Re: P645D
In fact, I'd really like a cheap Pentax 645. But prices are usually still a bit hard for me. I don't even think about 67. I'd really like one though ... -- Thibouille -- *ist-D,Z1,SFXn,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ...
Re: P645D
Hush, don't let the cat out of the bag. Some of us are filling our boots very nicely at the moment. Peter - Original Message - From: "Sylwester Pietrzyk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2006 3:45 PM Subject: Re: P645D Right now prices of second-hand lenses for 645 are very low... Actually lower than hi-quality counterparts with K-mount. For instance 120 macro either A or FA went for not much more than 300 Euro... Try to buy A 100/2.8 macro for that price :-) Really good times for amateurs who always wanted to have MF but couldn't afford it. Of course, much will depend on price. It all depends on the price of Kodak's sensor. 645nII body is actually cheaper than top Canon or Nikon 35 mm film SLRs... -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
Re: P645D
On 25 Jan 2006 at 18:00, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > These are very good lenses, not the low end harsh stuff. The Canon > 100/2 is in the same category. The rendering *is* different from > Pentax lenses ... I liken it to the difference between Zeiss and > Leica lenses, where the Pentax is analogous to the Leica. Interesting, thanks. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: P645D
On Jan 25, 2006, at 6:39 PM, Rob Studdert wrote: Quality differences between them ... very hard to call with respect to the 6Mpixel DSLR bodies. I bet if I posted two photos at full resolution taken with them you would be hard pressed to tell the difference. They're both excellent. What I find most pleasing about the 31mm is that it suffers virtually zero geometric distortion and is truly sharp to the edges on the 6MP bodies, it requires very little work in post processing even wide open. How would the Canon 28mm compare in these areas? With the proviso that I've not done rigorous lens testing with either, I would say the same for the EF28/1.8. Results out of the camera with either of them have been very satisfactory, both of them improve nicely with only light touches in post-processing. The Canon 28/1.8 is very similar in characteristics to the Canon 50/1.4 ... slightly soft wide open, very sharp from one stop down, nice "glow" and imaging qualities most everywhere. Focusing is fast and silent with the 28 due to the USM ring motor. These are very good lenses, not the low end harsh stuff. The Canon 100/2 is in the same category. The rendering *is* different from Pentax lenses ... I liken it to the difference between Zeiss and Leica lenses, where the Pentax is analogous to the Leica. Godfrey
Re: P645D
On 25 Jan 2006 at 16:04, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > Quality differences between them ... very hard to call with respect > to the 6Mpixel DSLR bodies. I bet if I posted two photos at full > resolution taken with them you would be hard pressed to tell the > difference. They're both excellent. What I find most pleasing about the 31mm is that it suffers virtually zero geometric distortion and is truly sharp to the edges on the 6MP bodies, it requires very little work in post processing even wide open. How would the Canon 28mm compare in these areas? Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: P645D
On Jan 25, 2006, at 3:16 PM, Pål Jensen wrote: Yep, the 31 is not exactly petite. That depends on perspective. If it had been a Canon lens it would have been among the most compact available in the EF mount. Digressing from the subject line for a moment... The FA31 is virtually the same field of view/speed choice as the Canon 28/1.8 USM is in the Canon line, with respect to the 1.6x crop factor bodies. The specification comparison is interesting: http://homepage.mac.com/godders/c28-p31-compare.html I've had both (still have the Canon...). The Canon 10D or 20D with the EF28 feels nicely balanced and reasonably sized. The Pentax DS with the FA31 feels nose-heavy and awkward to me, because the Pentax body is so much more compact and lighter. Quality differences between them ... very hard to call with respect to the 6Mpixel DSLR bodies. I bet if I posted two photos at full resolution taken with them you would be hard pressed to tell the difference. They're both excellent. Godfrey
Re: P645D
- Original Message - From: "John Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Yep, the 31 is not exactly petite. That depends on perspective. If it had been a Canon lens it would have been among the most compact available in the EF mount. Pål
Re: P645D
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 21:11:39 -, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I just started a contract at home. My poor 67 never even got inside my front door until last night. It's time to start using it! The disposable was only because I had forgotten my *ist D that day. I skied with it last weekend two days. Now I could be convinced to get a DA 40 for it. The 31 LTD was a little bulky under my coat. Tom C. Yep, the 31 is not exactly petite. The problem with the DA 40 is the AOV on digital. A 24mm pancake would be just the thing. John From: "John Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: P645D Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 21:00:06 - From Fuji throwaway to Pentax 67. You certainly cover a wide range, Tom. John On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:02:40 -, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I just bought 20 rolls of 220 Velvia 50 and 100 yesterday for the 67. You guys watch out and get ready to put on your tinted glasses. Tom C. From: "John Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: "pentax-discuss@pdml.net" Subject: P645D Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 11:14:52 - I've already said that Pentax is far too late in releasing this camera. However, I suspect it might be moderately successful. Many of the people who used to shoot with the 645 will have held onto their lenses, so their only cost in switching back will be the new body, and perhaps a new wide-angle. It's certainly going to push second-hand lens prices up a bit. If they reach a happy stage where they tempt people to sell them, but are not too expensive to buy, then I am sure some small-format DSLR people would be interested because it will be a cheaper way into big sensors than going Canon FF, and there is none of the hassle and cost of shooting big negatives/slides which used to put people off using film MF. Of course, much will depend on price. John -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: P645D
This one time, at band camp, "John Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've already said that Pentax is far too late in releasing this camera. I agree, many have already jumped ship to canon 35mm option. > > Of course, much will depend on price. If the price is right, and the sensor size/megapixels is right I would purchase 1 tomorrow, however, I dont see this being released tomorrow and I cannot put off a MF digital indefinitely. Waiting to see what photokina offers us. Fingers crossed Kevin -- "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote."
Re: P645D
I just started a contract at home. My poor 67 never even got inside my front door until last night. It's time to start using it! The disposable was only because I had forgotten my *ist D that day. I skied with it last weekend two days. Now I could be convinced to get a DA 40 for it. The 31 LTD was a little bulky under my coat. Tom C. From: "John Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: P645D Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 21:00:06 - From Fuji throwaway to Pentax 67. You certainly cover a wide range, Tom. John On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:02:40 -, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I just bought 20 rolls of 220 Velvia 50 and 100 yesterday for the 67. You guys watch out and get ready to put on your tinted glasses. Tom C. From: "John Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: "pentax-discuss@pdml.net" Subject: P645D Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 11:14:52 - I've already said that Pentax is far too late in releasing this camera. However, I suspect it might be moderately successful. Many of the people who used to shoot with the 645 will have held onto their lenses, so their only cost in switching back will be the new body, and perhaps a new wide-angle. It's certainly going to push second-hand lens prices up a bit. If they reach a happy stage where they tempt people to sell them, but are not too expensive to buy, then I am sure some small-format DSLR people would be interested because it will be a cheaper way into big sensors than going Canon FF, and there is none of the hassle and cost of shooting big negatives/slides which used to put people off using film MF. Of course, much will depend on price. John -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: P645D
From Fuji throwaway to Pentax 67. You certainly cover a wide range, Tom. John On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 20:02:40 -, Tom C <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I just bought 20 rolls of 220 Velvia 50 and 100 yesterday for the 67. You guys watch out and get ready to put on your tinted glasses. Tom C. From: "John Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: "pentax-discuss@pdml.net" Subject: P645D Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 11:14:52 - I've already said that Pentax is far too late in releasing this camera. However, I suspect it might be moderately successful. Many of the people who used to shoot with the 645 will have held onto their lenses, so their only cost in switching back will be the new body, and perhaps a new wide-angle. It's certainly going to push second-hand lens prices up a bit. If they reach a happy stage where they tempt people to sell them, but are not too expensive to buy, then I am sure some small-format DSLR people would be interested because it will be a cheaper way into big sensors than going Canon FF, and there is none of the hassle and cost of shooting big negatives/slides which used to put people off using film MF. Of course, much will depend on price. John -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
RE: P645D
I just bought 20 rolls of 220 Velvia 50 and 100 yesterday for the 67. You guys watch out and get ready to put on your tinted glasses. Tom C. From: "John Forbes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: "pentax-discuss@pdml.net" Subject: P645D Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2006 11:14:52 - I've already said that Pentax is far too late in releasing this camera. However, I suspect it might be moderately successful. Many of the people who used to shoot with the 645 will have held onto their lenses, so their only cost in switching back will be the new body, and perhaps a new wide-angle. It's certainly going to push second-hand lens prices up a bit. If they reach a happy stage where they tempt people to sell them, but are not too expensive to buy, then I am sure some small-format DSLR people would be interested because it will be a cheaper way into big sensors than going Canon FF, and there is none of the hassle and cost of shooting big negatives/slides which used to put people off using film MF. Of course, much will depend on price. John -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: P645D
On 2006-01-25, at 18:57, frank theriault wrote: I wonder if former 645 users who replaced their MF with digital didn't sell most of their lenses to finance the plunge into the dark side... Not likely, there are still quite a lot of them and good 645 lenses are less rare on eBay than good K-lenses :-) Some pros like YAB or Salgado still use P 645 too. If they can only get good price for sensor from Kodak it can be easily at about price of Canon 1Ds... -- Best regards Sylwek
Re: P645D
On 1/25/06, Mishka <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 1/25/06, John Forbes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > However, I suspect it might be moderately successful. Many of the people > > who used to shoot with the 645 will have held onto their lenses, so their > > only cost in switching back will be the new body, and perhaps a new > > wide-angle. > > add all hassy users who cannot afford/don't want to switch to H2D, > factor in a huge number of pentacon-6 glass -- it all can be used on > P645, and you'll end up with a substantial potential user base. > I wonder if former 645 users who replaced their MF with digital didn't sell most of their lenses to finance the plunge into the dark side... -frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: P645D
On 1/25/06, John Forbes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > However, I suspect it might be moderately successful. Many of the people > who used to shoot with the 645 will have held onto their lenses, so their > only cost in switching back will be the new body, and perhaps a new > wide-angle. add all hassy users who cannot afford/don't want to switch to H2D, factor in a huge number of pentacon-6 glass -- it all can be used on P645, and you'll end up with a substantial potential user base. best, mishka
Re: P645D
John Forbes wrote on 25.01.06 12:14: > I've already said that Pentax is far too late in releasing this camera. > > However, I suspect it might be moderately successful. Many of the people > who used to shoot with the 645 will have held onto their lenses, so their > only cost in switching back will be the new body, and perhaps a new > wide-angle. > > It's certainly going to push second-hand lens prices up a bit. If they > reach a happy stage where they tempt people to sell them, but are not too > expensive to buy, then I am sure some small-format DSLR people would be > interested because it will be a cheaper way into big sensors than going > Canon FF, and there is none of the hassle and cost of shooting big > negatives/slides which used to put people off using film MF. Right now prices of second-hand lenses for 645 are very low... Actually lower than hi-quality counterparts with K-mount. For instance 120 macro either A or FA went for not much more than 300 Euro... Try to buy A 100/2.8 macro for that price :-) Really good times for amateurs who always wanted to have MF but couldn't afford it. > Of course, much will depend on price. It all depends on the price of Kodak's sensor. 645nII body is actually cheaper than top Canon or Nikon 35 mm film SLRs... -- Balance is the ultimate good... Best Regards Sylwek
P645D
I've already said that Pentax is far too late in releasing this camera. However, I suspect it might be moderately successful. Many of the people who used to shoot with the 645 will have held onto their lenses, so their only cost in switching back will be the new body, and perhaps a new wide-angle. It's certainly going to push second-hand lens prices up a bit. If they reach a happy stage where they tempt people to sell them, but are not too expensive to buy, then I am sure some small-format DSLR people would be interested because it will be a cheaper way into big sensors than going Canon FF, and there is none of the hassle and cost of shooting big negatives/slides which used to put people off using film MF. Of course, much will depend on price. John -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
