Pentax 645D is here ! ! !

[danny_wong2]

<p>In the Photo of 645D lenses<br>

Each row, left to right:<br>

Top: 33-55 45-85, 55-110, 80-160 all FA's<br>

Middle: 35, 45, 75, 120, 150, 200, 300/5.6 all FA's<br>

Bottom: FA150-300, FA300/4, FA400, A600.<br>

All these lenses were from the 645n/II and along with the 645nII are still available new for purchase in Taiwan, Hong Kong and Japan.<br>

This display probably meant the 75 and 135 LS lenses are no longer in production. No reason why they would not work in the 645D with the aperture stop down shutter triggering mechanism.<br>

The is no question with Pentax's superb optical engineering in the wide and ultra wides that we would expect to see a lens in the 20's or maybe even a wider zoom range than the 33-55 very soon for the smaller sensor.</p>

[hal_a]

<blockquote>

<p>I can go to whatever city I want with digital and not have to worry about the film I'll find at Walgreen's or Ralph's or how the TSA guy nuked my ISO800 film cause he wanted to see my bag run through the scanner again</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Jeremiah, actually X rays are quite harmful to CCD and CMOS sensors. I recently read a paper about exactly the harm high energy radiation does to these sensors. If I find it again, I will certainly forward it to you. If passing 800 film through the scanner thrice ticked you off, you'll be very angry when an overzealous security officer scans your digital camera three times. Any damage to your sensor stays with you until you change the back/camera. With film, you can just get a fresh roll and feel minty again.</p>

<p>I'm not trying to start a panic here, each scan will probably do only very minor damage. The best thing you could do while travelling with your camera is to keep it in your carry on luggage. Don't check it, as checked baggages go through much more energetic Xrays.</p>

<p>How many people purchase new medium format digital cameras every year? And of them, how many are already invested in a medium format system? Pentax's main market will be those people who've never owned a Medium Format system, and those who are stepping up from the 645/645N/645Nii.</p>

<p>As an APS-C sensor user, I kind of wish Pentax would release a camera with better AF, and faster fps, full frame or APS-C. Since I've never printed larger than 8x10, that too only 16 times, higher resolution does not appeal to me that much.</p>

[personalphotos]

<p>Hal I really want to see that report. Many if not all of us travel on planes and if these scanners really do harm a CCD or CMOS chip. we'd probably carry the report with us to ask that the camera be visually inspected and not x-ray'd.</p>

[hal_a]

<p>Peter, the particular journal article I was refering to was testing CCDs in astrophysics applications. The X rays involved were quite energetic (some might even call them weak gamma rays). I don't have it on my home computer. However, on googling 'X rays damage ccds' I found this study: http://www.iop.org/EJ/abstract/0031-9155/44/4/022 which is perhaps more more applicable to photographers.<br>

Again, I have not compared the energies used in this study to scanner X ray energies, so my statement above is more scientific conjecture/extrapolation rather than strict empiricism.</p>

<p>I guess camera companies could put in a low pass filter, but the general public is not aware of the damage caused by X rays. Without scientific evidence, I can only guess that it is due to the damage being unnoticable, or that people end up changing their cameras before X ray damage becomes an issue. I've travelled with my Canon 1000D quite a bit (about 25 scans) since I bought it, and the difference in image quality between now and two years ago can be attributed to the dust gathered inside the lens, and the scratches on the skylight filter.</p>

<p>One interesting note from the study above is that damage to the CCD was greater if the camera was turned off.</p>

[jeremy_corbin]

<p>All I can add to the x-ray part is what the <a href="http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/assistant/editorial_1035.shtm">US-TSA says about the subject</a> on their website:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>None of the security equipment - neither the machines used for checked baggage nor those used for carry-on baggage - will affect digital camera images or film that has already been processed - slides, videos, photo compact discs or picture memory cards.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>But as we well know: The TSA is not known for their technical know-how. They process people and their luggage, and it's not always the same procedure from place to place. Who knows?</p>

<p>Justin, I wouldn't be getting into 645 for anything but curiosity. I don't own a scanner capable of imaging 35mm very well, let alone 120/220. I really doubt that I'd send anything out to get drum scanned either. So until I can afford a scanner, I couldn't even consider the purchase seriously. That was one of my pitfalls for 35mm in the first place, I was shooting more than I had money to develop and scan. My *istDS makes photos for nearly free, so I can learn and make all the mistakes I need to as I figure out who I am as a photographer. The 645D is interesting on that same basis. I think you would enjoy it quite a bit with the number of landscape shots that you have in your portfolio as of late, but who knows when it will get here and at what price?</p>

[mountainvisions]

<blockquote>

<p ><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=2380957">Peter Zack</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"><img title="Frequent poster" src="http://static.photo.net/v3graphics/member-status-icons/1roll.gif" alt="" title="Frequent poster" /> </a> , Mar 13, 2010; 08:45 p.m. (<a onclick="if (confirm('Are you really want to mark this message as spam and make it hidden from the thread?')) return true; else return false;" href="../bboard/report-msg-uni?on_what=forum&id=00VzZ9&return_url=/pentax-camera-forum/00VxZU?">report spam</a> ) (<a href="../bboard/admin-edit-msg?msg_id=00VzZ9">edit</a> | <a href="../bboard/admin-delete-msg?msg_id=00VzZ9">delete</a> )<br>

Hal I really want to see that report. Many if not all of us travel on planes and if these scanners really do harm a CCD or CMOS chip. we'd probably carry the report with us to ask that the camera be visually inspected and not x-ray'd.</p>

 

</blockquote>

<p>Peter, there is no way a report is going to force a visual inspection. TSA guidelines state that if a traveler wants film (any speed despite the "high speed" nonsense the TSA inspectors always state) hand checked they have to check it, but the catch is you have to fight for it. I always fight for my Provia 100 when I take film and digital. Sorry, I'm not buying running my unprocessed film through an Xray at least 2 times (maybe more if they rescan) isn't going to degrade it in some way. <br /><br>

But I'd love to be there when you argue the validity of the report, I am thinking it would be the type of thing where you end up in the room where they glove up and probe you before calling the FBI in to turn you life inside out.</p>

<p>Nevertheless, I would love to see this report as well. Since 9/11 I have flown so little (maybe 15-20 times), that it's really not relevant to me, but since this is the first I have heard of this I would be interested in seeing the report.</p>

<p>Oh and people...DO NOT PUT YOUR VALUABLES IN A CHECKED BAG. My friend donated a laptop and a camera to the baggage handlers on a 1 hour flight because he was too lazy to carry on his bag. I've had several things stolen over the years, don't be surprised if your camera is missing if it is checked, remember you essentially cannot even lock your bags anymore so even that little bit of safety is gone.</p>

<p>There is one little trick you can do to assure your bags and contents arrive, but i'm keeping that one to myself.</p>

[steve_t.1]

<p>With all this talk, I scanned this thread and I didn't see anyone question why only a 50,000 click shutter expectation.</p>

<p>DPReview- "and a newly designed shutter unit with a top shutter speed of 1/4000 second that can withstand as many as 50,000 shutter releases."</p>

<p>Canon, Nikon, and I believe even the K-7 will surpass that shutter life. Not that this camera's buyer will wear it out snap-shooting...</p>

[luke_kaven]

<p>Presumably the Pentax has a shutter with much higher mass than the 35mm or APS-c shutters. </p>

[mike_cruk]

<p>What I find particularly interesting the the choice of SDM for the autofocus. Is there anything that would prevent someone from making a 645->K-mount adapter with SDM passthrough? I'm wondering if we might eventually see something like the crop- and full-frame lens system other brands have, but with a larger divide between the two. Thoughts?</p>

[personalphotos]

<p>Don't see why not. The Tamron 1.4 TC can do this on APSc.</p>

<p>Some first thoughts and impressions on the camera have been published by <a href="http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/pentax645d-1st.shtml">Luminous Landscape</a></p>

[michael_elenko]

<p>Peter, that's a pretty interesting interview with Mr. Maekawa. It looks like Hoya/Pentax adapted a Lean design/build approach to keep costs down, which is smart. There also seems to be a firm reference to additional MF bodies in the pipeline. Now that's pretty exciting. Imagine something closer in appearance to a Leica S2 or even a Mamiya 7! </p>

<p>I hope Pentax sells tens of thousands of the 645D models in Japan.</p>

<p>ME</p>

[miserere_mei]

<p>Quote from the LL article Peter pointed to:</p>

<p><strong>Will the 645D become available outside Japan?</strong></p>

<blockquote>

<p><em>We intend to sell the 645D outside Japan at a certain point in time but I cannot give you a firm date today. We believe that such a high end body has to be sold on top of a suitable support infrastructure. Japan as our historical base was the market with the best readiness for such a launch, which is why we decided to control the availability in this first step. </em></p>

</blockquote>

[personalphotos]

<p>Mis and ME, I read an except from Pentax France (sorry I can't find it right now - I spend too much time reading web sites) that didn't have much in it different than the above but they did say that they were looking at the infrastructure to set up Pro support. It sounded as if they were considering bringing it to Europe and quite interested in doing so.</p>

<p>I think they have much bigger plans tucked away to push this along. The only thing I wonder is how FF fits in this? The interview imply's that they can compete with FF bodies from Canikony with this model. That they based the price target on this segment. I hope not. Certainly some FF possible buyers will look at this very seriously but others that are looking at high ISO's, frame rates, speed and size will still want a Pentax FF. My hope is a sub 20 MP, sub $2000 24x36 sensor camera before the end of the year. I just don't know if that's possible. The K-7 should be due for replacement sometime this fall as well if, the now normal replacement cycle is any indication.</p>

<p>They can leave the K-X alone for awhile. Nothing can touch it.</p>

<p>But if they can pull off a K-7 replacement that is competitive, a 24x36 that is as well, this is one serious line of bodies starting at the K-X and ending at the 645D</p>

<p> </p>

[personalphotos]

<p>There found it: <a href="http://www.focus-numerique.com/test-1061/interview-pentax-645d-interview-yazid-belmadi-1.html">Pentax France interview</a></p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>The main point was this: (pardon the Google translation) <strong>Digital Focus</strong> : Will you ask a marketing France?<br /> <br /> <em>Yazid Belmadi</em> : Pentax France wishes naturally 645D marketing on its market, but we must measure the costs of such an operation. This type of product must necessarily be accompanied by the establishment of a service "PRO" and a dedicated distribution network.<br /> We will, hopefully, an opportunity to present the show 645D medium format in June. A great opportunity to gather the views of key users of medium format and take the temperature of the market in Europe.</p>

</blockquote>

[michael_elenko]

<p>Peter, I don't think there is much of a relationship between Pentax releasing the 645D and the likelihood of their releasing a "FF" body. Nope, I think that a "FF" would place Pentax in too direct of a competition with existing products from bigger companies that have existing users (and support and promotional programs).</p>

<p>The 645D is perceived to bypass (or let's say <em>transcend</em> ) that market space to one where Pentax has some long standing respect and quick gain in Japan. I've been impressed with the positive words on forums from non-Pentax forum frequenters, so maybe this will be a major success.</p>

<p>I hope I'm wrong about the "FF" thing. Especially right now I'd surely pay for one, as someone pretty much gave me a FA* 24mm f2 that I've been enjoying using on my SuperProgram. Part of that pleasure is the immensely satisfying viewfinder, and it would sure be nice to replicate that on a digital body. I was using a friend's 5DMK2, nice camera, but its viewfinder was pretty unspectacular.</p>

<p>ME</p>

[personalphotos]

<p>Michael, That's what I was thinking as well. Could this be a way of staying out of that FF battle for a while longer. Who knows.</p>

<p>Funny you mention the 5DMKII not having an impressively bright VF. I was testing a D700 a few weeks ago and couldn't see any noticeable difference between it and my K20D. Not brighter at all. The Old film bodies are still superior. I'm not really sure why that is.</p>

[jonathan_rush]

<p><a href="http://www.ok1000pentax.com/2010/03/645d-japanese-first-hand-looks.html">According to the OK1000 blog, the 645D does have shake reduction!</a></p>

<p><a href="http://en.akihabaranews.com/39218/event-show/cp-2010-pentax-medium-format-654d-in-the-flesh">Dunno if these pics have been posted here, but there is a shot of a see-through case.</a></p>

[personalphotos]

<p>The official release says nothing about SR. I find it very difficult to believe that they would have left that out of the press release. Since pentax is letting the internet and trade shows do all the marketing, they would want to make sure that a completely unique feature to the MF category was highlighted at the top of the list of features.</p>

<p>I think that's supposition at best.</p>

[personalphotos]

<p>I just noticed he also askes if there will be a wooden grip. That was a part for the 6x7 series bodies and was quite different with only a flash shoe on the top. The 645 grip contained the batteries and a number of controls, it wasn't a detachable part.</p>

[j_marrs]

<p>For that price, I'll just keep my 645 film camera and my Nikon 9000 film scanner and produce similar results. I'd buy a full frame DSLR, before, I'd shell out 9 grand. That's ridiculous. Should get out a car loan to pay for that camera.</p>

[miserere_mei]

<p>Jonathan, the 645D doesn't have shake reduction, but it does shake the sensor to help get rid of dust, like the Pentax DSLR bodies do.</p>

[rparmar]

<p >J Marrs wrote:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>For that price, I'll just keep my 645 film camera and my Nikon 9000 film scanner and produce similar results. I'd buy a full frame DSLR, before, I'd shell out 9 grand. That's ridiculous. Should get out a car loan to pay for that camera.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>To make a fair comparison you have to compare the retail prices of each kit, not what you have to spend currently once you have amortised the value of one side of the comparison. The Nikon 9000 ED retailed for $2200 and the Pentax 645NII with insert $3000. Let's say the darkroom kit is $200 and that the room to set it up in comes free. Oh, and let's not factor in inflation.</p>

<p>On one side we have $5600 plus ongoing film and chemical costs plus the value of the time this takes.</p>

<p>On the other we have something significantly less than $9400 (US prices always are cheaper than a straight conversion) plus, um, the price of a couple SD cards.</p>

<p>Not so different, then.</p>

<p>Of course if you were to buy a 645NII now it would be much cheaper but is also end of life. You could not get the support professionals require. The ongoing value of this is more important than the price of the kit, in many instances.</p>

<p>(In case you think me biased, I just bought a scanner for my 645 negs. But I will also be saving up so I can buy the 645D six to twelve months after it is replaced by the next model.)</p>

 

[michael_elenko]

<p>Robin, I like your analysis, but the one component--the most important component to me that is lacking--is a reference to the value of time. Scanning film takes a lot of time (not to mention the time of dealing with developing film, either in house or by a lab).</p>

<p>This is highly subjective, but at a certain point in life some of us realize that time is more important than money. I can produce more work at acceptable quality levels with digital faster than by using film. Life's too short for some things.</p>

<p>ME</p>

[miserere_mei]

<blockquote>

<p>at a certain point in life some of us realize that time is more important than money.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yup.</p>

<p>There's also something else that factors into film vs digital: Taking photographs. It might sound silly, but it isn't; bear with me.</p>

<p>I have a Pentax LX, one of the finest manual focus film SLRs ever made, yet it sits on my office desk, unused. It needs a well-deserved CLA, but I can't bring myself to pay the $150 that will cost. I also have an ME Super (another great film camera) with a half-shot roll inside; been like that for over a year. I just don't have the impulse or desire to shoot film, then deal with the costs and annoyances of film development and scanning.</p>

<p>If I only had film cameras I would shoot with them, but much, much less than I shoot digital now. Some people love film and shoot it a lot (as Javier does on this very forum), but I know there are others like me. I have never bought a 645, and never will, because I know I wouldn't shoot it. Spending $2,000 on a 645 kit and film/development costs for a year would be a waste of $2,000. On the other hand, spending $10,000 on a 645D would be an investment for me—maybe not of money, but certainly an investment in my photography. I would shoot a 645D often, and I'm sure my photography would benefit from it.</p>

[rparmar]

<p >Michael Elenko wrote:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Robin, I like your analysis, but the one component--the most important component to me that is lacking--is a reference to the value of time.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Hey, I agree, which is why I included "plus the value of the time this takes" in my statement.</p>