The Leica T will likely sell well to its target market, i.e. those who are seeking status and/or great lenses. However, M lenses can be used on far more capable cameras than the T. T lenses are, on the other hand, only usable on the T. Anyone who chooses a Leica T over a Sony A7 is in need of therapy IMO.
Michael Piziak: If Ansel Adams were alive today I think he would use this camera.
"He would be 112. I doubt he could lift it."
Yeah, but the new Pentax is a whole lot lighter than the massive view camera that he used back in the day.
TechManager: This review states that the Pentax 645z uses the same Sony CMOS sensor as the Hasselblad and PhaseOne. This is incorrect as the Hasselblad and PhaseOne are CCD.
I am very skeptical; this camera seems more like a glorified DSLR then a move into a higher quality MF system.
What about tethered shooting? Is this an option with the Pentax?
Can you imagine what a Leica S3 will cost?
Calvin Chann: Full review please.
DPR is typically very slow to review Pentax products, so it will probably be quite some time before we see a full review or, just as likely, we will never see one. The 645Z is a dazzling specialty camera with a limited potential market, which means that many people may lust for it, but few will buy it. DPR is most interested in reviewing cameras with strong sales potential.
SDPharm: I wish Pentax had made an EVF and made it tiltable like the Panasonic GX7. It just does not seem comfortable to hold such a big camera at eye level.
I think the 645Z is best suited for tripod shooting, in which case one can use the rear LCD for LiveView, which I presume it has. It then almost becomes a miniature view camera, only the image is not inverted.
JonB1975: Want, want, want....... My first dream camera since the 1Ds MkII! As for those people saying Ansel Adams would never touch something like this - How the hell would you know???
I am sick of hearing people opine as to what Ansel Adams might use if we were alive today. All we know is that he was fanatical about image quality and used the best technology available in his time to achieve it. How anyone can think that he would reject digital technology out of hand is beyond me. He was not the purist that some imagine but was an artist and craftsman who chose the right tools to accomplish his goals. He would do the same today.
Zvonimir Tosic: 800g with a battery. DLi90 is about 50g. So without it, it's some .. 750g ..?
K5 was light-er, yes. But this camera is light-years ahead of K5. I wouldn't be surprised it hasn't been made slightly bigger and heavier to sport an FF sensor in some future model, that will share same tech, including same battery grip too.
Guys at CR Kennedy have already seen a K-5-bodied camera sporting an FF sensor, a year ago.
"What's your source for that? FF sensor in a K5 body?"
Well, Sony put a FF sensor in a much smaller RX1 body, proving that it can be done.
Gesture: Welcome, welcome upgrade and features to K-5 and a great competitor to Nikon D7100. But what is it with companies and naming. The next camera will be the K-1 and, then, there is no where to go. Others have boxed themselves in with naming everything the X Z and/or 1.
"Should have been called the K5IIs-2"
Are you serious? The K-3 is almost completely new, including the 24MP sensor, and you regard it as a minor upgrade from then K-5II? You must be living in a 5th dimension of reality.
tompabes2: The best selling accessory for this camera will be a Pentax logo to cover the Ricoh writing on the back.
The "Ricoh" name may be associated with office equipment, but the company has manufactured some very fine, innovative cameras over the years as well as some excellent lenses. And they have very deep pockets, much deeper than Nikon and Canon. So it would be presumptuous to dismiss their ability to compete aggressively in the photo market, if they choose to do so.
Robgo2: Anyone who cannot see the superor output from Photo Ninja is either in denial or needs an eye exam. And this superiority holds for other cameras and sensors as well.
I have extensive experience with Capture One, and while I prefer it to ACR/LR, it is no match for Photo Ninja. I say this having run numerous head to head comparisons. I also take issue with those who dismiss PN as superior only at default settings. There are no adjustments in any other raw convertor that I have tested that can match what I can get from PN, and I do not rely exclusively on its defaults. PN's defaults are superb, but they should serve as a starting point for the editing process. If you routinely accept the defaults as final, then you are missing much of the power of the program.
Anyone who cannot see the superor output from Photo Ninja is either in denial or needs an eye exam. And this superiority holds for other cameras and sensors as well.
The biggest surprise is how absolutely awful the Sony looks. And this is from a company that manufactures some excellent cameras.
If Pentax ever produces a FF DSLR, I think we will see the classic FA Limited lenses get the same treatment. They should also add SDM, except this time, it should be with a mechanism that is reliable.
While some might consider colorizing these iconic photos to be a sacrilege, how does it differ from transposing musical pieces from one instrument to another or even to an entire orchestra? It has been done many times. It is up to the listener/viewer to decide whether the transposed music/image can stand on its own.
A separate question in the case of colorized photographs is whether the original photographer would approve. On that point, we can only speculate, but I suspect that most would not.
rhlpetrus: Well, I'm catholic re cameras, use the iPhone, the V1 and the D7000 and several lenses, can't see a single reason to restrict myself to just one kit. Why, in a site dedicated to photographic gear, echo the big media calls for the demise of dedicated photographic gear?
When EVFs can produce IQ as good as the best LCD screens, DSLRs will no longer have a reason to exist. Of course, they will still work, and some people will prefer to use them, but the advantages of EVFs will then seem overwhelming to most people. We are not yet at that point, but no one should doubt that it is coming.
Tower: How many people to spend that money to get this sort of cameras?
What exactly do you mean by "this sort of camera?" If you mean a compact jewel with a spectacular lens and amazing IQ, then the RX1 is worth what Sony charges for it, and they seem to have quite a few buyers, including many who shoot with top of the line Leicas, Nikons and Canons. Some of those same folks are dumping their other gear and using the RX1 almost exclusively. Whether removing the already weak AA filter is worthwhile is for each individual buyer to decide. Personally, I find my RX1 to be about as sharp as I would want it to be.
ulfie: WHOA! 94mm (3.7 in.) long and nearly US $900. Rich guy's toy blunderbuss.
For the record, all Pentax DSLRs have in-body IS, so this lens will be stabilized on Pentax cameras. The same is true of at least some Sony cameras, as far as I know.
the jimmy: Anyone using PhotoNija? I believe it has Noise Nija incorporated into it. It may be considered more of a RAW converter, although it is not limited to just that.
Photo Ninja is an extraordinary raw convertor that produces outstanding results with relatively little effort. It has very powerful adjustment tools but also lacks features found in some other raw convertors. Nevertheless, the output is so superior, that I don't miss those features in the least. Still, PN cannot replace Photoshop when pixel level adjustments are required, e.g. local edits.
ljoliaferrier: PhotoNinja's noise [and to a lesser extend color] management is far ahead of the competition IMHO. PhotoNinja is not only a RAW converter, but a full-featured photo editing software.
I have used Aperture + NoiseNinja plugin, then Bibble Pro 5 (now Corel's Aftershot Pro). I also tested ACDSee Pro and Silkypix, amongst others.
I do a lot of night photography (www.ecrireavecdelalumiere.com), so good noise management (i.e. keeping details and contrast) is vital for me.
PhotoNinja is developed by the guys who produced NoiseNinja.
I am a huge fan of Photo Ninja, but it is not a full-featured photo editor. For one thing, it cannot do local adjustments. Other raw convertors, such as Lightroom, Aperture and Capture One can do that on raw files. Photoshop does it better on converted files, IMO. PS works at the pixel level, which is why it is so powerful at performing certain tasks.
cxsparc: Hi, to all you promoters of Photo Ninja and Raw Therapee: I did a simple, unscientific test comparing the results with Photoshop using a problematic file. RT is off-color to me, Photo Ninja has good color and detail, but I have problems with both yielding higher chroma noise.Maybe I am doing something wrong?RAW and JPG file are on my blog:http://luxorphotoart.blogspot.de/2013/05/tech-stuff-adobe-and-alternatives-for.html
For the time being, my setup works but if I ever buy a new camera not supported by my ACR CS5.1, I will retest again and possibly go the route of the free DNG converter to maintain my workflow.
I downloaded your raw file and put it through Photo Ninja. Removing both the chroma and luma noise was a trivial matter for Noise Ninja. Did you use it at all? I would be happy to send you a screenshot showing the NN settings that I used, if you will PM me. Also, the EXIF indicates that the photo was taken at ISO 100. I am very surprised to find so much noise at such a low ISO.
While I consider Photo Ninja to be the best of the current crop of raw convertors, but it is not a substitute for Photoshop. Even with the best raw conversions, there is often some pixel level editing that requires a pixel level editor. That is where PS comes in. Unfortunately, there are few alternatives at this time. I am unable to use Paint Shop Pro on my Mac, and Gimp does not seem to be able to open my TIFFS.