Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: 25mm 645D lens vs D800  (Read 14615 times)
tsjanik
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 545


« Reply #40 on: April 11, 2012, 08:11:01 PM »
ReplyReply

The Sony A850 was a loss-leading failure, and was discontinued before its older sibling the A900 which Sony explained was because it mostly took sales from the A900, not from the competition. Anyway, the dominant 35mm format players are Canon and Nikon, so they are the ones with the economies of scale to push prices down, not Sony, and their pricing is the main measure of the market. And the latest Canon and Nikon models do not lower prices at all --- in fact, the Canon 5D Mk 3 is the most expensive in the 5D series.

Sony might offer a 35mm format mirrorless body, though that would require yet another line of lenses, because the current NEX lenses are clearly adapted to the smaller format (the focal lengths of the zooms in particular show this). But even if so, why would that lower prices for 35mm format to mainstream levels?

I am assuming the G lenses would fit. 
I think you and I should agree to disagree.  As a landscape photographer, I see the $8000 price of the D3X  vs. the $3000 price of the D800 and think it costs less to get more of what I want.   (I know there are other differences aside from MP).
Logged
Lacunapratum
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 166


« Reply #41 on: April 11, 2012, 10:46:11 PM »
ReplyReply

I guess this forum is picking up on Pentax' lack of a convincing overall philosophy for their digital camera portfolio.  There is the Pentax Q born dead in the cradle because of a sensor too small for anybody who would consider an interchangable lens camera Sad.  There is the Ricoh GXR, a brilliant concept, but who has enough space in the camera bag for multiple sensor modules  Huh?  There is the APS-C duo consisting of the surprise success K-5 and the incarnation of ugliness lovingly called K-01  Roll Eyes.  Better than ist, I guess.  Both are capable cameras destined to trail behind the CaNikony competition (whatever that might be).  Part of it is the APS-C format that with its full-frame lenses ranks behind the full-frame competition in overall image quality.  Another part is the size of the mirrorless K-01 when compared to the Nixes (better: Nexusses or Nexi or even Nexuus) and m43s.  If successful at all, the K-01 would also brilliantly compete with the company's own GXR, slapping Pentax's mother Ricoh in the face  Embarrassed.  And then there is the 645D, still-born for half a decade and pondering for another between full frame and 44x33  Lips sealed

I left Minolta when they changed mounts from MC/MD to Maxxum because I felt I couldn't rely on the future of my lens system with a company that so readily abandons their loyal customers for any new technology.   Cry

I feel that Pentax needs to streamline their portfolio if they want to have a chance to survive.   Here is what Iíd like them to do  Wink

(i)   Keep the 645D and commit, either to a top-quality, reasonably priced full-frame system or to a very competitively priced 44x33 system that would compete with Canonís and Nikonís high end models.  The 44x33 version would entail upgrading to a next generation sensor and offering lenses at very competitive prices.   This system would also very well match with a mirrorless 44x33 body that would even better fit with the great 645 lenses.  Alternatively, a full-frame version would compete with Hasselblad and Phase and offer better integration, robust bodies, automation, and top lenses. 
(ii)   Have an APS-C system that competes with the best of the full-frame sensors in terms of quality.  Offer top lenses dedicated to APS-C.  This system would be more portable and elegant than the full-frame cameras and would nicely match with a parallel generation of mirrorless cameras.   Better wideangles would be part of the equation.  The K-01 is a great concept, but canít the body be more compact and elegant?   Huh
(iii)   Shelve everything else (Q, GXR, new 4/3).   Drop full-frame or totally commit.  At this point, I feel all lenses should be converted to DA, the DA line should be expanded, and quality further improved. 

Asahi Pentax of the 80ies with their Spotmatic, the 67, and later the 645 followed that philosophy.   This offering would set Pentax apart from the competition and turn them into a genuine alternative.  Unfortunately (or fortunately) I am not in a position to tell Pentax what to do and I realize itís hard for complex corporate infrastructures to see the light of day  Smiley.
Logged
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3971



WWW
« Reply #42 on: April 12, 2012, 02:25:26 AM »
ReplyReply

I would expect Nikon to start playing in the cheaper FX body segment late next year, after they have filled the D800 demand.

I never quite understood why Canon did not follow this model.

Cheers,
Bernard


Canon are following this model, just slower: 1Ds 5D etc.
For several years only Canon could make FF sensors, so they charged a premium.
The game has changed, now that Sony has turned FF SLR sensors into commodity items. Now everybody will have them, and prices will spiral down. In the end a mirrorless camera is just a box with a sensor, a lens mount, and a socket for an iphone Smiley


Edmund
Logged

Edmund Ronald, Ph.D. 
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7888



WWW
« Reply #43 on: April 12, 2012, 06:15:32 AM »
ReplyReply

Canon are following this model, just slower: 1Ds 5D etc.

What that the same sensor? I was under the impression that they were different.

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
tsjanik
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 545


« Reply #44 on: April 12, 2012, 10:02:15 AM »
ReplyReply

(i)   Keep the 645D and commit, either to a top-quality, reasonably priced full-frame system or to a very competitively priced 44x33 system that would compete with Canonís and Nikonís high end models.  The 44x33 version would entail upgrading to a next generation sensor and offering lenses at very competitive prices.   This system would also very well match with a mirrorless 44x33 body that would even better fit with the great 645 lenses.  Alternatively, a full-frame version would compete with Hasselblad and Phase and offer better integration, robust bodies, automation, and top lenses. 

The idea of both a 44x33 and full 645 system is appealing.  Same lens line (except the 25mm), just a difference in body costs and competing with both high end 35mm and MF. 

Quote
(ii)   Have an APS-C system that competes with the best of the full-frame sensors in terms of quality.  Offer top lenses dedicated to APS-C.  This system would be more portable and elegant than the full-frame cameras and would nicely match with a parallel generation of mirrorless cameras.   Better wideangles would be part of the equation.   

Most Pentax lenses are DA and I think you underestimate the K-5; it is really a very good sensor in a terrific body.
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5124


« Reply #45 on: April 12, 2012, 07:53:48 PM »
ReplyReply

I think you and I should agree to disagree.  As a landscape photographer, I see the $8000 price of the D3X  vs. the $3000 price of the D800 and think it costs less to get more of what I want.
No need to agre to disagree on simple numerical facts like steady $3000 price of entry to 36x24mm format for about seven years now! I have no disagreement that prices have come down from $8000 to about $3000, but that happened when the 36x24mm sensors were put in bodies at less than the absolute top of the line professional grade: from 1Ds to 5D, and from D1x, D2x etc to D700, and that started about seven years ago.  In fact, the very first 36x24 format DSLR, the Kodak 14N, was also far less than $8000, due to its lower level body.

My point is that since that change to putting 36x24mm sensors into bodies at less than absolute top of the line professional grade, there has been no further downward price movement, and so there is no evidence of a downward trend in sensor prices for some years now. All that has happened with the D800 compared to the equally priced D700 is putting a higher resolution sensor in that level of body, and to repeat, it is sensor size, not pixel count, that mainly dictates price. Consider the new Nokia phone with a 40MP sensor as an extreme example!
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7327


WWW
« Reply #46 on: April 12, 2012, 09:00:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I essentially agree with Bill, although I'd suggest that we may have some downward tendency on full frame DSLR prices.

The way I see it, it is as much a question of lenses. With Nikon there are some very good lenses from both Nikon themselves and Zeiss at reasonable price. You can buy a Nikon D800E and a very good Zeiss lens or the excellent 24-24/2.8 lens for below 5k USD.

From what I have seen in Miles Hecker's test shots, the Pentax 645D may have different CGA (Color Grid Array) characteristics from the Nikon so image may not mix that well.

Lloyd Chambers is doing a lot of testing of different system and I have the impression that he is quite careful in the testing he does. He did recently compare the Leica S2 with it's 120 macro lens with the Nikon D800 (not D800E) with the Zeiss 100/2 Macro Planar and I would say that Nikon came out on top, especially at the corners. So the Nikon D800 certainly seems to be a competent tool.

Best regards
Erik

The Sony A850 was a loss-leading failure, and was discontinued before its older sibling the A900 which Sony explained was because it mostly took sales from the A900, not from the competition. Anyway, the dominant 35mm format players are Canon and Nikon, so they are the ones with the economies of scale to push prices down, not Sony, and their pricing is the main measure of the market. And the latest Canon and Nikon models do not lower prices at all --- in fact, the Canon 5D Mk 3 is the most expensive in the 5D series.

Sony might offer a 35mm format mirrorless body, though that would require yet another line of lenses, because the current NEX lenses are clearly adapted to the smaller format (the focal lengths of the zooms in particular show this). But even if so, why would that lower prices for 35mm format to mainstream levels?
« Last Edit: April 12, 2012, 09:07:22 PM by ErikKaffehr » Logged

tsjanik
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 545


« Reply #47 on: April 12, 2012, 09:26:49 PM »
ReplyReply

........there has been no further downward price movement, and so there is no evidence of a downward trend in sensor prices for some years now. ....

Well, assuming we are both fortunate to be posting here in, say, five years, I suggest we evaluate our different opinions then.  The improvement in 35mm sized sensors could in fact be a consequence of the fact that 35mm is the most common format and the lenses are limited to that size.  The introduction of the 645D, at relatively low cost considering the limited market, may indicate that larger sensors are not prohibitive in cost; they simply need a larger market - achievable with a lower price.  Although I have no sales numbers for the 645D, I think it is apparent it has been a great success, despite its convoluted, awkward and delayed journey to the marketplace. The 645D has certainly forced downward price movement in the MF market and perhaps even 35mm (I think we're all surprised at the D800 price.)
« Last Edit: April 12, 2012, 09:35:53 PM by tsjanik » Logged
DandA
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 44


« Reply #48 on: April 12, 2012, 10:12:14 PM »
ReplyReply

The idea of both a 44x33 and full 645 system is appealing.  Same lens line (except the 25mm), just a difference in body costs and competing with both high end 35mm and MF. 

Yes, this senario is quite appealing but whether Pentax wants to support two different lines of medium format bodies, is hard to know.  Maybe, maybe not.  As simple as it seems, I believe its not as economically easy as it seems. They could even keep the present 40MP 645D and introduce a higher MP body, presumably with a larger sized sensor...although that I believe would require additonal capital to retool more of the camera as opposed to keeping the present sesor size and simply make two different resolution/bodies available.

I'm all for your initial suggestion Tom.  Even the 25mm with it's two varients would be available for the current cropped sensor 645D and a full frame one.

Dave (DandA)
Logged
ErikKaffehr
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7327


WWW
« Reply #49 on: April 12, 2012, 11:04:18 PM »
ReplyReply

Hi,

I'm not at all surprised at the D800 price. Nikon essentially upgraded the D700 body with a Sony 36MP sensor. The Sony sensor is same size as the 24 MP sensor used in the Sony Alpha 900. What I think is a surprise is that Canon set the D5III at a higher price point than Nikon did with D800.

I'd assume that prices are going down. I'd also assume that most development is done on smaller sensor and is moving upscale than the other way around.

More pixels need more processing power, and processing power still grow exponentially with time, it seems.

Best regards
Erik

The 645D has certainly forced downward price movement in the MF market and perhaps even 35mm (I think we're all surprised at the D800 price.)
Logged

tsjanik
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 545


« Reply #50 on: April 13, 2012, 09:52:31 AM »
ReplyReply



I'm not at all surprised at the D800 price. Nikon essentially upgraded the D700 body with a Sony 36MP sensor. ......

Interesting Erik, that is exactly the reason I would expect the price to be higher.  It's as if Pentax replaced the 40 MP 645D sensor with a 120 MP and didn't change the price.  Huh

Tom
« Last Edit: April 13, 2012, 09:57:16 AM by tsjanik » Logged
Lacunapratum
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 166


« Reply #51 on: April 13, 2012, 12:26:30 PM »
ReplyReply

Tom,

I agree - two 645 lines may be attractive, especially if one of them was mirrorless. 

In terms of the K-5 I don't dispute that it's a great camera, but in the market it falls short when compared to Canon's or Nikon's offerings because both their more versatile system.  What I am saying is that Pentax isn't dedicating their resources into a few top lines but rather diverting their investment on many levels and thus risk falling short on all (except the 645). 
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5124


« Reply #52 on: April 13, 2012, 01:25:47 PM »
ReplyReply

Well, assuming we are both fortunate to be posting here in, say, five years, I suggest we evaluate our different opinions then.
OK! Five years seems a good time frame for you, Bernard, Erik, and I to reassess our predictions.
Logged
tsjanik
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 545


« Reply #53 on: April 13, 2012, 01:29:12 PM »
ReplyReply

Tom,

I agree - two 645 lines may be attractive, especially if one of them was mirrorless. 

In terms of the K-5 I don't dispute that it's a great camera, but in the market it falls short when compared to Canon's or Nikon's offerings because both their more versatile system.  What I am saying is that Pentax isn't dedicating their resources into a few top lines but rather diverting their investment on many levels and thus risk falling short on all (except the 645). 

The K5 and 645D are in fact a very complementary pair of cameras. Need resolution- 645D; need hand holdable, high ISO, compact Ė K-5.  As nice as the top C&N systems are, theyíre not much smaller than the 645D.  The K-5 with the 40mm is small enough to fit in my jacket pocket, canít do that with a D3x or even a 5D.  As much as I would like to see a FF Pentax, it seems that developing a good 645D and APS-C system is a good strategy for Pentax; no direct competition with the big players.

I agree with you on the Q and K 01; I'm not sure who the market is for those cameras, although the 01 would be more appealing with a finder of some sort..


Logged
tsjanik
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 545


« Reply #54 on: April 13, 2012, 01:30:43 PM »
ReplyReply

OK! Five years seems a good time frame for you, Bernard, Erik, and I to reassess our predictions.

OK, Deal.
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7888



WWW
« Reply #55 on: April 14, 2012, 06:33:40 AM »
ReplyReply

Well, assuming we are both fortunate to be posting here in, say, five years, I suggest we evaluate our different opinions then.  The improvement in 35mm sized sensors could in fact be a consequence of the fact that 35mm is the most common format and the lenses are limited to that size.  The introduction of the 645D, at relatively low cost considering the limited market, may indicate that larger sensors are not prohibitive in cost; they simply need a larger market - achievable with a lower price.  Although I have no sales numbers for the 645D, I think it is apparent it has been a great success, despite its convoluted, awkward and delayed journey to the marketplace. The 645D has certainly forced downward price movement in the MF market and perhaps even 35mm (I think we're all surprised at the D800 price.)

Ok, see U in 5 years! :-)

Cheers,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
tsjanik
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 545


« Reply #56 on: April 15, 2012, 10:29:35 AM »
ReplyReply

Ok, see U in 5 years! :-)

Cheers,
Bernard

Good, although it may take less time than that.  Pentax's next version of the 645D, if it appears, may be sooner than that.  Of course we may all be using iPhones by then.   Grin

Tom
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5124


« Reply #57 on: April 15, 2012, 12:43:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Good, although it may take less time than that.  Pentax's next version of the 645D, if it appears, may be sooner than that.
Should we have a betting pool on its price and sensor size?

I will go for the same 44x33mm format and a price about the same or modestly lower ...  with an outside chance of a bigger sensor in a body more expensive than the current 645D but less expensive that any competitors with that same sensor size.
Logged
Radu Arama
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 138


« Reply #58 on: April 16, 2012, 05:49:45 AM »
ReplyReply

IMHO it makes no sense for Pentax to go now for a larger sensor in size as long as they have too many gaps in the system to compete in the highest of ends. But then again a two tier camera system in the long term (44x33 mm and close to 645 film) makes perfect sense. So, I predict a new state of the art successor of the 645D to appear within an year with the following characteristics:

- New sensor, the same 44x33 mm in size sensor in a CMOS incarnation, highly optimized for low ISO image quality and highest DR on the market, 50 to 56 MP, 100-6400 ISO native range extend able to 50-12800, true 16 bit RAW, capable of LiveView and video;
- New AF and metering systems;
- New processing board, much faster image processing, dual SDXC cards with at least UHS-1 speed;
- Exactly the same body (maybe a larger LCD on the back);
- They could give up the PEF native format and use only the Adobe's DNG;
- Not more than 15-20% more expensive in Euro and USD MSRP, probably about 10% more expensive in Yen (I think that they won't pass above the psychological 1M Yen barrier).

Considering that between now and end of 2013 in theory Pentax should put 5 new digitally optimized lenses on the market I foresee a second larger sensor camera emerging in 2014 based on the "645D2" but with a 70-90 MP sensor of equal pixel pitch but (obviously) larger area.

Best regards,
Radu
Logged
eronald
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3971



WWW
« Reply #59 on: April 16, 2012, 07:09:20 AM »
ReplyReply

Deleted
« Last Edit: April 16, 2012, 07:12:01 AM by eronald » Logged

Edmund Ronald, Ph.D. 
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad