Full Frame or Digital Medium Format - it's Time to VOTE!

dotnik · Oct 5, 2008

Stomie said:
The result is as we know...the 645D is "shelved for the time being"

The Pentax Photokina interview has now been translated to danish.

http://zoom.comon.dk/index.php/news/show/id=782

"Pentax has no FF DSLR plans and they have in-depth experience with a MF camera system. The final decission to launch a MF DSLR has not been made yet but people can count on a state-of-the-art 40 - 50 MP MF camera when it appears."

There you go. There is no FF versus MF from their point of view. That issue only exists in this forum. Launching the 645D does not affect the possibillity of a Pentax FF DSLR.

--
.......
Have a nice day (a picture is worth a thousand words)
Jim

Link to Pentax SLR Forum Best images:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=23551175

Inspiration Challenge - in depth feedback guaranteed

'Don't overestimate technology - nothing is knowledgefree'

Lance B · Oct 5, 2008

dotnik said:
Hmm. Í really don't think that money or intentions should determine
ones right to have an opinion.

I never said it should not allow one to have an opinion, just that who would realistically buy a 645. I have the resources to keep my APS C system and purchase a 645 system as well, but I doubt that I will, so I wonder why so many here are advocates for the 645 in front of FF.

dotnik said:
That means people who "only" plan to use DA lenses are not entitled
to participate in this debate at all. If they buy more lenses they
will most likely buy DA limiteds, DA* or older manual focus lenses
instead of FA* or FA Limited lenses simply because they are cheaper.
You are in fact saying that the majority of Pentax users here are not
entitled to have an opinion regarding this issue.

Where did I say that? All I asked was who would actually buy a 645 system considering the huge cost.

dotnik said:
Looks like some of the FF first people fear that a 645D project is a
direct threat against their own FF hopes. I simply don't think that
Pentax is ready to launch a FF system in the near future anyway but
they have apparently continued to keep the 645D project alive. They
should finish that 645D project and start a full scale FF R&D project
instead.

Why should the 645 system be a priority? I think there would be more people ready to buy into FF than 645 considering the cost.

dotnik said:
Of course I would love a MZ-S style FF DSLR because of the size,
handling and that great VF but let us not forget that it was not the
MZ-S that kept Pentax in business. It was the other SLR's in the MZ
line and the 645 system. A FF DSLR will be in the same position as
the MZ-S. Most people would love to have one but only a fraction
would actually buy one.

We could argue the merits of what draws people to Pentax, a 645 system or a FF system, until the cows come home. I do think that an appropriate question here would be who is more likely to buy into FF or 645.

dotnik said:
Finally I think this forum will not show the true interest in a 645D
and why should it.

Then why ask the question on this forum?

dotnik said:
What I do know is that the 645 system was a big
success even though it was so expensive that most people here would
never see it as a realistic alternative personally.

Being a success in 645 film is vastly different to a MF format in digital, but this is not the scope of the discussion. I simply asked who here would be actually buying into the 645 system considering the cost. It seems there are many here advocating a 645 system, but I am sure that many wouldn't be buying into such an expensive system.

dotnik said:
Hopefully Hoya / Pentax see things in a broader perspective.

--
Lance B
http://www.pbase.com/lance_b

Lance B · Oct 5, 2008

Genes Pentax said:
Genes Pentax said:

But I firmly believe that for this larger percentage of DSLR buyers
that you speak of do not need more than APS-C. Whether it is Pentax

Click to expand...

Well, need is one thing. Wanting is another. People tend to upgrade
regardless of the need. For instance, do people really need K20D?
Doubt it for 90% of the folks out there. My ist D serves me fine.
But I do want something more than K20D.

The image quality of the *ist D is more than enough, in fact, the 6Mp sensor is superb and one of the best. I would have been more than happy to have the 6Mp sensor in a K20D body with all it's features.

Genes Pentax said:
Genes Pentax said:

Genes Pentax said:

I guess you are one of those handful of photographers I am talking
about. What percentage of the DSLR buyers do you think you represent?

Click to expand...

Ah, but that's my point. That's why there doesn't need to be a cheap
affordable Digital MF camera, or even for Pentax to make a FF Camera.
There isn't a big enough market for high-end expensive digital
cameras, to allow Pentax to compete successfully and to make a profit
and make it worthwhile to themselves and their market. Get a decent

Click to expand...

My point was that there seem to be bigger market for FF than MF. As
prices come down, it seems the FF market will get bigger faster than
MF. After all, the market for Canon's 5D is for high-end
enthusiasts, not just pros.

One other Pentax should get FF is to provide a vision for its
customers. Whether you like it or not, people tend to dream about
upgrading when they buy a product. So, having a higher end FF camera
available will give people hope of being able to upgrade to the
higher end camera. More often than not, purchase decision for most
consumers is emotional, not just logical. So, without the high end
FF, Pentax loses on the emotional appeal to the consumers compared to
Nikon or Canon.

Gene

--
http://genespentax.blogspot.com/
http://flickr.com/photos/genespentax/
Brand New Sigma EF-530 DG SUPER for only $225.
Brand New Tamron 70-300mm Di LD Macro for only $135.

--
Lance B
http://www.pbase.com/lance_b

SilvioIDS · Oct 5, 2008

.. or, at least, I will try.

I'm a "serious and interested amateur", and, as long I will stay in this categury, I will never go into (the actual incarnation of) FF. MF is further away. My incursion in MF world was with a cheap and dirty Kiev 88 (really worth a try!) which worked really fine, giving outstanding results (after I managed to fine tune it with the help of a former Kiev repairman). I would be using it today if I could fine a laboratory able to develop my 6x6 slides and BW photos without messing it up... And this isn't so easy to find.

Digital is another story. A full 35mm file, and a 645 file more than it, need a complete working solution: lot of HD space, a way to easily organize it, lots of processing power and an investement in a (soon obsolete) camera which is much more than I can afford. No way for me.

But what if I earned my living from photography? Well, it's a different tale. A wedding photographer or a photojournalist would probably find a MF (or digital FF) camera of little use. Slower workflow, expensive hardware and archival, unnecessary quality compared to the final output. But a studio photographer (portrait, still life, catalogues) would probably love that sort of camera. Just a bunch of lenses to go with it? They're used to this, they usually employ no more than a couple primes in their work. Some of them use just a fixed camera mounted in a stand, fixed distance and lights. They DO NOT have LBA (sorry Lance). Going into digital, for them, has really few options. Hasselblad and Phase One, mainly. And when the world was analogue many of them had a Pentax 6x7. What the heck, the majority of my photo books have MF examples taken with a Pentax 6x7!

So, for a pro (a much abused word in these days), or better, for a group of pro doing a specialized job (who were the main users of MF cameras before digital and, mostly, they still are) a digital 645 would be "handy". Would be an option between other options... Cheaper than Leica and Hasselblad, probably (BTW, they're branded Hasselblad, but in reality they are Fuji cameras and lenses), much better than FF and still portable (I would be not so quiet bringing a 30k Hasselblad around...). A breakthrough in a traditional, expansive market.

But not economically profitable, except for the ads and the "image". I don't think that a 645d would ever be a popular seller... It probably could be a prestige flagship: "Hey, do you have that bulky FF? No way, we've the 645D!"... That's why Pentax freezed but didn't busted completely the project. Hoya knows that they need to do a publicity stunt, and maybe they want to have it at PMA (much in the way Leica stoled headlines with a prototype which nobody knows how to classify... And how well it works).

If you want the money follow the Km d/K1000 d. They have the potential to sell like potato chips, much as Nikon did with D40 (everybody hated that camera when it come out... But it sold so well that Nikon had the financial power to put out a whole bunch of high quality contender to Canon throne). Then, in the next years, we would see what all the money earned with the new supercheapo Km line will bring to us. If Km will sell well (I hope so).

Just my opinion, of course...

-----------------------------------------
Silvio
Rome, GMT+1

Voff · Oct 5, 2008

Augustmoon said:
I also firmly believe that while Pentax did once make a decent (after
a few iterations) 645 Camera and sold it at a reasonable price. The
R&D and materials and selling point price and profit margin allowed
them to do that. This is no longer the case and the much more
expensive and intensive R&D required for Digital MF along with the
materials and the construction (even in the Vietnam) will end up with
a camera that is out of the price range and usefulness to those who
make up the Pentax market.

Pentax is in a very unique position in MF digital. They are the only major manufacturer showing interest in this field. The other MF manufacturers are small backyard outfits in comparison to Pentax who makes 2,5 million digital cameras a year. In addition, the 645D use the same circuitry design as the K20D. Saving cost. Another costsaving measure is the fact that the chasssis, mirror box and finder system is moved wholesale from the old, long paid for 645. As if this wasn't enough, the Hoya takeover have written off all the developing cost on previous years losses. Making lenses in Vietnam on facilities than make 1,5 million SLR lenses a year spells affordable lenses as well as oposed to all other MF lens manufacturers. Pentax is in a position to make an "affordable" MF digital solution and make MF digital within the economic reach of the enthusiastic amateur (which is their goal). The main problem is if Nikon or Canon jump into the MF field before Pentax does....

Voff · Oct 5, 2008

KL Matt said:
Ok, if they are going to have a 55mm lens as a new "normal," that
means the sensor on this thing is going to be barely any bigger than
a full-frame 24x36 sensor would be if at all.

No. It would originally have 2 times the size of a FF sensor. However, this sensor has been dropped and it will now use the largest sensor available (which probably means FF - 645) at 40-50mp.

Emmanuel Diver · Oct 5, 2008

Sticking to my K100D....because its :

A) What I can afford
B) What I'm used to
C) It's about the pictures not the gear.

--
http://www.flickr.com/mannydee

KL Matt · Oct 5, 2008

dotnik said:
"Pentax has no FF DSLR plans and they have in-depth experience with a
MF camera system. The final decission to launch a MF DSLR has not
been made yet but people can count on a state-of-the-art 40 - 50 MP
MF camera when it appears."

I bet those 40-50 Mb raw files are going to be just super fast and snappy to process on our little dual-core desktops. ;-)

A 500 gig hard drive will probably only fit less than 10,000 of them. And then you need to back them up, too.... Are hobbyists really going to go out and buy multiprocessor server boards and raid arrays to deal with these files? I doubt it. So the files are going to scare them away.

If this thing actually is going to be a full-frame 645 sensor, it can't possibly be conceived for the advanced amateur market. At least not any amateur I've ever heard of. So all of us enthusiastic amateurs looking to upgrade from our k20d's to something with a larger sensor are going to be forced to switch brands. Bummer for us.

-Matt @ no amateur on earth, unless their hobby is printing bilboards, will see any benefit from 50 MP vs. 22

Stomie · Oct 5, 2008

dotnik said:
Stomie said:

The result is as we know...the 645D is "shelved for the time being"

Click to expand...

The Pentax Photokina interview has now been translated to danish.

http://zoom.comon.dk/index.php/news/show/id=782

"Pentax has no FF DSLR plans and they have in-depth experience with a
MF camera system. The final decission to launch a MF DSLR has not
been made yet but people can count on a state-of-the-art 40 - 50 MP
MF camera when it appears."

"final decision has not been made" & "when it appears" are significant statements & no "loss of face" will ensue if it does not come to pass, if you get my drift ;->

Personally, I'd be happy to see either FF or MF or both. The indications are that Hoya are pretty much convinced that it would be economically unviable & yet deep down would like the satisfaction of completing an unfinished project along with the industry prestige that would ensue from it.

I believe that there would be a lot of internal debate going on about it.

dotnik said:
There you go. There is no FF versus MF from their point of view. That
issue only exists in this forum. Launching the 645D does not affect
the possibillity of a Pentax FF DSLR.

The issue in this forum? multi plural methinks :->

The K20D imo would be the highest speced, enthusiast camera, with the highest IQ in the market at the price & still, there are people here that are waiting for a price drop. At the same time there is a screaming for the upgraded "Pro" or FF Pentax to be out....the K20 was only announced just 10 mths ago & released barely over 8mths ago. Mind you most of the people owning it & or complaining about it wouldn't even come close to utilizing it's full capability. But folks still want twice better, more bells & whistles & at 1/2 the price.

It is not unusual & has always been a part of the photo landscape for people who can afford it, to own state of the art gear. My dentist owns both Hasselblad & Mamiya MF as well as a D3 & D700 & has recently been increasingly talking about Leaf :-

I go to see him & instead of seeng Xrays of my teeth, he shows me his landscapes & kids on his clinical monitor. LOL
--

Please note: all images displayed by me on this or any other site are copyright ©

JanneM · Oct 5, 2008

KL Matt said:
KL Matt said:

"Pentax has no FF DSLR plans and they have in-depth experience with a
MF camera system. The final decission to launch a MF DSLR has not
been made yet but people can count on a state-of-the-art 40 - 50 MP
MF camera when it appears."

Click to expand...

I bet those 40-50 Mb raw files are going to be just super fast and
snappy to process on our little dual-core desktops. ;-)

A 500 gig hard drive will probably only fit less than 10,000 of them.
And then you need to back them up, too.... Are hobbyists really going
to go out and buy multiprocessor server boards and raid arrays to
deal with these files? I doubt it. So the files are going to scare
them away.

Huh? Yes, the files are bigger. But you're rather overdramatizing the difference.

As an example, I process my K10D images on an 1Ghz laptop with no problem whatsoever. When I do big panoramas - twice as big or more than the files from a medium-format camera - the machine can bog down due to memory requirements (a 10k by 6k image in fifteen layers will start swapping quite a bit) but I can still do it.

A typical, not high-end desktop is three or four times faster than my laptop; if you have a decent amount of memory, processing those files will present no problem. Or just ask people processing scanned medium-format film images today.

And it's medium format. You don't come home with twohundred snapshots to process and store. Each image takes three times more space than a 15mp APS image, but you shoot less.

"Multiprocessor server boards" is unhelpful, hysterical hyperbole - or a cynical, dishonest attempt at swaying people with deliberate falsehoods.

KL Matt said:
If this thing actually is going to be a full-frame 645 sensor, it
can't possibly be conceived for the advanced amateur market.

They've never said full frame. Nobody has said full frame. Their own statements about shake reduction and similar does in fact point to a smaller frame format for a medium-format camera too.

KL Matt said:
At least
not any amateur I've ever heard of. So all of us enthusiastic
amateurs looking to upgrade from our k20d's to something with a
larger sensor are going to be forced to switch brands. Bummer for
us.

Just switch already. You've had years to do it and plenty of cameras to choose from - even adapters so you can use your Pentax lenses.

Just don't forget to buy a multiprocessor server board for those huge files you'll get.

--
Pics: http://www.flickr.com/photos/jannem/
Blog: http://janneinosaka.blogspot.com

dotnik · Oct 5, 2008

Lance B said:
dotnik said:

Hmm. Í really don't think that money or intentions should determine
ones right to have an opinion.

Click to expand...

I never said it should not allow one to have an opinion, just that
who would realistically buy a 645. I have the resources to keep my
APS C system and purchase a 645 system as well, but I doubt that I
will, so I wonder why so many here are advocates for the 645 in front
of FF.

Fair enough. I think we look at it strategicly and not so much what would suit us best personally.

Lance B said:
Lance B said:

That means people who "only" plan to use DA lenses are not entitled
to participate in this debate at all. If they buy more lenses they
will most likely buy DA limiteds, DA* or older manual focus lenses
instead of FA* or FA Limited lenses simply because they are cheaper.
You are in fact saying that the majority of Pentax users here are not
entitled to have an opinion regarding this issue.

Click to expand...

Where did I say that? All I asked was who would actually buy a 645
system considering the huge cost.

The same people who made money with their 645. The 645 is a pro system and as a pro you are only concerned about your investment form a purely business point of view. They don't care about a few thousand $$ more or less as long as their equipment dellivers consistantly. Please keep in mind that pros make long term investments.

Lance B said:
Why should the 645 system be a priority? I think there would be more
people ready to buy into FF than 645 considering the cost.

The 645 system appeals to pros in the first place. They are less concerned about the cost. The 645 system will more likely attract users from other brands whereas it is highly questionable wether Pentax FF would appeal to other than people already having Pentax FF lenses. Common business logic means that it would make Pentax FF relatively expensive. Please remember that it was cameras like the K100D and K10D that attracted people towards Pentax again and not their lenses.

The best 645 lenses are at least on par with the FA Limiteds and there are plenty of them out there not being used on a digital system at all. You can't say the same about the 35mm lenses.

Lance B said:
Lance B said:

Finally I think this forum will not show the true interest in a 645D
and why should it.

Click to expand...

Then why ask the question on this forum?

Because it is a relevant debate to all concerned about what happens to Pentax and because it has been a top story at Photokina perhaps.

I just wanted to question the statistically value of this poll but not the debtate it might create.

Lance B said:
Being a success in 645 film is vastly different to a MF format in
digital, but this is not the scope of the discussion. I simply asked
who here would be actually buying into the 645 system considering
the cost. It seems there are many here advocating a 645 system, but I
am sure that many wouldn't be buying into such an expensive system.

Yes. I am one of them but I still think a 645D launch would be the best strategy for Pentax at the moment if I have to choose between MF and FF.

--
.......
Have a nice day (a picture is worth a thousand words)
Jim

Link to Pentax SLR Forum Best images:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=23551175

Inspiration Challenge - in depth feedback guaranteed

'Don't overestimate technology - nothing is knowledgefree'

dotnik · Oct 5, 2008

KL Matt said:
KL Matt said:

"Pentax has no FF DSLR plans and they have in-depth experience with a
MF camera system. The final decission to launch a MF DSLR has not
been made yet but people can count on a state-of-the-art 40 - 50 MP
MF camera when it appears."

Click to expand...

I bet those 40-50 Mb raw files are going to be just super fast and
snappy to process on our little dual-core desktops. ;-)

I am not sure the 645 system is aimed at such people in the first place.

KL Matt said:
A 500 gig hard drive will probably only fit less than 10,000 of them.
And then you need to back them up, too.... Are hobbyists really going
to go out and buy multiprocessor server boards and raid arrays to
deal with these files? I doubt it. So the files are going to scare
them away.

Harddisk space is generally cheaper the more you buy from the start. Harddisk space has never been cheaper. How many hobbyists are prepeared to deal with 24 MP files?

KL Matt said:
If this thing actually is going to be a full-frame 645 sensor, it
can't possibly be conceived for the advanced amateur market. At least
not any amateur I've ever heard of. So all of us enthusiastic
amateurs looking to upgrade from our k20d's to something with a
larger sensor are going to be forced to switch brands. Bummer for
us.

You are quite right. It is conceived with pros in mind.
--
.......
Have a nice day (a picture is worth a thousand words)
Jim

Link to Pentax SLR Forum Best images:
http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1036&message=23551175

Inspiration Challenge - in depth feedback guaranteed

'Don't overestimate technology - nothing is knowledgefree'

JensR · Oct 5, 2008

Hi Rohan!

The factor would be 1/formatfactor and 0.7 is very close for FF-> MF

And yes, these things exist, but mostly in theory and practice and a few specialised optical devices, AFAIK.

There has been one very early dSLR which had one and it swallowed light and degraded the image. To my knowledge, it has not been used since.

Cheers
Jens

--

'Well, 'Zooming with your feet' is usually a stupid thing as zoom rings are designed for hands.' (Me, 2006)
My Homepage: http://www.JensRoesner.de

JensR · Oct 5, 2008

wy2lam said:
People started to take Pentax seriously because the K10D was a
product with interesting features

I don't doubt it. But its larger size seemingly didn't cause it to fail.

wy2lam said:
So I'd say its popularity has nothing to do with its size - I'll go
as far as to say if the K10D were made as small as the K200D, it'd be
an even better seller.

You maybe right, despite Rupert60 calling everyone crazy who wants a small camera

Anyway. Just my point. A small FF camera that offers the right features at the right price without being a FFeature monster like the D700 and 5DII - that would be Pentax's chance.

wy2lam said:
wy2lam said:

My belief is that there is a market for FF cameras which have
profoundly less features than the D700, 5DII or A900, at a lower
price and smaller size. Pentax could do this. But in a few years, the
big three will have closed that niche.

Click to expand...

You may be right, but I don't see an FF camera at any lower price
than these bodies - after all in an FF body the sensor still dictates
the cost - larger sensors don't just get more expensive - they get
exponentially more expensive due to lower yields.

I know. But have you looked at the massive list of features that these cameras have? Many here would be happy with a small, simple, sturdy FF offering. And I think reducing the features would allow the price to come down a fair bit.

Look at the difference in price between the K20D and the K200D. Or, more extreme, the K20D and the K-M. All using the same sensor size. So. There FF can surely be made cheaper than it is - even now. The big three don't want it. They want to harvest the wealthy consumers first - and they need to have feature-rich cameras for them. I think Pentax as a niche player could (must?) play the game differently.

wy2lam said:
The cash cows beside lenses are still P&S.

Is this really so? I can't really imagine. But then, noone tells us...

wy2lam said:
Too bad Pentax looks
totally giving up that market. Only if it could use PRIME in the
Optios and make a waterproof 750Z out of it - it could be a game
changer.

I agree. There is definitively a market for waterproof P&S that cater for the snapshooter and the enthusiast. And Pentax had some promising candidates.

wy2lam said:
When an FF body gets as small and light as an MZ-50, heck, I'll
loosen the expectation to a something between a K200D and a K20D,
I'll jump ship. Again, I predict it's not something that can happen
at least until the next Summer Olympics.

And that's the problem :-/

The MZ cameras are really nice. Small, reliable and decent feature set at their respective price levels.

Cheers
Jens

--

'Well, 'Zooming with your feet' is usually a stupid thing as zoom rings are designed for hands.' (Me, 2006)
My Homepage: http://www.JensRoesner.de

John Bean (UK) · Oct 5, 2008

KL Matt said:
no amateur on earth, unless their hobby is printing
bilboards, will see any benefit from 50 MP vs. 22

No, but nor will they see the image compromises they would on FF as a result of edge effects from the geometries involved. The use of a cropped 645 format keeps in largely immune to the "digital-only" problems im the same way that APS-C does for "35mm" digital formats.

This rears its ugly head most in the kind of photography that interests me, and in voting in this thread I was considering which larger-than-APS format I would prefer for my purposes should I ever be able to consider buying one. And that's clearly cropped 645 - the number of megapixels doesn't even come into it.

--
John Bean [GMT+1]

Jonathan Demarais · Oct 5, 2008

No one cares (in the pro community) if they go medium format either.
Hasselblad, Phase, Leaf, Mamiya, Sinar, that small market is hugely covered.
--

'I cried because I had no E-3. Then I met a man with no E-510'

Olympus E-410, E-330, Nikon D100 (IR) & Pentax K20D.
57 lenses of various types from most brands.

KL Matt · Oct 5, 2008

JanneM said:
Huh? Yes, the files are bigger. But you're rather overdramatizing the
difference.

Yes, I am. Very observant of you.

JanneM said:
As an example, I process my K10D images on an 1Ghz laptop with no
problem whatsoever.

Seeing how sluggish Lightroom 2 is on my Pentium IV 2.6 Ghz desktop w/ 1 gig ram with k10d raw files, I would never think of even installing it on my old 1-Ghz dell laptop, which is fairly snappy for an old laptop. I can't imagine what would happen with a 50MB file even on my desktop. The processor would go up in smoke. My computer does well with 6MP raw files. Anything bigger is too slow.

JanneM said:
When I do big panoramas - twice as big or more
than the files from a medium-format camera - the machine can bog down
due to memory requirements (a 10k by 6k image in fifteen layers will
start swapping quite a bit) but I can still do it.

Of course you can. It's merely a matter of how much time you have to spend on it. Some people are more patient than others.

JanneM said:
And it's medium format. You don't come home with twohundred snapshots
to process and store. Each image takes three times more space than a
15mp APS image, but you shoot less.

I don't know if I necessarily want to shoot less, or work slower. But I don't want MF in the first place.

JanneM said:
"Multiprocessor server boards" is unhelpful, hysterical hyperbole -
or a cynical, dishonest attempt at swaying people with deliberate
falsehoods.

Jan, maybe you need to calm down a bit?

JanneM said:
JanneM said:

If this thing actually is going to be a full-frame 645 sensor, it
can't possibly be conceived for the advanced amateur market.

Click to expand...

They've never said full frame. Nobody has said full frame.

Jim just said that their marketing guy said it would be the latest greatest 40-50 MP full-frame 645 chip if and when it comes, read his post above in this thread.

JanneM said:
Their own
statements about shake reduction and similar does in fact point to a
smaller frame format for a medium-format camera too.

Yes, and that's exactly my point - either versio of this camera is ill-suited to today's enthusiast market. A smaller MF sensor won't be so much larger than a full-frame 135 sensor if at all to even provide any of the benefits of a bigger format. So if APS-C Pentax users want to stick with the brand, they're forced to buy a complete new system lenses included without even seeing significant advantages over the competition's full frame offerings. Or if it is full frame MF, well it's not an amateur camera anyway. Either way it's nothing for us. Bummer.

JanneM said:
Just switch already. You've had years to do it and plenty of cameras
to choose from - even adapters so you can use your Pentax lenses.

Just don't forget to buy a multiprocessor server board for those huge
files you'll get.

Now who's being cynical?

-Matt

JensR · Oct 5, 2008

For once, I'm with Lance!

(It just got a bit colder in hell)

The 645D is a threat to FF development and the whole Pentax corporation, IMO. If it doesn't work, the future of Pentax is in jeopardy. But I'm repetitive.

dotnik said:
Fair enough. I think we look at it strategicly and not so much what
would suit us best personally.

Well. Many here even weren't (aren't) aware that a 645 will not allow using their K-mount lenses. So this "poll" really creates a skewed impression and not a realistic picture of strategy.

dotnik said:
dotnik said:

Where did I say that? All I asked was who would actually buy a 645
system considering the huge cost.

Click to expand...

The same people who made money with their 645. The 645 is a pro
system and as a pro you are only concerned about your investment form
a purely business point of view.

Are there any Pentax 645 pros left? Haven't they all left for other options by now?

dotnik said:
The 645 system will more likely attract
users from other brands

How? Why?

dotnik said:
whereas it is highly questionable wether
Pentax FF would appeal to other than people already having Pentax FF
lenses. Common business logic means that it would make Pentax FF
relatively expensive. Please remember that it was cameras like the
K100D and K10D that attracted people towards Pentax again and not
their lenses.

Their lens line-up with a mix of good DA and excellent FA lenses had some impact, too. And while most 645 users have gone, it is not yet too late to keep the FF people with Pentax, before they leave to CNS.

dotnik said:
The best 645 lenses are at least on par with the FA Limiteds and
there are plenty of them out there not being used on a digital system
at all. You can't say the same about the 35mm lenses.

Of course I can. There are way more 35mm lenses out there than 645 and they are not being used as intended, but crippled on a crop sensor which puts resolution requirements on them for which they weren't designed and DOFamputates them.

Plus, quite a few of the DA lenses work well on FF (DA 70, DA 40, DA 200, DA 300) and some zoom lenses at their longer end. And all the others can be cropped - sometimes to considerably more coverage than on APS-C.
Nothing of that would work on a 645D.

--

'Well, 'Zooming with your feet' is usually a stupid thing as zoom rings are designed for hands.' (Me, 2006)
My Homepage: http://www.JensRoesner.de

steelski · Oct 5, 2008

If Pentax releases a cheap MF camera like people are expecting, Its is going to have a larger impact than most people are expecting.

Usually professionals rent their MF cameras, but if they can put the price down to somehwere where its affordable to buy. they are quids in. Dont forget that the High end image processors will eventually get passed down to a Pentax FF or APS-C if developed for MF. This also goes visa versa.As Pentax would be the only manufacturer in MF and APS-C, they could reduce the cost of one and increase quality of the other.

I am one of the people who would be interested in a MF camera eventually, but not quite yet.

I do very much desire a AFi series camera with some of that great schneider glass. But then again, Pentax have a better rep in MF glass than they do in 35mm.

KL Matt · Oct 5, 2008

Hi John,

John Bean (UK) said:
No, but nor will they see the image compromises they would on FF as a
result of edge effects from the geometries involved.

I heard a lot about that when the first full-frame cameras came out, but haven't been hearing much at all about it lately. Does what you are talking about have more to do with the sensor technology or lenses?

John Bean (UK) said:
The use of a
cropped 645 format keeps in largely immune to the "digital-only"
problems im the same way that APS-C does for "35mm" digital formats.

I think it's a trade-off. APS-C only lenses have the exact same corner sharpness problems that full-frame lenses do on 24x36 sensors. And full-frame lenses are frequently older designs and don't necessarily resolve as much detail as some of the new APS-C lenses. Quality primes will do well across the frame regardless.

John Bean (UK) said:
This rears its ugly head most in the kind of photography that
interests me, and in voting in this thread I was considering which
larger-than-APS format I would prefer for my purposes should I ever
be able to consider buying one. And that's clearly cropped 645 - the
number of megapixels doesn't even come into it.

But it sounds like they want to pack them in as tightly as possible even for a new 645d, too. Shame, isn't it?

-Matt

Full Frame or Digital Medium Format - it's Time to VOTE!

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Enthusiast

Senior Member

Senior Member

Leading Member

Veteran Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Forum Pro

Senior Member

Veteran Member

Keyboard shortcuts