Japanese festival images with the Pentax 645D

[chris_willson]

<p >Just got back from a two week trip shooting some Japanese festivals with the 645D.<br>

I've started putting up images on my blog and Flickr, so far these are of the Akita Kanto Matsuri, but more will follow over the next few days.<br>

<img src="http://travel67.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/6450850-blog.jpg?w=470&h=352" alt="" width="470" height="352" /><br>

<img src="http://travel67.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/6450855-blog.jpg?w=470&h=628" alt="" width="470" height="628" /><br>

<img src="http://travel67.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/6451029-blog.jpg?w=470&h=616" alt="" width="470" height="616" /><br>

Another shot I took in Akita was of this Lotus flower in the moat of Akita Castle.<br>

<img src="http://travel67.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/6450908-blog.jpg?w=470&h=628" alt="" width="470" height="628" /><br>

There is an impressive amount of detail, that you can't see in the above image so I uploaded a full size JPEG to <a href=" <br>

Overall I've been really pleased with the camera on this trip. More images to follow.<br>

Chris<br>

<a href="http://www.TRAVEL67.com">www.TRAVEL67.com</a></p>

<p> </p>

[mike_earussi1]

<p>I've really been impressed by the amount of detail in the 645D, but many of the photos look a bit dull/flat. Is that just a PP problem or inherent in the chip? </p>

[miserere_mei]

<p>Chris, I don't mean to take away from your accomplishment here, but web photos look pretty much the same to me as far as tech-specs go—the differences only become apparent at large print sizes (and sometimes when pixel-peeping).</p>

<p>Given the above, my curiosity is driven more towards the experience of using the camera rather than the photos it takes. I would love to hear more about your time using it and how it affects your photography—I've found that I take better pictures with a camera I enjoy using than one I don't :-)</p>

[mountainvisions]

<p>glad someone else commented on that. Honestly, I don't really understand how these images couldn't have been taken with a K-7.<br /><br />mis, you should pick up a 645N for your club shooting. Nice big viewfinder and with a good b&w film and processing you should be able to do some nice available light work. Stand processing neopan 400 in high dilution HC-110 yields and almost grainless image at EI 800 and 1600. <br /><br />you can also get a feel for the pros and cons of a bigger system.</p>

[chris_willson]

<p>Thanks for the comments. <br>

You're completely right that small web images don't really show off the camera's ability. You can get an idea of the detail from the full size JPEGS I put on Flickr. Of course there is more information in the Raw files.<br>

My goal however is for the images to be used for features including spreads in travel magazines. I want to be able to offer photo editors high image quality. For the past 10 years I have shot exclusively with the Pentax 67II system but processing times were getting longer and clients were needing images faster. I needed a digital system to use along with my film system and I'm pleased with the results.<br>

Could I have taken all the above shots with my 67II camera? Yes for 1, 2 and 4. Probably wouldn't have got shot 3.<br>

No PP was done to the files except for the watermark. (In camera sharpening was also turned off). Purposely avoiding PP at the moment as I think people at the moment want to see images from such as new camera before they have been transformed in PS.<br>

I think the flat dull lighting is due to overcast conditions which I prefer for portraits but this is a personal view.<br>

K-7 is a great camera, as is the 645N, I still love my Pentax 67II and would recommend it to anyone.<br>

Hope this answers a few of the questions<br>

Chris</p>

[mountainvisions]

<p>chris,<br /><br />i'm still a little confused. I understand shooting medium format film for the size of the negative, but once you moved to digital I am confused at the advantage of the 645D for magazine prints. The K-7 should provide more than enough resolution and it doesnt appear the 645D has a significant ISO advantage.<br /><br />I know quite a few travel photographers make a living shooting APS-C digital, so I guess I'm wondering what publications are making full use of your significantly larger files in an era when travel publications are dying and everything is shifting to internet.<br /><br /></p>

[miserere_mei]

<blockquote>

<p>Justin wrote:<br>

it doesnt appear the 645D has a significant ISO advantage</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It most certainly doesn't. The engineers were not looking for ISO strength but rather IQ when the chip was designed...which I think is typical of Kodak sensors. See the Leica M9 also.</p>

<p>What surprises me is that they didn't go for ISO 25 or something like that—it would certainly be an attractive point for many.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Justin wrote:<br>

glad someone else commented on that</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Ha ha ha, I'm not as evil as you are, Justin. I think there <em>are</em> benefits to the 645D, even though none of them apply to me, but I trust Chris knows what they are and will use them to <em>his</em> advantage.</p>

[thomas_janik]

<p>Hi Chris:<br>

Thanks for your posts. I've seen very little else on the web from this camera. I too am interested in the handling; I'm assuming it is much like the 645N, which is wonderful. Have you compared 67 scans to the 645D output? I'm really curious as to how they compare.<br>

You might consider posting in the medium format forum; there is considerable interest in this camera in that group.</p>

<p>Tom</p>

 

[mountainvisions]

<p>Miserere,</p>

<p>Benefits? Yes, of course there are. But for travel photography I'm not so sure.</p>

<p>Recently on the web there have been several well written articles on the death of travel photography. These articles were written by career travel photographers lamenting the end of spending on high quality travel images because there are few printed publications left. iPads only have limited screen resolution, and if media does ultimate shift to a digital delivery (which it will) there really isn't a need for 40MP images.</p>

<p>Many travel photographers, including Bob Krist prefer DX cameras (nikons term of APS-C as I'm sure you know) over FX (full frame) because of the size advantage of camera and lenses. As a matter of fact, Bob Krist was commenting in an article he actually prefered the D90 over the D300 in many instances because it was the sweet spot in size. This is precisely why I feel like Pentax should be doing more to market the K-7, the DA* lenses, and the DA Limiteds as the ultimate travel kit.</p>

<p>Beyond that, I recently had an exchange with QT Luong about the 645D and it being ground breaking. His thoughts? That medium format was a format of the past, and that it was a very niche market with a lot of limitations, EVEN AT Pentax $9,000 price point. The limitations included lens selection and size. FWIW, I argued that there was a market for such a camera, since it in a sense was a large format replacement in a much smaller package. However, I don't see it being a 35mm replacement anytime soon. Sure the 645N is only a little bigger in surface area than a K10D, but shooting with it is more of a chore, storing and carrying it is more of a chore as well. All this in an era when squeezing stuff onto carry-ons is getting tougher and tougher.</p>

<p>There is absolutely no doubt for people printing extremely large fine art images that the 645D or any larger sensored high pixel count camera could benefit from, but the reality is this is a small market. Of course I think the market for FX DSLRs is also a very small market when all is said and done for the same reasons QT feels MF is dead.</p>

<p> </p>

[ukhov]

<p>About second pic -strong contrast on the face were other part of image can be done better with 77mm.If can't be impress with studio equipment -good to ask what use can be? </p>

[miserere_mei]

<p>Justin, QT still shoots LF film, right? Does digital MF not beat film LF IQ-wise? (Wow, that was a lot of 2-letter acronyms for just one sentence.)</p>

<p>I'm not surprised travel photographers prefer DX (indeed, I know what that means) to FX, given the huge FF digitals Canikony have released. There was a reason Galen Rowell chose 35mm film cameras back in the day, and that reason is still valid today.</p>

<p>No need to argue 645D with me; I've always thought they should have released it either when it was first announced, or never. Despite not thinking FF is crucial to Pentax's survival (or even wanting FF myself), I would still have preferred the R&D money for the 645D to get spent on a FF Pentax. But we all know Pentax works in mysterious ways.</p>

[Dave Luttmann]

<p>One thing I've noticed from the posts Chris has made of full rez samples....making a 30", 40" or 50" print from the 645D will clearly show the K7 to be a toy in comparison for landscape work. As a 4x5 shooter, I was still stunned at the resolution and lack of noise in the samples. Even at 16x20, the difference between a camera like the K7 and the 645D is easily apparent.</p>

<p>The 645D appears to be an incredible tool....well beyond anything that the K7 or K20D is capable of reproducing in a large print.</p>

[chris_willson]

<p>Thanks for the comments. There are pros and cons to using medium format whether it be film or digital. My goal when I started shooting with the Pentax 67II was to try and provide clients or customers with the highest quality images I could produce, I am continuing to do this now using the 645D alongside the 67II. As Dave said you really see the difference when printing large, but it also gives photo editors that ability to crop to fit and still maintain image quality. <br>

Here's a few more images from the trip taken with the 645D<br>

<img src="http://travel67.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/6451686-blog.jpg?w=470&h=628" alt="" width="470" height="628" /><br>

<img src="http://travel67.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/6451895-blog.jpg?w=470&h=628" alt="" width="470" height="628" /><br>

<img src="http://travel67.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/6451980-chris-willson-charissa-blog-470.jpg?w=470&h=674" alt="" width="470" height="674" /><br /><br /></p>

[Dave Luttmann]

<p>Chris,</p>

<p>Where did you buy the camera?</p>

[chris_willson]

<p>You can only buy the camera in Japan at the moment. I got mine from Amazon Japan. Here's the link<br>

<a href="http://www.amazon.co.jp/gp/product/B003BLGFW2?ie=UTF8&tag=travel67-22&linkCode=as2&camp=247&creative=7399&creativeASIN=B003BLGFW2">PENTAX 645D Amazon Japan</a><img src="http://www.assoc-amazon.jp/e/ir?t=travel67-22&l=as2&o=9&a=B003BLGFW2" border="0" alt="" width="1" height="1" /></p>

[Dave Luttmann]

<p>Thanks Chris. I've played with quite a few Raw files from the 645D....stunning is all I can say. At the sizes I print (32x40 and smaller) I see 4x5 quality out of the machine. As I would also be using the unit for some wedding & portraiture work, I am curious as to how you find the dynamic range of the unit. The samples I've worked with weren't particularly taxes in terms of range, so I'd like to know your thoughts.</p>

<p>Did yours come with the 55 as a package, or does Amazon sell the lens seperately?</p>

[chris_willson]

<p>I also got the lens from Amazon Japan it was another 90,000 yen.<br>

Not sure about dynamic range, only other digital cameras I have are the Optio W60 and an iPhone!<br>

Probably best to wait for people who test a lot of cameras to give a qualified opinion. (Same goes for auto focus speed etc....) <br>

Camera should be great for weddings and portraits. </p>