Best 645 shots so far

I bought a Pentax 645 body in the summer and an FA 75mm f/2.8 lens to go with it. Obviously the AF of the FA lens is useless on the body, but I got a good deal on it and it's mint, and I might upgrade in the future.

This is my first medium format camera and I'm enjoying it very much, especially the DoF control. The quality increase from 35mm film is considerable (though I still lust over the 6x7 cameras). I like to keep the lens wide open unless there's a particular reason not to do so (for greater DoF).

I thought I would post some of my best shots so far, taken on a variety of films. The subjects may be boring in many cases, since I haven't had (or made) enough good opportunities to use the camera (or any other).

Feedback and constructive criticism very welcome.

Kodak Portra 400.

[IMG]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y232/jonnymacd/Film/Film%2015%20-%20645%20Kodak%20Portra%20400/BilbaoPortra400645014a_zps1fb48aff.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y232/jonnymacd/Film/Film%2015%20-%20645%20Kodak%20Portra%20400/BilbaoPortra400645001a_zpsb2d6ba26.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y232/jonnymacd/Film/Film%2015%20-%20645%20Kodak%20Portra%20400/BilbaoPortra400645003a_zps80f58620.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y232/jonnymacd/Film/Film%2015%20-%20645%20Kodak%20Portra%20400/BilbaoPortra400645004a_zps7fefc830.jpg[/IMG]

Fuji Reala 100.

[IMG]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y232/jonnymacd/Film/Film%2012%20-%20Fuji%20Reala%20645/Reala100645008a.jpg[/IMG]

Kodak Portra 160 (shot at ISO 125).

[IMG]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y232/jonnymacd/Film/Film%2011%20-%20Kodak%20Portra%20160%20645/Portra160645006a.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y232/jonnymacd/Film/Film%2011%20-%20Kodak%20Portra%20160%20645/Portra160645005a.jpg[/IMG]

Fuji Pro 160NS (I love this film).

[IMG]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y232/jonnymacd/Film/Fuji%20Pro%20160NS%20645/Fuji160NS645027a.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y232/jonnymacd/Film/Fuji%20Pro%20160NS%20645/Fuji160NS645021a.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y232/jonnymacd/Film/Fuji%20Pro%20160NS%20645/Fuji160NS645029a.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y232/jonnymacd/Film/Fuji%20Pro%20160NS%20645/Fuji160NS645004a.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y232/jonnymacd/Film/Fuji%20Pro%20160NS%20645/Fuji160NS645034a_zps0930aff9.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y232/jonnymacd/Film/Fuji%20Pro%20160NS%20645/Fuji160NS645025a_zps92ef15b6.jpg[/IMG]

Ilford FP4+.

[IMG]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y232/jonnymacd/Film/Film%208%20-%20Ilford%20FP4%20645/ScanFP4120072.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y232/jonnymacd/Film/Film%208%20-%20Ilford%20FP4%20645/ScanFP4120067.jpg[/IMG]

Very Nice Work

For all its technology theirs still something about film that digital cant match, nice

Very nice series of photographs.

I've recently purchased a 645n with 45mm 2.8 and 80-160 2.8 and have shot several rolls of film through it and been very impressed with the results. I've been half tempted to sell due to the lack of use it's getting but that may change and I may well end up keeping it Well done.

Thanks for the comments and re-assurance everyone.

You should keep the 645, your results are impressive. If the cost is too much then just downgrade to an original 645 body and A lenses. You'll only really lose AF and it will be much cheaper.

I find using film is something of a battle. I wanted to shoot my wife's birthday party with the 645 using Ilford 3200 but she complained and forced me to take the K200D. Her reason was that the quality of film is much lower than digital.

In part she has a point but it's not film that limits the quality, it's the resolution of my V500 scanner. This is much less of a problem with medium format than with 35mm.

Anyway, I intend to persevere because I find so many instances where film produces a great image while digital produces a dull one. Digital is great for recording events or when sharpness is key, but for simply producing beautiful images, film cannot be beaten.

I thought I'd add a few more recent ones. I really love the colours of the 400H and the tones of Tri-X. I'm looking forward to trying more low-ISO B&W in the summer. I just wish medium format gear was compact enough to take on more holidays...

Fuji Pro 400H

[IMG]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y232/jonnymacd/Film/Edinburgh%20Jan%202013%20-%20400H%20and%20Tri-X%20645/EdinburghJan2013400H026a_zpsfff1151e.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y232/jonnymacd/Film/Edinburgh%20Jan%202013%20-%20400H%20and%20Tri-X%20645/EdinburghJan2013400H017a_zps96cee6a4.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y232/jonnymacd/Film/Edinburgh%20Jan%202013%20-%20400H%20and%20Tri-X%20645/EdinburghJan2013400H012a_zps666c4d54.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y232/jonnymacd/Film/Edinburgh%20Jan%202013%20-%20400H%20and%20Tri-X%20645/EdinburghJan2013400H006a_zpsfddff85a.jpg[/IMG]

Kodak Tri-X

[IMG]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y232/jonnymacd/Film/Edinburgh%20Jan%202013%20-%20400H%20and%20Tri-X%20645/EdinburghJan2013400H032a_zps79c1c145.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y232/jonnymacd/Film/Edinburgh%20Jan%202013%20-%20400H%20and%20Tri-X%20645/EdinburghJan2013Tri-X037a_zpsa4156232.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y232/jonnymacd/Film/Edinburgh%20Jan%202013%20-%20400H%20and%20Tri-X%20645/EdinburghJan2013Tri-X040a_zpsd5deb29c.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y232/jonnymacd/Film/Film%2017%20-%20Tri-X%20400%20645/Fuentesauco003a_zps680d0592.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y232/jonnymacd/Film/Film%2017%20-%20Tri-X%20400%20645/Fuentesauco001a_zps3de73d42.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y232/jonnymacd/Film/Film%2017%20-%20Tri-X%20400%20645/Fuentesauco013a_zps825e3e11.jpg[/IMG]

Do you mean you keep the lens wide open for more DoF or have I read you wrong. Wide open is less DoF and closed down is greater DoF.
The photos are good and a lot have shallow DoF.
I had a 645 for many years and did weddings with it and always used ASA (ISO) 160 pro as it is the best film for skin tones.
I had the 55mm, 75mm, 200mm, and the 75mm leaf shutter lenses. The leaf shutter alows you to use flash at up to 1/500th. sec.
Enjoy your 645. I did.
CHEERS Vic.

Sorry, I could have worded that better. I mean that greater DoF is the reason I might stop it down, if the shot requires it.

I think #3 in the first set and #7 in the second set are outstanding. Think I'm stuck with digital now though

I thought I'd update this thread with some more recent shots. Lately almost all of my medium format photography has been done on non-Pentax 6x6 gear. My 645 has my first-ever roll of Velvia in it, which I hope to finish off this weekend with the first autumn colours in Segovia, then starts the challenge of finding somewhere to develop it and then I'll need to scan it (which I hear is tougher than colour negative... But I am yearning for the feel of the 645 again.

Anyway, on with the photos.



Tri-X 645 2013 015b por Jonathan_in_Madrid, en Flickr



Tri-X 645 2013 014b por Jonathan_in_Madrid, en Flickr



Edinburgh Reala 007a por Jonathan_in_Madrid, en Flickr



Edinburgh Reala 006b por Jonathan_in_Madrid, en Flickr



Edinburgh 400H 005a por Jonathan_in_Madrid, en Flickr



Edinburgh 400H 009a por Jonathan_in_Madrid, en Flickr



Edinburgh Tri-X 004a por Jonathan_in_Madrid, en Flickr



Edinburgh Tri-X 008a por Jonathan_in_Madrid, en Flickr



Edinburgh Tri-X 007a por Jonathan_in_Madrid, en Flickr



Edinburgh Tri-X 020a por Jonathan_in_Madrid, en Flickr



Edinburgh 400H 004a por Jonathan_in_Madrid, en Flickr

Hi johnathon.

I have been looking at getting a 655n to play with. Can you tell me how do you scan your negs or do you get them put onto cd at processing?

Gary

Hi Gary. All the B&W I develop myself at home, the colour is all developed in a pro lab here in Madrid. All my negatives are then scanned with an Epson V500 flatbed scanner using the standard software. It's time-consuming and the quality is not the best but it's simply the only way to scan small and medium format film to a TIFF (rather than a simple jpeg) without paying a pro lab to do it, which is very expensive. Pro scans will have better resolution and they don't appear to have the problems getting the colour correct that I have with my scanner.

The learning curve is steep, I'm still learning after over a year with the scanner. It is rewarding though, and gives me an opportunity to learn a new skill as well as improve my PP skills.

I would thoroughly recommend a 645 though. It's probably the best high-quality, flexible medium format setup that you can get for the price. My other MF gear are folding cameras and a Yashica TLR, which are nice and more compact, but they're simply lacking a lot of features compared to the 645.

After a while playing second fiddle to a few other medium format cameras, I have been using the 645 again recently. The 55mm lens I acquired at the beginning of the year is proving to be just as good a performer as the 75mm.

Here are some recent shots.

Fuji Pro 160NS:



Pro 160NS, P645 009a by Jonathan_in_Madrid, on Flickr



Pro 160NS, P645 004a by Jonathan_in_Madrid, on Flickr



Pro 160NS, P645 008a by Jonathan_in_Madrid, on Flickr

Fuji Reala:



Aguilas, Reala, P645 014a by Jonathan_in_Madrid, on Flickr

Some really good photos there, I prefer the atmospheric ones generally to the more abstract ones.

I've spent more time with my P67 recently but also have a (non-Pentax) 645 which I've started to use again. The 645 format is really versatile and capable of capturing almost anything. It offers good film economy and in most cases it is much more efficient than shooting 6x6.

A link to my 645 shots on flickr: link

Agreed.

Can't put my finger on it, but the combination of larger format and film certainly gives the image a certain something.




.