D800e.
The camera body is superb though, the best on the market in my view. It's just a pity that they didn't provide a fully articulating rear LCD instead of the mere flip up and flip down variety.
@ecka84: I believe 645 is Pentax 645 A mount reference, not the format.
What about flare control?
Toh: Samsung S4 battery is 2600mAh. To fully charge it in 26 seconds the minimum charging current would be 360A regardless of material used. 360A is more than a typical current draw when cranking a car. The cable used has to be at least the size of car battery cable, which gets hot when cranking for too long. A typical USB cable would evaporate in a split of a second! If the charging voltage is 5 volts you would need a 1.8KW (360A*5V) charger! Current S4 charger is about 10W!
But what phone operates at 110V? I wouldn't want to carry dynamotor with me to convert 110V->5V.
love_them_all: First I was happy to read this. But then the Hassy of today would not put out another reasonably cost product. It will be another expensive MF that is easily over $20k.
Perhaps that is the reason they don't have the money to focus on MF. :)
brycesteiner: You can shoot a lot of film for that price, with a larger dynamic range.
Does DPReview do reviews on this equipment?
Larger dynamic range, right. Your sources are like 5 years old. Film can only dream about 14 DR stops.
Well, expensive kinda goes with MF. Can't see any reason why it wouldn't be.
Jogger: What is this "film" that they speak of?
Sadly, Internet people just don't know what sarcasm is.
peevee1: Not surprisingly, the pancake lens performance is not impressive. But at least they are small.
Just go and take some pictures using pancake lenses instead of looking at some numbers. Then we'll talk about impressive.
bossa: I can attest that the Pentax 40mm is pin sharp wide-open, unlike the DX0 Mark test results show. I cannot understand how DX0 Mark continually gets substandard test scores for Pentax lenses. Lenstip scores the DA*55 at almost 50 lpmm, one of the sharpest 50's they've tested and yet DX0 Mark gets different scores.
Another site has the canon and Pentax 40mm on about even pegging re' resolution but the Pentax has better CA but worse in the Bokeh department.
Probably because DxOMark tests only one lens and only one time. These tests are as useless as they can be. I find user reviews much more informative.
DotCom Editor: Two days, and I'm only the second to comment. That's about all the market research you'll ever need regarding "Windows Phone."
No, That's about all the market research you'll ever need regarding "DPReview Connect".
yonsarh: I don't like to use filter on my cameras. It will effect on your sensor as well.
For me English is also a second language. But JWest's comment is just so funny. I don't believe he intended any offense.
HowardChernin: This lens will not "act like an 85mm lens". It will give you angle of view of an 85mm lens, but the perspective will still be that of a 58mm lens. Just sayin'!
Perspective only depends on the distance between you and the subject. If you take a picture with FF + 85mm lens, and then from the same spot with APS-C + 55mm lens, then perspective will be the same.You can easily check it yourself even with P&S. You can even take a picture from the same spot with FF + 85mm, then with FF + 21 mm, crop it to have same FOV, and you'll still have same perspective.
Strikeroot: "Ugly" must be what people revert to saying when they have no other avenue for meaningful criticism.
Want a beautiful camera - buy Leica. Sony talks function here, not fashion.
Axibis: Is DSLR going to die soon?
Well, AF will match DSLRs sooner or later, but I guess battery life will always be a downside. Constant sensor read-out consumes a lot of power.
kecajkerugo: why so many people is talking abouit the tiny FF? Real prof. use larger format and Pentax got it: 645. For advanced amateurs the APS-C is perfect and the m4/3 can be even more.
Well, I'd rather have APS-C with superb features than FF with mediocre.
Pentax may not have FF, but in APS-C DSLR market Pentax provides best price/performance in my opinion.
kbryd: Yeah...very nice, but still I don't understand why two Sigma lenses I had (100-300/4EX and 10-20/3.5-5.6) were rubbish. Both were extremely out of focus, actually only one side of the image was out of focus...
But USB dock available only for Nikon, Canon and Sigma mounts, isn't it?
3dreal: It IS possible to produce best possible series of lenses. Zeiss are currently proving it with its coming HQ lenses. They will beat every currently FF lens.
Maybe Zeiss just have very strict QA and throws away most of the lenses. That's one reason for high price I guess.
ARTASHES: with my limited acknowledges about sensor I think this one isn't any better than any actual FF sensor on the market, but the it's advantage is that it will use total surface of the sensor to create an fullhd video because the whole sensor has exactly the same resolution as the fullhd while the 20mp+ sensors can't do this, in fact to create a fullhd D800 for example will have to take only several pixels from given surface to avoid re-sizing from 36 mp and so it uses only some part of whole surface that's impact the IQ in low light, conclusion : the size of individual pixels is important for video making but is irrelevant for photography where you can resize and so this penalize big resolution sensor for video making and that's why Canon made this one with such big pixels
"grabbed from the whole sensor not just a cropped portion" Not a cropped portion, but not the whole sensor either. Just skips some pixels to keep bit-rate in check.