Dario wrote:
Just a niche I won't negate the existence of.
Yes, but at present full frame 35mm DSLR is a niche and two years
ago DSLR's were a niche....
Pål
The debate is so interesting, and so complicated, and you guys have
such a great experience ! It is not easy to jump in.
I agree with you Pål, and I hope that other considerations (delays,
bad marketing...) won't prevent the success of the 645D.
Concerning the "good enough" question, I think that if small DSLR
chips and 35mm lenses get better, big DSLR and MF lenses get better
too, so the quality gap between small and medium format should stay.
I remember a phrase from Jacques Tati, saying something like "with
16mm film, I can shoot a door, with 35mm film I can shoot a house,
and with a 70mm film I can shot a building." It was at the time of
the shooting of the feature film Playtime.
Recently, I've read an itv of S. Salgado, in the french magazine
Reponses Photo n°163, written by P. Bachelier and J.C. Bechet. I
don't think you can have access to this magazine outside of France,
so I'm going to translate some parts the best I can.
Sebastião arrested his choice on the Pentax 645 NII after trying a
dozen of MF cameras. Many reasons for his choice. First, the Pentax
645 is monobloc, with integrated prism and handle. Its construction
makes it less fragile on the ground than its more studio dedicated
concurrents, with their changeable accessories. "It's a very durable
camera ; as much as a Leica M5 or a Nikon F". It is very low
consuming : 6 AA batteries (which you can find anywhere) give it a
greater autonomy than 100 films. Sebastião takes 4 cameras (2 as
backups) (...)
"The light measure is very precise : my lightmeter stays in my bag.
The camera is well thought, because everything falls under the hands.
But I asked Pentax if they could modify the ergonomy of the handle
for a shape in which fingers could stick." (...)
"Before going to medium format, I had never worked with zooms. The
chief ingeneer of Pentax optics department insisted for me to try
them and he convinced me. I don't see any difference with primes.
Zooms have a handicap : they are slower, but I work mainly under the
sun and it isn't a problem. The screen is very bright. The only
difficulty is to keep the horizon straight. It's easier with small
format, thanks to its more panoramic format." The 2 zooms used a lot
are the 45-85 and 80-160 mm. "When I shot the whales, zooms did make
the work easier for following there movements. I used the 35 mm when
we could come closer. And for their jumps above the water, the 200
mm. The whales do 5 or 6 jumps in a go, and you can anticipate the
shooting." For the primes, the choice was the 35, 120 macro, 200 and
300 mm, and a 1,4X multiplier. The praise doesn't stop about the know-
how of Pentax. "Generally, the japaneese optics have a too high
contrast. Pentax is more german, sweeter, closer to Leica. The optics
give a very good sharpness, even at f:32. The 1,4 multiplier is of
excellent quality : the 200 becomes a 280 and the 300 a 420 mm. For
the close-ups, the 120 macro is terrific."
It's been a long time since we amateur photographers look at photo-
journalists with Nikon gear and action-photographers with big Canon
glasses, and vice-versa. But we could start to be interested in what
maybe is a niche : a camera for nature and landscape photography. The
Pentax 645 seems to answer the needs of artists such as Sebastião
Salgado or Yann Arthus Bertrand. I would like to know if they're
interested in the 645D !
http://www.yannarthusbertrand.com/yann2/affichage.php?
reference=365J-05-27&pais=France
http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/salgado/image/0,15021,1366014,00.html
François
