Jan wrote:
>Question: Is it really true that the 67 with standard lens (say 2.4 105mm) >must be used on a tripod all the time to get sharp images ? Regardless of what's true or not; you need more of a tripod with the 67 than the 645 adding to the bulk. Now we are at the main differences between the two systems: size and weight. If you're a landscape photographer that don't shoot roadside scenics exclusively, weight is an issue. The 645NII with the FA645 33-55/4.5 AL and the FA645 55-110/5.6 ED weights the same as the Nikon F5 with the AF-S 28-70/2.8. That's right; a medium format slr with two pro grade zoom lenses weights the same as a pro 35mm slr with a standard pro zoom lens! Regardless on how you put together your 67 system a Pentax 645 system can be put together more flexibly and at a lower weight and size. This difference is even larger if you want to shoot telescapes. For handheld 645 images see this link: http://www.andyrouse.co.uk/Photogear_Page.htm >More in general, what do YOU see as strong points for the 67 versus 645 >for landscape/nature ? The strong point is the bigger negative. >How about future developments (digital back) ? Your best bet is the 645 system. There are rumors for digital solution for the 645 and also Pentax filed patents for a digital back for the 645. >About image quality, I feel the step from 35mm to 645 is much larger (3x >in image area) than 645 to 67 (1.6x in image area). Yes. The big jump is from 35mm to 6X4,5. Commercially, among picture buyers, no distinction is made between 6X4,5 and 6X7. It's medium format and 6X4,5, 6X6, 6X7 and 6X9 are treated equal. >The ideal would be to have both of course, and use the 67 lenses on the >645 too, but that would not fit by budget at the moment :-) I also would like to have both but since I can only afford both I prefer the 645 system. P�l - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
