วีดีโอ

Yeah I never played with that before, but I'd like to try it out sometime!

An interesting idea possibly due to the slight warmth differences between the two sensor types

Thank you so much! That made my day!

Oh yeah I'm a fan of M43 system. I also still use an Olympus E500 from almost 20 years ago that uses the same sensor size, although with a mirror. Definitely a great system, and Olympus/OM system has really pleasing color science!

Yeah it's definitely a weakness of the 645D, but I'd say I've gotten used to it over the last year!

Yeah those are great points! A viewer of this channel actually sent me his 645Z to borrow in order to make a comparison of the 645D/Z! So be on the lookout for that to come soon!

@@ColtonMatocha I look forward to it.

Thank you! Kinda the first video of that style that I've ever done, but I enjoyed it. Will have to make some more in 2025! The group projects is something I'd like to do more of next year if given the opportunity to do. You've got some great highlights there! Now is a great time to look back on the years successes as you start to dream about what 2025 can be! Thanks for always sharing your thoughts! Happy New Year!

@@ColtonMatocha I was gifted a never used Ricoh GRX, with the 4.5-52.5 mm 10 mpx CCD modular for Christmas, going to have fun with that, don't know if I pick up the other modulars. Was a pleasant and unexpected gift!

@@thissidetowardscreen4553 ooo! I hope to see some photos from that!

Possibly an understatement 😂

Both are really solid cameras! I know the OM-1 could be better in video, yet, I still use my Omd E-m10 mark iii to shoot video. It gets the job done, so I can imagine the OM-1 does plenty!

Yeah I definitely misspoke there!

I couldn't agree more!

Yeah I'd love to repeat this test in different software to see how much the editing tool impacts the results!

An in memoriam for the cameras lost this year. Do you have any cameras left after that?!

@@ColtonMatocha My Oly E-1... the 5MP Kodak CCD camera i keep telling you you need to try. Honestly man, i know your thing for colours and this camera really is different - absolutely kills my E-300 which, as you know, runs the same sensor as the E-500. Built like a tank (i often just drop it or throw it because it doesn't care!) and the best DSLR in my hand ever. Still have a mint E-5 DSLR. And i still have my soulless, efficient, 'modern' cameras and the Spotmatics for my Takumars. Spoilt for choice, really. This coming year will be about filling out my vintage glass range - i just find it way more satisfying to shoot with for most subjects. What about you? Thinking of upgrading to the 645Z?

@luzr6613 This could be the year I finally find a fair price on an E-1. Just to see what all the hype is about. Would love to put it head to head against the E500 and dare I say, the 645D? Funny that you mention the 645z! Another viewer of this channel just sent me one to test out! Gonna put it head to head with the 645D!

@@ColtonMatocha That's massively cool about the Pentax! Just when i get over being envious of you, the whole damn cycle starts over....

The ability to swap backs mid roll was a huge selling point for me. I love having my staples in one back, and then my experimental/project specific film in another. Ingenious! Plus the Mamiya glass is so freaking sharp. I mean I don't have to tell you! I've been very impressed with the Pixel 9 pro so far. Huge update from my Pixel 4. Will make video quality a lot better for the b-roll stuff! Photos are a dramatic upgrade too!

Yeah my OMD has gone on a few trips with me this year!. A camera with solid color science, 4k video, a pop-up flash, and extremely small/lightweight. I'm very curious where OM System will take the E-M10 series in the future.

That's a good robust setup. Covers a lot of needs. I've been thinking about getting some kind of action cam to help with video creation. Probably something used and cheap that can still do 4k. But for now, my phone is good enough lol.

Keeping my fingers crossed that your KP can be fixed. Brilliant camera. How do you feel about the image quality (resolution aside) between the K-r and KP? The Pentax Q series is one of those cameras that's always on my list to keep an eye out for. Maybe one day I'll find one at a price I can't ignore. Definitely a slick camera though! As far as those bridge cameras go, sometimes they really steal the show. Especially now that most camera brands are doing away with the pop up flash (which annoys me endlessly, not to have the convenience of one). That all-in-one setup can be enticing! Thanks for sharing your top picks! Love to see the Pentax on display here! Merry Christmas! Happy 2025!

@@ColtonMatocha I uses all the same lens I use with the K10D, K-r and KP. Along with vintage lens. I wonder sometimes just the right combo of lens and sensors?

@thissidetowardscreen4553 that compatibility definitely makes for a great experience!

You're welcome! Thanks for watching! Yeah it's definitely a camera I would describe as great fun! I always feel like a secret agent when I use it! 😂

Fun is the new "I walked uphill both ways to school"!

Not the easiest to use camera, but certainly worth the effort!

Yeah it definitely makes you wonder how much of reviews are part of the marketing cycle these days

Yeah it definitely has a very dreamy vibe! I picked one up for my Canon R7 to use in photo/video and it's already a hit! What kind of video do you shoot?

​@@ColtonMatocha I am a bit of a beginner. I really like the cinematic style of video. Although I am more a photographer myself and consider my very experienced in this regard. Videography still feels a bit like the time I started with photography. Currently I am making videos of classic cars where the seller it pitching why you should buy this car. A few days ago I received an adjustable ND filter. Next month I am going for a trip to Morocco and I think it would be a good time to try to make some interesting cinimatic shots.

"Ton" backwards is "Not" and I did not include any images 😂 But, there is another video where I took it on a photo walk 🎉

Your footage was incredible! Perfect vibe fit for both the carnival and the filter! Definitely want to shoot together again!

I have the autofocus set to single spot af (or whatever its called) so that only the single center point is used for focusing. I think that helps to lock in at night. I also tend to shoot things which are fairly easy for the camera to detect with high contrast. What setting are you using? And which lens?

@@ColtonMatocha I tried shooting nightime portraits with the 14-42 kit lens and the 30mm 1.4 sigma lens, but I could not get it to focus, even when selecting for a single AF point. Basically, it can likes to catch on the lights behind my subject or just hunts.

Yes exactly! I remember using my parents VHS-C camcorder when I was a kid to make comedic sketches and just being enamored with how great it was! A few years ago I wanted to make my short horror film on VHS, but I couldn't get a working one in time so I shot it on a modern camera. So getting to work with Tape Collector was awesome! Definitely felt like it made a great vibe for the video! Thanks for watching as always! I appreciate it! Do you still have your old VHS camera? Might be time to bust it out!

@@ColtonMatocha I don't have it anymore, but I did buy one of the last VHS players. I have so many VHS tapes I need to convert from the late 80s early 90s. I do have a Sony DSR-PD170, Just not used it, works perfectly, was bought at a Local Access TV station selling old equipment. $10.00

@thissidetowardscreen4553 That's right! I remember you mentioning something about that! What a great find!

Nice! Sounds like a good simulation!

Having that dedicated camera is key!

I don't think the 645D is worthless, but it's certainly not state of the art. Fujifilm has definitely done well with their GFX line and I think they've got some great glass also!

Yeah the Pentax was definitely designed for studio or specific landscape work. It's certainly an old design that wasn't ever intended to be a versatile walking around camera. But, I will say I've taken it around doing some photo walks or outdoor outings and it wasn't as heavy or bulky as it looks on paper. Definitely a brick, but a brick I enjoy 😅

Funny enough I went back last night and provided some final touches to the Fujifilm image and got it a lot closer. The glowing effect still isn't as pronounced, but I think I'd be the only one who would notice lol 🤣

For sure, but that image was noticeably more cream colored than the reality and the entire image was more warm than the Fujifilm. The white balance of the Fujifilm was more accurate to what I saw with my eye.

Hahaha me too 😅

Yes! I think when I do these reviews, I tend to look at them from my preferences rather than what is perfect/imperfect. For better or worse lol 😆

Yeah I pretty much agree with what you wrote here! To answer your white balance question, both cameras were set to an identical WB Kelvin and that was still the difference I saw in spite of that. There is a way in-camera to further adjust the WB so that might be a solution. But the default appears to create a slightly warmer look even when you set to a specific kelvin. I agree with the Godox statement, but I'd take it a step further and say that the electronic aperture does not perfectly snap into place and there can be some exposure variation between shots. I did go back last night and tweak the images further to get the exposure a lot closer. The gummies on the Fuji improved, but still not quite as "glowy" as the pentax file. In regards to a professional using one of these I think the Fuji would be a no brainer. While the Pentax is my favorite, it has some issues like long processing time that would make it a deal breaker for most professional product photographers. The Fuji has the added benefit of use with a complex tilt shift system which would be a major potential benefit to a product photographer. Such setup isn't available for the Pentax 645D. I still love the 645D, and luckily for me I'm just using it for Art so I can deal with any limitations it has. Though, the Fujifilm brings a lot to the table. I appreciate your thoughtful comment! Thanks for watching!

@@ColtonMatocha - Did you shoot raw? I presume you did and if so, then it is important to know a few things about raw processing. (1) Any white balance & tint setting in camera will be added as meta-data to the photographs but the actual raw data elements will not change - the meta data inform e.g. Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) how to open the file. Whatever you adjust in camera changes nothing except how ACR shows the photo. Note that ACR is the only thing that does raw processing in the case of Adobe - it is camouflaged in Lightroom Classic (LrC) and explicitly visible in Photoshop (Ps). You can run ACR stand-alone from Bridge (Br). ACR saves your edit in .acr sidecar files and LrC ignores these. (2) When you open a raw file with the "Adobe Standard" profile selected, then note that this is not one generic file, under that title. Depending on the (supported) camera associated with the image file, ACR opens the matching profile file. Adobe Standard processes towards the Adobe preference of neutral and relatively flat. If that's not your thing then you have to come up with your own variant(s). (3) As "Adobe Standard" and "Camera" profiles are Adobe's pieces of art ;) differences you perceive between the shots from different cameras may actually be profile differences. They may say a lot about the camera you used, or it may be completely meaningless. We don't know. If brand C's images don't have convincing blue tints/tones, then that may be due to the sensor, but it could alternatively just be a profile issue. If you look in LrC's Adobe Standard folder, you'll see somewhere between the 1200 or so files that in some cases there are different profiles for different firmware versions even. Unfortunately the profile files don't have version or original date created in their properties (in Windows) so we cannot see when a profile got updated. But if it were a new version we don;t know if that was because they improved the support for the camera or because better newer raw processing required a modification (in a similar way we may get an update of the catalogue with new LrC versions because improvements require a new data model i the database called catalogue). As to differences between cameras and exposure (4), note that the ISO (iso is a word derived from the classical Greek isos and means same or equivalent - so it is pronounced as "eyeso" - you know you are doing it wrong when it sounds like "I ass oh") never defined "correct exposure" with the "ISO" unit that we think defines sensitivity. But it merely defines equivalence. How it exactly relates to correct exposure is for the photographer to figure out. Calibration for exposure is one thing and for true colours another. When we calibrate we should look at the camera, different ISO settings, potential deviations in shutter between different exposure times, different distances, different aperture values, different lenses , and the light sources. Your not so old Profoto studio pack may have very bad colour temperature consistency (CTC) while a much older studio set from broncolor will have very good CTC. In the last couple years, everybody has improved here and what was unique to broncolor in, say, 1980, now may be done by cheap Godox kit. You have to test shoot (calibrate). Especially when you work towards the edges of colour space and contrast envelope (dynamic range in a single shot) of your technology. (5) And a big deal between cameras is, presuming correct shutter calibration, that the "number" in "f/number" does not inform about how much light comes through the lens. This means that measuring exposure with camera A and lens A' cannot be copied to camera B with lens B' (for A=/=B). In the first place A and B may be apply a slightly different opinion on correct exposure as under (4) but the "number" in f/number only indicates the f/number for the cases that the lens was set to infinity. When you focus closer by, the lens may "focus breathe" and the corollary of this is "aperture breathing". My 105/2.8 macro lens becomes f/4.3 when set to minimum focus distance. (6) A bigger issue that (5) regarding the "number" in f/number is that it does not inform us how fast a lens is. So the f/number gives the relation between focal length at infinity focus and the diameter of the fully opened diaphragm - we call the opening aperture (opening) or entry pupil. But this says nothing about how efficient the glass elements are in relaying the image. Go to DxO Mark website and find a 1.2L prime lens of a somewhat older generation and you'll see that it has a T-value of 1.5. Then look for a 1.4G lens (say, both 85mm) and note that this one also has a T-value of 1.5. This means the light Transmission value for both is identical - they are equally fast. (7) and related to (5) and (6) is that the 1.2L does not necessarily have shallower Depth of Field (DoF) than the 1.4G when both are fully opened. This simply follows from the DoF formula depending not only on focusing distance, effective aperture and effective focal length, but also from a mutt parameter called Circle of Confusion (CoC). This combines some 6 effects. It e.g. relates DoF to how large you display the photo. At the camera end CoC relates film/sensor resolution and lens resolution and the impact of processing to sharpness, hence the CoC. Altering the CoC in the formula has great impact. So as the example 1.2L lens is not so sharp and the 1.4G lens is very sharp, so it is possible that the 1.4G has shallower DoF, even.

Phase One has 53.4mm x 40mm cameras but they cost about $50000

Yeah I was going to mention the PhaseOne sensor size. Incredible cameras with an incredible cost lol. That said, it would be fascinating to see an even larger sensor. Not sure that it would be a success, but interesting nonetheless.

AFAIK the biggest digital sensor available (like Hasselblad H6D-100c or several PhaseOne) correspond to 6x4.5. If I am not wrong there are NO 6x7 or 6x9 digital sensors.

@@vannoz66 Yup. I don't believe there are any larger than 645 in mass production. Might be some scientific or one off sensors that have been created, but nothing to my knowledge which is available to the general public as a complete package.

Bigger than the 53.9 x 40.4 (medium format full frame) would be awesome but also hilariously expensive. More so than you'd think. Just an FYI a standard wafer used to produce these sensors would be in the range of 150mm, 200mm, or 300mm in diameter. If we are generous and say they are gonna use the biggest standard wafer and going by just surface area numbers then on the 53.9 x 40.4 you might be able to make about 35 of them (discounting making a square in a circular wafer) that is not many, that same wafer can make more than 75 full frame sensors plus if a defect in a full frame sensor is found cool you lost 1 sensor in a wafer, 1 rejected medium format sensor would be like tossing out 2ish full frame ones. So scaling up to 6x7 or 6x9 that problem gets much less good. Anyways would be nice but very unlikely given how much it costs just to make almost 645.

Yeah the two lens I have are the 14-54mm and the 35mm prime. Both are incredibly sharp and worth picking up if you're an avid user of the 4/3rds system. I definitely shot the maximum RAW file size. Very few edits outside of the basic corrections!

Yeah totally agree. I would need to do it again with the same lens somehow. Thanks for watching!

I agree. I did a video a while back where I processed files from a medium format camera, a four thirds camera, and an Apsc camera. All different brands. Very few people were able to match up the images to the correct cameras. So I do believe that with the power of image processors, you can do pretty much anything. That said, I do think there are some smaller elements which become characteristics of a camera that can be good to know. Additionally, I think any amount of time saved becomes much more valuable when you're using the tool frequently. If you're saving several minutes between photos because one RAW file is already down the path you want to go, that makes a difference then with each set of photos you edit. Also potentially valuable information for people who prefer not to make many edits. At the end of the day, this info is fun to look at, but doesn't mean as much as people think. If you can get a great shot on a medium format camera, you should be capable of getting a great shot on any other camera from the last 10-20 years.

@@ColtonMatocha That's a good effort, Colton, but i'm sorry, i can't give it to you. The answer i was looking for was 'Sir Alfred Lord Tennyson in the 2nd Test at the Battle of Balaclava, with match figures of 7-26 from the Dowager's end and two innings, out for a Duck in the 1st (caught silly short-leg) and 97 NO (all singles) in the 2nd'. Anyway... we'll have another for you next week so you'll have every chance to make amends. We know you can do it! Cheers.

@luzr6613 damn, that was the answer I almost went with before I second guessed myself. 😅

@@ColtonMatocha Gotta trust that reptilian brain, man - its been around a long time. Anyway... I think so too. And consider that the vid you previously did - we all knew what the cameras were and it was still impossible to be sure. Trolling around, i think there's an awful lot of horse-pucky claimed about gear, with people being so sure they are Right. You find exactly the same thing in Audio circles - works there too for driving sales.

Yeah I suppose those ranges are more similar! This still worked out pretty well though aside from I think the pentax lens was maybe less sharp than the fujifilm. I've noticed that about this particular lens.

@ from “Pentax Forums”, the 645 zooms from FA and A series are soft wide open. On digital, you probably need to get to F8 or lower for best sharpness. It’s a great source for Pentax related topics.

@What_Other_Hobbies yeah I've used that resource a few times. This was shot at f11 so it should be within the sharper range, but its also possible there's an issue with the lens itself

Yeah I agree that the Pentax file definitely is more appealing and requires less editing time to look great! I was surprised how different the files looked, but it would be worth opening them up in another editor to see if there is any difference with how the algorithm handles the files. That said, I see the Kodak CCD files looking great time and time again.

Yeah I agree that different tools handle files uniquely. I used LR since that's been the tool of choice for me. But similarly, LR does not play well with Sony RAW files. Totally different experience if you use Sony's Imaging Edge.

That's more for Xtrans, CMOS is fine.

On these shots I was aiming for a 2-4 second exposure on a tripod. It varies though depending on what you're trying to capture.

Unfortunately in this case, the hot shoe is too tight for the trigger to fit. So adding more would just make that fit worse. I'd be worried about damaging the delicate Sony multi interface if I tried to force it.

Yeah the photos feel similar to the Pentax 645D with a difference in terms of "glow" and with how each camera handles white balance. I'll be putting out a comparison video soon!

Yeah had it for a little bit! That's what I used for the Halloween episode! 😁🎃

Thank you! I appreciate that a lot! I'm really glad you enjoyed the photos! 😁

Thank you! I'm glad you enjoyed it!

Not in this outing, but I have used ND filters in the past to shoot carnival long exposures at sunset and twilight hours! These were all without an ND filter because I don't have one for that particular lens. I'm glad you enjoyed them though!