Pentax 645 reviews?

[adelorenzo]

Hang out on Pentax Forum. There is a body listed right now for $125 and plenty of lenses for sale. I've bought and sold almost all all my Pentax stuff over there.

 

[Alan Gales]

i recently bought a Pentax 645, i had been looking at them years ago, but read a few bad reviews, and heard the the 645N/NII were the ones to get, but they were more than i wanted to spend.
well i bought one anyway, maybe paid AU$250ish with a 75mm 2.8.
anyways, i love it.
buttons aren't an issue, the viewfinder is bright enough.

my dilemma now is, do i want another lens! 45mm or 150mm...

There is nothing wrong with the 645N. The big advantage of the NII is that it is newer.

I owned the 150mm FA, 120mm FA macro, 75mm FA and the manual focus 35mm. They were all great lenses. I have read that the 45mm lenses were a little soft. You might do your research before you buy one.

Anyone with experience with the 45mm?

 

[Pupfish]

I rate the viewfinder of my P645N above all the other cameras I've got or have owned, and this includes Nikon F5, D300, Pentax LX. The ergonomics of the camera are really superb. The one lens I have for it is the SMC-A 35mm f/3.5, also superlative (one of the sharpest optics going, at any price, and this one was cheap). If there's a mechanical weak link it's been that the shutter dial has popped off a couple of times, I glued it back on; there's a fellow selling shutter dials new for under $25 on ebay.
P645N doesn't like to run off of NiMH rechargeables, which AA batteries I use with practically everything else. So instead I use lithium cells and they last quite a few rolls and a long time.
The slow shutter sync speed can be an issue if you do portraiture... 1/60th. The P67 is worse at 1/30, dreadful, actually, outdoors. There are a couple of leaf lenses for each that sync to 1/500.

 

[revdocjim]

Here in Tokyo the 645N is readily available for about $250 or less. And most of the lenses are less than $100 if they are the A series. The ones that cost more are the 35mm, the 45mm, the 300mm and the zooms.

Alan asked about the 45mm. I too have read a few things here and there but had pretty good luck with it. Nevertheless, when a low priced 35mm came along I was more than happy to trade in the 45mm. Now I have the 35mm, 55mm, 75mm, 120mm, 150mm and 200mm.

 

[JamesR]

There is nothing wrong with the 645N. The big advantage of the NII is that it is newer.

I never said there was?
I said the 645N and 645NII were recommended over the 645.
And while they might be newer and better, there is nothing wrong with the original.

 

[Alan Gales]

I never said there was?
I said the 645N and 645NII were recommended over the 645.
And while they might be newer and better, there is nothing wrong with the original.

Sorry James. I went back and re-read your post and I originally read it wrong. I thought you said that the 645NII was the one to get and you had left out the N. My mistake.

No, there is nothing wrong with the original if you like it. Personally, I hated the buttons but that is just my opinion. The original of course takes just as nice photos as the later models for quite a bit less money.

 

[elekm]

I had one. Bought it for $300 and resold it for the same amount. Overall, I liked the camera, but it was much too heavy to shoot 6x4.5. I thought it was extremely well made. And the ergonomics seemed very good.

 

[GRHazelton]

I have the 645n with the 35, 55, 75. 120, and 200mm lenses. It is marvelous. The lenses are sharp and they all have that proper "feel". I've gotten consistent, excellent exposures with the metering system, and the TTL flash mates properly with my Pentax AF400T flash system.

As others have said the viewfinder is excellent. The focus confirmation is usefull, but not essential. Two tripod sockets, a stroke of genius. And the camera uses either an electronic cable release, or the old fashioned sort the way the photo gods intended. BTW, the film inserts are easily converted from 220 to 120 with a small screwdriver and care. The 220 inserts are generally cheaper. Go for a 645n, you won't regret it.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I find med format to be a pretty big letdown compared to LF, not only due to neg size but general lack
of movements. And you won't save any weight except in the filmholder category. Late Pentax lenses are
quite good, esp for the going prices. I shoot a P67 sometimes for travel, windy and rainy conditions, for wildlife, or just for a change of pace from LF. It's got a pretty aggressive mirror slap, so you either
have to shoot it at fast speeds or on tripod with mirror lockup. It's like an oversize SLR and quite a bit
different than the 645. Both Pentax cameras are classics. But I personally find 6x7 at the margin of
acceptable neg size for enlarging (unless I just want small prints). 645 is just too small.

 

[Existing Light]

I find med format to be a pretty big letdown compared to LF, not only due to neg size but general lack
of movements.... I personally find 6x7 at the margin of
acceptable neg size for enlarging (unless I just want small prints). 645 is just too small.

I think "acceptable" in terms of film format/min film size for enlarging is subjective to an extent. But then, I'm partial to smaller prints (I will say, though, that the only large prints I've seen have been college art student exhibitions, and many of them are lacking in terms of composition, emotion, and all those subjective "somethings" that I think should be in a photograph; the only redeeming quality is the impressiveness of scale). Also, I'm getting to the point physically and emotionally where carrying around a 5x7 camera is becoming too burdensome. Other than a high-end digital camera, medium format film is most likely going to be the route I'm going to have to go, regardless of what the large format master race thinks. I really do mean no disrespect, but I feel like the film size argument is akin to the megapixel and full-frame vs crop frame sensors arguments in digital photography forums or lens quality arguments or whatever else we can argue about: kinda pointless; as long as you really understand what your system can and cant do, you can make good prints with whatever you've got

 

[Alan Gales]

But I personally find 6x7 at the margin of
acceptable neg size for enlarging (unless I just want small prints). 645 is just too small.

Several times I have offered my mother-in-law 8x10 prints of my daughter. She won't have any prints that big. An enlargement to her is 5x7 and she thinks 4x6 is perfectly fine. She also thinks I'm nuts for owning an 8x10 camera.

 

[GRHazelton]

Just today I went to a camera sale at Wings Camera in Atlanta, GA. I was sorely tempted by a Calumet 4x5 view with an adequate lens for $200. The big Bogen tripod holding it was about the same cost. They also had a gorgeous Linhof Super Technika press camera with a 3.5 Xenotar lens.... But.... I'd have to buy a 4x5 enlarger, unless I intended to scan to a file to print digitally, not my idea of silver process. A 4x5 enlarger would be too big for the space I have for a darkroom; the Beseler 23c is stretching things as it stands. So, unless I have a mammoth windfall to build an addition onto the house for a darkroom, 6 x 7 from my baby Busch Pressman will have to be the upper limit, with 35mm and 6x4.5 Pentax gear for general use.

 

[Pupfish]

I find 645 is a nice nexus between sharper lenses and larger working apertures, with sufficient film real estate to not be bumping up against film grain and resolution limits, as one can easily do in 35mm. Pretty much all formats from 135 on up are capable of making decent sized enlargements. It's actually easier to handhold my P645N than a 35mm SLR to achieve critical sharpness throughout for big prints; I get tack sharp results often to silly slow speeds like 1/8s, not every frame sharp but a sufficient number of keepers in environments where I could not take a 4x5 or a tripod (and certainly would not have time to set up and take down). Not waterproof but the P645N is pretty well bombproof and snow resistant-- it's my first choice for snowshoeing and XC skiing jaunts in the mountains, for instance.

 

[Existing Light]

I did sign up at PEntaxforums. I'm gonna spend a few days, I think, getting in to conversations and such in attempt to prove I'm trying to be a serious member of the forum before trying to buy something. And, I know, me be serious? I'll try, anyway

 

[Richard Jepsen]

I had one. Bought it for $300 and resold it for the same amount. Overall, I liked the camera, but it was much too heavy to shoot 6x4.5. I thought it was extremely well made. And the ergonomics seemed very good.

I'm sure the 645N is a great camera system. One attribute I wish I had on my Bronica RF645 is the diopter. But, the RF645 is small, lightweight, user friendly, great hand feel, and like Pentax has excellent optics. Yup, limited to 45/65/100, but sufficient for general photography.