Fascinating read. Feel free to send it to me if you require a second
opinion.
Alan C
-----Original Message-----
From: Stanley Halpin
Sent: Monday, December 08, 2014 7:57 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Reflections on using the Pentax 645Z [Part 2]
[continued from a previous “Part 1” due to excess verbosity and PDML limits
on size of posting.]
Part 2: What is it like to use it (and is it worth the price?)
In the above listing of some “positive” and “negative” observations on the
645Z, I think there are more “-“ items than “+” items. But don’t think of
this as a math problem where too many negatives must swamp the positives. I
have tried to be thorough and somewhat picky, trying to give fair warning of
possible “issues” to any who might be thinking of making the step to a 645z.
But what isn’t accounted for above is the experience of using the camera and
the experience of looking at the images later on a good monitor. In short, I
have no regrets about making this purchase. I have some regrets about having
sold many of my most favorite K-mount lenses in order to finance the
purchase, but I am happy with the resulting two-format system and the set of
lenses I have for each system.
Shooting with the 645z is a lot like shooting with any Pentax DSLR of the
last few years. Just bigger and better. Coming from the K-5 series or K-3,
you would be ready to go within a few minutes of taking the camera out of
the box. And your spare K-3 battery would already be charged so you wouldn’t
need to wait for the 645z battery charging process! Turn it on, wander
through the menus to tweak some of the settings away from default to your
preferred style, and fire away.
The first thing you may notice is that the whisper-quiet K-3 shutter is not
included with the 645z. Shutter release is accompanied by a subtle but
definite “thunk.” Not loud enough to disturb, but you’ll know for example
when the self timer has done its thing and the shutter has been triggered.
The second thing you may notice, when you pull the card out, and dump those
first images into your processing tool of choice, is that the images don’t
seem that spectacularly different or better than you were getting with the
K-3. Several things going on here. First, the K-3 is pretty darn good!
Second, you may well not see the advantages of the larger file until you go
beyond that first RAW-to-jpg-to-screen translation. Third, you probably
rushed out and tried some handheld shots. On this last point, at the risk of
repeating my self, note that this is a large heavy camera. Even if you can
handhold a K-3 with no problem, you probably can’t with this camera, not
without practice anyway. And oh by the way, don’t forget that there is no SR
to provide a safety net.
So, go online, order one or two plates from Really Right Stuff.
Carrying a tripod is a nuisance. Over the last two-three years I have come
to use a tripod for a majority of my shots with the K-5, K-5ii, K-3 and now
the 645z. I still find it a pain, especially when traveling. One thing that
I like about the 645z is that it encourages me to be more deliberate in my
shooting, to carry the tripod, to use the tripod. To frame and consider and
reframe. To review on the LCD. To use the Liveview. To experiment with
alternate f-stops and ISO for variations in DOF. A lot of this is due to the
nice large bright large viewfinder and (tilting) LCD which make composition
and review much easier for my aging eyes.
On my recent trip I alternated, using both the K-3 and the 645z. (And
sometimes the WG-III.) I seldom carried both; I usually took the 645z and
then usually my tripod as well. But when we went on a catamaran to go
snorkeling, I took the K-3 (and WG-III for underwater). When I got up early
to go on deck to see the sunrise, that was with the K-3. If I was sitting
poolside working on my laptop, the K-3 or WG-III was along. But if I was in
a taxi off to see the Winston Churchill painting locale and some of the
Madeira sea-cliffs near Funchal, I had the 645z and tripod. So, the 645z was
my formal dress camera, the K-3 was my casual camera, and the WG-III was my
informal/leisurewear camera. I suspect that that usage pattern will
continue.
I’ve gone on long enough. Except that I haven’t directly answered the key
question: is the increased resolution etc. worth it? Worth the expense,
worth the need to switch to a new set of lenses, a new set of working
habits? And I can’t answer that question because so much depends on your own
cost-benefit factors. Only you know how big a financial sacrifice you can
cope with, and how willing you are to try new things. Only you know what you
are trying to do now with your photography and where you might want to take
it in the future. FWIW, in terms of broad categories of photography, I would
expect the 645z to be an ideal tool for scenic shots, maybe for studio work.
Nature shots, especially macro but probably not so much birds and other
small fast-moving distant wildlife. Good for situations where you set up on
a tripod, deliberately and carefully compose and shoot. If you do decide to
buy one, don’t expect to find mine on the used-camera market anytime soon.
stan
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
follow the directions.
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
http://www.avast.com
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
