Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-23-2014, 04:47 PM   #16
Site Supporter
geomez's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Preskit Arizona
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,561
QuoteOriginally posted by pickone Quote
If it wasn't for all the sensor snobs, I wouldn't be able to afford a couple of them at $850 a piece. Bring on the bad reviews, maybe I get a few more Qs.
I'm certainly a beneficiary of Pentax's previous "flops" (just look at my sig), but as much as I like cheap gear, I'd like the company that makes and promotes these wonderful systems to survive if not thrive.

03-23-2014, 05:29 PM   #17
Site Supporter
6BQ5's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Nevada, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,064
There's always going to be trade off between size and durability. Personally, I'm ok with the Q's external size. Some heft is good since it gives you something to hold on to.

I'd rather Pentax figure out how to make the internals thinner and push the sensor back further. That would enable a larger sensor in the future.
03-23-2014, 05:59 PM   #18
Pentaxian
calsan's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Perth, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,367
Not so! The lens has to be at the distance from the sensor it was designed for.
03-23-2014, 06:04 PM   #19
Pentaxian
VisualDarkness's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,439
QuoteOriginally posted by calsan Quote
Not so! The lens has to be at the distance from the sensor it was designed for.
Well, we would finally get alot of macro lenses to choose from.

03-23-2014, 08:19 PM   #20
Pentaxian
calsan's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Perth, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,367
he he!
03-23-2014, 08:20 PM   #21
Site Supporter
6BQ5's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Nevada, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,064
QuoteOriginally posted by calsan Quote
Not so! The lens has to be at the distance from the sensor it was designed for.

The current lenses may not be able to accommodate the bigger spot size necessary for a larger sensor that is pushed back deeper... But a whole new line could!
03-23-2014, 08:40 PM   #22
Pentaxian
calsan's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Perth, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,367
Oh - I follow. Buy wouldn't that be a completely different camera then? Not another mount!
03-23-2014, 08:48 PM   #23
Site Supporter
6BQ5's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Nevada, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,064
QuoteOriginally posted by calsan Quote
Oh - I follow. Buy wouldn't that be a completely different camera then? Not another mount!

Maybe, maybe not. I would hope that the optical engineers at Pentax can figure it out. Didn't Nikon do something similar with one of their lens mounts? It's the same physical mount but the spot size can be either APS or FF sized. The camera does an automatic cropping based on the lens information.

03-23-2014, 09:09 PM   #24
Pentaxian
VisualDarkness's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,439
QuoteOriginally posted by 6BQ5 Quote
Maybe, maybe not. I would hope that the optical engineers at Pentax can figure it out. Didn't Nikon do something similar with one of their lens mounts? It's the same physical mount but the spot size can be either APS or FF sized. The camera does an automatic cropping based on the lens information.
The still have the same register distance. If you increase the distance between the mount and the sensor the lenses designed for the old one won't be able to focus to infinity. Changing flange distance changes focus.
03-23-2014, 10:08 PM   #25
Site Supporter
geomez's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Preskit Arizona
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,561
QuoteOriginally posted by VisualDarkness Quote
The still have the same register distance. If you increase the distance between the mount and the sensor the lenses designed for the old one won't be able to focus to infinity. Changing flange distance changes focus.
But what if this new theoretical Q had a larger sensor that moved forward and backward, effectively changing the flange distance to accommodate the lens?
03-23-2014, 10:23 PM   #26
Pentaxian
Fogel70's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,737
QuoteOriginally posted by geomez Quote
But what if this new theoretical Q had a larger sensor that moved forward and backward, effectively changing the flange distance to accommodate the lens?
That is a way too complex design, that will end up way too expensive.
It's probably hard to find users that want to spend a lot extra on a feature like that.
03-23-2014, 10:33 PM   #27
Site Supporter
geomez's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Preskit Arizona
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,561
QuoteOriginally posted by Fogel70 Quote
That is a way too complex design, that will end up way too expensive.
It's probably hard to find users that want to spend a lot extra on a feature like that.
Possibly, but point and shoot cameras lenses move automatically closer or further from the sensor when they're powered on and off. Is there really that big a difference from moving a sensor when you put certain lenses on and off?
03-23-2014, 10:34 PM   #28
Pentaxian
VisualDarkness's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,439
QuoteOriginally posted by geomez Quote
But what if this new theoretical Q had a larger sensor that moved forward and backward, effectively changing the flange distance to accommodate the lens?
It then has to be system capable of being as exact as about 0.01mm or better. To that it would probably make the camera bigger to housh the new system and why do it then?
03-23-2014, 10:41 PM   #29
Site Supporter
geomez's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Preskit Arizona
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,561
QuoteOriginally posted by VisualDarkness Quote
It then has to be system capable of being as exact as about 0.01mm or better. To that it would probably make the camera bigger to housh the new system and why do it then?
If it makes it bigger than it's not a good idea. I'm not an engineer, I'm an idea man.
03-23-2014, 11:03 PM   #30
Pentaxian
VisualDarkness's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,439
QuoteOriginally posted by geomez Quote
Possibly, but point and shoot cameras lenses move automatically closer or further from the sensor when they're powered on and off. Is there really that big a difference from moving a sensor when you put certain lenses on and off?
Of course it could be done, but is it worth it? We now have one system for the aperture, one for focusing, one for the shutter, one for shake reduction and everytime you add something more things becomes a lot more complex. The compact cameras you talk about use the focusing unit to achieve that, not an external sensor movement one.

Adding another system for the flange distance would probably cost as much that you rather buy two different cameras for the lenses instead. It just doesn't make sense since it's easier to kill the current system and build a new one instead.

---------- Post added 03-24-14 at 07:07 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by geomez Quote
If it makes it bigger than it's not a good idea. I'm not an engineer, I'm an idea man.
No harm in brainstorming, that's were new great ideas come from! I bet that the Pentax engineers and the economy department have shaken their heads multiple times already this year.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, cameras, idea, instead, lens, lenses, mirrorless, mount, pentax, pentax q, pentax q10, pentax q7, q10, q7, samsung, sensor, system
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why doesn't anyone make a CS adapter for the Q? GibbyTheMole Pentax Q 16 05-15-2013 07:40 PM
Can Pentax make FF smaller than competition? kenyee Photographic Industry and Professionals 64 02-19-2013 05:56 PM
Pentax Q, the little camera that could. lenshoarder Pentax Q 4 01-31-2013 07:37 PM
Could/should Pentax ever make a new leaf shutter lens? TomTextura Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 06-12-2012 08:48 AM
Ideas on how Pentax could make a FF unique (I'll start) Quazimoto Pentax DSLR Discussion 51 02-24-2012 05:14 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:39 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top