Med Format. DSLR

I heard that the med format DSLR was back on. Has anyone heard that it might be as well? If it's true, I will definately be getting one. I can't see Pentax not having an MDSLR.

The 645D is still mooted to be a reality, but a lot will depend on the final price. I don't think Pentax have plans that many will sell outside Japan and the USA - I seem to recall a figure of 200 per annum being mentioned, which is a tiny market.

The last I heard it is back on but that it will be a Japanese market only product. Of course with the wonders of the Internet I'm sure you'll be able to get one sent to you from Japan without too much trouble, just be aware that it won't be cheap to buy!

And on a similar subject, I think the Leica S2 is due to hit the shops at the end of next month - I dread to think how much it'll cost but probably not hugely more than the existing MF DSLRs...

For amateur purposes, I don't see the point. For professional purposes, you'd just buy the Hasselblad.

Pentax wouldn't sell to professionals because they don't have a professional service setup (they could if they wanted to but plainly they don't find it worth while, ditto Olympus). The professional market is quite small compared to the amateur one and generates little profit for Nikon and Canon other than its great marketing value.

Assuming a 39 megapixel sensor, for even the biggest monitor screen you're throwing away most of your pixels and even for a top quality commercial print at 300dpi, you'd be discarding pixels until your print measured 2 feet across. It's true you could crop more but in practise you don't use a medium format camera for the type of subjects you can't control.

Since I am a happy amateur now, I find even the pixel count of my GX20 too many. It only comes into its own for my contributions to my agent's stock library, though even there 8megapixels would normally be more than enough.

Maybe I'm missing something - I usually do.

I can see that a MF pentax can be atractive for starting professionals though and even some oldies might go back to Pentax simply for the joy.

About the sensor, it's going to be most likely a Kodak, the KAF-31600 with 31,6MP was last mentioned but Kodak in the mean time have brought out the KAF-39000 & KAF-50100 with 39MP & 50,1MP so who knows what end up in the 645D.
It's all about where they want to place themself.
50,1MP sounds very interesting though, it sounds a lot but the pixels are more then 50% larger then that of the K20D & K7 sensor if I'm correct.

Assuming it can use existing 645 lenses, there must be many potential customers.

G

Knowing Pentax's excellent track record on backwards compatibility, I'd expect the 645D to take exisiting 645 lenses and of course 67 lenses with the adapter.

I don't think the numbers would be big enough to make a new mount a possibility anyway.

I am a professional with 2 small businesses but there is no way on earth that I would be able to afford a Hasselblad unless my lucky numbers suddenly made me a rich man!

If Pentax do bring out the 645D then I would very seriously consider it, as I have been considering it since the first plans many moons ago. Until then I shall leave it on my wish list or keep spending my £1 a week on my lucky numbers

Paul

Business wise, I'm not so sure. I bought my Hasselblad outfit, 2 bodies, one electric, 50, 80, 150 and 250 Sonnars in 1978. It did cost me a small fortune.

In 1993 I sold the lot. Apart from servicing every couple of years, they cost me nothing in repairs. But what was amazing was that I got near enough the same price for them in '93 as I paid for them in '78.

That made them the cheapest cameras I had ever had - though inflation had taken its toll of the price, of course.

I still struggle to see the point for an amateur though. Where would that extra quality show up? Not on the web, for sure.

My GX20 enables me to make prints at top quality 300dpi at 16 inches across. I can't imagine many people would need more than this. But obviously many people do and I'm interested to know what I'm missing.

I suspect some people just want the best, not what's best for them. You just need to look at the people that buy Quad Core PCs with buckets of RAM and Storage, and then use it for nothing more then browsing the web and writing letters...

Other then that, I'm sure the only time you'll need that higher performance will be, as you say, for printing larger then we do, or at least, having the option to do so.

Yes, very good point and what I was missing.