Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: The New Pentax MF  (Read 5876 times)
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #20 on: March 17, 2010, 11:47:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: tsjanik
Fred:

You are, of course, correct when you mention lens availability.  I believe you referring to the Pentax 35mm lens lineup; frankly, I thought the DA lens line was a one of the bad decisions.  Not really any size, cost or weight savings compared to FF 35mm lenses, while limiting the sensor size to APS-C.
A quote from Bernard’s interview of Mr.Maekawa:
We believe that many photographers who used to own our film bodies are looking for a reasonably affordable digital solution that would enable them to keep using their lenses while delivering all the values of digital bodies.”
There is a large number of Pentax lenses out there waiting for a digital body.  Apparently Pentax’s intention is to initially produce bodies for photographers who have an exisiting supply of Pentax MF lenses. As a customer, I might prefer many new lenses, but as a business decision it makes sense- they are introducing the camera without a huge initial cost in lens design and production.
According to the interview, existing film lenses (other than wide angle) work quite well.  In my own informal tests of 67 and 645 lenses on a K20D, the MF lenses are the equal of the 35mm.

I’m ready for a visit to Japan.

Tom
Yes, but let's see now the e-bay market !!!  
Tom, do you use the genuine adapter? to fit the 67 lenses on the K20D. I'm interested in that. Does the green button work?
Indeed for longer focals the crop factor is interesting but for the ones who need wide angle it is more an issue.
I do not like very much seeing my prime 28mm 2.8 M transformed into a standard lens...

Fred.


Logged
tsjanik
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 560


« Reply #21 on: March 17, 2010, 11:50:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: Mark D Segal
On the basis of what knowledge and authority should you be convinced by this statement? DO you really believe that Phase-1 for example isn't capable of manufacturing interchangeable MF systems which fit together perfectly when used as designed? Do they sell these extremely expensive systems to demanding professionals and advanced amateurs only to open themselves up to liabilities?

Look, it's fine if Pentax and Leitz decided for their own reasons to sell an integrated product, but that doesn't mean there's necessarily anything at all wrong or risky about the other system, if made right.
Mark:

You said: “DO you really believe that Phase-1 for example isn't capable of manufacturing interchangeable MF systems which fit together perfectly when used as designed

I didn’t say that, explicitly or implicitly.  If my agreement with Mr Maesawa’s statements gave you the impression I was denigrating any other product, it was not my intent.

You also said: “On the basis of what knowledge and authority should you be convinced by this statement”.  Perhaps I should have expanded my original post to mention that most of my photography is outdoors, often in inclement weather and much is done with a tent as my base.  I don’t think I need to explain further.

Tom
Logged
tsjanik
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 560


« Reply #22 on: March 17, 2010, 11:59:52 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: fredjeang
Tom, do you use the genuine adapter? to fit the 67 lenses on the K20D. I'm interested in that. Does the green button work?
Fred.

Fred:

Yes I have the Pentax 67 to K adapter and yes, the green button works.  No auto diaphragm however, so you must stop down for meter readings and exposure.  Honestly, there is little value in any 67 lens shorter than the 75mm on the K20D unless you have a Zoerk adapter for stitching .  The wide angles are just too large and not really wide angles anymore.  The 105mm f2.4 makes a very nice portrait lens and the 300mm/400mm EDs are superb, even wide open.

Tom
Logged
fredjeang
Guest
« Reply #23 on: March 17, 2010, 12:08:16 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: tsjanik
Fred:

Yes I have the Pentax 67 to K adapter and yes, the green button works.  No auto diaphragm however, so you must stop down for meter readings and exposure.  Honestly, there is little value in any 67 lens shorter than the 75mm on the K20D unless you have a Zoerk adapter for stitching .  The wide angles are just too large and not really wide angles anymore.  The 105mm f2.4 makes a very nice portrait lens and the 300mm/400mm EDs are superb, even wide open.

Tom
Thank you Tom.
Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6977


WWW
« Reply #24 on: March 17, 2010, 12:10:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: tsjanik
Mark:

Perhaps I should have expanded my original post to mention that most of my photography is outdoors, often in inclement weather and much is done with a tent as my base.  I don’t think I need to explain further.

Tom

OK, that's a different story - it's nothing to do with the design or quality of the equipment per se; rather it's how you use it which makes an integrated design more practical for you. That makes sense.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
mmurph
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 507


WWW
« Reply #25 on: March 17, 2010, 09:05:21 PM »
ReplyReply

Nice article Bernard!

I was disappointed to see they did not address tethered shooting from day 1. For fashion in the studio, that really is a "must have", even with a 35mm like the Canons. Big gap for a MF. Pull the card and download leads to mistakes! And "get it close" has been replaced by "get it perfect."    

Is the LCD top quality? I see 921k pixels at DPReview?

I hope there won't be too many Version 1.0 glitches! I had the Kodak 14n on preorder at 2-3 shops until the first samples started to show up.

Wish us luck! I may finally start working again this year.  

Michael
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7680


WWW
« Reply #26 on: March 18, 2010, 12:12:46 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

You should check these two articles:

http://www.josephholmes.com/news-medformatprecision.html

http://www.josephholmes.com/news-sharpmediumformat.html

It's quite obvious that alignment and precision can be problematic. It's surprising we see so little discussion about it. The articles by Joseph Holmes indicate that the problems are common.

Best regards
Erik


Quote from: tsjanik
Mark:

You said: “DO you really believe that Phase-1 for example isn't capable of manufacturing interchangeable MF systems which fit together perfectly when used as designed

I didn’t say that, explicitly or implicitly.  If my agreement with Mr Maesawa’s statements gave you the impression I was denigrating any other product, it was not my intent.

You also said: “On the basis of what knowledge and authority should you be convinced by this statement”.  Perhaps I should have expanded my original post to mention that most of my photography is outdoors, often in inclement weather and much is done with a tent as my base.  I don’t think I need to explain further.

Tom
Logged

vandevanterSH
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 626


« Reply #27 on: March 18, 2010, 08:44:20 AM »
ReplyReply

's quite obvious that alignment and precision can be problematic.
**********
Probably why Hasselblad has gone to factory aligned body/back combination.  

Steve
Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6977


WWW
« Reply #28 on: March 18, 2010, 09:07:26 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: ErikKaffehr
Hi,

You should check these two articles:

http://www.josephholmes.com/news-medformatprecision.html

http://www.josephholmes.com/news-sharpmediumformat.html

It's quite obvious that alignment and precision can be problematic. It's surprising we see so little discussion about it. The articles by Joseph Holmes indicate that the problems are common.

Best regards
Erik

Very extensive and interesting articles Erik, thanks for posting. I wonder whether he will be testing the new 645DF and Phase 40+/65+ backs with Phase lenses. We used these at the Death Valley workshop (about 30 sets altogether including instructors) and no-one complained about any systemic sharpness issues based on four days of shooting and many images.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5163


« Reply #29 on: March 18, 2010, 09:48:40 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: tnargs
I have seen numerous mentions of the Four Thirds format dSLR cameras being less than optimally proportioned for landscape photography.
Firstly, Pentax is probably limited to using existing MF sensors in the catalogs of Kodak and Dalsa, all of which are 4:3 except the one larger, more expensive 55MP Dalsa. Leica has paid extra for a special 45x30mm sensor, but for wider panoramic landscape shapes that only gives 1mm more width than the Pentax 44x33mm, so it hardly seems worth the higher cost of a custom sensor! Cropping 44x33mm to 44x29.3mm gives 3:2 when you want it.

Secondly, the idea that a 3:2 format camera is better than 4:3 for those interested in landscapes is a bit of a myth, and hard to reconcile with all the great landscape photographers who have chosen large format and medium format gear with formats like 10"x8", 5"x4" 56x56mm (6x6), 56x42mm (645), 70x56mm (7x6), 75x56mm (8x6) and so on. None of these is wider the 4:3 and most are squarer. The only 3:2 or wider formats I know of in MF or LF film were always uncommon, like 9x6 and 17x6.

The idea that 4:3 is a bad gear choice for landscape photographers seems to turn on two fallacies:
1. People who are interested in landscapes have little or no interest in any other subject matter.
Instead, I am sure than many MF users including Pentax 645 users also photograph many urban scenes, portraits, interior scenes, and nature scenes at closer range than stereotypical landscapes: trees, flowers and such.

2. All landscapes are sweeping panoramas with wide, low horizons.
Instead, landscapes often feature strong vertical elements from mountains, trees and so on. Some famous Ansel Adams landscapes are verticals, and many fill the height of a 10x8 frame and would suffer badly from cropping to a wider, lower shape. Since we are talking about the Japanese market only for now, perhaps we should study images of Mount Fuji for shape preferences!

Once you look at the overall balance of composition that users are likely to be interested in, the case for inferiority of 4:3 (and more so the classic 5:4 shape of most large format and also of "7x6" MF) become very unclear.
« Last Edit: March 21, 2010, 12:20:16 PM by BJL » Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 7680


WWW
« Reply #30 on: March 18, 2010, 11:41:11 AM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I noted that Joseph Holmes mostly had issues with rental backs. It seems that new backs where quite OK. Regarding the lenses I got the impression that there were some new lenses which were in bad shape.

I have noticed that there is little discussion on tolerances, focusing precision and so on regarding MF-equipment and I don't know why this is the case.

I guess that the equipment at PODAS is well maintained.

It's well possible that Phase has assured better lens quality than the competition. Some of the bad lenses came from Hasselblad, some from Rodenstock/Schneider and some were made by Mamya.

Whatever equipment we have, I'd suggest it's worth to do some check out to see that we have a decent sample.

Best regards
Erik


Quote from: Mark D Segal
Very extensive and interesting articles Erik, thanks for posting. I wonder whether he will be testing the new 645DF and Phase 40+/65+ backs with Phase lenses. We used these at the Death Valley workshop (about 30 sets altogether including instructors) and no-one complained about any systemic sharpness issues based on four days of shooting and many images.
Logged

Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6977


WWW
« Reply #31 on: March 18, 2010, 12:43:52 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: ErikKaffehr
Hi,

I have noticed that there is little discussion on tolerances, focusing precision and so on regarding MF-equipment and I don't know why this is the case.

I guess that the equipment at PODAS is well maintained.

Whatever equipment we have, I'd suggest it's worth to do some check out to see that we have a decent sample.

Best regards
Erik

Hi Erik,

I expect there would be more discussion of MF problems if there were more people experiencing them; also possible these people simply don't talk much or they haven't pushed their systems to the nth degree as Holmes has.

The equipment we used at PODAS was new - very new.

And yes, automatically, whatever we buy we should test it thoroughly, especially making real-world photographs with it. As I've mentioned several times on this Forum, however, this kind of testing is not easy to do properly. It requires forethought about subject matter and test conditions, and much attention to detail about quite a few variables which can influence the results and give us either misplaced complacency or misplaced concern.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 8210



WWW
« Reply #32 on: March 19, 2010, 10:03:59 AM »
ReplyReply

Mark and all,

Thanks, glad you found it interesting.

Sorry I couldn't spend more time here these past few days, things have been a bit busy lately.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
buckshot
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 184


« Reply #33 on: March 19, 2010, 10:28:19 AM »
ReplyReply

A 40MP 44x33 MF kit for less than $10K - from a maker with a great reputation and lots of great lenses out there. Hmmm...suddenly the 40MP 44x33 P40+ and Aptus II-8 backs begin to look a bit (!) over priced. That said, you can move them between e.g. a tech camera and an SLR...but then again, I bet the LCD screen on the Pentax is a beauty.
« Last Edit: March 19, 2010, 10:29:08 AM by buckshot » Logged
bobrapp
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10


WWW
« Reply #34 on: March 22, 2010, 08:14:17 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: buckshot
A 40MP 44x33 MF kit for less than $10K - from a maker with a great reputation and lots of great lenses out there. Hmmm...suddenly the 40MP 44x33 P40+ and Aptus II-8 backs begin to look a bit (!) over priced. That said, you can move them between e.g. a tech camera and an SLR...but then again, I bet the LCD screen on the Pentax is a beauty.

The 645D could be a real game changer - if the camera lives up to expectations.

Bob Rapp
Logged
image66
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 122


« Reply #35 on: March 23, 2010, 10:19:11 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: bobrapp
The 645D could be a real game changer - if the camera lives up to expectations.

Agreed! This may be the "Canon D30" of the digital medium format world.

Even if it is half the quality of the other MFDB systems it will still be competitive for the price.

Pentax has a reputation for building "bullet-proof" cameras and has a simply outstanding lineup of lenses. Feature-wise the medium-format cameras always seemed a half-step behind the competition, but not so far behind as to be ignored. Pentax made what is arguably two of the best hand-holdable (behind the Contax 645AF) medium-format cameras ever. Where other cameras may have been better for studio work or high-volume work (interchangeable backs), the Pentax 67 series and the Pentax 645 series cameras gave the average working pro doing wedding and portrait work a highly mobile camera that didn't get in your way--except for the maximum flash sync-speed.

As to "landscape photography", I doubt that anybody who actually used a Pentax 645 system for landscape work would admit to any foibles of the system. It was really that good.

Exciting times, Indeed!
Logged
buckshot
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 184


« Reply #36 on: March 23, 2010, 12:41:08 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: bobrapp
The 645D could be a real game changer - if the camera lives up to expectations.

Bob Rapp

Coming from Pentax I'm hoping for the best. Some competition at last in the MFDB world! In whatever way Phase/Leaf are planning to respond, they shouldn't hang around. I know two pros who are putting off upgrading their backs until they see the Pentax. With the difference in price between it and the Phase/Leaf equivalent backs, you could fly to Japan and pick one up in person and still have money in the bank. I'm sure you won't have to though - the grey market will take care of that. What next? A P40+ for under $10K - who knows? Hang on a sec., I can get a 40MP camera with lens for $10k...so, a P40+ for $7.5k anyone?
Logged
Mark D Segal
Contributor
Sr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 6977


WWW
« Reply #37 on: March 23, 2010, 12:48:39 PM »
ReplyReply

Before we get too carried away, let's count the chickens and compare the eggs after they hatch.
Logged

Mark D Segal (formerly MarkDS)
Author: "Scanning Workflows with SilverFast 8....." http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/film/scanning_workflows_with_silverfast_8.shtml
Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad