Thanks for posting that.....very inspiring
Zvonimir Tosic: Regarding inverting the 645 Z into a mirrorless;There are numerous worthless mirrorless systems out there, from a tiny sensor ones all up to the FF. Why are you so hungrily craving another one? Why such a desperation, insatiable greed, lack of respect for uniqueness?Isn't there enough cheap electronics to feast from, or you crave something that still dares to stand on its own and resist to the blind fad? It seems many have already become the Borg.
As I pretty much figured, it's currently all to do with size / weight. My DSLR feels fine and for landscape / weddings I feel no need for mirrorless. If I was going to go hiking in the mountains or long days as a tourist and was after ultimate power to weight ratio, then yes Olympus and Fuji...........
on a serious note...........what is there really to be gained from mirrorless when actually taking a photo?? I'm not against them, I just have mirror cameras...(apart from K-01 I just snapped at bargain price) Sure they are generally smaller, ok, cool, what else will make such a difference to my photo's that I can't do with a K5, 70D or similar? AF is generally within acceptable range for most all modern cameras.....I don't do mcuh video, if I did for weddings coming up, i'd buy a video cam....so i'm quite serious, do they offer major advantages?
BozillaNZ: So int he end Pentax still can't produce any full-sized sensor cameras! It's either Cropped 35mm or cropped 645, Pentax is for Croppers! It's sensor is far smaller than theactual '645' model number suggests, no matter how you fans spin it.
He's happy, just successfully grabbed, Troll of the month award....
Khun_K: it is a time this product, although I am sure will be quite good, will not help Pentax, it is unfortunate that there is little room in the market left for Pentax. Nothing wrong with Pentax, it is just tough.
The ignorance of some people astounds me.....
Super486: 645Z for landscape/portraits and K-3 for action would be a great combo!
said it a long time ago, Ricoh/Pentax now need to hook up with a mobile device producer, then they'd be gaining a whole lot more to their tech and prospective market.
+1 on that,The Pentax combo now looks seriously achievable and usable for pros and enthusiasts. For me, at least, by passes any FF requirements. (not that it would be a bad thing)
mike kobal: Sorry, but a sensor size of 44x33mm cannot be called medium format by traditional definition.This is a APMFS-C sized sensor (Advanced Photo Medium Format System type-C)
The 645Z raises the bar again with IQ vs size of camera discussion.It boils down to how much you are willing to lug around, what your requirements REALLY are,How much your prepared to pay, andHow much you place on the camera being a "look at me" kind of trophy.For most portrait and wedding work nowadays, 4/3 and aps-c will easily suffice as they are producing FF quality from not long ago.Of course it's MF, significantly bigger than FF....peoples definitions are often stuck in age old ideas.
How does the most popular cameras thingy work over on the right? Obviously you have to have had a review first(??) to gain any sort of popularity.
Its not going to ruin my day, just saying.............
That's a seriously affordable piece of amazing kit !!!!
Cmon DPR, lets have a decent review this time, hey look it's got video, that should give it at least 80%...........Lol
gravelhopper: Interesting to see that dpr does not mention the K3's AF capability in low light. For every in-door available light photographer this is as cruicial as low noise at high ISO. When reviewing the K5 II this was mentioned: "As for light levels, I was able to compare the K-5 II with the Nikon D7100, and found I was able to focus with the K-5 II in lower light than with the Nikon. In exceptionally low light (a large blacked-out room lit with a single tungsten bulb) there was a clear point where the Nikon's AF system (rated down to -2EV) just gave up, never delivering a focus confirmation beep, and the K-5 II (rated down to -3EV) kept on making accurate decisions." Also something I do not understand: for both the K5 ii and the K3 the whole "performance" section is missing while it is being part of other reviews. Anyway, I hope the K5 ii low light capabilities are a base feature in all Pentax bodies now.
...yes the K5II low light AF is insanely good
Keith Reeder: Zvonimir,
you've made that ALL up.
Yes, that's the one i'm thinking of......
gdfthr73: It Just drives me nuts. So many amazing full frame lenses for the K mount camera and no full frame K-mount camera exists. WTF
Brendon,Ultimately it comes down to your 'power to weight ratio' so to speak. What do want to lug around vs what IQ you really need. The reality is even many pro's are using lesser sized sensor systems now when FF is not really needed, like aps-c or 4/3. If your photographing for the average wedding or a small magazine article, the IQ of these smaller sensors is producing the quality of FF a few short years ago.....so how good do you need for most applications? Where really a K3, Xt-1 or OM-D would easily suffice.
LensBeginner: Cons:1. never shot jpg2. ditto3. that's a problem with lenses, not camera4. true. But it's a camera, not a videocamera5. true
...not many cons there, are there? ;-)
Pentax has the 560mm tele lens, also a 300mm plus a 1.4 x tele converter to go with them. Not to mention they come weather resistent for wildlife, where Canon and Nikon aps-c bodies generally do not. I'll concede on the FF upgrade, but crop is good choice for wildlife for weight, size and the crop factor plus small amount of difference in IQ unless your going to print large. Yes Canikon are much more availbale in some countries, here in Australia, no issue, in fact Pentax Aus are the Sigma distributor and awesome to deal with. Pentax are very much improving their sales network after years of neglect..Also for many, the upgrade path to MF and the impending 645Z will shake a few cages with 50mp, video and it handles like a DSLR....so upgrade path??? I'm hearing you, but I think what i'm getting at is it's more of a red herring than you and many others would think.For what its worth I couldn't care too much what i shot with, just don't like misinformation.
@Brendon1000.Yes it is a good camera, much like everything else on the market right now.Whilst I am not not aggressively challenging you, we need to look at what it is you and or most people want in a camera that makes the Ricoh/Pentax system so incomplete?A body with enough lenses to easily satisfy 99% of users, tripods can be purchased anywhere, along with lighting systems for studios, filters from Cokin, has very good astro tracer for astrological buffs, now with FLU card for studio use and perhaps wildlife, battery grips, flash system improving and my Metz branded one gives me great shots everytime, remote controls, almost every 3rd party item can be used for correct thread measurement on end of lenses...........so just asking, is this perceived system thing just another red herring like "lack of lenses" and poor AF ?? I am wondering what cannot be fitted and used to or with a Pentax DSLR that won't satisfy the most largest majority of users??
If it drive you so...nuts....then go buy a Canikonony.They may well do so soon, but why wade into a small market share area, when you do so well at 'crop sensor' which really is so close to FF anyway.Ricoh are currently posting profits and it must come down to doing things either properly, cost effectively, profitably or not at all.
It's become such a blown out of proportion issue, much like Pentax's perceived lack of lenses from other brand users fanboys and pimply faced salesman with no real knowledge, who choose to find any crumb of evidence to put down someone else, where in fact Pentax has the best APS-C range around and still a significant 3rd party manufacture usage.If people can't shoot decent results with ANY of the current crop of cameras from any brand, be able to AF and find mostly enough lenses to suit then they have issues.....
Whilst he doesn't produce evidence or a link to a test...and neither can I right now, I do recall a test between the original K5 and the D7000 a couple of years ago where this was the result, not by a huge margin..........in fast moving subjects I would find that hard to believe. However having the K5IIs, I can attest that I have so few failed AF and it can focus in Low light like you wouldn't believe. It would make an interesting test and there would be a margin of error for individual cameras and lenses and human factor, but I think the perceived and legendary and supposed poor AF is now a thing of the past, was never really a major issue and any current problems rest with a few of the lenses. How many milli seconds really makes any sort of difference to 99% of users??
Lucas_: Seems a great camera, at a good price! I thought the K-3 had a FF sensor, though. My bad!
In real life, not a hell of a lot of difference.
AlexRuiz: Because I like gadgets, I may just buy this camera. That way nobody can tell me how good or how bad it is. However I will wait until black Friday, as I expect the price to be about $600 at that time (perhaps a a refurb).
Last year I bought an Oly OMD EM-5 based on all the positive internet reviews, and found it to be grossly overhyped...so I sold it.
This year I bought the fuji X-T1 also based on internet noise. I find it only moderately overhyped. Overalll a great camera though. No complaints.
At the end of 2012 I also bought the D600...a camera that people cringe at due to the oil issues (which never happened to me). Interestingly, my all time best shots have been with the D600 and the 50 f1.4 and 35 f2.
My point? In real world practice (and considering what one shoots), features and specifications don't tell the full story.
....and the reality that virtually nobody could tell which camera and lens you've taken a picture with, say at laptop screen size or less at least. A bit of tweaking, RAW or Jpeg, Canon, Nikon, Pentax, Sony, Fuji etc...........once you like how something work for you, who gives a continental. For someone looking at their next purchase, all this will be of value. Yes it's a nice cam, so am I sure that the Xt-1 would be too.