Pentax 645D global launch

Shadowblade wrote in post #11025437
The image circle of the TS-E 17 is 67.2mm. The diagonal of the Pentax 645D is 55mm. Plenty of room there.

re: Plenty of room there.

Not really. You won't get much from the tilt or shift and the extreme edges of the lens are likely soft but hey I'd like to see it in action. Might be quite useful.

jetcode wrote in post #11025500
re: Plenty of room there.

Not really. You won't get much from the tilt or shift and the extreme edges of the lens are likely soft but hey I'd like to see it in action. Might be quite useful.

Even on full-frame (with higher requirements for sharpness than 645, due to the greater magnification to produce a print) the 17L is very sharp at full shift. Given that the 17L is designed for full-frame, it'd appear even sharper on 645 (just as large-format lenses tend to appear softer on MF digital backs than on 4x5 film). You'd get less shift, but tilt shouldn't be affected - in any case, for landscape photography, tilt tends to be much more in play than shift.

The left and right edges of the 645D's sensor correspond to the edge of the 35mm frame at 4mm of shift; the top and bottom correspond to the 35mm frame at 4.5mm of shift. Given that the TS-E 17L allows for 12mm of shift in any direction, there's still plenty of scope for shift, there should be little vignetting and the edges should be plenty sharp.

cool ShadowBlade ... I'm used to view cameras and lenses with lots of image circle like a Fuji 450mm f/12.5 lens which is tiny and can cover an 11x14 camera or the Fuji 240 f/9 which is tiny but covers 8x10 with movements!

I just saw a studio shot and it was less than spectacular.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/in​dex.php?topic=44684.0

Compare that with this ... (P25+ and professional artist)
http://www.flickr.com …lexiasinclair/4​071075371/

or this (6x6 film scanned pro photographer)
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/brooksayola/469​32251/

The DR isn't there for me. Everything I've seen so far is a little flat and underexposed. Lets see what a pro can pull from this camera. The resolution is there but the shadows drop off fast and furious. Wonder what this camera could do with Zeiss rendering; with a more controlled micro contrast.

This image tells the story well ... noise, not enough DR, and flat color
http://www.flickr.com …in/set-72157624938971922/

jetcode wrote in post #11025628
cool ShadowBlade ... I'm used to view cameras and lenses with lots of image circle like a Fuji 450mm f/12.5 lens which is tiny and can cover an 11x14 camera or the Fuji 240 f/9 which is tiny but covers 8x10 with movements!

I just saw a studio shot and it was less than spectacular.
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/forum/in​dex.php?topic=44684.0

Compare that with this ... (P25+ and professional artist)
http://www.flickr.com …lexiasinclair/4​071075371/

or this (6x6 film scanned pro photographer)
http://www.flickr.com/​photos/brooksayola/469​32251/

The DR isn't there for me. Everything I've seen so far is a little flat and underexposed. Lets see what a pro can pull from this camera. The resolution is there but the shadows drop off fast and furious. Wonder what this camera could do with Zeiss rendering; with a more controlled micro contrast.

Large-format lenses not specifically designed for digital are usually less than kind to digital sensors - since MF digital backs are smaller than typical large format 4x5 film, they require much sharper lenses to achieve the same image quality as 4x5 film. Also, a typical large format UWA isn't all that wide on a 36x48 sensor - digital-specific 'large format' lenses usually produce a smaller image circle to give the width and sharpness needed for smaller sensors.

Shadowblade wrote in post #11025668
Large-format lenses not specifically designed for digital are usually less than kind to digital sensors - since MF digital backs are smaller than typical large format 4x5 film, they require much sharper lenses to achieve the same image quality as 4x5 film. Also, a typical large format UWA isn't all that wide on a 36x48 sensor - digital-specific 'large format' lenses usually produce a smaller image circle to give the width and sharpness needed for smaller sensors.

I understand that ... it was a reference to what I deem reasonable movements ...

The DR isn't there for me. Everything I've seen so far is a little flat and underexposed. Lets see what a pro can pull from this camera. The resolution is there but the shadows drop off fast and furious. Wonder what this camera could do with Zeiss rendering; with a more controlled micro contrast.

This image tells the story well ... noise, not enough DR, and flat color
http://www.flickr.com …in/set-72157624938971922/

The files at 1600 look about what my 1D IIN files look like. Most MF digital go to hell above 400 so its noise capability is above say a P40 digital back. I can deal with not having as high a dynamic range as other MF cameras offer. Especially when I could open my bag take it out and shoot in the pouring rain and not have to have a sterilized environment like other MF systems seem to need. The only other I know of is a Leica S2 and it is 3X the cost of this....

it seems that with what we get we have to learn to work with ... here are some more images which showcase the 645D in better light scenes.

http://fiveprime.org/h​ivemind/Tags/645d,pent​ax

jetcode wrote in post #11026019
it seems that with what we get we have to learn to work with ... here are some more images which showcase the 645D in better light scenes.

http://fiveprime.org/h​ivemind/Tags/645d,pent​ax

The portraits are really impressive and the street shots are good. So far, I'm impressed. Forget about pixel peeping gentlemen, 40 MP is plenty.

So far I like what's coming out of my 5DII better in terms of color and pop ...

jetcode wrote in post #11026880
So far I like what's coming out of my 5DII better in terms of color and pop ...

I do like the Canon colors.

OTOH, for those who want a large-sensor camera with tilt-shift movements at a similar price point to this (i.e. for landscapes):

Hasselblad CFV-39 digital back - not much more expensive than the Pentax, and you get a 49x37mm sensor.

Anyone know how to retrofit a TS-E 17L onto a lensboard mount, including some sort of lever to maintain aperture control? It'd give a very nice 12.5mm-equivalent horizontal angle of view on that sensor, while maintaining the tilt function (and a bit of shift).

Shadowblade wrote in post #11028937
Hasselblad CFV-39 digital back - not much more expensive than the Pentax, and you get a 49x37mm sensor.

Actually the camera for this back is not cheap. A good used H2 is $3400 and up. Lens are mighty pricey in the several thousand a pop range. A fairly good deal at B&H is the J3DII-31 which is $12k in kit form with a 80mm. List is $18k.

Shadowblade wrote in post #11028937
Anyone know how to retrofit a TS-E 17L onto a lensboard mount, including some sort of lever to maintain aperture control? It'd give a very nice 12.5mm-equivalent horizontal angle of view on that sensor, while maintaining the tilt function (and a bit of shift).

I'd like to see the result of this since the widest lens to date for 645 that I have seen is a 28mm and this is a MF lens with a MF image circle. There would be some form of image regardless of the circle.

jetcode wrote in post #11034877
Actually the camera for this back is not cheap. A good used H2 is $3400 and up. Lens are mighty pricey in the several thousand a pop range. A fairly good deal at B&H is the J3DII-31 which is $12k in kit form with a 80mm. List is $18k.

The point would be to use it as a digital back for a large-format view camera, not a medium-format body, in order to gain the tilt and shift functions for landscape and architectural photography. View cameras are relatively cheap.

Lenses are expensive, but so are good lenses for any format!

Since it's a lens designed for 135 format, I'd expect it to be exceptionally sharp on a format more than twice the size! With minimal vignetting too, since there's still a fair bit of room on each side.

You could even just fit a Mamiya DM56 with a 56mm-wid sensor into the TS-E 17L's image circle - you'd lose shift, but, for landscapes, maintain the all-important tilt function.

I'd guess that fitting it into a lensboard wouldn't be too difficult; attaching a timed leaf shutter would be harder (essentially, you'd need a leaf shutter that fits onto the EF mount behind the lens), as would finding a way to control aperture.

jetcode wrote in post #11034877
Actually the camera for this back is not cheap. A good used H2 is $3400 and up. Lens are mighty pricey in the several thousand a pop range. A fairly good deal at B&H is the J3DII-31 which is $12k in kit form with a 80mm. List is $18k.

The point would be to use it as a digital back for a large-format view camera, not a medium-format body, in order to gain the tilt and shift functions for landscape and architectural photography. View cameras are relatively cheap.

Lenses are expensive, but so are good lenses for any format!

Since it's a lens designed for 135 format, I'd expect it to be exceptionally sharp on a format more than twice the size! With minimal vignetting too, since there's still a fair bit of room on each side.

You could even just fit a Mamiya DM56 with a 56mm-wid sensor into the TS-E 17L's image circle - you'd lose shift, but, for landscapes, maintain the all-important tilt function.

I'd guess that fitting it into a lensboard wouldn't be too difficult; attaching a timed leaf shutter would be harder (essentially, you'd need a leaf shutter that fits onto the EF mount behind the lens), as would finding a way to control aperture.

I'm sure the Pentax is nice but I've grown a bit more to appreciating what the 5DII can do. It is versatile. Wonder where Canon goes from here. In a year or two another generation will appear. In the meantime I am lusting after a format I've never shot and that is 6x6.