EthanX: Funny. Given the relatively low resolution (1024x768, if I'm not mistaken) this photo had on the XP installation disk, I always thought it was some sort of digital artwork.
Mamiya RZ67 medium format?! (!!!)?
I wish I could see a high resolution version of this photo. It should be wonderful.
Wow man, thanks for that.
I have to tell you, I find your version ever prettier than the original one. Good shot!
photosen: Cool video, I always assumed it was a photoshop image. Windows' BSOD has been seen way more times though.
HowaboutRAW - Micro$oft has a reputation for releasing one or two good OS, then one 'problematic' OS. It's been going on for too long for me to believe it's just a coincidence...
But this means that we'd probably get something good after 8 :)
Frank_BR: 1550g body only?! I bet only prism and mirror mechanism weigh half that.If Ricoh wanted to launch a new camera, it should be a MF mirrorless, as Sony will do in the coming months.
The only justification for the 645Z is it will help to reduce a bit the inferiority complex of many fans of the Pentax brand, which never had a FF DSLR on the market. Now, Pentax fanboys can say to Nikon and Canon fanboys:
- "Mine" is bigger than yours.
A mirrorless Medium Format camera would need a whole new set of lenses. This baby has backward compatibility with all the existing 645 lens. That's why.
"the 645Z is it will help to reduce a bit the inferiority..."...Enough with the nonsense, 'k? This is a MF camera. It's not just bigger, it's also better.
DPNick: "order of magnitude"LOL!
You shouldn't feel embarrassed, IMHO. It appears that some people just can't appreciate a long, detailed article, but instead they have to find some minor details to pick on. Shame for them.
Personally I do think that 8500 is in order of magnitude less than 29000, especially when expressing the number of dollars required for buying a camera.
Thanks for the Hands-On, I enjoyed it.
falconeyes: This will become the camera with best image quality ever made up to today!
(in terms of DxOMark, it should score around 105 Overall Score and 50MP, even though the jump from 35mm is small (0.79 crop)).
I hope that Ricoh releases the marketing money needed to make this a bold statement for Pentax being overall leader in IQ. The brand needs a bit of hype to make a come back, esp. in the US.
Until now, MF cameras didn't have particularly high maximum ISO's.
I wonder what photos with ISO of 204800 would look like with the 645Z - I believe they would really open new doors for anyone shooting at night!
DPR, I believe you have a mistake in the specs sheet - "Articulated LCD" says "No", and I believe it has one.
Looks like one amazing camera, btw. I think it's a really significant leap ahead in terms of usability for MF cameras.
phoenix15: Most obviously, no Ricoh badge on the back that was complained by hardcore pentaxians. If one read K-3 review in page 4, DPR even wrote: "The real changes are on the back, and we're not talking about the 'Ricoh' logo on the K-3." :)
Apparently, Ricoh do listen to the fans. This 645z is truly a winner in MP league.And maybe pro FF shooter will give some credit to this machine. I am curious to see the image quality compared to Nikon D4s or Nikon D800e, or Canon 1DX.
Hope DPR will review it faster than what they did to Pentax K-3
It's a MF camera. IQ should be in a different league, compared to what the 1DX or D800e etc. can provide...
But you don't have to wait much too see that - just google up and find some samples frpm the 645D. I guess the Z is even better (even if that's hard to believe, the D is close to perfect IMHO).
Rooru S: dpreview team!! Please share some moderate high ISOs samples with us!!
They already replied below that Ricoh (Pentax owner) didn't allow them to post any samples.
We'll probably have to wait for a full review, if there's one in the pipeline. After all, this is a niche camera.
Chev Chelios: This was news a couple of years ago wasn't it? Just google it.
He was tracked down when they first announced the retirement of XP a while back. This article implies he has only just been found!
Well, that's the first time I read it. So, for some of us it is news, after all.
Funny. Given the relatively low resolution (1024x768, if I'm not mistaken) this photo had on the XP installation disk, I always thought it was some sort of digital artwork.
823 comments, excluding mine.
jango: i don't understand: if " the D5300 presents D7100-level image quality" as said in the review, way the score of the image quality of the d5300 is less then the d7100 when compared?
Guess they just can't give the 5300 a better score on IQ than the 7100 got.
Matters of "politics", I assume...
ArcaSwiss: Amazing how many experts there are here, NOT. Why do you think this isn't an improvement over the other DP2 Merrills ? Surely Sigma knows what they are doing.
Why... Is it not ok for people to come forward with their opinion?
People who read here do have a clue about cameras, you know.
JeffAHayes: If I said all I'm really thinking I fear I'd get banned from DPReview.
To say the least, I find it QUITE ironic that the Nikon D7100 got THOROUGHLY TROUNCED in the popularity poll for Best new DSLR of 2013 (coming in 3rd or 4th behind the K-3). And that if you read the comments posted below the poll, MANY Nikon shooters -- including more than a few who felt "TRAPPED" in the Nikon format with their D7000 or 7100 because they'd invested too much in Nikon glass said THEY voted for the K-3 because they think it's superior to anything Nikon has, and would switch if they could afford to.
Yet DPReview has YET to do a review of the 2-1 winner of that poll, instead giving one of the sore losers its BEST review score and putting it out here as the camera it recommends the most. In fact of ALL the cameras in this list, the K-3 was the ONLY ONE not yet reviewed by DPReview!
Things smell like the coast when the tide goes out to me!Jeff
The 7100 was announced on Feb. 2013 and reviewed 2 months later, in April.
The K3 was announced on October 2013, so if we get a full review by the end of the month, or even sometime next month - there wouldn't be much to complain about, would there?
I just hope DPReview doesn't make us wait NINE months again, as it was with the review of the K5-II, posted last June after being announced on Sep. '12. That was really weird...
SRT3lkt: I don't need 36mp for tiny 35mm sensor.
I just took a closer look at the low light samples. And to put it straight, this "tiny monster" puts even the Canon 5D MK3 to shame.
Too bad DPR didn't put the 1D in line for comparison.
In one word - WOW!
"tiny 35mm sensor"?
babalu: I think I'll revise my opinion about vote rigging. I have now looked again at all the entries, and, just from an aesthetic point of view, this is a worthy winner. I concur with Rumpelhund's comment below.Congratulations . (still, the voting seems to have a strange pattern; 11 5.0 votes are very rare).
You're neglecting the beauty of the model. 11 out of ~35 giving a straight 5.0 to her hair and eyes shouldn't surprise anyone.
Anyway, statistically, the sample isn't large enough to show a real issue.
oldfogey: Regression to the median! One of the problems of challenges that also allow the entrants to vote is that the winner is most often the median of the entries. She does look cute - in a sexist sort of way - but hey - wasn't that how most of the entrants interpreted the challenge. This wasn't an effort at gender equality after all! The focal plane seems to be on the stockings rather than on the eye makeup.
She's not sitting on thin air, bro.. It's a stone bench. You should just change your monitor's settings a little bit, that's all.
And @ oldfogey - she's not just "cute", I think she's truly pretty. But I guess it's just a matter of taste...
Snaaks: get a life. seriously
John, some pretty 20 year old woman living on a 2nd floor apartment may not be _that_ boring after all...
Plus I don't think she'd be able to hear this tiny drone when she's in the shower - are you sure that any security cameras already exist in this kind of places as well?
Am I the only one wondering why DPReview has chosen to make a preview and not a full review for this lens?
I mean - They've done a real good job for a preview, but unlike camera reviews, the reviews for lens are usually only 4-5 pages anyway. So what's the overhead in running this one test that will give us their famous widget results and make this a proper *review*? Another single day of work?
Come on, DPReview - we trust you! I just wanna know how good this lens performs...