New Pentax 645D

Nice to see it released, but all these MF cameras are
far too costly for us mere mortals :'(

shimbo
 
shimbo said:
Nice to see it released, but all these MF cameras are
far too costly for us mere mortals :'(

shimbo
Click to expand...

I agree, but compared to the most of them, I think the price is attractive enough. ;)
Now Pentax just needs to release a digital 35mm full-frame.
 
Voyager said:
Why is it called a 645 and not a 443?
Click to expand...

:lol:

Unfortunately 645 digital full-frame sensors are still too expensive and most of the digital cameras / backs are cropped. I'm sure this will change in the future, like it's changing on 35mm dSLR's.
Since this camera uses lenses from the Pentax 645 system, it makes sense to keep the name.
 
jimlizard said:
Since this camera uses lenses from the Pentax 645 system, it makes sense to keep the name.
Click to expand...
I guessed that. ;)

This seems to be the 'DX' for medium format. I guess it may fly - if people think they really need higher quality images. But unless we stop viewing them on screens and start printing them out BIG we don't really, do we?
 
You're right. The quality is already amazing and it's possible to make some huge prints from these files. We don't really need much better than we already have.
In my opinion, the main problem has to do with the lack of wide angle lenses, since they don't make specific lenses for cropped sensors, like they do for APS-C and APS-H dSLR's.
Larger sensors also offer a better control over the DOF, which is important for people who like to play with that (I do).
 
jimlizard said:
In my opinion, the main problem has to do with the lack of wide angle lenses, since they don't make specific lenses for cropped sensors, like they do for APS-C and APS-C dSLR's.
Click to expand...
Well, if they become popular they surely will - the first dSLR's had very limited wide-angle lens options (comparatively) and that did not stop them becoming all pervasive.

I'm even not sure making digital versions of film cameras is particularly sensible - digital photography could (have been) different. But photographers are a conservative lot - and we are saddled with reinventing old tech with a new 'film'. :bang:
 
shimbo said:
Nice to see it released, but all these MF cameras are
far too costly for us mere mortals :'(

shimbo
Click to expand...

But hopefully the appearance of this camera will drive down the prices of those below it in the food chain.
 
Voyager said:
Is there any technical advantage of one over the other?
Click to expand...

SD cards came later and I have read that they are superior from the electronics design point and use more advanced chips. Only the early Pentax *istD took CF cards all the cameras since have taken SD or SDHC, so it makes no sense going backwards. I certainly prefer SD to CF a lot of domestic TV stuff reads them and some readers turn them into a flash drive. I have a little wallet that holds 8

It's hard to find readers now that will read at 20MB/s apart from the expensive Sandisk Extremes. Singim are very good but now unobtainable. The readers knocking around Poundland etc. only manage 4MB/s

This was a Singim that Aria used to stock, I managed to get two at £1 each :D

SDHC is also used in HD Camcorders.

shimbo
 
Joe T said:
I dont think so, but CF cards are much easier to handle (being bigger) - which I would have thought is useful in a high-pressure commercial environment.
Click to expand...

The 645D features a double SD slot, this came a bit as a surprise for shooters used to CF cards in other high end camera. What are the reasons for this choice?

Here also, we decided for SD by considering several factors. First, we believe that SD has more potential as a long term storage standard than CF that is sort of reaching the end of its life cycle as a technology.

Besides, keeping the body of the 645D as compact and light as possible was high on our list of priorities and the SD cards are obviously smaller.

Finally, we heard complains from several photographers about bended pin issues with CF cards that, considering the main target usage of the camera, we wanted to avoid also.
 
Voyager said:
I guessed that. ;)

This seems to be the 'DX' for medium format. I guess it may fly - if people think they really need higher quality images. But unless we stop viewing them on screens and start printing them out BIG we don't really, do we?
Click to expand...

How exactly did you come to that conclusion?
 
SDHC is used extensively in the Pro Video World. These are some of the top cards that get used at up to 60 fps continuous shooting.

Unfortunately the best card the "ATP Pro-Max 16GB class 6 for Professional use" is very hard to find in this Country. I've just bought one of their card readers, hope it's a lot faster than the crap that's on sale most places at present.

shimbo
 
King_Boru said:
How exactly did you come to that conclusion?
Click to expand...
Which? 'The 'DX' for medium format' or the 'if people think they really need higher quality images..unless we stop viewing them on screens and start printing them out BIG we don't....'?

It is not a 6x4.5 frame so it is a 'DX' for medium format - as DX are not 'full frame 35mm.

And the size hardly takes much imagination. Most people do not print out giant images. I expect that by far the majority of digital images are never realised in any other way than as colours on a screen. Those that are (generally) are not printed out as poster sized prints. :cuckoo:
 
Voyager said:
'I expect that by far the majority of digital images are never realised in any other way than as colours on a screen. Those that are (generally) are not printed out as poster sized prints. :cuckoo:
Click to expand...

Indeed, but following on from that logic we would all be still using 3mp cameras. We dont need 10/15/24mp DSLR's to produce pictures to view on screens but still buy them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top