# Pentax 645Z: Why no DXO test yet?



## V8Beast (Feb 3, 2015)

Anyone else find it peculiar that DXO has yet to test the Pentax 645Z? According to photogs that own both the D810/D800 and the 645Z, the Pentax absolutely blows the 36 megapixel Exmor into the weeds in terms of DR, ISO, and tonal range. This seems to support the Canon conspiracy theorist claims that DXO is in bed with Nikon 

Seriously, though, various third parties have been testing the 645Z for almost a year now, yet the only camera that can top the D810 is conveniently absent from DXO's database. Makes ya wonder ;D

I bring this up not as a way of bashing Nikon, but because I'm genuinely interested in giving the 645Z a go. It would be nice to see a comparison between the 645Z and the currently top-rated sensor (D810), but I suppose that's not going to happen. 

BTW, I posted this in the wrong section before, so my apologies to anyone that had to read it twice.


----------



## V8Beast (Feb 3, 2015)

Here's an interesting thread on the topic:

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3714320#forum-post-54222997


Here's an interesting reply in that thread:

Gazeomon wrote:

When the 645Z hit the DXO test bench, the gauges and monitors simply imploded. They will never forgive Pentax for that

Nikonandmorewrote:

You got that right!!!

And I concur even more because I have used the D800E and D810 extensively (both topping DXO's charts) and even they are absolutely fantastic cameras, the IQ, DR and low-light performance of the 645z, literally obliterates them.. this not mentioning the resolution difference. I have had the opportunity to shoot with the D800E & 645z side by side and compare the pictures, and we are talking Porsche Boxter with a Ferrari Enzo. Its that simple. DXO would have to re-structure all their benchmark testing and charts just to accommodate the results from the 645z. ALSO, NO QUESTIONS WHAT SO EVER, that the IQ from the 645z (and low-light performance) is far above the Phase One IQ250. Whatever Pentax has done with the readouts of the sensor (same as the Phase One's back), they've done an amazing job at pushing extra juice out of it.. and a theoretically "negligible" extra 1MP. This, at a third of the price. Yeah........ Phase One, Hasselblad and DXO.. they are all burning with facts they cant handle or and very inconvenient to accept as the reality.


----------



## Halfrack (Feb 3, 2015)

Just buy the Z - there is no comparison. Hop over to LuLa and see some of the reviews.

I have a Hass and love it, but the Pentax does something different. Weather seals, high iso, cheap used lenses, focus peaking, live view - it's all there.

I'm interested to see if the R does compared to the rumors, but still, the 810 doesn't appeal, even at the discount.


----------



## KAS (Feb 3, 2015)

I've been on the fence since the Z was announced. I was just waiting to see what Canon's next move was; I've been waiting a very long time for a proper 1Ds replacement. We'll see if it's here with the forthcoming 5Ds. I think all of the people waiting for a 1Ds replacement, myself included, will need to accept that it won't be in a 1-series body.

That being said, it will likely be a difficult choice for me. I only have one 67 Pentax lens but many Canon lenses. 

I kind of want that MF FOV, and not sure the 50mp in a 135 format will do the resolution justice.


----------



## V8Beast (Feb 3, 2015)

Halfrack said:


> Just buy the Z - there is no comparison. Hop over to LuLa and see some of the reviews.



Statements like these don't help me. I need an excuse not to buy one  I will definitely check out the LuLa reviews. wockawocka (thanks, BTW) wrote a great review a few posts down, which has really opened my eyes to what an user-friendly, affordable medium format system can offer. 



> I have a Hass and love it, but the Pentax does something different. Weather seals, high iso, cheap used lenses, focus peaking, live view - it's all there.



The cheap used lenses is the real kicker, IMHO. I need focal lengths between 24-200 to replicate my Canon kit, and it looks like I can pick up three used Pentax lenses to cover that range for about $2,500. Not too shabby at all. Likewise, the it's insane high ISO capability, AF system, and weather sealing means I could potentially use it in the field in lieu of a 35mm DSLR in scenarios where MF was never really an option. 

This wouldn't replace my Canon setup, but complement it, and my oh my what a nice complement it would be


----------



## V8Beast (Feb 3, 2015)

Karlpedal said:


> What do you want to know?
> The MF sensor is the same Sony as in Nikon D800 series but bigger.



The two main things I'd like to research are:

1) The incredible DR and shadow recovery of Exmor sensors is well documented, so no need to beat that horse here. What impresses me the most about the 645Z (and MF in general) is it's ability to render final tonal gradations far better than 35mm. My question is, will this actually show up in print? 

My editorial clients use very low quality paper, printers, and ink. For that type of work, I feel that the on-screen tonal range advantage of MF wouldn't translate to the end product. On the flip side, my commercial and advertising clients have much higher printing standards and budgets, where there's a far greater chance of the IQ benefits of MF transferring over to paper. In general terms, how good does the quality of printing/paper/ink need to be to realize the tonal range advantage of MF vs. 35mm? 

2) How user friendly in the field is the 645Z it vs. a modern 35mm DSLR? Before upgrading to the 5D3, I slummed it with a 5DC for many, many years. I can't image that the AF and overall handling of the 645Z could possibly be more of a pain than the 5DC.


----------

