Thank you very much for sharing your personal experiences like this, Stan. This is especially appropriate for me as I've been considering the cost/benefit equation myself but without any personal input.
I'm glad that it has worked out for you and that you are not regretting the decision to buy into this format. I will probably take my next step by trying one out in a studio. I hope that Henry's will rent one to me. On Mon, Dec 8, 2014 at 12:57 AM, Stanley Halpin <[email protected]> wrote: > [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. -- -bmw -- 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.
