>was about to buy 645z >Fuji gfx-50s announced Any reason

>>2929199
>pricetag
>features
>new product
>only 3 months


Just wait anon. I am too.

>>2929199
>Any reason I shouldn't wait?

because pentax is kawaii as fuck, theres your reason.

>>2929199
why do you want MF anyway anon

with what you shoot, m43 is more than enough :^)

>>2929210
I run a mobile photocopy business for fine art reproduction at galleries.

>>2929213
you'd want a 645 with pixel shift, too bad it don't exist

>>2929217
Anything is better than Canon L.M.A.O.,, xDD

>>2929199
I've owned the Z for almost two years now, it's a kick-ass camera no matter how you slice it.
However even I am considering trading it in for the Fuji, because the lens range is far more on-point, like the 110mm f/2, this one lens might tide me over, but also dat 23 & 45mm... it's like they knew exactly what I wanted.
And a proper 120mm Macro right out the gate too, so it's also a work-viable system.
The only thing left to know is how the EVF and AF will perform, and the prices; if it's like $6000 for the body and $2000 per lens, I'll be all-in, just not until they release the 45 & 110 which is what I'm really waiting for.

>>2929213
show photos liar

>>2929222
lol it's just a job, nothing to be jelly about.

>>2929221
How do you think IQ will compare in the real world?

>>2929213
Same here actually, switching to the 645Z massively improved my workflow compared the Canon 5D2 I was using before. I had to resort to all sorts of stitching tricks and image stacking to get nice results, now I just take the whole artwork in one snap and call it a day. Enough res to see stroke textures on artworks 1x1.2m in size, bigger than that and I stitch from two halfs.

>>2929222
Depending on whether the art is private or common, we can't show you examples, nearly everything I shoot for example is private.

>>2929225
Between the 645Z and Fuji? Probably minimal, down to the better Fuji lenses. In a studio setting at f/10, no difference.

>>2929224
im happy for him and very curious if he's not lying, so please OP show photos

>>2929229
Ugh, sounds like a dream. Stitching has been a nightmare. Btw, which tripod head do you use for the 645Z? Arca-Swiss? I'm considering the Manfrotto 405.

>>2929231
I also have the 405, on a Gitzo 3xxx model tripod. I can't say it's super great, I simply didn't want to spend 2x as much on the Arca which didn't offer horizontal gearing, but it's still a massive improvement over the hell that is a pan-tilt head.

>>2929234
Are you doing 4 strobes, one at each corner, or one each edge? Also, do you insist that the artwork is mounted on the wall? Do you remove the frame? Or do you have some sort of easel that you bring with you? I'm fairly new at this, but I want to make it full-time. I have a lot of connections in the region now and I enjoy the work.

File: _IMG3888_ff.jpg (1MB, 1440x1760px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1440x1760px

>>2929267
For portability's sake, I'm often using just two strobes, so long as the artwork isn't too big, and any irregularities in tonality across the image field I correct using LCC/FlatField; Capture One has it built-in, and Lightroom has a free plugin you can get on their site.
Essentially I replace the art with a big white board and take a second photo of it that's out of focus, and in post it's used as a subtraction frame on the original to flatten out the illumination.

I always remove the frame when possible to avoid shading, but some cases it's not possible, so you just have to angle the strobes in more. I shoot on a big adjustable easel, wall-mounting would save space, but I'd need some sort of pully system. you can't be certain that walls are straight anyway, I use a level when adjusting the easel.

Also, I use cross-polarization, which means a polarizing filter on each strobe and on the lens, it removes all reflections and stray light from the art, and also lets you shoot through glass in the freak case that you NEED to photograph an artwork behind glass and it can't be removed. This alters the spectral properties of the light captured, so you need a custom profile for your camera of a color checker under this type of illumination. I use Rosco film that I taped onto cardboard frames that I cut to size, and simply clip them to the front of the strobes, just make sure not to use modeling lights or you'll screw them up.

I attached a 100% crop of a 645Z frame and a 5D2 frame blown up 63% to match, the painting was altered slightly in the time between shots (which is why I had to photograph it again), but it should serve as a good indicator of the difference. Original was 70x90cm so the crop represents an area of about 10x17cm. The Z looks like my old slide film in texture and detail.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Equipment Make	RICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD.
Camera Model	PENTAX 645Z
Camera Software	Adobe Photoshop CC 2015 (Macintosh)
Photographer	Konstantin_Kovalev
Sensing Method	One-Chip Color Area
Focal Length (35mm Equiv)	118 mm
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Width	7693
Image Height	5948
Number of Bits Per Component	16, 16, 16
Compression Scheme	Unknown
Pixel Composition	RGB
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	360 dpi
Vertical Resolution	360 dpi
Image Data Arrangement	Chunky Format
Image Created	2016:09:20 10:39:11
Exposure Time	1/125 sec
F-Number	f/9.0
Exposure Program	Manual
ISO Speed Rating	100
Lens Aperture	f/9.0
Exposure Bias	0 EV
Metering Mode	Spot
Flash	No Flash, Compulsory
Focal Length	150.00 mm
Color Space Information	Uncalibrated
Image Width	1440
Image Height	1760
Rendering	Normal
Exposure Mode	Manual
White Balance	Auto
Scene Capture Type	Standard
Contrast	Normal
Saturation	Normal
Sharpness	Normal
Subject Distance Range	Distant View

File: IMG_3575.jpg (102KB, 874x655px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 874x655px

>>2929317
and my shitty setup.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]

Camera-Specific Properties:
Image-Specific Properties:
Image Orientation	Top, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution	72 dpi
Vertical Resolution	72 dpi
Color Space Information	sRGB
Image Width	874
Image Height	655
Scene Capture Type	Standard

Is there any reason to buy MF aside from needing to take a super high-res photo in studio?

>>2929403
Yes

>>2929403

to take a super high-res photo outside studio perhaps?

>>2929403
That's why people are excited for the Fuji, it's going to be more convenient to take with you, seeing as it's some half the size and weight of comparable systems.

I already got the Z for this reason in the first place, seeing as Hasselblad and Phase One cameras are astronomically huge, but this I could literally have with me all the time.

>>2929403
Landscapes, obviously gear comes last with landscapes if your composition is shit

>>2929317
This is great info, thank you. I'm using two Einsteins and polarizing film/cp filter, and I figured for larger work it would begin to be a necessity that I purchase another two. Could you give more info on that process?

>>2930023
>Could you give more info on that process?
You mean flat field correction? It's absurdly easy.
1. Photograph art as usual.
2. Without moving anything or changing exposure settings, replace art with plain white canvas or other matte surface, it must be large enough to cover the camera frame edge to edge.
3. Shift focus enough so the surface is out of focus, and take another photo, and make sure no part is blown out (if it is you also exposed the painting too brightly).
4a. If using Capture One, there is a tab called LCC, select the white frame you shot and generate a profile, then navigate back to the actual art shot and apply the profile from the same LCC tab.
4b. If using Lightroom, download the Flat Field plugin from the Adobe site, and install it from the extension manager. Then you select two images, run the new extension in interleaved mode, and it'll work automatically.

In both cases you can generate corrections to form a library of shots that represent typical art sizes, if you can ensure that you can replicate conditions perfectly every time.

This process has a negative impact on dynamic range, so unless you have something like a D810 or A7RII, still try to ensure that the variance in surface illumination is fairly even to begin with.

>>2930312
In one case I had to shoot a really wide panoramic work, so I flipped the camera into portrait, and moved the lights with the camera like a scanner between shots. If you make sure the geometry is precise in every shot, you can use a single correction frame on every capture, and then stitch the frames. It doesn't have to be with scientific accuracy, just make sure to always have a tape measure on hand, if you don't already.

>>2929317
Have you thought about using a shifting lens (e.g. http://www.zoerk.com/pages/p_pshift.htm) to take 4 frames and then combine them?

>>2930330
I thought about it, but it's not necessary, all you really need is a macro lens 100mm or longer. There's no reason you can't use one though, TS lenses are also reasonably sharp and lack field curvature enough to work.

>>2929221
It's gonna be a 10k body and 3 to 6k per lens. Source: have source.

>>2930375
>10000 for the body

kek fag

Even Fuji said that the body will be "well under 10k" and ~10k WITH lens.

>>2929199
Was about to do the same thing OP. I am going to wait and see how this camera turns out. Maybe it turns out to be a better alternative , however the fuji crops have abysmal battery life, even among mirrorless. I hope this wont be the case with their medium format camera.

KP, how do you charge for your services? A place near me charges by the file size. I can't imagine you charge by the hour.

>>2932139
>A place near me charges by the file size.
Pretty much this; back in the day it was based on film size, so not much has changed. Getting an 8x10 slide was $80+ at the time and then $120 for a drum scan, expensive!
Maybe if one actively worked at a museum or archive, they'd be paid by the hour, but I don't know for certain.

>>2932175
$120 for a drum scan? That's crazy. I pay half of that for scanning 8x10...

>>2932176
Not just the scan itself, but color-matching and editing for a print-ready master file, scanning for art reproduction was a bit of a more involved process if you wanted things looking close 1:1.