Oh my!

[nicolas claris]

For my last shoot in the Bahamas last week, Pentax lent me a Z…

The gap between the 645D and the 645Z is huge!
AF is more precise and they are many more points.
HDR in camera is not anymore in JPG but raw, the results are stunning, even with people in the frame.
Saving on cards is much faster even with more data, one can easily shoot raw in burst!
I was a little concerned that the lens I have will may be show some weakness due to the new resolution, but far from that the CMOS delivers incredibly sharp and clear images (needs much less sharpening), even the "old" 80-160 mm : ). The only down side is some moiré patterns that appear in some cases but they are easily treated in Lightroom.
And many more!
Low light shooting was pretty good with the D, but with the Z the limits are really pushed far away…

Below is hand held shot of a moving subject from a moving platform by night :

PENTAX 645Z
HD PENTAX-D FA645 MACRO 90mm F2.8ED AW SR
1/8 s; f/2,8; ISO 2000​

 

[Asher Kelman]

For my last shoot in the Bahamas last week, Pentax lent me a Z…

The gap between the 645D and the 645Z is huge!
AF is more precise and they are many more points.
HDR in camera is not anymore in JPG but raw, the results are stunning, even with people in the frame.
Saving on cards is much faster even with more data, one can easily shoot raw in burst!
I was a little concerned that the lens I have will may be show some weakness due to the new resolution, but far from that the CMOS delivers incredibly sharp and clear images (needs much less sharpening), even the "old" 80-160 mm : ). The only down side is some moiré patterns that appear in some cases but they are easily treated in Lightroom.
And many more!
Low light shooting was pretty good with the D, but with the Z the limits are really pushed far away…

Below is hand held shot of a moving subject from a moving platform by night :

PENTAX 645Z
HD PENTAX-D FA645 MACRO 90mm F2.8ED AW SR
1/8 s; f/2,8; ISO 2000​

I'm so happy at the news! How long is the loan?

Some practical insights? What about mirror lock-up? Is it needed to extract full resolution? How is the damping of the shutter and what speed can you hand hold safely with the Pentax image-stabilization?

Asher

 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

For my last shoot in the Bahamas last week, Pentax lent me a Z…

The gap between the 645D and the 645Z is huge!

Hi Nicolas,

Hope you get the opportunity to call it your own some day. It seems like a very useful camera for your type of shooting scenarios, and it's supposed to be decently weather sealed (don't know about the lenses).

Enjoy!

Cheers,
Bart

 

[nicolas claris]

Hi Nicolas,

Hope you get the opportunity to call it your own some day. It seems like a very useful camera for your type of shooting scenarios, and it's supposed to be decently weather sealed (don't know about the lenses).

Enjoy!

Cheers,
Bart

Hi Bart
your hope is shared ! ; )

Yes the Z is in the ball park for my needs.
Sealing is the same as the 645D and I never had any problem with it, same for the lens.

On the loaned Z I did some quick micro adjustments (empirically), if i ever own a Z, I'll have to dig with your tools!

For this the live view will be of great help (there is no live view on the D).

 

[nicolas claris]

I'm so happy at the news! How long is the loan?

Some practical insights? What about mirror lock-up? Is it needed to extract full resolution? How is the damping of the shutter and what speed can you hand hold safely with the Pentax image-stabilization?

Asher

Hi Asher

Loan is over : (
I'll post more image later when agreed by the client, and therefore will give some practical insights : )
Something that might be very useful that I didn't have time to test is tethering shooting and the wifi connection…

Mirror locking works as it did on the D, I don't use it much except for shooting macro.
It has afaik nothing to do with extracting full resolution. - ? -

The damping of the shutter is smoother than on the D but not quiet!
With low speed you are never safe with or without image-stabilization, it depends of each person, personally, I feel not being so bad, see the shot in the OT…

 

[Asher Kelman]

Nicolas and Bart,

I wonder whether this, (and the other Sony equipped 50 MP sensors in the Phase One, Hasselblad and Leaf iterations), really trounce the newly released Canon 5Ds and its sibling.

Does size of the really larger "MF" real estate make the difference at this stage of digital camera development? Is the Canon wizardry enough to make up for it's 4 micron sensel size.

Finally, how good are the lenses. Are they challenged too?

Asher

 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Nicolas and Bart,

I wonder whether this, (and the other Sony equipped 50 MP sensors in the Phase One, Hasselblad and Leaf iterations), really trounce the newly released Canon 5Ds and its sibling.

Does size of the really larger "MF" real estate make the difference at this stage of digital camera development? Is the Canon wizardry enough to make up for it's 4 micron sensel size.

Hi Asher,

The fact that both have 50MP sensors, is only part of the story. An equally important part (besides handling differences) is that the lens projects the image with more magnification (longer focal length) on the physically larger sensor. More magnification means that the lens doesn't need to be pushed so far, and that results in a higher Modulation Transfer Function (MTF) response for a given feature size, assuming one lens can perform as well as the other one for the other platform. Also, because the focal length for the Pentax will be longer, that usually means that lens aberrations can be designed out easier.

Finally, how good are the lenses. Are they challenged too?

The good thing is that a higher MP (denser sampling) sensor, will pull more resolution out of the same lens than a lower MP sensor will. This will result in a significantly improved MTF response (also at lower spatial frequencies), and that will translate into an image that will be much easier to post-process and it will look better compared to a likewise processed file from a smaller MP sensor.

The question then becomes, how is the absolute lens quality. I think there Pentax can still make some progress, where Canon already started that process of upgrading their lens line a number of years ago.

Lens design technology (software), and choice of materials (lower lead content, rare earth elements, new compounds), and manufacturing techniques (mass production of aspherical elements, coatings), has improved. So new designs, especially when designed for Digital cameras (with a filter stack as part of the optical design) will potentially make a jump in quality possible.

Cheers,
Bart

 

[Asher Kelman]

Hi Asher,

The fact that both have 50MP sensors, is only part of the story. An equally important part (besides handling differences) is that the lens projects the image with more magnification (longer focal length) on the physically larger sensor. More magnification means that the lens doesn't need to be pushed so far, and that results in a higher Modulation Transfer Function (MTF) response for a given feature size, assuming one lens can perform as well as the other one for the other platform. Also, because the focal length for the Pentax will be longer, that usually means that lens aberrations can be designed out easier.

Thanks Bart!

This is easy to follow and works for LF too!

The good thing is that a higher MP (denser sampling) sensor, will pull more resolution out of the same lens.....

The question then becomes, how is the absolute lens quality.

I have not tried the 50MP Sony Sensor-equipped competing series of cameras as yet. But I have rented an 80 MP Phase One camera with a Schneider 80 mm lens. I am currently examining the resulting files by seeing how well they print large compared to those from a Sony A7R paired with its Zeiss 55mm 1.8.

At first I thought that the Sony derived prints competed well above their MP weight and the Phase One just was very good. I now realize that processing those files is a key factor and I may be able to get Phase One files to pull out ahead. I just reprocessed a file that at first defied enlargement to 70" high without looking bland. On reworking the file, I can see there's much more resilience in the Phase One file if up reseed where the "multiplying factor" is an integer and we avoid odd fractions ......and also "output-sharpened" using the best techniques.

Am I correct that using using integers and not odd fractions can give rise to better enlargements?

Doubtless, how the 645Z Pentax files are treated in various reviews online should be factored in to our comparisons.

Asher

 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

I just reprocessed a file that at first defied enlargement to 70" high without looking bland. On reworking the file, I can see there's much more resilience in the Phase One file if up reseed where the "multiplying factor" is an integer and we avoid odd fractions ......and also "output-sharpened" using the best techniques.

Am I correct that using using integers and not odd fractions can give rise to better enlargements?

Hi Asher,

The short answer is; It shouldn't !

I've done an investigation into that matter of integer or fractional upsampling factors, and found no evidence of it making any difference.

What could happen, is that the non-low-pass filtered images of the Phase One file have aliasing artifacts that suggest sharpness when upsampled with an algorithm that will add more artifacts (e.g. regular bicubic instead of bi-cubic smoother). It also matters which Raw converter is used to convert the Phase One files. Photoshop ACR, or Lightroom, create more artifacts than the very good Capture One raw converter (it's free(!) to use in DB mode with Phase One digital backs), which handles issues like aliasing very well (no surprise because the digital backs usually do not have an OLPF).

It's a real pity that Capture One doesn't convert Pentax 645 D/Z files, which I think is shortsighted because people who cannot afford the cost of a Phase DB and camera system to use it on. will not buy it anyway. The users of the Pentax platform are a different target audience and they would love to buy the Capture One licence, so Phase One could still make money. Apparently they are scared by the Pentax offering, even if it doesn't have the dealer support structure of Phase products.

Cheers,
Bart

 

[Doug Kerr]

Hi, Bart,

The good thing is that a higher MP (denser sampling) sensor, will pull more resolution out of the same lens than a lower MP sensor will.

In fact, the critical property in that regard is pixels per mm at the focal plane (indeed, the matter of sampling density, as you said). That varies as the square root of pixel count only if the overall sensor size is the same. If we are speaking of "the same lens", of course it would be natural for the sensor size to be the same, but just to be certain . . .

Best regards,

Doug

 

[Doug Kerr]

Hi, Bart,

I've done an investigation into that matter of integer or fractional upsampling factors, and found no evidence of it making any difference.

That is very interesting and very important. Thanks for the link to your work in that matter.

Best regards,

Doug

 

[Doug Kerr]

Let me try and crystallize the observations of Asher and Bart as they pertain to different format sizes, and how "magnification" fits in (although interestingly enough I will not use that term at all).

Imagine that we have two cameras of different format size, a larger format on camera B than on camera A.

Imagine that we are going to photograph the same scene with both cameras using lenses that will give the same field of view. That is, the amount of scene that fills the frame on camera A will also fill the frame on camera B. These lenses will thus have different focal lengths (and of course will be likely of different families as well owing to the difference in format size, and thus the kind of mount, needed size of image circle, etc. etc.)

Suppose, nevertheless, that the MTF curves of the two lenses (I speak of the form of MTF curve that plots MTF vs spatial frequency, not the form that plots MTF as distance from the center of the image) are "comparable". Simplistically, that means that the optical resolution (in cycles/mm) for the two setups will be the same.

Is that likely to be true of our two lenses? Dunno. Depends in great part on the price!​

But in camera B, the image of the scene is spread over a lager sensor, and thus the resolution across the entire height or width of the image, in cycles, will be greater. This means that, insofar as the optical portion of the system is concerned, we have the potential for finer detail with camera B than with camera A.

Now we need to consider the limitation cause by a finite sampling density. We know from Brothers Nyquist and Shannon that we can only represent a continuously varying phenomenon with a set of discrete samples (in our case, pixel values) if the sampling rate is greater than twice the highest frequency contained in the variation.

To have this completely and equally fulfilled in our two setups, camera A and B, given the optical resultion situation I described above, it is necessary that in camera B there be the same number of pixels across the height (or width) of the sensor as in camera A. Thus the pixel count for the two must be the same.

Now we can work this story backward. We now have cameras C and D with D having a larger size sensor. The pixel densities of the two sensors are the same, so D has more pixels.

Thus, from a sampling theory basis, camera D could capture as discrete pixel values a greater overall resultion (in cycles) than camera C.

But of course that ability is of no value if the optical portion of the system does not deliver that overall resolution.

And for that to be true, then (simplistically), the lens on camera D must have an MTF that holds its height (say, for example, 50% of its low-frequency value) out to a greater spatial frequency than the MTF curve for the lens of camera C.

As we deal with all these interacting factors, we have to be careful not to be tossing around pixel counts without respect to the size of the sensor, or not paying attention to changes of field of view caused by both lens focal length and sensor size. (I don't at all suggest that the essays above are deficient in that regard. Just an alert to all the players in this game.)

And we have to be very careful not to oversimplify this by saying, for example, of two lenses for use on cameras of different format size, that "lens X has a 'better' MTF than lens Y." Or to speak of "comparable quality" of two lenses for use on different format size cameras.

Best regards,

Doug

 

[Asher Kelman]

Bart,

Thanks for all the clarifications!

Can one convert the Pentax 645Z files to DNG format and then have access to Capture One for processing and finally save as DNG and use ACR to bring in the color correction profile one has made for that camera and the lens corrections from ACR?

Asher

 

[nicolas claris]

Bart,

Thanks for all the clarifications!

Can one convert the Pentax 645Z files to DNG format and then have access to Capture One for processing and finally save as DNG and use ACR to bring in the color correction profile one has made for that camera and the lens corrections from ACR?

Asher

Yes, very easy, Adobe DNG converter does that, but your edit in C1 won't be recognized by ACR or Lightroom.
Note that you can shoot in camera DNG with the Z (also with the D) but C1 won't recognize that file.

As you know I've been a long time user of C1 (since V3) and loved it.
But since I have the Pentax 645D I was forced (DNG contains less infos than the PEF) to adopt LR.

So shoots after shoots I learned how to use LR.

As C1 V8 is recently out I wanted to test again against LR…

I have spent some hours this afternoon comparing edits from C1 and from LR.

LR gives me better results! of course the C1 demoisacing is standard and not adapted to the 645 Z files…

 

[Asher Kelman]

Yes, very easy, Adobe DNG converter does that, but your edit in C1 won't be recognized by ACR or Lightroom.
Note that you can shoot in camera DNG with the Z (also with the D) but C1 won't recognize that file.

As you know I've been a long time user of C1 (since V3) and loved it.
But since I have the Pentax 645D I was forced (DNG contains less infos than the PEF) to adopt LR.

So shoots after shoots I learned how to use LR.

As C1 V8 is recently out I wanted to test again against LR…

I have spent some hours this afternoon comparing edits from C1 and from LR.

LR gives me better results! of course the C1 demoisacing is standard and not adapted to the 645 Z files…

What about DXO or other odd RAW packages like RAW Therapee etc?

Asher

 

[nicolas claris]

What about DXO or other odd RAW packages like RAW Therapie etc?

Asher

Last time I checked DXO it didn't read the 645D files.
As for the other, I don't have time to try them all!

Also I'm happy with LR5 results…

 

[Asher Kelman]

Last time I checked DXO it didn't read the 645D files.
As for the other, I don't have time to try them all!

Also I'm happy with LR5 results…

I think I know how you feel. I also am using ACR CC 2014 more than Capture One right now as it is more fluid. The filing system for capture one drives me nuts! but some of the features like removing oddities in skin tone are really useful.

I own Lightroom for some time, but only now do I want to use it for its output sharpening. Still, I'm most comfortable working with layers in Photoshop.

Asher

 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Bart,

Thanks for all the clarifications!

Can one convert the Pentax 645Z files to DNG format and then have access to Capture One for processing and finally save as DNG and use ACR to bring in the color correction profile one has made for that camera and the lens corrections from ACR?

Hi Asher,

As Nicolas said, the Adobe DNG converter can create a DNG, or the Pentax cameras can produce a DNG, but the PhaseOne camera back has it's own file type for optimal compatibility with the Raw converter.

DNGs from the Pentax will not convert with full quality in Capture One, in fact it does a worse job than Adobe ACR or Lightroom does. Other, non-medium-formats, will convert with full quality in Capture One. Corrections in Capture One, do not carry over to ACR/LR in Raw files, so the only thing would be to create a TIFF and work on that in the other converter/editor.

Cheers,
Bart

 

[Asher Kelman]

Hi Asher,

As Nicolas said, the Adobe DNG converter can create a DNG, or the Pentax cameras can produce a DNG, but the PhaseOne camera back has it's own file type for optimal compatibility with the Raw converter.

DNGs from the Pentax will not convert with full quality in Capture One, in fact it does a worse job than Adobe ACR or Lightroom does. Other, non-medium-formats, will convert with full quality in Capture One. Corrections in Capture One, do not carry over to ACR/LR in Raw files, so the only thing would be to create a TIFF and work on that in the other converter/editor.

Cheers,
Bart

Do we know whose fault this is - Ricoh Pentax being stubborn and secretive or else Phase One being selfish? Do Hasselblad files work optimally with Capture One? what about Pentax files from their APS C sized cameras?

Asher

 

[nicolas claris]

Do we know whose fault this is - Ricoh Pentax being stubborn and secretive or else Phase One being selfish? Do Hasselblad files work optimally with Capture One? what about Pentax files from their APS C sized cameras?

Asher

Read the last post there : http://forum.phaseone.com/En/viewto...Z&sid=49937e9b2a9bad1a718cb2077fc6a3e7#p81939

And make your own opinion !

The Phase poster is not telling the truth…

When I got the 645D, I made a support case asking for the support of the Pentax 645 D by C1.
Below is the reply I got :

Oct 2012 19:04

Nicolas,
I, and the support department, unfortunately do not have a contact to provide you.
The permission necessary to support specific cameras is handled through the marketing department, where the demand is calculated against the available resources we have to implament support. The Pentax 645D is a very unique case as it is a Medium Format camera and to date no other manufacture of Medium Format Cameras has allowed us to use their RAW files, due to our production of Medium Format systems (Sinar, Hasselblad, Pentax, Leaf *prior to partnership). As such I do not hold out much hope that we will be allowed to support the Pentax 645D.
However, pressure on Pentax would certainly help to expedite support should it happen in the future. I would suggest you contact the Sales department of Phase One via the contact list below to see if they can provide an adequate contact for Pentax.
http://www.anp.se//content.asp?account=41445047714944504271&artid=494A594772424A5F417740&

Also, other avenues like Facebook and Twitter (aside from various forums) are an excellent way of getting exposure and "rallying the troops" for your request.

Kind Regards,
D...
Phase One Support

 

[Asher Kelman]

Read the last post there : http://forum.phaseone.com/En/viewto...Z&sid=49937e9b2a9bad1a718cb2077fc6a3e7#p81939

And make your own opinion !

The Phase poster is not telling the truth…

When I got the 645D, I made a support case asking for the support of the Pentax 645 D by C1.
Below is the reply I got :

Nicolas,

I think they make it clear that they have no intention of making Capture One work with any competing MF digital camera! Now that the 50 MP Canon 5Ds is to be widely available, it remains to be seen if they will essentially go against that policy as 50MP from Canon in good light is 50 MP! I think that they may be sorely tested by the 5Ds arrival.

Asher

 

[nicolas claris]

Nicolas,

I think they make it clear that they have no intention of making Capture One work with any competing MF digital camera! Now that the 50 MP Canon 5Ds is to be widely available, it remains to be seen if they will essentially go against that policy as 50MP from Canon in good light is 50 MP! I think that they may be sorely tested by the 5Ds arrival.

Asher

They make it clear now!
Before they let me understand (and I have other messages from them during that same period) that I should do some lobbying to force their marketing dept. to recognize the the 645D (and now the Z).
After all all other cameras from Ricoh Pentax are fully compatible with C1.

I do not know what they will do, but for sure they will not treat the new upcoming Canon as a MF camera for the good reason that it is not.

 

[nicolas claris]

Funnily enough to be mentioned, the image in the OP has generated no comment…
This post let only comments about comparison of the camera with other brands using the same Sony Sensor and post-production softwares…
So, and Asher knows I'm a bit stubborn, here's the image again, for my own pleasure!

 

[nicolas claris]

Hi Nicolas,

Hope you get the opportunity to call it your own some day. It seems like a very useful camera for your type of shooting scenarios, and it's supposed to be decently weather sealed (don't know about the lenses).

Enjoy!

Cheers,
Bart

Hope granted!
I ordered the 645 Z today together with the marvelous 120 mm macro : D
I'll keep the 645 D as my back-up so I'll share the same lens.
Delivering early next week they said!

 

[Bart_van_der_Wolf]

Hope granted!
I ordered the 645 Z today together with the marvelous 120 mm macro : D
I'll keep the 645 D as my back-up so I'll share the same lens.
Delivering early next week they said!

Congrats, with the (hopefully soon to arrive) new camera. The benefit of the (relatively) affordable body is that one can indeed have a spare unit as insurance/back-up. For some of the other Medium Format alternatives it would require a huge investment, or a very good local dealer (wherever one is shooting at that time).

You/your work deserves a camera like that, and the camera deserves an owner like you ...

Cheers,
Bart

 

[Asher Kelman]

Hope granted!
I ordered the 645 Z today together with the marvelous 120 mm macro : D
I'll keep the 645 D as my back-up so I'll share the same lens.
Delivering early next week they said!

Nicolas,

Congrats! Pentax Ricoh is lucky to have to as a customer! I hope they gave you a good price. Unfortunately Ricoh knows the price is good anyway and it stands well with the far more costly Phase One, Hassy and Leaf interpretations of the same Sony sensor.

So which lenses do you own now. I'd have thought the 90 mm with image stabilization would be especially useful from a helicopter!

Asher

 

[nicolas claris]

Congrats, with the (hopefully soon to arrive) new camera. The benefit of the (relatively) affordable body is that one can indeed have a spare unit as insurance/back-up. For some of the other Medium Format alternatives it would require a huge investment, or a very good local dealer (wherever one is shooting at that time).

You/your work deserves a camera like that, and the camera deserves an owner like you ...

Cheers,
Bart

Thank you Bart
yes, it is very comfortable and peace of mind to have such a back-up camera…
BTW, where I usually shoot they are no dealers of no brands so no help possible whatever the camera brand is… And there are so many possibilities of damage, sand, salt, water, helicopter vibrations, falling due to boats movements (it happened with the Sinar, whooooo scary!) not to mention falling overboard…
But vineyard are more quiet! (and less in remote places)

 

[nicolas claris]

Nicolas,

Congrats! Pentax Ricoh is lucky to have to as a customer! I hope they gave you a good price. Unfortunately Ricoh knows the price is good anyway and it stands well with the far more costly Phase One, Hassy and Leaf interpretations of the same Sony sensor.

So which lenses do you own now. I'd have thought the 90 mm with image stabilization would be especially useful from a helicopter!

Asher

Thanks Asher,
can't wait to get the Z!
As for the price it is to be considered if it is or not a good investment and if one can "sell" the MF quality to one's clients… the rest is just a banker matter!

Today, before the awaited 120 mm macro, I have the following lens:
DFA645 55 mm ƒ 2.8 AL (IF)
SMC Pentax-DA 645 25mm F4 AL [IF] SDM AW
HD D-FA 645 Macro 90mm F 2.8 AW SR
smc FA 645 80-160mm f4.5
smc FA 645 300 mm f4 ED (IF)

Heavy enough!

My case which I bring with me in cabin when flying weights: 40 pounds (with the laptop inside and the two 645 bodies).
Completely out of regulation, but how can I do else?
When the company's guys check the weight I open the case… :
A big silence and then they let me go in the plane