Pentax 645Z

<p>Looks interesting for those with deep pockets and willing to carry a beast of a 51.4 MP camera….Medium Format AND 35 mm Full Frame (so the site says)… http://ricoh-imaging.ca/en/products/cameras/645Z/index<br>

Specifications: http://ricoh-imaging.ca/en/products/cameras/645Z/highlights</p>

<p>It has the same size sensor as the 645D although it has 44"x3" but it packs more pixels 53 vs. 40. It also has a lot more features. Not sure how it stands up to the Mamiya 645D</p>

<p>35mm FF seems a bit misleading since the 645 only takes Pentax MF lenses, But yes its a tempting camera for those who can get hold of such glass. <strong>Body weight</strong>: Approx. 1550 g (including battery and memory card) <strong>Body only</strong>: Approx. 1470 g aren't that bad compared to Mamiya RB/RZ or a roll holder on a Technika.</p>

The Mamiya 645D is very much a 90s AF body whereas the Pentaxes give you features of modern dslrs. Clonky vs

elegant.

<p>B&H....$8498.00. They didn't hit the $10,000 mark! This surprised me. Smart.</p>

<p>Any comparisons between the original Pentax N and the Digital versions as far as picture quality ?</p>

<p>Very niche product. I wonder if Ricoh will be able to get their money back for developing and manufacturing this body and all the new lenses. Sensor is not even twice the size of a FF sensor, so it doesn't even provide a stop light gathering advantage. I get it that some people may need that resolution for studio work or landscapes, but how many of them are there really?</p>

<p>I'm not sure about the resolution. Under ideal conditions, it seems overkill. 70x100cm offset printed pictures. On the other hand: it was Tmax at ISO 1600 that sold me into film MF. When we crank up DSLR ISO and start denoising the results bining 75% of the captured pixels isn't unusual and the 645Z's surviving 12MP seem handy and nice to have.<br>

About the customer base I think it will grow. 4K monitors start hitting the market now. A 650 Euro Samsung 4K screen seems cheaper than an entry level color corrected Eizo but displays 8.3MP at once. The industry has displayed prototype 8K screens and is probably not sleeping. 8K will display 645Z images with a few pixels seam for cropping. What's wrong about a desiring stills camera with "just enough pixels to be displayed on your TV screen"? - Times seem changing. A while ago we argued about "no real need for lots of megapixels because our current monitors don't display them and nobody has the space to hang bunches of huge prints. - I have no clue where things will go with a society photographing mainly for Flickr and friends & family's smartphone screens, but imagining a 2000 Euro 8K monitor I guess we will want high resolution cameras for ourselves.<br>

A local online dealer listed all Pentax 645 lenses as "on backorder" an Austrian one seems having a few and awaiting others. I am of course not sure if those dealers tell the truth or don't have the money to shelf glass, but anyhow: a company unable to flood stores with lenses can't have not enough customers, can it?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>About the customer base I think it will grow.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Not at this price point and not with such a large system. This is of interest only to people that absolutely need that resolution and that also have the patience to properly use the camera to exploit it. The A7r already offers more resolution than its users can exploit and enough to fill an 8K screen and it's cheaper and more portable than the 645Z.<br>

<br>

I agree that long term high resolution displays will become common (it's a few years now that I've been mentioning that scenario as justification for high resolution images) but by the time that will happen we'll find a lot more affordable devices for capturing 40MP+ images or video for them. The 645Z won't pave the way for the masses to get there. 4K and 8K sets are a gimmick anyway at this moment - nobody really needs them, but they're made because the technology allows it, not because anyone has figured out scenarios where they can actually provide a benefit. A lot of other things need to be developed to make them useful devices - it will take many years.</p>

<p><em>Very niche product. I wonder if Ricoh will be able to get their money back for developing and manufacturing this body and all the new lenses. Sensor is not even twice the size of a FF sensor, so it doesn't even provide a stop light gathering advantage. I get it that some people may need that resolution for studio work or landscapes, but how many of them are there really?</em><br>

<em> </em><br>

Enough of us that Ricoh will recoup their investment. The lenses being released are essentially older designs either being freshened up or in some cases simply being reintroduced to the American market, and were never discontinued in some markets. It's obvious Ricoh is aggressively going to use the 645Z as a flagship product to help re-establish a brand. The original P645 and subsequent N and Nii versions were primarily designed as field cameras for landscape and nature shooters. The new 645Z not only continues to meet the requirements of those shooters but with the new additional features and capabilities, aims directly at some of the Hasselblad and Phase markets. The difference in cost between the Pentax and the others will not be lost on a large part of the market or potential new users, including financially able amateurs and hobbyists. While cameras like the a7r are interesting and capable travel cameras, they don't really fill the need for many types of studio shooting or for individuals such as myself who prefer a large view finder rather than EVF. <br>

<em> </em><br>

4K and 8K video development has grown out of a commercial cinema need because 2K is not adequate for capture nor projection. At the recently held NAB the 4 and 8K demos by Canon, SONY, NHK, served to demonstrate just how rapidly the technology is progressing at all levels from capture, to processing and editing, to distribution and display.</p>

<p>The BDA is already working on specifications for 4K Bluray. Samsung has said they can deliver players by years end if necessary. 4K will happen quickly and it will be a demonstrable improvement over the existing and severely handicapped ATSC digital standards. New digital standards are in development for OTA 4K digital. In two years time 4K will commonplace in many markets. NHK plans to have 8K available in Japan by 2020. It's not going to take years, 4K will be here quickly, with broadcasters and cable companies kicking and screaming, being dragged along by the market, as they always are. But 4K is happening, it won't be years away.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>But 4K is happening, it won't be years away.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I am talking about wide adoption. About people buying sets that are large enough for them to see the difference vs HD. And about content being made available that they will care to buy. That will take years. And that's just for 4K. All this resolution boost doesn't even make sense when they still have trouble ensuring color accuracy. They do it because they can do it, not because it improves our viewing experience.<br>

<br>

Meanwhile, Panasonic GH4 also offers the opportunity to generate 4k content at a very nice price. Guess which system will sell more cameras?</p>

<p>Well Laurentiu, let me get you up to speed. Sets are available now that enable you to clearly see the difference, even at a mere 50". Basically, you can see the difference because the present HD standards can only be described as HD Lite, very much emasculated from the days of the analog 1125/60 system. Obviously, a 30 meg analog channel was not commercially possible but the system demonstrated what was and is possible.</p>

<p>Bandwidth constraints and profit-driven media suppliers, plus compromised technical specifications have allowed the present ATSC formats to be compromised. We all see that almost on a daily basis. A visit to a Best Buy and a look at a closed loop Samsung 50" 4K display will tell you instantly the difference is clear. I can see it on a 2600 pixel wide monitor. In a world where people are watching small displays more often and on a solo personal basis, such as the so-called Retina displays by Apple and others of a similar nature, viewers will see a difference.</p>

<p>But regarding adaption, major programmers are already archiving in 4K just as they did with 2K long before OTA signals were broadcast. It was HBO and several other satellite-delivered services that broke the ground with 2K HD in the US. I completely disagree with you that 4K won't improve the viewing experience. I've been involved with HD developments since the 80s. I saw what was possible in studio and lab conditions, followed by what the compromises of ATSC standards did to the viewing experience. I now see what is possible with 4K and the attempt to right some wrongs. It is more than just resolution, it's improved color space, new compression schemes that reveal fewer artifacts combined with better sensor technologies. You seem to be convinced that 4/8K are unnecessary, forgetting that they were technologies developed for commercial cinema. We're seeing the technology now evolve into consumer products.</p>

<p>As for wide adoption, we'll see the public using 4K cameras to shoot their own videos and play them on their 4K displays. Whether you see it or not 4K is coming like a freight train. If you really believe it will be 5-10 years before it is widely adopted, I think you have seriously misjudged the market. I've had this same discussion before and challenged people to actually go see 4K on a store display and without exception I've had the same reaction. Just today I played the Panasonic 4K demo downsized on a 30" Dell monitor for a 77 year old friend. Even though it was downsized to 2600 pixels wide it was still amazing to him and he could clearly see the difference. If your reaction is otherwise, I'm pretty confident you'll be in the minority.</p>

<p>I ordered my GH4 two weeks ago. A Panasonic rep told me at NAB the GH4 was the heaviest preorder in terms of numbers of any camera they've ever introduced. Canon, Nikon, and all the others will be forced to join the parade and that is how you get wide adoption. In a way Panasonic and the others will be following the Steve Jobs concept of giving the public something they didn't even know they wanted.</p>

<p>Wondering how much lower the used 645D models will sell for as the Z's start to hit the street ?<br>

I would like to have either one. </p>

<p>I'm sure quite a number of 645D owners aren't looking to move quickly to the Z until some decent images files are posted. So far, they haven't been particularly impressive but I have no reason to doubt the Z IQ will be superb when all is said and done. It's getting quite a bit of play on www.getdpi.com and the owners/supporters of some of the other brands seem to be in a circle the wagon mode.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I've been involved with HD developments since the 80s.<br /></p>

</blockquote>

<p>That's just my point. It takes decades for "developments" to make it to widely adopted standards. I still watch a lot of content that is not HD, btw, so if I'm not fully on the HD wagon, how do you expect to sell me 4K and 8K? Ten minutes in a movie, I can't tell if I'm watching a BluRay or a DVD unless I obsess about that question - I can see the difference, but that doesn't mean it matters or that I need it.<br>

</p>

<p><em>That's just my point. It takes decades for "developments" to make it to widely adopted standards. I still watch a lot of content that is not HD, btw, so if I'm not fully on the HD wagon, how do you expect to sell me 4K and 8K? Ten minutes in a movie, I can't tell if I'm watching a BluRay or a DVD unless I obsess about that question - I can see the difference, but that doesn't mean it matters or that I need it.</em><br>

NHK and to a lesser extent, CBS Television, started working on the analog precursor to our present 1080 digital system in the late 70s, first public demos took place in the late 80s. After the system was 'digitized' it was mid-late 90s before 1080i first became available by satellite. That effort concluded much of the developmental heavy lifting. In fact, NHK began work on development of the 8K system in 1995 before 1080 even hit the air. That was 19 years ago and barely a half dozen years after the introduction of DVDs, and 4K came along as part of that development.</p>

<p>Unlike the initial HD development period where studio, post and broadcast gear, and software, had to be developed, that all exists now. Some production houses have been archiving in 4K for several years and almost all professional production will be in 4K within a couple of years. To be sure, just as now, there will continue to be a tier of formats ranging from 4:3 SD to Cinema 17:9 4K. It will be a multi-format world but 4K will become the new consumer reference standard just as 1080P is today. Your continuing argument that it will take years is baseless and simply not fact, so far as North America and Asia are concerned. </p>

<p>You can argue against the need for HD all you wish but the inarguable truth is you will be in the minority. If you're perfectly willing to watch a film in SD, good for you. Most people, given the opportunity would choose otherwise and HD certainly will not save poor content. Most people in the film and video industry, myself included, believe that 8K will be mostly embraced by the commercial cinema market. 4K will become the 'sweet spot' for HD distribution, if for no other reason because 4K downrezed to 1080 has a better look than native 1080.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Your continuing argument that it will take years is baseless and simply not fact, so far as North America and Asia are concerned.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It will take years, not months, for the majority of households in any major market to own a 4K or higher TV set. This is not a baseless opinion, but simply an educated one, based on current interest as gauged in <a href="http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/HDTVs/4K/Ultra_HD/Smart_TVs/research-reveals-dramatic-hdtv-growth-among-us-homes/14111">studies covered in media</a>:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>A new study reveals that 77 percent of US households now own an HDTV, while smart TV adoption is minimal <strong>and awareness for 4K displays remains low</strong>.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>This is recent - 2014, so I don't know what your hope is, but to me it doesn't sound like 4K sets will reach 50% of the households in less than ... yes, <strong>years</strong>.</p>

<p>And let me remind you where we started from. I said this:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I agree that long term high resolution displays will become common (it's a few years now that I've been mentioning that scenario as justification for high resolution images) but by the time that will happen we'll find a lot more affordable devices for capturing 40MP+ images or video for them. The 645Z won't pave the way for the masses to get there.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I also told you:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Meanwhile, Panasonic GH4 also offers the opportunity to generate 4k content at a very nice price. Guess which system will sell more cameras?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>To which you replied:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>A Panasonic rep told me at NAB the GH4 was the heaviest preorder in terms of numbers of any camera they've ever introduced.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>So what are you really disagreeing about? Is it for <strong>this part</strong>?</p>

<blockquote>

<p>If you really believe it will be <strong>5-10 years</strong> before it is widely adopted, I think you have seriously misjudged the market.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I didn't say 5-10 years, I said years. It doesn't really matter how many it will take between 2 and 10 - the point is that within a year, the camera market can respond to demand for devices in way more appealing packages than the 645Z.</p>

<p><em>It will take years, not months, for the majority of households in any major market to own a 4K or higher TV set. This is not a baseless opinion, but simply an educated one, based on current interest as gauged in <a href="http://www.highdefdigest.com/news/show/HDTVs/4K/Ultra_HD/Smart_TVs/research-reveals-dramatic-hdtv-growth-among-us-homes/14111" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">studies covered in media</a>:</em><br /> <br /> Disregarding entry level sets, it's quite likely within two years 4K sets will dominate sizes in the high 40" range and above. You'll see them at Costco and other box stores. As customers add sets to households or replace their early flat screens, they'll be replaced with 4K as a matter of routine. Just as most high end HD sets are now 3D capable, even if the capability is not used, likewise 4K sets will make inroads although most will not see much if any true programming until OTA and cable delivery begins. They'll be used for upconverting 1080 to 4K. As for public awareness, it matters not. It's what manufacturers of consumer TVs, cameras, broadcast gear want to push down the pipeline. The general public is technically illiterate. Chances are that if you took a poll the vast majority of the public think their DVD players are delivering HD to their flat screens or by switching to the Stretch mode on their HD sets, 4:3 becomes HD. What the public is aware of means nothing in the overall scheme of things.</p>

<p>As for the 645Z having any influence on UHD adoption, it will have none. To the best of my knowledge there is no video capability for 4K in the 645Z other than interval shooting. This conversation diverged from one about the 645Z. I'm not quite sure where you got the idea from any of my comments that the 645Z would influence the adoption of 4K.</p>

<p>I think we've taken this as far off topic from the main thread as needed.</p>

<p> </p>

<blockquote>

<p>I'm not quite sure where you got the idea from any of my comments that the 645Z would influence the adoption of 4K.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>I guess I made the mistake to belittle 4K in what was meant to be a casual remark and that started you up on 4K. And then I thought you would only delve into that topic with such enthusiasm because you find it relevant to this thread, not just because you disagreed with my low opinion of 4K. Such is the way of Internet conversations.</p>

I plan on keeping my 645D with the two zoom lenses I bought for it. A while back I had heard the new model sported a cmos chip. This told me the new camera would have movie capabilities. It also shoots three frames per second in photography. The older 645D is one photo every 1.1 seconds. That it, but what great pictures can be had.

 

If I could afford the new version I would want it set up for Infrared photography and movies.

 

I bought the 645D when it came out so I could have vastly better resolution in picture quality. It meant I could bypass the full frame DSLR cameras.

 

I do wonder where the other competing camera companies will take their product lines in the next year or two.

 

CHEERS...Mathew

<p>I'd love to shoot with one sometime but I don't think I can justify the expense for a camera that is so big and heavy. I do so much of my photography via bike, skis, or by hiking. Lugging this thing up and down mountains might kill me. <br>

If I ever get the the point where other people carry my gear I'll consider it! :)</p>

<p>645Z does look like nice upgrade over the 645D, a little resolution boost, speedier operation, and I'd think that live view and tethering via the Flu card might be the biggest usability improvements.</p>

<p>There are so many reasons to pick other cameras or systems than this for video, I think it's hardly worth discussing. That 645Z is now capable of it is slightly interesting but I imagine it was included mostly because it cost Pentax/Ricoh very little extra to do so once they'd adopted the CMOS sensor, and it allowed them to tick another box on the marketing sheet.</p>

<p>I guess, other than money, being healthy is another advantage to get pictures. I continue to utilize what the Pentax 67II can offer, and so, yes, I lug it up, and down hills. In fact before a trip, I train for the lugging two weeks in advance. It goes with the territory if your shooting the landscape, That's just what's on the menu when shooting the landscape. If not the Pentax 67II, or the Z.. It'll be some other rig reason to huff and puff. I know what the future holds, but we're not there yet.<br>

The questions we have about the Z are not answered yet, we haven't seen pictures from the Z. Even if we did on the screens here on social media, it doesn't matter. What matters with the Z, is the print, but we're living in a sphere of neglect of the print these days, and these discussions some how have a habit of dissolving the print.</p>

<p>Maybe I will find a deal on a 645D from someone who just wont be able to live without the Z, that would<br>

make me very happy! Anyone want to make me a deal on the D for seed money toward your Z?</p>

<p>Honestly, I could not justify purchasing ANY medium format unless I was selling my pictures professionally, although I do know of a used 645N with a 45-80mm lens for $895. Shooting film was a joy, and I would have no trouble returning to it.</p>