Is Betterlight Still the Standard?

[astroanalyst]

Oh I see the new Pentax 645D II is about to come out any day now.

[koh303]

The new pentax is only appealing because it is DIRT cheap. Its not the best camera our there, but for the price of D800 you get almost 4X the sensor size, and some of the best lenses out there (they are also stupidly cheap for some reason).
The pentax does not compare well with the newer hasselblad, which is about 10X more expensive or with the 2-4X more expensive phaseone/mamiya system with the later backs.

Another redeaming feature of the pentax is a very good user interface (including a tripod socket on both the vertical AND horizontal planes).

There are really only these three options... and in all cases you pay for what you get. IMHO - the 645D is more then plenty for any repro work, but then again testing for the specific use should confirm this first.

[Drew Wiley]

You don't want to scan because it seems like to much work, but are willing to stitch??? You can't just pan the camera for this kind of stitch like someone might in
a landscape panorama. You'd need some very precise equip to keep everything on the same plane, for rectilinearity, unless you've got endless PS correction patience. Arca makes some nice MF equip for this kind of thing, but be prepared for a serious investment. ... But don't underestimate the quality of Pentax lenses, even if Hassy
might offer a superior system overall. A P645 would still maul any DLSR in terms of final image quality, esp with a macro lens.

[analoguey]

The new pentax is only appealing because it is DIRT cheap. Its not the best camera our there, but for the price of D800 you get almost 4X the sensor size, and some of the best lenses out there.

Isnt the D800 about 3k USD? Is the Pentax around the same minus lens? (I'm assuming it's integrated back)

[astroanalyst]

I believe the 645D is about $6500 without a lens and the 645D ii will be a couple of thousand more so it is considerably more expensive than a D800e.

[astroanalyst]

I don't think I said that scanning was too much work... i wouldn't mind doing that if the results were great.
It just seems that the MF cameras actually outdo the LF film cameras.

Stitching didn't appear that difficult. I've lived on photoshop for the last 15 years so I don't think it would be a problem. I would also mount the camera on a slider to keep it parallel to the art piece.

So it looks like you are also in agreement that the Pentax is the reasonably priced camera that yields the best value to achieve acceptable results.

[Drew Wiley]

OK.. here we go again.... and again... and again... and again. Take the most expensive MF back you can find and sloppiest view camera work on the planet and make a comparison. Sounds you've been spending too much time surfing web hearsay. But the pros and cons have been endless debated elsewhere, and seem to be more a matter of voodoo religion than objective fact. Take the approach you feel comfortable with. Either way will work. But there are real advantages to having some kind
of lens movements, esp rise. And I really don't know how well these little "shift" lenses actually work for high-resolution applications - remember, you want a somewhat long focal length relative to format, to avoid iillumination falloff and corner distortion. Maybe someone else can comment on that, cause I have no personal
interest in those 'lil things.

[Drew Wiley]

... but I should have clarified that I know nothing about DLSR shift lenses for such applications. Others would. The Pentax MF shift lenses are basically custom
super-angulon designs and would probably not compete in a fine detail sense with either the latest large format or top-end DLSR lenses. There were basically designed as a poor man's architectural lens, and I'd be pretty surprised if they can compete with Pentax's basic lens formulas, which can be pretty good in some
focal lengths - but remember that the wide-angle ones will not be corrected for potential color-fringing with digital backs (versus film). One more reason to stick
with somewhat longer focal lengths. They have introduced a couple of re-engineered lenses specifically for digital capture, but they're damn pricey.

[Rollinhofuji]

Thanks Drew, someone had to say it.

[koh303]

Isnt the D800 about 3k USD? Is the Pentax around the same minus lens? (I'm assuming it's integrated back)

There is some promotional on the 645D making it close to 4800$ (i think).
In any case as my old professor Kenny Lester used to say:
You can't compare small pixels to large pixels" (comparing full frame 35mm slr to MF digital backs of equal or even lesser MP count)