Pentax 645D is here ! ! !

[mountainvisions]

<p>$9400 is a bargain.</p>

<p>The hasseblad goes for $6000 more, and the Canon 1D FF goes for a little less.<br>

It's actually priced in a sweet spot. Plus it's weather proof, and since this is marketed towards (at least in part) landscape shooters that can be a big deal.</p>

<p>Remember it's not marketed at the guy who already thought a $2000-4000 camera was just too expensive, it's marketed at people who can turn that $9000 investement into a return quite quickly selling their work.</p>

<p>Most people don't realize how big Pentax market share in the MF market was, to this day when you flip the pages of PopPhoto or Outdoor Photographer in the credits are quite a few Pentax 67 and 645 images.</p>

<p>Is it too late? Who knows, but I guess we'll find out...</p>

[shots worth sharing]

<p>Needless to say, most of this discussion is over my head but I like the sound of it. The point is that this is going to generate some serious Pentax buzz in influential photographic circles.</p>

<p>Like ME sez,</p>

<blockquote>I only hope the thing is <em>really really good</em> .</blockquote>

<p>I have to admit I flinched a bit at the mention of SDM: I sure hope they've done some thorough de-bugging.</p>

<p> </p>

[ricardovaste]

<p>What a beautiful camera! I wish one day I can afford such a well crafted tool.</p>

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>Not so much weddings, unless you strobe every single interior shot. The CCD, despite its area, is not designed for low light—the max native ISO is only 1000, with 1600 being available as a software push. No, this is a camera for slow, low ISO photography.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Not that low. When film ruled for weddings, most were shot at ISO 160 or ISO 400.</p>

[ricardovaste]

<p>^ I would use it for landscapes and still life myself, I wouldn't consider it for weddings at all (except perhaps formals... but even then I don't think it would benefit)</p>

<p>I shot my first wedding a couple of weeks ago. I was between 800 and 3200 most of the time. And with 2.8~1.4 lenses. I just don't think it would work that well, not for my informal style anyway... depends what sort of images you want to capture i guess.</p>

[personalphotos]

<p>Yeah Mis what are you talking about!!! Actually you are right about the church stuff. But I can see this being a wedding shooters camera. Mostly for the formals and portraits. Many shooters have 2 or more bodies and would use their ISO killer camera at the church but use the 645D before at the brides house, after for the formals and then switch back at the reception.</p>

<p>Plus there's an added benefit to the wedding shooter. We're always complaining about the declining prices people will pay for the work. If you have one of these and some stunning enlargements in your portfolio from it, you can command a much better price. Imagine meeting clients who just left the last appointment where the shooter was using an XTi. You put that beast on the table and explain why they need you and only you. Sure it's expensive up front but you only need 2 lenses and I bet with the higher fees, it would pay for itself very quickly.</p>

[johnw436]

<p>I think this is going to be huge in the Medium Format arena. Many wedding photogs are shooting Leaf or Phase backs on older 500 series Hasseys or have bought the new H series, which is actually a Fuji camera start to finish.</p>

<p>Someone mentioned the flash sync speed of the Hasselblad. That comes from using leaf shutters, so the shutter syncs at all speeds. That always was a huge Medium Format feature. The tradeoff is you get slow shutter speeds. Most leaf shutters only go to 1/500. </p>

<p>Where Pentax was really smart is making it backwards compatible to the old Pentax lens line, whereas Hasselblad created an entirely new beast with the H series.</p>

<p>Perhaps I missed it... Does this camera have a removeable back? </p>

[shaloot]

<p>wow I don't get on photo net pentax's forum for one day due to an illness and this is what I miss?! </p>

[ralph_jensen]

<blockquote>

<p>Plus there's an added benefit to the wedding shooter. We're always complaining about the declining prices people will pay for the work. If you have one of these [Pentax 645D's] and some stunning enlargements in your portfolio from it, you can command a much better price. Imagine meeting clients who just left the last appointment where the shooter was using an XTi. You put that beast on the table and explain why they need you and only you.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Peter, I know your point but I'm not sure most couples would see a huge difference between an enlargement from a $900, 18mp Canon Rebel and a $9,000, 40mp Pentax 645D.</p>

<p>A lot of very good wedding photographers are able to impress their clients with prints made from "only" 12mp cameras like the D3 and D700. That's because often times the ability to use a fast zoom lens in very low light produces photos that impress B&Gs more than huge enlargements of formal portraits will.</p>

[didibaev]

<p>Finally the wait is over! Sooner or latter I will have one, and wish all fellow pentaxians have it too. Cheers!<br>

<a href="http://www.pentax.jp/english/news/2010/201008.html">http://www.pentax.jp/english/news/2010/201008.html</a></p>

 

[miserere_mei]

<blockquote>

<p>You put that beast on the table and explain why they need you and only you. Sure it's expensive up front but you only need 2 lenses and I bet with the higher fees, it would pay for itself very quickly.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Hey Peter, I'm on the phone with Pentax Japan, they're asking if you want one or <em>two</em> 645D's.</p>

[andrewg_ny]

<p>Also interesting: SD rather than "professional" CF cards. Not that I think this is a problem...the latest SD tech seems like it's probably up to the task.</p>

<p>What, no AA battery grip? Oh well, it would have been sweet. :-) (kidding.)</p>

<p>I also note it uses the same battery as K-7 (think of the cost savings!), and its focal plane shutter X-sync is now 1/125 instead of the film 645's laggardly 1/60. Not surprising that supports P-TTL flash and HSS.</p>

<p>I think one of the other reasons it might need to be nurtured in Japan first is that they need to first target existing 645 system owners who already have lenses and my guess is that there are more there than anyplace else; they haven't announced a slew of new lenses yet, and it seems likely that a brand new wide angle will be required. My guess would be an ultra-wide zoom in the spirit of the FA645 33-55/4.5 but even wider to match the smaller sensor.</p>

[jeremy_corbin]

<p>I'm not entirely sure why, but this part excited me...</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The PENTAX 645D has a pair of memory card slots for the recording of images on both SD and SDHC memory cards. This dual-slot design gives the photographer extra data-storage options: for instance, recorded images can be assigned to different cards according to recording format (such as RAW or JPEG), or one of the cards can be used as the backup of the other. The settings for each memory card slot can be easily made by dedicated button.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The possibility of making a backup of your SD card right then and there or having the slots serve different functions seams incredibly redundant! (redundant in the good way, I'm a tech guy after all.)</p>

<p>If I win the lotto, I'll get a few for ya'll to try out and "review." :-)</p>

[miserere_mei]

<blockquote>

<p>If I win the lotto, I'll get a few for ya'll to try out and "review." :-)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>We now have this in writing and will hold you to it :-D</p>

[mountainvisions]

<p>Mis,</p>

<p>I don't understand your statement about wedding shooting.</p>

<p>Most weddings I have been to have the place strobed from rehearsal to reception. Even the churches get strobed after the service (very few allow during the service). And actually when I was "playing around" with my 645N and Ilford 3200 (@ IE 3200 no less) I was still marginally able to get decent shutter speeds at f/2.8 (bearing in mind the DOF of a 645 at f/2.8 is like a APS-C at f/1.4). So basically without a strobe even 3200 is borderline, and I highly doubt 6400 from any system in available light is good enough for large color prints of good quality.</p>

<p>If ISO 800 is clean, I think most wedding photogs will get by just fine. They did it for decades using film.</p>

<p>However, I am not really sure that wedding photogs need this sort of resolution. I mean how big are people printing their wedding photos these days that a 15MP APS-C or a 22MP 24x36 can't meet the needs. Bearing in mind that a APS-C meets 35mm film resolution, and a 22MP FF meets medium format film res, both of which were used for decades. You would have to be pretty vain to want a mural of yourself on your wall (ok, I admit I have such a mural, but like I said, you have to be pretty vain).</p>

<p><em>Disclaimer, I am neither a wedding photographer nor a self proclaimed expert on wedding photography, but as I photographer I obviously scrutinize the setups and ask a few questions here or there at a wedding to base my assumptions on. These assumptions may only be as good as the photographers shooting the weddings I have attended, and thus might be entirely wrong, or worse just plain foolish! </em></p>

<p>Andrew,</p>

<p>The X-sync on the 645 series isn't as horrible as people think. if you get leaf shutter lenses (actually cheaper than the regular counterparts) you get 1/1000th x-sync.</p>

<p>I agree though, this is going to be huge in the medium format arena. Of course the IQ has to be on par with other MF systems, or at the very least a slight slight slight notch below, and also a full step above the best FF system. If not, give me a reason to not stick with say a Canon/Nikon system where I can use the same lenses for film, digital, APS-C, etc?</p>

[dmitri_serdukoff]

<p >Stunning. Bravo, PENTAX! I have been waiting for a camera with similar specifications for years. Really glad it is no one other than PENTAX who finally delivered it. This company understands device ergonomics, unlike many of its competitors. Even if this camera had been delivered with fewer pixels, it still would have been nothing less than revolutionary. I particularly want to praise the CORRECT 1.3333 aspect ratio. Sensor size could be a bit bigger, but let’s live with what we now have. I personally have been developing mechanical accessories for the PENTAX 645 platform (I own a 645 II), in order to be able to use old exotic uncoated lenses with focusing as well as with tilt capability on any 645 body, knowing all well that the 645D was eventually coming. As much as PENTAX kept dropping development of the 645D and resurrecting it again, I personally was doing the same with my accessories. Finally, here is my chance to finish all my adaptations that kept collecting dust for the past couple of years. Finally, I hope PENTAX software is written by people who truly understand their field, unlike their competitors. PENTAX is dead – long live new PENTAX! They bring hope to disseminate mediocrity in camera development, that one sees today wherever one chooses to look. I wish other stubborn and wrongfully proud players like CANON, NIKON, MAMIYA, HASSELBLAD (I own some) and others learn from no less stubborn but always promising PENTAX. Dmitri Serdukoff</p>

[RickW]

<p>This =is= an exciting new camera, but I have a sense of deja vu...</p>

<p>Through the 1990s, Pentax had the 67 and 645 series for pros, but the 35 mm line topped out at the SF-1/n and (P)Z-1/p. Sales languished and market share fell, as there was no "trickle down" effect from the MF pro line to the amateur/prosumer 35mm line.</p>

<p>Presumably Pentax learned from that experience, and figures the 645D will make money on its own .</p>

[hinman]

<p>I know this coming and I ventured out months ago and bought this -- my Lol645D, the 645N, which I can afford with an A 75mm f/2.8 and a FA 45mm f/2.8. It is a bummer that I get sidetracked with Pentax K-x and my new 35mm with Ricoh xr-p that I leave my 645 unused. I am ordering 120 films this week and hopefully join the excitement. Here are some product shots of my 645N to celebrate Pentax latest milestone</p>

<p align="center"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2527/3885181637_4812209b07.jpg" alt="" width="500" height="332" /></p>

<p align="center"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2571/3885175953_f423827bf7.jpg" alt="" width="332" height="500" /></p>

<p align="center"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3433/3885177325_dfc62a291e.jpg" alt="" width="500" height="332" /></p>

<p align="center"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3480/3885977978_810a5f92af_m.jpg" alt="" width="159" height="240" /> <img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2575/3885978130_6e08f185c7_m.jpg" alt="" width="159" height="240" /> <img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2546/3885975454_b4068bca09_m.jpg" alt="" width="159" height="240" /></p>

<p align="center"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2669/3885979464_dcd8b6bbf3.jpg" alt="" width="500" height="375" /></p>

[andrewg_ny]

<p>Thanks, Justin. I am aware of the LS lenses but there are only a few (3?) lenses, and none of them are the ones I already own for 645N or appear to be particularly common on the used market. This is why I think that a 1/125 X-sync plus the availability of HSS is a *good thing* for system versatility, even if for those who use flash a lot might enjoy the benefits of the leaf shutter setup.</p>

[jonathan_rush]

<p>I guess shake reduction isn't a selling point in this market?</p>

[personalphotos]

<p>My assumption on SR is twofold. One, it may be expensive or not even possible to move a sensor that big to give much advantage. There's a lot more surface and weight to correct on a sensor this size.<br /> Second the target market would use a tripod quite a bit with this. The emphasis was put on vibration reduction of the mirror and the well designed (easy to get to) lock up. This is a heavy camera and the lenses will also be heavy. So a tripod for anything critical would be a must have. Very much like a shooter that uses long lenses on a smaller format unit.</p>

<p>So I don't think this would be much of a selling feature since you'd have it turned off a lot of the time on a tripod.</p>

[jtk]

<p><em> "Most people don't realize how big Pentax market share in the MF market was, to this day when you flip the pages of PopPhoto or Outdoor Photographer in the credits are quite a few Pentax 67 and 645 images."</em><br>

True, but Pentax only had segments of those markets because it was inexpensive (compared to Hassleblad) and compact (compared to LF or Mamiya RB). </p>

[pbarnes]

<p>I posted this last month in another thread on this forum:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>I had a fantasy the other day about a digital camera designed for landscape photographers, - no need for 6,000 frames/sec, or ISO 12million, or shake reduction, or pretend video, or on-board flash. Just think of the sensor size and image quality that could be built for the same cost as a K-7 if the other (unnecessary to me) stuff is left out.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Well i got what i wished for, only there are a few too many zeroes on the price tag. Goes to show how much I know about camera manufacturing.</p>

<p>But I am still excited - as Michael E says, if it's bigger, it's got to be better. Feel the width! And a mirror lock up <strong><em>knob!</em> </strong> That alone is almost worth the entry price to me. (I'm assuming that as it is a knob when you put the mirror up it stays up until you put it down - now that's innovation) Plotting ways of raising the cash required....</p>

[luke_kaven]

<p>This could be the Subaru WRX of modern digital cameras.</p>

[jtk]

<p><em>'This could be the Subaru WRX of modern digital cameras."</em><br>

<em></em><br>

...or, the Edsel.</p>