645D

Would the heat generation from such a large sensor not make video extremely difficult to implement?

I wonder if when we get to this level of resolution whether or not it isn't better to just use a video camera?

I'm certainly no physicist but I'd have thought a larger surface area would run cooler as it would have intrinsically superior heat dissipation properties. I'm quite happy to stand corrected on that though!

The main problem I see is that all the current DMF cameras (plus the Leica M9) use CCD sensors and video appears to require a CMOS sensor. While the compromises in using CMOS technology are accepted in prosumer cameras, if I paid £8k+ for the very best image quality I wouldn't want that quality compromised for the sake of feature bloat. Of course there may well be new technologies on the horizon that render the last point moot, but as things stand right now I can't see who would buy an extremely expensive still camera with a less-than-state-of-the-art sensor. I wouldn't...

We had this argument over video d-slrs not too long ago...
adding video won't hurt image quality... k10 vs k5... think about it...
ccd and cmos are both used for video sensors in pro video cameras....
heat and other issues can be addressed... what would be needed is the computing power of the k5 x two cores which could be done and combined with dual card slots and faster af to increase the 645's burst rate to match the k5's current abilities... now sensor size... use pixel doubling (or quadrupling) to get 1080 p with ultra low light video capabilities, and also release a (2 lenses in one) 3-d lens ( each lens using one half the big sensor) to record simultaneous 1080p video streams ( you lose some low light performance) and you'd have the highest resolution 3-d on the prosumer market...

all without sacrificing still image quality....

Piece of cake.....

my point exactly... they gotta release a 645 mk II or in this case a 645 -DV (video) sooner or later... do it sooner and you can have side by side with the current model for a slightly higher premium...

Getting the indie film makers as well as studio shooters lusting after Pentax may sell more aps-c d-slrs as sort of a halo effect draws attention to the brand.

no, its still complete rubbish Don...there is no market for a "Medium Format DSLR Video Camera". At all. For £10k you can rent a lot of pro HD camera, RED camera, 35mm camera, 70mm camera, IMAX camera, etc...

The (limited) market for 4k video shooting is so you can play around in Post and edit down to HD or even SD resolution....if you are someone shooting a major Feature and can afford a Soho edit facility with a massive server farm, not someone making a Wedding DVD or a lo/no-budget short with Final Cut on a macbook

Even the manufacturers aren't too keen on 4k any more...they are currently chasing 3D as their next opportunity to sell everyone new equipment all over again (which, incidentally, is only done at 1/2 resolution...)

And even 4k, which is the current digital "optimum" for Cinema use (although double the resolution most commonly used for digital cinema) - is 4096x2160. A Pentax 645 shoots a wopping 7264x5440 - that's 2 1/2 times bigger than is needed for a full-size cinema screen. so... errr.... no, nobody is wanting to shoot at that resolution, whether they are George Lucas or George Nobody!

70mm has been around since the 1890's... IMAX since the late 60's... ultimate resolution isn't always the best, most practical, or cost effective solution! Bit like Medium & Large Format photography, really... its a niche.


p.s.
Tow Bar on a F1 Car said all of the above much more concisely though

1) current 3d is half resolution... because they are using two lenses on the same sized sensor, so to get the full resolution, one method would be to use a sensor that is twice as big..
2) calculate the resolution you need for an 8x10 then explain the resolution of the k5 sensor... But why go bigger than most people need to right?
3) niche or no niche, medium format is still in demand, and high res video is as well.
4) ya'all got it backwards I'm not talking about putting a tow bar on an f1... I'm talking about putting an f1 engine's horsepower into a tow truck..... it will haul and it will haul a$...!!!, um I mean butt.

I've got to admire your persistence and dedication to the cause Don, and I'm personally very glad you and others like you are out there thinking up new ideas and ways of doing things.

Having said that I still think you're not only barking up the wrong tree but you're actually in the wrong forest. Nothing anyone has put forward has explained to me why you would need a sensor as physically big (and as expensive to manufacture) as the 645's in order to shoot video. I do fully understand the call for higher resolution, but in a few years we'll see 40MP in phones and 100+ in SLR/mirrorless cameras.

I don't buy into the 3D argument either I'm afraid - it would be far simpler, cheaper and more elegant to have two APS-C sized sensors side-by-side. In fact I wouldn't be suprised to see Red (or someone of that ilk) come up with such a solution in the very near future.

most likely to see me with two kx's and a bracket... maybe even this year if I can find a decent Mac software solution for editing and delivering.... Been having fun with the k10's and 50 mm 1.4's... might even opt for another 35 2.4 but stills and stop frame animations aren't going to cut it for serious film making...

That was my point. While I know I'd cream over the IQ of a 645 I simply cannot see a time where I'd ever want to make those kind of enlargements.

I export all my edits from Lightroom to 1400x1000max.

Comparing the K-5 and 645 Sensors on DXOmark

they both score 82 and looking at ISO performance ... the 645 tops at 1600 and th k-5 has more dynamic range.

I know the 645 is better than the K-5 in many other ways, but when I get my K-5 I shall be doing a lot of shooting at higher ISOs from 3200 to 25600. high ISO noise and low dynamic range as always been the handicap in my current cams, rather than the ability to enlarge up to poster/room/billboard size.

Ok, if I was Rothschild, I'd just buy it all anyway..

The confusion probably stems from us wanting things without having a purpose for them.

The 645D has its own quite definite purpose and if you need it you need it and it will be unsurpassed.

I want an iPad, for example, but in reality have no real purpose for one.