Any thoughts on the new Pentax 645D

Dave C

Just reading about the new 645D Pentax with a 40MP back for 10K$$$.Do you think it is going to be revolutionary in bringing the MF prices down to Earth ?I know Hassleblad has reduced their prices.Of course the D3X is 8K$$$.Rumors are the new canon will be 32 MP ? Just how many MP does one need?
How do you figure out how many MP a 8x10 color transparency if it were drum scanned for instance or for that matter a 4x5 ? Just curious....

ziggy53

There is no direct correlation or comparison of film to digital, but I believe that when digital SLR cameras hit around 6 MP they roughly matched 35mm film. Likewise I think that when the digital FF 35mm cameras hit 20 MP that it roughly corresponds to a good 645 film scan.

Of course digital most closely matches the appearance of a fine grained slide film in many cases, but slide film is around 8 stops dynamic range, where many dSLRs now have more than 8 stops DR. Digital cameras are also more flexible with ISO and the ability to mix different ISO sensitivities without changing rolls is a great benefit, as is the ability to shoot incredible quantities of images in a single session without changing rolls.

If dust got in the camera with film loaded (after a lens change, for instance) it might mostly affect the single frame and then when you advanced the film it would generally move the problem off the frame so that subsequent images would be less affected. With digital, dust can affect multiple images unless you have a system with dust removal capabilities. Even then the dust elimination doesn't always work so it's better to be very careful and to check the system especially if you need to shoot at small apertures.

The Pentax digital 645 system is really just 44mm x 33mm in image size, so not a staggering amount larger than FF 35mm at 36mm x 24mm.



Considering the costs I am happy with FF digital 35mm format and a bunch of lenses.

I do still have a bunch of medium format film equipment, Hasselblad, Mamiya, Yashica, Kiev and Lubitel, but I rarely use them anymore. Even the large formats are in jeopardy because it's now become practical to stitch multiple images together to produce images with absolutely incredible resolution and print sizes with incredible detail. See what our "Baldy" did with a number of images stitched together (warning this image size will bring down a dialup connection)(This is just a single vertical strip. The complete image covers the entire church building):

http://cmac.smugmug.com/photos/472303454_ojUut-O.jpg

I do still also have a 4" x 5" monorail view camera (Calumet) and several lenses, but the market for that type of imagery is dwindling.

My recommendation is to invest in FF 35mm digital for the best current price to performance system unless you have a paying need for something different that justifies the greater expenses of a larger format. Scanning digital backs are relatively cost effective for the resulting image sizes, but you just can't beat stitched images for the most cost effective gigapixels for static subject photography.

http://www.smashingtips.com/gigapixel-photography-inspirations

Dave C

ziggy53 wrote: »

There is no direct correlation or comparison of film to digital, but I believe that when digital SLR cameras hit around 6 MP they roughly matched 35mm film. Likewise I think that when the digital FF 35mm cameras hit 20 MP that it roughly corresponds to a good 645 film scan.

Of course digital most closely matches the appearance of a fine grained slide film in many cases, but slide film is around 8 stops dynamic range, where many dSLRs now have more than 8 stops DR. Digital cameras are also more flexible with ISO and the ability to mix different ISO sensitivities without changing rolls is a great benefit, as is the ability to shoot incredible quantities of images in a single session without changing rolls.

If dust got in the camera with film loaded (after a lens change, for instance) it might mostly affect the single frame and then when you advanced the film it would generally move the problem off the frame so that subsequent images would be less affected. With digital, dust can affect multiple images unless you have a system with dust removal capabilities. Even then the dust elimination doesn't always work so it's better to be very careful and to check the system especially if you need to shoot at small apertures.

The Pentax digital 645 system is really just 44mm x 33mm in image size, so not a staggering amount larger than FF 35mm at 36mm x 24mm.



Considering the costs I am happy with FF digital 35mm format and a bunch of lenses.

I do still have a bunch of medium format film equipment, Hasselblad, Mamiya, Yashica, Kiev and Lubitel, but I rarely use them anymore. Even the large formats are in jeopardy because it's now become practical to stitch multiple images together to produce images with absolutely incredible resolution and print sizes with incredible detail. See what our "Baldy" did with a number of images stitched together (warning this image size will bring down a dialup connection)(This is just a single vertical strip. The complete image covers the entire church building):

http://cmac.smugmug.com/photos/472303454_ojUut-O.jpg

I do still also have a 4" x 5" monorail view camera (Calumet) and several lenses, but the market for that type of imagery is dwindling.

My recommendation is to invest in FF 35mm digital for the best current price to performance system unless you have a paying need for something different that justifies the greater expenses of a larger format. Scanning digital backs are relatively cost effective for the resulting image sizes, but you just can't beat stitched images for the most cost effective gigapixels for static subject photography.

http://www.smashingtips.com/gigapixel-photography-inspirations

Thanks a whole bunch for your input.I am reading and slowly learning.The larger format gets geometrically more expensive as you hint and not only the cameras and backs , but the computer to handle the gigantic size image files.
I plan on renting a Nikon D3 with a few lenses here soon to begin to physically try out the cameras.I am in no big rush to purchase anything.
Someone is going to let me borrow their Pentax waterproof camera to take with me sailing and they said I would be amazed at the results.
Thanks again for putting up with my dumb old self.

ziggy53

Dave C wrote: »

... I plan on renting a Nikon D3 with a few lenses here soon to begin to physically try out the cameras.I am in no big rush to purchase anything.
...

The Nikon D3 is a camera that will go down in history as Nikon's first digital FF SLR body. With calibrated, and perfectly usable, ISO sensitivities from 200 through 6400 it continues to amaze those who use it. Nikon pulled out all the stops with the D3 and it will be a viable shooter's platform for some time to come.

Enjoy.