Voff

Voff

Lives in Norway Norway
Joined on Feb 6, 2006

Comments

Total: 9, showing: 1 – 9
In reply to:

Almeida: What is the equivalent aperture godmanit?!

Equivalent aperture is F:4.5. Aperture is aperture regardless of format. The same for focal lenght.
Equivalent DOF and focal lenght giving equivalent angle of view is something else.
DOF is dependent on aperture, focal lenght, focusing distance and subject magnification. This will be different for different formats; formats are not DOF equivalent. Smaller formats give inherently higher magnification than larger. The crop factor hits in at closer focusing distances. In addition, at some focusing distances and apertyres the image is DOF insensitive; ie you get the same image with regard to DOF (everything is in focus) regardless whether you shoot at 2.8 or 22. It is meaningless to insist on different apertures when comparing formats when it won't matter. However, exposure always matter; F:4.5 is 4.5 regardless of format.
You need to specify focus distance when comparing DOF.

Direct link | Posted on Aug 5, 2014 at 00:53 UTC
On Hands on with the Pentax 645Z article (660 comments in total)
In reply to:

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.

Formats larger than 35mm and smaller than largeformat is medium format....

Direct link | Posted on May 14, 2014 at 14:10 UTC
On Hands on with the Pentax 645Z article (660 comments in total)
In reply to:

Galbertson: Cannot find in specs if 645Z has mirror locku. I believe 645D had mlu, a mechanical function quite usable. On my pentax 67 it is essential to guarantee IQ.

If 645Z has mlu, is it activated via "lock" button on top left of camera?

The mirror lock button is the button on the prism on the right side of the camera in front of the grip...
It says up...

Direct link | Posted on Apr 19, 2014 at 15:03 UTC
On Ricoh announces medium-format Pentax 645Z article (161 comments in total)
In reply to:

Glenn Schultes: I have been reading all your comments and the number of whiney comments a large number of you make.
This camera is for the image craftsmen of photography. People, who want the best image they can, people who make an image and then work that image until they can say they are truly happy with it. So stop saying stupid things like No Pro will use it. Pro's have a different focus - Make Money to live on.
Pentax have been at the Medium Format business for a long time, so what if the sensor isn't a true 60x45 in size. It's bigger than any Full Frame 35mm sensor, and at the end of the day it is the image that counts. Pentax have made an excellent camera, they've made Medium Format easy. I don't feel bad for those people who can't see that. I remember when auto focus was first put into MF cameras, the purists were horrified and ranted and raved about how - No Pro will ever use it, and there are no Real photographers out there who would ever use such a camera. All the same whiney arguments are coming back. Well guess what - Pro's all over the world use auto focus - and they have no plans on giving that up any time soon.
If you want to live in the dark ages and be a Luddite, and cancel your Internet subscription so I don't have to read your comments here.
I love that Pentax still supports our craft. I love that Pentax dares to be different. If you want same old same old then stay with the Big 2 and be happy. But stop sucking the life out of us happy Pentaxians.
End Rant

I can remember when it was said that no pro would use cameras totally dependent on batteries.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 18, 2014 at 19:22 UTC
On Hands on with the Pentax 645Z article (660 comments in total)
In reply to:

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?

I don't know what glorified DSLR means. Pentax have been making MF (D)SLR's continuous since 1968.

Direct link | Posted on Apr 17, 2014 at 15:44 UTC
In reply to:

Petroglyph: Tilting LCD on MF. It makes excellent sense to me. Also an ultra wide 645 lens. I wonder how many $$$ for that one.

$5000 +

Direct link | Posted on Feb 6, 2014 at 14:00 UTC
In reply to:

bossa: I was hoping for a mirrorless version to get the size down to a D800 or D4 but they've stuck to the previous format.

http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/img/dcw/docs/634/076/02.jpg
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/img/dcw/docs/634/076/03.jpg

Mirrorless would have reduced its market potential with about 90%. Mirrorless are less than 1/5th as popiular as DSLR's in the lower price brackets. At the 645D's sales point it is even worse.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 6, 2014 at 13:56 UTC
In reply to:

Ayoh: Looks like it might do video judging by the Mic and Speaker holes visible on the left side of the body

http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/img/dcw/docs/634/076/02.jpg

And the new zoom has built in stabilization too looking at the switches

Should be a really impressive piece of kit, and 1/2-1/3 the cost of the competition.

Shallow DOF like 1.0 to 1.4 is about 0.000001% of all images taken and most of them are useless or would have been improved upon stopping down. Low light imaging is the primarly use of ultra fast lenses.
Shallow DOF is the least of your problem when shooting MF which is why most MF photos are shot at F:11 to 22.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 6, 2014 at 13:53 UTC
In reply to:

Simon Says: Anyone who follows the tech industry knows that history suggests that any sort of "medium", be it floppy in the very distance past, discs, CF/SD, etc. shrinks over time, while the performance of next generation but smaller medium initially doesn't perform as well, will catch up and surpass the standard of yesteryears.
(For details on this subject: check out "innovator's dilemma")

Sensor is just another example of a medium for light, and there is no exception.

We are already experiencing this trend from Medium format -> FF -> APS-C -> 3/4 -> ?

Trust me, at some point smaller sensors will be technologically advanced enough to be just as good as bigger ones of the past.

For film it was the smallest format that delivered adequate results that won. I believe we will see the same for digital. If anything, better sensors will make smaller sensors more viable....

Direct link | Posted on Aug 2, 2013 at 23:40 UTC
Total: 9, showing: 1 – 9