Dear Pentax

PentHassyKon · 03-10-2009, 01:35 PM

Originally posted by sholtzma

Okay, my turn to throw out a wild idea: Why don't digital cameras have a fully digitalized way of determining depth of field?

Is something like the following scenario possible and feasible? Your autofocus lens sends info about aperture and distance-to-focused-subject to the camera. The camera's processor calculates a depth of field range, which shows in the viewfinder. This effectively moves the depth-of-field scale off of the lens body into the viewfinder digital info. Furthermore, the DOF scale in the viewfinder is colored, with red at either end, yellow towards the middle, and green in the "middle", corresponding to degress of sharpness within the DOF. So, as you focus, you see the degree of sharpness you are achieving.

No more looking at charts. No more looking at lens bodies. No more having to see and make judgments about darkened images in a viewfinder.

I'm not aware of any camera manufacturer that has done this. So, if it could be done, and done within the size and price of a typical digital camera, it would be a scoop for that manufacturer.

IIRC, Canon had this back in the film days. You focused on the nearest item you wanted in focus, press a button, focus on the farthest item, press a button, and voila - camera determines proper exposure based on the two focus points.

**sholtzma** · 03-10-2009, 03:34 PM

"IIRC, Canon had this back in the film days. You focused on the nearest item you wanted in focus, press a button, focus on the farthest item, press a button, and voila - camera determines proper exposure based on the two focus points."

But what I am asking for has nothing particular to do with determining exposure. Look, the OM4-T allowed the photographer to take a sequence of spotmetering points, and the camera would average them for you. Automating exposure has to a great extent been done; digital cameras do all sorts of whiz-bang things with digitally treating and showing exposure.

I'm talking about the camera both figuring out DOF for you digitally, and providing a simple but detailed readout that allows you to "see" DOF and decide how much DOF--all digitally.

soccerjoe5 · 03-14-2009, 04:29 AM

Pentax please give us HDMI video output. I really need it for studio work. If not, I'll probably have to buy a second system (Canikon)

The Pentax software is too slow and clunky for tethered studio work!

Please give us better software!

OregonJim · 03-18-2009, 02:58 PM

Okay, I know this is probably a dream, but:

How about Pentax doesn't create a new camera at all, but instead creates just a digital back to use on legacy cameras? Think about it - the design would be simple, just an image sensor, memory card slot, and a button to set ISO speed. The existing camera would control everything else, just as though it were still using film. There can be any number of ways to sense when to 'capture' the exposure without having to be coupled into the exposure system - like a proximity sensor to detect shutter movement for example. I would *love* to have a digital LX!

Dream over...

dan aron · 03-18-2009, 03:03 PM

Hey Pentax, can you lit the mode dial marks..

OregonJim · 03-18-2009, 03:03 PM

Originally posted by OregonJim

Okay, I know this is probably a dream, but:

How about Pentax doesn't create a new camera at all, but instead creates just a digital back to use on legacy cameras? Think about it - the design would be simple, just an image sensor, memory card slot, and a button to set ISO speed. The existing camera would control everything else, just as though it were still using film. There can be any number of ways to sense when to 'capture' the exposure without having to be coupled into the exposure system - like a proximity sensor to detect shutter movement for example. I would *love* to have a digital LX!

Dream over...

Dream not quite over, I had another thought -

Instead of a digital back, it could be a drop in 'cartridge' - the sensor sits on the film plane, while the attached, 'empty' 35mm canister holds 2 AAA batteries to power it!

bt*ist · 03-19-2009, 01:14 PM

Dear Pentax.

Fix the autofocus. Seriously, I am embarrassed on your behalf more than my own when I have centra focus and I can go to the centre of the picture on a whole sequence and found you've missed. Yes, sure, in low light. Why have it otherwise? If it's a beautiful crisp day I could focus myself. Centre focus. CENTRE FOCUS.

File numbering. Quite honestly, is there something so hard in making a count that continues FOREVER without resetting to zero and then arbitrarily restarting or continuing depending on whether another card has been inserted with an image on it, or continuing then filling a folder and then resetting the count from zero just because you have? I can't even explain the issue except in this summary : LEARN TO COUNT. Deal with people clocking their cameras and using multiple cards.

I ask for competetence in my equipment. Fix the basics before you add more stuff.

One day I intend to have enough money at hand, and if photography continues to be as important to me as it is today, I will at that point make a choice between systems. And when that day comes I will be judging you on your merit, not because of legacy equipment.

Fix the basics. And they are BASICS.

**David Whiteley** · 03-19-2009, 03:16 PM

Originally posted by OregonJim

Dream not quite over, I had another thought -

Instead of a digital back, it could be a drop in 'cartridge' - the sensor sits on the film plane, while the attached, 'empty' 35mm canister holds 2 AAA batteries to power it!

I had that same dream in the early days of digital! It starts to dissolve rapidly when you start thinking about the details (interface, exact positioning of sensor to match film plane down to the millimeter, protecting sensor from dust & scratches...). Pity. The idea of making any and every 35mm film camera into a digital camera would be awesome.

wazza999 · 03-20-2009, 08:27 PM

I saw a report in the New Scientist in the late 90's about this being developed. As I understand it, the patent was purchased by a major camera manfacturer and that was the last that was heard of it. Warren

Gravyboy · 03-25-2009, 06:32 AM

Originally posted by bt*ist

Dear Pentax.

Fix the autofocus.
...
One day I intend to have enough money at hand, and if photography continues to be as important to me as it is today, I will at that point make a choice between systems. And when that day comes I will be judging you on your merit, not because of legacy equipment.

Which is pretty much where I find myself now...

Bophoto · 03-25-2009, 10:59 AM

Use a sensor that can be rotated 90" so it can take vertical picture without changing the camera, take it off tripod and put it back vertical. It´s probably cheaper but definitive more practical to rotate sensor than have a extra robust holder for a tripod. It be a higher camera but more easy to use, See pic;

kenyee · 03-25-2009, 02:26 PM

Pentax Remote Assistant/tethering suggestions:
- Change the order it downloads in when you shoot JPEG+RAW so it transfers the JPEG first, then the RAW
- If the camera is only shooting RAW or JPEG, transfer over the thumbnail first
- Add an option to save JPEG in progressive format so it can be displayed by a viewer as the image is being downloaded

Vinfer · 03-26-2009, 02:56 AM

Dear Pentax my dream is not a different sensor format,
i'm not interested in the "sensors format war" etc...etc...etc..., i want "only" a new lens, this: DA* 11-16.

F16 · 04-03-2009, 11:17 PM

Originally posted by Stevopedia

Dear Pentax,

I've said it once and I'll say it again. Please include an aperture simulation lever on the next DSLR and un-cripple the K mount. An un-crippled DSLR would sell like hotcakes and make a bunch of people with old lenses very, very happy.

Come on, let's have open aperture metering! ...again!

+1

Absolutely idiotic that this function has been removed.

I have plenty of other requests, but might as well start with one of the most obvious, this would make a large amount of Pentax users happy.

Elton · 04-05-2009, 01:43 PM

Originally posted by Bophoto

Use a sensor that can be rotated 90" so it can take vertical picture without changing the camera, take it off tripod and put it back vertical. It´s probably cheaper but definitive more practical to rotate sensor than have a extra robust holder for a tripod. It be a higher camera but more easy to use, See pic;

Are you kidding? A revolving back is one thing, but a revolving sensor does not sound like a good idea to me...

03-25-2009, 10:59 AM	#251
Bophoto Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 429	645d Use a sensor that can be rotated 90" so it can take vertical picture without changing the camera, take it off tripod and put it back vertical. It´s probably cheaper but definitive more practical to rotate sensor than have a extra robust holder for a tripod. It be a higher camera but more easy to use, See pic; Attached Images

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Dear Pentax About your lenses.	offertonhatter	Pentax News and Rumors	112	04-10-2012 03:44 AM
Misc Oh dear, oh dear, oh deer...	Rense	Post Your Photos!	5	11-05-2010 07:41 PM
dear pentax please be more careful	anepo	Photographic Technique	2	06-08-2010 11:43 AM
dear Pentax.......	nathancombs	Post Your Photos!	5	01-04-2008 11:17 PM
My Dear, Dear Friends: Don't Do This.	Mike Cash	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	54	12-07-2007 11:08 PM

03-10-2009, 01:35 PM	#241
PentHassyKon Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: SoCal Posts: 415	Originally posted by sholtzma Okay, my turn to throw out a wild idea: Why don't digital cameras have a fully digitalized way of determining depth of field? Is something like the following scenario possible and feasible? Your autofocus lens sends info about aperture and distance-to-focused-subject to the camera. The camera's processor calculates a depth of field range, which shows in the viewfinder. This effectively moves the depth-of-field scale off of the lens body into the viewfinder digital info. Furthermore, the DOF scale in the viewfinder is colored, with red at either end, yellow towards the middle, and green in the "middle", corresponding to degress of sharpness within the DOF. So, as you focus, you see the degree of sharpness you are achieving. No more looking at charts. No more looking at lens bodies. No more having to see and make judgments about darkened images in a viewfinder. I'm not aware of any camera manufacturer that has done this. So, if it could be done, and done within the size and price of a typical digital camera, it would be a scoop for that manufacturer. IIRC, Canon had this back in the film days. You focused on the nearest item you wanted in focus, press a button, focus on the farthest item, press a button, and voila - camera determines proper exposure based on the two focus points.

03-10-2009, 03:34 PM	#242
sholtzma Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Salisbury, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,043	"IIRC, Canon had this back in the film days. You focused on the nearest item you wanted in focus, press a button, focus on the farthest item, press a button, and voila - camera determines proper exposure based on the two focus points." But what I am asking for has nothing particular to do with determining exposure. Look, the OM4-T allowed the photographer to take a sequence of spotmetering points, and the camera would average them for you. Automating exposure has to a great extent been done; digital cameras do all sorts of whiz-bang things with digitally treating and showing exposure. I'm talking about the camera both figuring out DOF for you digitally, and providing a simple but detailed readout that allows you to "see" DOF and decide how much DOF--all digitally.

03-14-2009, 04:29 AM	#243
soccerjoe5 Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Philippines Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,343	Pentax please give us HDMI video output. I really need it for studio work. If not, I'll probably have to buy a second system (Canikon) The Pentax software is too slow and clunky for tethered studio work! Please give us better software!

03-18-2009, 02:58 PM	#244
OregonJim Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon Posts: 1,327	Okay, I know this is probably a dream, but: How about Pentax doesn't create a new camera at all, but instead creates just a digital back to use on legacy cameras? Think about it - the design would be simple, just an image sensor, memory card slot, and a button to set ISO speed. The existing camera would control everything else, just as though it were still using film. There can be any number of ways to sense when to 'capture' the exposure without having to be coupled into the exposure system - like a proximity sensor to detect shutter movement for example. I would love to have a digital LX! Dream over...

03-18-2009, 03:03 PM	#245
dan aron Forum Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Finland Posts: 55	Hey Pentax, can you lit the mode dial marks..

03-18-2009, 03:03 PM	#246
OregonJim Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon Posts: 1,327	Originally posted by OregonJim Okay, I know this is probably a dream, but: How about Pentax doesn't create a new camera at all, but instead creates just a digital back to use on legacy cameras? Think about it - the design would be simple, just an image sensor, memory card slot, and a button to set ISO speed. The existing camera would control everything else, just as though it were still using film. There can be any number of ways to sense when to 'capture' the exposure without having to be coupled into the exposure system - like a proximity sensor to detect shutter movement for example. I would love to have a digital LX! Dream over... Dream not quite over, I had another thought - Instead of a digital back, it could be a drop in 'cartridge' - the sensor sits on the film plane, while the attached, 'empty' 35mm canister holds 2 AAA batteries to power it!

03-19-2009, 01:14 PM	#247
bt*ist Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: London, UK Photos: Gallery Posts: 211	Dear Pentax. Fix the autofocus. Seriously, I am embarrassed on your behalf more than my own when I have centra focus and I can go to the centre of the picture on a whole sequence and found you've missed. Yes, sure, in low light. Why have it otherwise? If it's a beautiful crisp day I could focus myself. Centre focus. CENTRE FOCUS. File numbering. Quite honestly, is there something so hard in making a count that continues FOREVER without resetting to zero and then arbitrarily restarting or continuing depending on whether another card has been inserted with an image on it, or continuing then filling a folder and then resetting the count from zero just because you have? I can't even explain the issue except in this summary : LEARN TO COUNT. Deal with people clocking their cameras and using multiple cards. I ask for competetence in my equipment. Fix the basics before you add more stuff. One day I intend to have enough money at hand, and if photography continues to be as important to me as it is today, I will at that point make a choice between systems. And when that day comes I will be judging you on your merit, not because of legacy equipment. Fix the basics. And they are BASICS.

03-19-2009, 03:16 PM	#248
David Whiteley Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Ottawa-Gatineau, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 372	Originally posted by OregonJim Dream not quite over, I had another thought - Instead of a digital back, it could be a drop in 'cartridge' - the sensor sits on the film plane, while the attached, 'empty' 35mm canister holds 2 AAA batteries to power it! I had that same dream in the early days of digital! It starts to dissolve rapidly when you start thinking about the details (interface, exact positioning of sensor to match film plane down to the millimeter, protecting sensor from dust & scratches...). Pity. The idea of making any and every 35mm film camera into a digital camera would be awesome.

03-20-2009, 08:27 PM	#249
wazza999 New Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Canberra Australia Posts: 5	I saw a report in the New Scientist in the late 90's about this being developed. As I understand it, the patent was purchased by a major camera manfacturer and that was the last that was heard of it. Warren

03-25-2009, 06:32 AM	#250
Gravyboy Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Stalybridge, Manchester, UK Posts: 6	Originally posted by bt*ist Dear Pentax. Fix the autofocus. ... One day I intend to have enough money at hand, and if photography continues to be as important to me as it is today, I will at that point make a choice between systems. And when that day comes I will be judging you on your merit, not because of legacy equipment. Which is pretty much where I find myself now...

03-25-2009, 02:26 PM	#252
kenyee Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Boston, PRofMA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,026	Pentax Remote Assistant/tethering suggestions: - Change the order it downloads in when you shoot JPEG+RAW so it transfers the JPEG first, then the RAW - If the camera is only shooting RAW or JPEG, transfer over the thumbnail first - Add an option to save JPEG in progressive format so it can be displayed by a viewer as the image is being downloaded

03-26-2009, 02:56 AM	#253
Vinfer Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Ottaviano (Italy) Posts: 56	Dear Pentax my dream is not a different sensor format, i'm not interested in the "sensors format war" etc...etc...etc..., i want "only" a new lens, this: DA* 11-16.

04-03-2009, 11:17 PM	#254
F16 Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: U.S. Posts: 104	Originally posted by Stevopedia Dear Pentax, I've said it once and I'll say it again. Please include an aperture simulation lever on the next DSLR and un-cripple the K mount. An un-crippled DSLR would sell like hotcakes and make a bunch of people with old lenses very, very happy. Come on, let's have open aperture metering! ...again! +1 Absolutely idiotic that this function has been removed. I have plenty of other requests, but might as well start with one of the most obvious, this would make a large amount of Pentax users happy.

04-05-2009, 01:43 PM	#255
Elton Junior Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Norway Posts: 34	Originally posted by Bophoto Use a sensor that can be rotated 90" so it can take vertical picture without changing the camera, take it off tripod and put it back vertical. It´s probably cheaper but definitive more practical to rotate sensor than have a extra robust holder for a tripod. It be a higher camera but more easy to use, See pic; Are you kidding? A revolving back is one thing, but a revolving sensor does not sound like a good idea to me...