Pentax 645z Review

Its a great option and price. I have always loved the feel and everything a medium format has. With the Nikon 810 here now, I thin a lot of the medium format cameras may start to come down in price. A comparison of the D810 and 645Z are pretty close, and with the price of about a third less I would have to pick the 810.
I would actually love them both, lol

Don't tempt me! ;-)

Kevin -- That is exactly what I'm thinking. For Pentax to make full-frame cameras I understand they would have to make lenses to go with them. So here, if I may suggest, is the Pentax answer to the full frame DSLR.

I think it is Frank

Looks like a good system. My only concern with any MF system based on my experience is portability. If you do studio work or shoot with a tripod than its not a concern. If you do a lot of travel related photography like I do it can become a hassle working with a MF system. They are a little bigger and heavier than a full frame DSLR system so carry it all day can be a drag. Packing for flights can also be challenging as they take up a lot space in your carryon. Guess it all depends on the type of photography you do.

I don't know too much about high-end camera bodies but 8k doesn't sound very affordable to me as the review seems to think :).

Then again my photography so far hasn't really required me to stretch beyond my Nikon D5100 camera body (lenses are a completely different story...)

I think the reviewer means that $8k is affordable in the MF camera market. Most MF bodies cost $20k and up. And I mean up for the higher end and more MP bodies.

The sensor in the 645z is identical to the ones used by PhaseOne which start at around 28k.

I looked up "medium format" comparing with "full frame" camera (couldn't find the terms used together and didn't want to read for hours trying to find out) is that slightly smaller than a "full frame" most of the pros use or is it the same?

If it is not the same as a full frame what is the philosophy behind it other than not wanting to take sales away from the overpriced full frame camera?

Back in the days of film Medium Format cameras were basically the next size up from 35 mm, for example the Pentax model this originates with had a negative 6 cm by 4.5 cm.

Joshua, are you saying a medium format camera is larger than the regular 35 mm but smaller than a full frame?

Suzanne -- at this link compares the sizes of 35mm with Medium format for film. Full frame means the digital sensor is the same size as 35mm Film ... most SDLR's have what is called a crop factor compared to full frame. So, Medium Format digital is larger sensor size than Full Frame. This is all in basic terms hope it is helpful to you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medium_format_(film)

Frank, thank you for distilling all that information! I'm going to read the article because I want some insight on what I now think is a very cool camera. If you could have a full frame camera or a medium format camera which would you choose and why?

Suzanne -- I would go with the medium format Pentax over a Full Frame sensor. First, Pentax does not make Full Frame. For the money the camera highlighted in this thread, as Kevin said, is not much more money for the larger sensor compared to FF. In other words, if you talk to a camera sales person they usually talk more megapixels. However, sensor size does a much better job I think if you're interested in spending the money for Full Frame.

You asked if I had to choose between FF and MF. Truth be told, I like my Pentax ( crop sensor ) K10-D because it has a CCD sensor and not the average CMOS sensor ... but that is getting a little deep I think for this discussion. However, the processors in the phone cameras are incredible and useful for most photography applications. I recently posted an article on my FAA blog about this if you'd like to click the tab on my gallery page and read it. Bottom line for me is that photography is about the artists vision and how s/he uses the camera as a tool, pick one and master it.