> fra: Sylwiusz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > On 2005-03-18, at 00:23, Rob Studdert wrote: > > > I pretty much agree though I'm sure a lot of Canon DSLR have replaced > > MF gear > > in studios too. My negativity stems from the likely assumption that > > few working > > pros still use or would adopt a digital P645 kit over a top end Canon > > or back > > for their old MF kit. Of all the studios I've visited and portrait > > sessions > > I've attended I can't remember once seeing P645 as the camera of > > choice. P67 > > were a far more popular camera here, though Hasseys, Bronicas and > > Mamiyas made > > up the vast bulk of MF bodies.
> You're right Rob. But on the other side how many 645 AF Mamiyas have > you seen in studios? I believe these are 6x7 Mamiyas that made them > popular among Pros. This is rather field camera and I think it is even > less popular than Pentax 645 and has much lesser choice of lenses - > just 10 AF versions, while Pentax has 17 for 645 AF. Oh and older > manual Pentax 645 lenses are fully compatible with 645 AF bodies, while > Mamiya 645 AF can use their MF lenses only with stop down metering. So > I believe Pentax 645 could be more interesting for pros because of > wider choice of lenses. I agree with you there. My experience is that Mamiya 645 are made to be inexpencive but unreliable. Among other things a friend of mines Mamiya passed out at temperatures below 0C. My Bronica, another guys Pentax and a Hasselblad worked fine. Because of this I'm not convinced about the quality. We should also remember that both Kodak and Pentax have made dslrs before, while Mamiya hasn't. If Kodak and Pentax join forces they should be able to make a decent camera at a decent prise. I know that Kodaks FF cameras have had their problems with image quality, but on the other hand some people are impressed by the dynamic range Pentax have got out of the CCD sensor in the Ds. At jpg it is even better than Fuji S3, with RAW the S3 is slightly better. DagT
