PetaPixel

Specs and Price Info for the Pentax 645D II CMOS Medium Format Camera from CP+

pentax645d

We weren’t able to send anyone all the way to CP+ this year, and some of the products and details emerging from the trade show have us a little sad about that.

We already shared the news that Fuji will soon be debuting a 50mm tele conversion lens for the X100/s, and now we’ve got some specs and price information for the upcoming Pentax 645D CMOS Medium Format camera.

The info comes to us from the folks over at DC.Watch, who heard it from Ricoh at CP+. And even though a couple of the specifications are given in ranges rather than a definitive number, this should give you an idea of what to expect when the camera gets its official announcement, which should happen sometime this Spring.

pentax645d_1

According to DC.Watch, the new camera will boast:

  • A 40 – 50-megapixel sensor
  • A SAFOX XI AF module
  • 3fps continuous shooting
  • Max ISO of either 102,400 or 204,800
  • A shutter life of 100,000 actuations
  • Live view capability with movie function
  • USB 3.0 support for tethered shooting

Additionally, they were also told that the final camera would cost about $10,000 and would arrive officially in mid-April of this year.

For more info check out our previous coverage and be sure to check back often for more updates on the CMOS Medium Format front.

(via Photo Rumors)


 
  • teila

    People who don’t shoot medium format often forget that two large advantages over a tiny sensor camera like the D800 is the much larger angle of view that can be had with medium format. Example, if you’re shooting with a 35mm lens in a bathroom with a D800, you will get MUCH less in the frame than shooting the same scene with a MF camera. It’s night and day.

    Sync speed? Try shooting a model spiking a volleyball on a beach at 1pm in the bright sun. You want to shoot a f/4, so you add an appropriate neutral density (ND) filter, and shoot with a shutter speed of 1/800 or even 1/1600 using a high powered strobe/pack combo… non of that worthless Nikon/Canon “high speed sync” speed light stuff.

    When you’re up close to the model hitting the ball, you get more of the action in the shot AND you’re closer, so the resulting photograph has a different “look” entirely or what many people call a different “feel”.

    If you take the shot using a 6×7 or 6×9 MF camera or a 4×5 large format camera, the resulting photograph is even more different than what you’d get with a D800. There’s much more to think about than just image quality and silly MTF, high iso, and dynamic range charts; That’s why many photographers can’t stand the smaller formats… because aside form being convenient and utility in nature, the results compared to larger formats is much of the time, a let down.

    There’s different “medium format” sizes to think about. A digital back that’s a 6×4.5 or 6×6 (hasselblad 500 models, etc.) don’t even offer the nice wide angle of view as the 6×7 and 6×9 range finders. . another reason why many portrait professionals are still screwing around with film, which although a pain in the ash, can offer far more in a single scene than any full frame 35mm based digital camera. All MF cameras aren’t necessarily even close to being the same…

  • teila

    Actually it’s not a “big” difference.

  • http://alanklughammer.com/ Alan Klughammer

    Yes a 35mm is an ultra wide on a medium format, and close to normal on a m43. Assuming coverage, a 35mm focal length would be a fisheye on a large format camera. if you use a wide angle lens like a 16mm on the D800 you will get the same coverage.
    The camera in question, The Pentax D645 has a focal plane shutter, the same as a D800, but since your sensor is so large, your sync speed is even slower than a D800 (1/125 vs 1/250). I think there are a very few leaf shutter lenses you can use, but if I remember, these are a bit fiddly (you have to put the camera on bulb). There are advantages and disadvantages to each type of shutter.
    Large format cameras typically allow lens (and back) movements, but you can get similar results with a tilt shift lens (or Nikon used to have a bellows that had movements).

    I still stand by my original statement that the difference between a MF digital camera and something like the D800 (and possibly the rumoured Canon) is less and less.

  • teila

    It’s not an issue of lens equivalency as it is the reality that you have considerably more latitude with a large sensor shooting up close or in close confines. The D800 (great kit) just can’t match getting the same info into the frame as MF and LF without having an ultra-wide angle lens look. M43 just can’t compete. The Pentax’s sore point is the horrible sync speed- not *as* much of an issue in studio setting that don’t use much ambient light, but can be an issue for many in studio and out. Phase/Hasselblad both have faster options. Hopefully Pentax gets on the ball and brings forth at lest two leaf lenses. For most typical work, only 2 or 3 LS lenses are really needed anyway.

    You’re correct. There are advantages to each kind of shutter.

    I meant not to contradict your assessment between the two formats, but rather to put it out there for anyone unfamiliar, that there’s far more to MF than image quality related attributes, which alone, can make a tremendous difference in a person’s photography irrespective of iso performance, resolution, or dynamic range performance. Just like the difference between 1.5x (crop Nikon) compared to “full frame” can be a night and day difference based merely on how much of the scene you can get into one photograph.

    Agreed 100%… for those shooting catalog, and other shots of a general nature that don’t require more; the difference between using a D800 and MF is virtually nil which is a testament to how far photography has come in a relatively short time.

    Best in photography to you Alan.

  • http://alanklughammer.com/ Alan Klughammer

    Thanks teila, I agree that there are other differences. I am just bringing my biases built during the film era. I shot mainly 35mm and 4×5. I always found medium format a bit too “in between”

    I guess my point, which largely agrees with you, is that, in the digital era, MF digital has become kind of like the 4×5 of the film era (ignoring movements) Very specialized and used mainly for studio and landscapes (with quite a few notable exceptions of course…) That makes full frame take over the medium format film niche and crop sensors becoming the common camera, much as 35mm film.

    As mirrorless and m43 grows, I wonder if it will push the use cases down again, where the common format is ~m43.

    Again, kind of interesting, as I never shot much MF in the film era, but now I shoot full frame in digital…

    Just some rambling thoughts before my first coffee….

  • teila

    Great things to think about. I hope Pentax hits a home run with the 645z. Enjoy that coffee… I’m about to put a pot on; it’s cold out!