Any reason not to buy a 645 ?

[jt991]

<p>Several years ago I used a 645 for a while and must say was impressed by it. Now presented with an opportunity to buy one (with the "standard" 75mm lens) supposedly in mint condition priced at 299GBP.<br>

All refernces to this version conspicuously absent from the UK Pentax site , so hoping a UK user may read this post to recommend a repairer over here to be trusted for CLA work etc as may be necessary.</p>

[stemked]

<p>James, I'll leave this here for a few days and then move it over to Medium Format where your post belongs. In the meantime:<br>

Any reason NOT to buy a 645? Ok, here's a few reasons.<br>

It is rather heavy (compared to most 35mm systems).<br>

Lens prices will likely go sky-high when the digital 645 becomes available.<br>

If you don't like the 645 format<br>

If you need to shoot fast and want to use pre-loaded film canister system. (Like Hassy, Bronica, Mamyia offer)<br>

You 'waste' part of the film area (unlike 67).<br>

Support for a film 645 is likely to be 'lacking' from Pentax.<br>

There are a LOT more reasons to like it though. But since you didn't ask...</p>

<p> </p>

[bob_stevenson]

<p>Well perhaps it might be more helpful to ask the opposite question,...Why do you want TO buy it?</p>

<p>If you just want to have a play with a 'real' camera that gave a good account of itself in the 'film era', then three hundred quid is not really a lot to pay, so buy it and have a good play. You'll enjoy it and learn a lot about photography.</p>

<p>However, if you are hoping for to go 'up a gear' and get much better pix, then you should ask yourself how you are going to exploit this cameras undoubted image quality(?) The rest of the gear required to get into medium format is going to cost much much more than the initial three hundred quid.</p>

<p>For a start, you are going to need either a good medium format enlarger in a darkroom, or a good scanner. The UK is one of the worst places to try to use medium format now. Most of the photo infrastructure of film processing, printing and above all scanning, has almost disappeared. Only a few companies still exist, are mainly proffessional outfits and will be very expensive for an amatueur to use unless you get particularly lucky.</p>

<p>If you do get lucky, and find both a good relatively cheap scanner that will get the best from your trannies,..and a good cheap efficient processer,.....then please let me know!</p>

<p>Once you have sorted out that lot, all you need is to find yourself a decent A2 printer at a good price and you will be all set up...........</p>

[Member69643]

<p>

<p>Isn't this a brand-specific forum for all Pentax products?</p>

</p>

[bkpix]

<p>James,<br /> <br /> P645 is a fun camera and produces outstanding photos. I can't think of any reason not to buy one now if you're interested, though you might shop around a bit on price. You can get an excellent condition body plus 80 mm lens from KEH for under $400 US. Not sure how that compares to British pounds. I'd look on craigslist for a while.<br /> <br /> Actually the camera can be used with pre-loaded film inserts to allow quick film loading. What's missing, compared to other medium format systems, is the ability to change film backs in mid-roll.<br /> <br /> And, of course, the possibility of a digital 645 from Pentax (supposedly appearing in the spring) means there's likely to be some sort of future support for the lenses.<br /> <br /> Bob</p>

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

<p>"It is rather heavy (compared to most 35mm systems)."</p>

<p>And rather light compared to most 67 systems. And the advantage is that you get 2.7X the area of 35mm.</p>

<p>"Lens prices will likely go sky-high when the digital 645 becomes available."</p>

<p> So buy now while prices are low!</p>

<p>"You 'waste' part of the film area (unlike 67)."</p>

<p>Huh? You get 50% more shots per roll. There is no additional waste.</p>

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

<p>Double post.</p>

[stemked]

<p>Wolfeye,<br>

No, just 35mm film and digital systems. Medium format questions should be posted in the Medium Format forum. I know we have a lot of users here who use Pentax medium format (myself included) that's why I'll leave it up here for a few days and then transfer it over to that forum. <br>

The main reason is simple, these comments are archived for future users. Presumably if someone has a Pentax 645 question they will search that archive.</p>

<p> </p>

[stemked]

<p>Bob,<br>

Possibly not the best scanner in the world but I have the Epson (flatbed) 2450. It has holders for 67, 645, 4X5, and of course 35mm slides and negatives. Its no drum scanner, but its pretty good.</p>

[janne_moren]

<p>The V700 will do 645 nicely, as will the new V600. As they scan MF and above at lower resolution than 35mm (expect to get about 2600dpi or so when calibrated) you won't see much of a resolution increase of your scans compared to 35mm, but of course all other aspects of image quality are much improved. I use 6x7 myself, but not for the resolution increase.</p>

 

[trw]

<p>If your scanner reduces resolution for larger film, try VueScan. It works for me at full resolution any size (4x5@4800dpi is crazy slow though and I haven't tried 8x10 film) even though the CanoScan 9950f is not supposed to do this. It may seem silly to scan at such a high resolution since the lens may not resolve so fine a detail and film flatness is likely iffy. It does help to reduce apparent grain if you scan at full rez and down-sample in Vuescan.</p>

[janne_moren]

<p>Trent, the resolution limit for V700 is a hardware limit, not software. It basically has two scanning heads, one of which (the 6400dpi one) will only scan 35mm (it only covers the 35mm holder area), while the other, general purpose head has a nominal 3200dpi. Of course that's the optical resolution; the practical result seem to be around 3500dpi and 2600dpi respectively. Which is good enough.</p>

<p>I use Vuescan and I have tried it of course, just to make sure: with 35mm there's a definite, clear difference between scanning 3200 and 6400, while MF at 6400 is just the 3200 scan scaled up. Of course you _could_ do some trickery like adapt a 35mm holder to scan one part of a larger frame at a time, then stitch them together afterwards. But really, even scanning 645 at a practical 2500dpi gives us more than enough resolution for just about any normal use already.</p>

 

[mc2imaging]

<p>Pentax does not support the original 645 anymore, that is probably why you don't see a reference to it on the Pentax UK website.</p>

<p>3rd party repair shops may be able to support the camera for mechanical repairs, CLA's, and the like, but my concern is possibility of a need to reprogram the camera. The program settings are stored in volatile memory. If the backup battery is neglected and allowed to go dead, the P645 turns into a paperweight. I have yet to find a 3rd party that can perform the required reprogramming. The 646N versions don't have this vulnerability.</p>

<p>If it was something you used a lot, it probably wouldn't be an issue. Put a sticker on the bottom to remind yourself to change the battery every 5 years, no problem. Put fresh AA's in it before swapping the backup battery and you are fine.</p>

<p>Something you don't use as often is more likely to get forgotten. I'm not trying to scare you out of it, but you should be aware of the potential for failure.</p>

[bkpix]

<p>Matthew:<br>

The battery issue is something I didn't know of. Do you know where to get the backup battery?<br>

BK</p>

[andrewg_ny]

<p>I have heard of what Matt is describing but am wondering about the details--I suspect it <em>may</em> be the 645N with this vulnerability and the 645Nii that fixes it by making it user-programmable. Did ur-645 ever have any programmable options?</p>

[sfcole]

<p>My beef with the format is the same as that with 35mm: it's too long and you have to cut off something to get to 8x10 or 11x14. I prefer the square.</p>

[danny_wong2]

<p>I have shot the professionally with the original 645 since 1985 and 645N in 1997.<br>

From my experience it is faster changing film with the inserts than the back system with all the interlock mechanisms.</p>

[johnmarsden]

 

<p >The Pentax 645 is highly respected bit of kit. Beware there are autofocus and non autofocus types.</p>

<p >I think 645N are the AF ones and I recall there was a 1 and 2, but this is testing my memory – all I'm saying is check what you're getting.</p>

<p >Some of the ones used by pros will have had a hard life – be careful.</p>

<p >There is a certain magic in using roll film – but this comes at a cost. Some would argue apc sized digital has surpassed even 645 film – it probably hasn't but it is certainly close to most casual observers.</p>

[yuri_huta]

<p>There is no internal batter issue with the 645N. So you just worry about the 6 AA batteries in the grip.<br>

The original 645 is a nice camera. It was quite popular, so there are lots of<br>

parts' bodies out there if something should happen to yours. Or the prices are so reasonable, get a second body.<br>

http://www.pentaxcanada.ca/support/general/index_film.php is where you can get a manual for the original version.<br>

One advantage it has over the 645N and 645NII is that for really long exposures (hours) it can do this whereas the newer models can't take such long exposures.<br>

Lots and lots of lenses and accessories floating around.</p>

[tim_drake]

<p>My Pentax 645n feels small and light after shooting my Ebony or B&J 4x5. With its big bright viewfinder, I can shoot fast using preloaded 220 film holders. Unless you print square, the square format has more film waste. The only reason I can think not to buy a Pentax 645n is to maybe also check out a Fuji GA645ZI. Both are on my favorite cameras list.</p>

[bob_stevenson]

<p>A disadvantage with 645 so far unmentioned, is that the cameras can be unweildy when using the vertical/portrait format as the whole thing has to be physically turned and held securely. for tripod use this becomes even more of a bind without special fittings to allow quick repositioning. The special heads/fittings in turn make incereased weight. The 6x6 format is much better and easier to use in this regard as there is no need to turn the camera and decisions about horiz/vert can be left to editing later.</p>

<p>At the end of the day, these considerations are best left to individual users as 'one mans meat is another mans poison'.</p>

<p>Every time discussion about medium format comes up (and this has been true for many decades) there is always someone who thinks that a particular rollfilm format 'wastes film'. This is of course complete non-sense which does not stand up to a cursory consideration. Photographic evaluation is a far superior method of working out which format is right for you. If you must use some kind of other evaluation then cost per frame is a better method of working things out.</p>

<p>Lastly, there is no way in which APS-C sensor can equal any rollfilm format although it soes look like the newer 'full frame' DSLRS are beginning to equal 645 in terms of all round image quality. however , this is unlikely to be seen in real terms unless yo are making fairly large prints. If you only make 10x8's then you simply don't need to use a medium format system.</p>

[stwrtertbsratbs5]

<p>"My beef with the format is the same as that with 35mm: it's too long and you have to cut off something to get to 8x10 or 11x14. I prefer the square."</p>

<p>So you can cut off even more to print 8x10 or 11x14?</p>

[sfcole]

<p>Robert,<br>

Actually, more often than not I compose and print the square. <br>

But if you need a square out of a 645, then you really chop off negative area.<br>

Scott</p>

[yuri_huta]

<p>The nice thing about the Pentax 645/645N/645NII is that there are tripod mounts on both the horizontal and vertical ends. You can have two tripod quick release type plates in both vertical and horizontal tripod mounts and this lets you flip quickly, securely and easily between landscape and portrait orientations.<br>

<br /> There are a lot of really nice used lenses and accessories out there for the Pentax 645 series. You can use the autofocus lenses on the manual focus body and the manual focus bodies on the autofocus bodies. Lots of versatility.<br>

I can't believe the deals I have been getting recently. I received a like new Pentax 645 FA 400mm f/5.6 ED IF, Pentax Rear Converter-A 1.4x, Pentax 645 extension tube set, two RRS mounting plates for the 645N body for well under $1000.<br>

I built an extensive kit for relatively little money and have a hybrid digital solution with a medium format film scanner.<br>

So, no reason not to buy one... well except that we might end up bidding on the same gear.</p>

[charleseagan]

<p>I would say don't buy it if you want good low-light performance or want to shoot fast action scenes, then I would go another route. For portrait and lanscape, though I think it's great.</p>