New Pentax 645D camera without IR filter announced in Japan

Ricoh Japan announced a new version of the Pentax 645D medium format digital camera that will be produced without the IR filter and will be called Pentax 645D IR. In addition to achieving some interesting photography effects, infrared photography is also used by museums, libraries and in forensic investigations. The company foresee only 100 units to be produced/sold annually. The price of the 645D IR was not announced.

This entry was posted in Pentax and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
  • Camaman

    Gotta love that logo!
    Pentax has the BEST design team EVER!

    BTW, can you put a fist through that mount? 🙂

  • Keith Seric

    I wonder if this means Pentax will be producing lenses optimized for use up to 1100nm. It would be nice to have alternatives to Coastal Optics, and the image circle of 33 x 44mm would allow some shift and tilt on FullFrame.

    • Tilt-shift infrared did you say?


      If you want to do TS on FF IR converted DSLRs, the existing TS lenses and DMF lenses are perfectly fine. 1100nm is a bit of a moot point popularised by the Zeiss IR line. The ZF-IR line has optimised coatings to make the lenses brighter at ~1000nm but what makes better images is the choice of glass+lens design and these are the same in the ZF-IR and the standard ZF/ZE lines. CO, lenses, like the UV-VIS-IR 60 is built from the ground-up (e.g. multi-Fluorite elements!) with full-spectrum or IR imaging in mind. So if Pentax makes “IR lenses”, they’ll be more like the Zeiss ones than the CO ones.

      Also, the peak response of modified or dedicated sensors is below 1100nm, so even if the lenses are up for it, the wavelengths around 1100nm get much less relative exposure than lower wavelengths and they show less anyway. Having used 720nm, 830nm and 1000nm filters on modified cameras, what I can say is, visually you don’t really gain anything good as you go above the 830nm range. Most of the time you’re worse off with longer wavelengths because of the very long exposures (even on modified cameras), higher scattering (glass) and lower diffraction limited apertures.

  • Troll Prozac

    Interesting choice. Personally I think IR photography is crap 99% of the time and I can’t imagine why anyone would buy this… but hey, someone might.

    Someone might buy a Luna too.

    • Alex

      This camera has special uses, it’s not for the general public.

    • Nishi Drew

      Photography in general these days is a lot of unthoughtful, distasteful and boring trash, but then the gems really shine that much more when buried amongst all of the rest. IR, like HDR, has it’s specific uses that make fantastic shots, while the majority of attempts could be horrific…

  • Jannard Woot

    It’s about time something came along that would support my Zeiss f0.7 Infrared lens for Medium Format. Lol

  • D0n

    Is PEntax charging people for air? lol!
    takes k-5II, REMOVES aa filter… charges more for the extra air gap…lol!
    takes 645-d REMOVES ir filter…. charges more for the extra air gap… lol!

    if they start removing sensors, I won’t be able to afford the next round of new models…

    seriously though… I want a k-01 with 4k video and live hdmi out during recording…

    • By that logic, Nikon is charging people for air as well. The D800E removes aa filter – charges more for the extra air gap!

    • “air gap”? 😀

      Can’t you noobs just talk about what you know (=shut up)?

  • Back to top