Dear Pentax - Page 11

jct us101 · 12-05-2008, 02:13 AM

Well said.

*Ratmagiclady* · 12-17-2008, 10:47 AM

I think that with all the marketing appeal of being able to use the old MF lenses, it's time to make a screen that works real well with them, and AF, too.

I offer for your consideration, Pentax, an idea I've dubbed, the 'Ratseye' screen. You take something like a stock screen, maybe brighten it like you'll never touch a kit lens again, and you put a nice fat ring of microprism-for-faster-lenses around a matte circle just big enough for critical focus and keeping an eye on the AF.

And, yeah, more user positions on the mode dial. Though I'd say keep it a mechanical one.

inuafrj · 12-17-2008, 07:15 PM

Originally Posted by lurchlarson

Somethings that I'd like to see in the flagship Pentax

4-8 fps 15-20 frames Raw and Unlimited on the highest quality jpeg

The ability to shoot in loss-less tif.

nearly noiseless up to ISO 6400 and ISO boosted to 25600

I will be disappointed if the K30d only really boosts the MP without doing anything to the ISO quality.

If you want a bigger MP count make it a full-frame.

Separately

DA* 300m f/2.8 would be a dream

It would be nice to see an "affordable" medium format..

Whoa.. Would love to see this one.. Plus maybe MAKE THE SAFOX IX already..

Just a thought.. Is ~15MP saturating the APS-C sensor size already?

Class A · 12-17-2008, 08:26 PM

Originally Posted by lurchlarson

The ability to shoot in loss-less tif.

Where is the disadvantage to shoot in RAW and have a workflow that automatically converts RAW into TIFF? A compressed format like JPEG makes sense to be supported by the camera because of the space (speed) savings. But I don't see the point for a memory hungry format next to RAW like TIFF (on camera). JPEG 2000 might be a good idea; it produces less compression artifacts (and has a lossless compression option).

Originally Posted by inuafrj

Is ~15MP saturating the APS-C sensor size already?

Depends on the lens you are using. For many lenses more than 15MP isn't necessary. For some (e.g., those whose sharpness peaks below f/8) it is worth having even more MPs.

kolouch · 12-18-2008, 04:31 AM

Dear pentax,

dont't waste time by making colour models of entry level cameras. Why don't you listen users? We need better AF in lowlight, more FPS, x-sync at least 1/250 and better IQ on high ISO ..

*Blue* · 12-18-2008, 09:48 AM

Originally Posted by kolouch

Dear pentax,

dont't waste time by making colour models of entry level cameras. Why don't you listen users? We need better AF in lowlight, more FPS, x-sync at least 1/250 and better IQ on high ISO ..

Go try manual focusing a film camera in the dark . . .

dutch · 12-18-2008, 09:55 PM

Copy image files to usb hard drive with out a computer or specialized media unit.

and.. better auto focus of course

elkarrde · 12-19-2008, 01:03 AM

i like the idea of "ratseye" screen, although, i would like more 45 deg split focusing prism instead of microprism ring. also, that diagonal split-focus could light up in red as a AF-confirm, and should behave just like current stock AF center point.

i'll be satisfied with that very much, i'm fine with anything else.

ratjadi · 12-20-2008, 04:11 AM

Pentax, where are you going? Do you really want to compete agains Sony or Canon with shiny stylish gems like the white K2000? I think this is futile.

We need things in the tradition of a photography dedicated company.

1. Better AF, finally!
2. A focus screen like Ratseye (like the idea). There is no sense in legacy support without a focus screen.
3. Tilt/Shift lenses, please, at least one for architectural work.
4. We have primes, yes, but no fast wideangle. Basically it is the same dilemma as Oly users face, nice camera, but no fast wide? We need a 24/2, soon!

*Ratmagiclady* · 12-20-2008, 09:24 AM

Originally Posted by kolouch

Dear pentax,

dont't waste time by making colour models of entry level cameras. Why don't you listen users? We need better AF in lowlight, more FPS, x-sync at least 1/250 and better IQ on high ISO ..

I'm sure they'd say, 'It's no bother, really.' If they sell a bunch of these things, and promote the brand, it'll probably mean they can invest more money in performance... not to mention get more retailers to actually carry Pentax, if a lot of people just have to have one of these.

As performance goes, I don't doubt that improving this is always on the mind of their developers: I hope they concentrate on the performance and handling, rather than bloating the cameras (and their prices) with 'gee-whiz' features.

Though it really is time they made some more stuff specifically for all the manual-focus people they've attracted.

Glad some folks like my Ratzeye idea. (Admittedly, there might be some legal sketchiness about spoofing someone else's trade name.

Maybe in the spirit of fun and backhanded compliments, though.

)

I wonder if they aren't working on a true 'pro-level' camera, just for the prestige factor if nothing else. It'd be nice if they took a departure from the go-big formula and made something more LX or MZ-S-like, there.

ewalk · 12-22-2008, 09:02 AM

Originally Posted by ratjadi

4. We have primes, yes, but no fast wideangle. Basically it is the same dilemma as Oly users face, nice camera, but no fast wide? We need a 24/2, soon!

If you're willing to give up AF and a pile of cash, Zeiss makes three primes from 21mm to 28mm with f/2 to f/2.8.

I don't think you can go much wider and faster without getting into Leica and Canon L territory. (21mm/24mm f/1.4 for Leica, 24mm f/1.4 Canon L - all vastly more expensive than the Zeiss primes.)

*Blue* · 12-22-2008, 09:31 AM

Originally Posted by ratjadi

Pentax, where are you going? Do you really want to compete agains Sony or Canon with shiny stylish gems like the white K2000? I think this is futile.

We need things in the tradition of a photography dedicated company.

1. Better AF, finally!
2. A focus screen like Ratseye (like the idea). There is no sense in legacy support without a focus screen.
3. Tilt/Shift lenses, please, at least one for architectural work.
4. We have primes, yes, but no fast wideangle. Basically it is the same dilemma as Oly users face, nice camera, but no fast wide? We need a 24/2, soon!

They do have a DA 15mm f4 ltd coming out sometime in the spring. There is also the 21mm f3.2 ltd. The Sigma 20mm f1.8 and 24mm f1.8 are huge in comparison so its a trade off. There is the DA 14mm f2.8.

*Ratmagiclady* · 12-22-2008, 01:35 PM

I suggest packaging these lovely things with proper body and rear caps. These slip-on things are a menace to my peace of mind.

*benjikan* · 12-22-2008, 02:45 PM

Originally Posted by Ratmagiclady

I suggest packaging these lovely things with proper body and rear caps. These slip-on things are a menace to my peace of mind.

Hear, Hear...I couldn't believe it when I got my camera's from Pentax. I had to request body caps!!!

*nostatic* · 12-26-2008, 06:42 PM

ok, I'll play.

Dear Pentax,

Please continue doing what you do really well, and jump in with both feet in a few more areas. Unlike some, I could care less about fps or other specifications. I just want incredible images. And those start with the glass. So...

Please keep making DA ltd, DA* and FA ltd lenses. Please increase the QC on the DA* and ltds (especially the 16-50*). I'll gladly pay another $100-200 for the 16-50* if I know it'll be perfect. The FA ltd lenses are damn near perfect. Don't change a thing (well, quick shift would be sweet)...and keep making them in Japan.

Better AF would be nice, but I'm not so worried about speed but would prefer consistency and no hunting.

Give me something to put my FA ltd lenses on that uses all that glass (ie a FF body). Or make an "affordable" MF system (d645). You will never "beat" Canikon in the spec battle, especially for APC, so make something else. Sure, they have FF bodies, but they don't have the FA ltd lenses ready to put on them.