Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-06-2012, 12:23 AM   #316
Pentaxian
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
Is it your dream?


really? 16 MP at crop 2? for 1100 EURO? Looks like some kind of wardrobe or bookcase
LOL, agree, small sensor in a big body, copying an old design that was never particularly attractive anyway. If this is the future.... then give me a K-01.

02-06-2012, 12:54 AM   #317
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
Are you people completely ignorant? "A big body"? Have you seen the sizes of the m4/3 cams?

Take a look at this shot of a guy with an E-M5:
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7002/6817515117_57ee53a010_z.jpg

Also, John: Comparing the K-01 with a 7d? Really? Try the 600D instead which has the same sensor and is more entry level oriented. You guys seem to be clutching at straws to defend this Duplo brick of a camera that no one in their right mind can argue is a good idea.

My first SLR was a Pentax and I really love their older gear, but c'mon, what the hell is happening lately? An SLR that won't highlight selected focus points but can be had in a variety of colors, an overpriced small-sensor mirrorless abomination with "toy" lenses, and now a chunky viewfinderless camera "for designers" that somehow marries the disadvantages of both SLR and mirrorless.

At some point, were I still a Pentaxian, I'd be getting royally pissed off at what they are up to these days.

Also, what is with these threads where people constantly have to "prove" that Pentax is better than product X?
02-06-2012, 12:59 AM   #318
Veteran Member
TOUGEFC's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Brisbane
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,561
Its too bad the OM-D is 4/3 :ugh:
02-06-2012, 01:05 AM   #319
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: 5th floor
Posts: 1,322
QuoteOriginally posted by pingflood Quote
what is with these threads where people constantly have to "prove" that Pentax is better than product X?
This is commonly known as "insecurity."

02-06-2012, 01:11 AM - 2 Likes   #320
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
QuoteOriginally posted by TOUGEFC Quote
Its too bad the OM-D is 4/3 :ugh:
What is funny is that quite often people start discussion how APS-C is really "equivalent" to full frame because for the same DOF you get twice the light so the sensor size is not as important bla bla bla, but when it comes to 4/3 vs APS-C then suddenly a smaller sensor is a huge problem.

Seriously, do you guys not see this insane bias? Should Pentax release a camera the size of a D4 with a cell phone sensor in it, you'd somehow find a way to praise it.
02-06-2012, 01:12 AM   #321
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,112
QuoteOriginally posted by pingflood Quote
Are you people completely ignorant? "A big body"? Have you seen the sizes of the m4/3 cams?

Take a look at this shot of a guy with an E-M5:
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7002/6817515117_57ee53a010_z.jpg
122*89*43 mm without battery pack - no incamera flash

looks like small DSLR - it's funny, but silly

Last edited by ogl; 02-06-2012 at 01:18 AM.
02-06-2012, 01:16 AM   #322
Veteran Member
Frogfish's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 4,490
QuoteOriginally posted by Fontan Quote
This is commonly known as "insecurity."
Or it could also be known as refuting some of the utter BS coming from the CaNikon forums (and posters like PF) when a camera has yet to even be released or tested. Some of the BS emanating from other forums is vitriolic to say the least.

This is some interesting information on the advent of mirrorless cameras that was posted by Shaky on another forum :

Here's the link to the full interview : Sony interview: Ten years from now, will mirror-based cameras be a distant memory? - Imaging Resource

QuoteQuote:
Industry-wide, it's clear that 2011 was a year in which mirrorless came into its own. It's no secret that the adoption rate of the mirrorless category in the US relative to, say, areas like Asia is not as great. I think most know that the mirrorless portion of the interchangeable-lens camera business has been hovering just a bit below 10% for the two years that mirrorless has been available.

. . .In the US. Starting a couple of years ago, it was a small fraction of the interchangeable-lens camera business, and it rose steadily to 5, 6, 7 percent, whereas in Asian countries mirrorless as a percentage of total interchangeable-lens cameras rose to 20% fairly quickly.

. . .the adoption rate in the US is a bit slower than it has been in other areas, but now in 2011 as more manufacturers have entered the category . . .we see that that rate has grown quite a bit. . . and is actually pushing towards 20% in November and December.
QuoteQuote:
the mirrorless camera segment, or the compact system camera segment was originally conceive. . to appeal to those users stepping up from a compact point and shoot camera, who consider an SLR and choose not to buy one, typically because of size, weight, complexity, things like that.

That was the conventional wisdom, and I do believe in the long term, that will be the primary appeal for these cameras.

However, during the early adoption stages, I think it's been pretty clear that a more enthusiast-focused customer has been a larger percentage of the purchasing than most-anyone would have expected, so typically we see middle-level models performing very, very well and being very high-demand, even more so than the entry-level models.

And I think that that's changing as time passes, because more and more of the original core customer, the entry-level customer who's stepping up from a point and shoot to an interchangeable-lens camera, I think more and more of those customers will come in, and then naturally the entry-level models will become more and more popular.

But at least at first, at least through the first couple of years of CSC evolution, that hasn't always been the case.
02-06-2012, 01:21 AM   #323
Veteran Member
TOUGEFC's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Brisbane
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,561
QuoteOriginally posted by pingflood Quote
What is funny is that quite often people start discussion how APS-C is really "equivalent" to full frame because for the same DOF you get twice the light so the sensor size is not as important bla bla bla, but when it comes to 4/3 vs APS-C then suddenly a smaller sensor is a huge problem.

Seriously, do you guys not see this insane bias? Should Pentax release a camera the size of a D4 with a cell phone sensor in it, you'd somehow find a way to praise it.
Ive never once said that APS-C is quivalent to full frame, so I dont know why you quoted me and said that ?!?! Im all for FF, FF is better than APS-C full stop.

As for a D4 cam with a small sensor, thats not something I would praise, cant speak for others though!

02-06-2012, 01:21 AM   #324
Pentaxian
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
QuoteOriginally posted by pingflood Quote
What is funny is that quite often people start discussion how APS-C is really "equivalent" to full frame because for the same DOF you get twice the light so the sensor size is not as important bla bla bla, but when it comes to 4/3 vs APS-C then suddenly a smaller sensor is a huge problem.

Seriously, do you guys not see this insane bias? Should Pentax release a camera the size of a D4 with a cell phone sensor in it, you'd somehow find a way to praise it.
You're being unfair to TOUGEFC. He's not an APS-C apologist, and nor am I. When the Q was released I was a huge critic of it, and I lament that Pentax doesn't have a FF DSLR.

The OMD with battery grip & zoom is about the most ridiculous camera I've ever seen. The sensor size to body size ratio is way out of wack.
02-06-2012, 01:22 AM   #325
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
QuoteOriginally posted by Frogfish Quote
Or it could also be known as refuting some of the utter BS coming from the CaNikon forums (and posters like PF) when a camera has yet to even be released or tested. Some of the BS emanating from other forums is vitriolic to say the least.
Well, since you are now starting with personal attacks, maybe you can tell me what "utter BS" I posted?
02-06-2012, 01:29 AM   #326
Pentaxian
bossa's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 4,538
It ain't an OM if it's crop. And if it is, then Id say it's crop of S**t but that wouldn't be nice.
02-06-2012, 01:30 AM   #327
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: 5th floor
Posts: 1,322
Having to refute BS (or whatever it maybe for that matter) may very well stem from insecurity. That is all I am saying.
02-06-2012, 01:30 AM   #328
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
QuoteOriginally posted by TOUGEFC Quote
Ive never once said that APS-C is quivalent to full frame, so I dont know why you quoted me and said that ?!?! Im all for FF, FF is better than APS-C full stop.

As for a D4 cam with a small sensor, thats not something I would praise, cant speak for others though!
Fair enough, I was making more of a general observation, and should have skipped quoting your post.

Either way, I was completely against 4/3 for a long time; then I read some interesting articles from accomplished photographers who claimed the print quality--even at larger sizes--from 4/3 sensors was sufficient for them, and it got me digging into the subject a bit more. Well, turns out that current 4/3 cameras will produce absolutely excellent prints at least at the sizes (13x19) I generally print at. So unless I am sitting staring at 100% crops on the computer I would not find 4/3 lacking in any way.

Of course I still like (and will continue to use) FF since my legacy lenses are "right" on that format, but if one considers just the camera system (without taking into account adapting older glass etc) it looks at least to me as if m4/3 is completely sufficient image quality wise. Now, tracking autofocus and such I doubt is there yet nor will be for some time, so it is not all roses... (but that is a camera disadvantage, not a sensor size disadvantage!)
02-06-2012, 01:35 AM   #329
Veteran Member
TOUGEFC's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Brisbane
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,561
Im sure its more than capable of excellent quaility prints, just like many other crop sensor camera's on the market.

I like FF for the DOF possiblities, its as simple as that.
02-06-2012, 01:36 AM   #330
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,112
QuoteOriginally posted by pingflood Quote
Fair enough, I was making more of a general observation, and should have skipped quoting your post.

Either way, I was completely against 4/3 for a long time; then I read some interesting articles from accomplished photographers who claimed the print quality--even at larger sizes--from 4/3 sensors was sufficient for them, and it got me digging into the subject a bit more. Well, turns out that current 4/3 cameras will produce absolutely excellent prints at least at the sizes (13x19) I generally print at. So unless I am sitting staring at 100% crops on the computer I would not find 4/3 lacking in any way.

Of course I still like (and will continue to use) FF since my legacy lenses are "right" on that format, but if one considers just the camera system (without taking into account adapting older glass etc) it looks at least to me as if m4/3 is completely sufficient image quality wise. Now, tracking autofocus and such I doubt is there yet nor will be for some time, so it is not all roses... (but that is a camera disadvantage, not a sensor size disadvantage!)
I've played with a lot of Raw files from 4/3 and m4/3 cameras from the web and et.c....I can't get the sharpness and details like at Pentax's APS-C cameras...AT ALL.
My daugther uses E-420, my brother uses E-PL1. It's the level lower than APS-C - FOREVER.

Only old Panasonic L-1 was really cool in terms of IQ at low ISO. I never buy crop 2. It's the deadlock of DLSR.

Put a lot of features there - inside cameras, nothing will change. IQ is lower than APS-C and FF.
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, fuji, k-01, k01, legacy, lens, mirrorless, olympus, pentax, pentax k-01, support, time
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Full size Fuji X-Pro high ISO images posted... JohnBee Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 12 02-05-2012 09:30 PM
Fuji EVIL - Pro Winder Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 14 10-12-2011 02:12 AM
Pentax PRO Feature that a Pro Photog couldn't find in CaNikon! HermanLee Pentax DSLR Discussion 16 05-03-2009 09:36 AM
street shots - Fuji 400 Pro Gooshin Pentax Film SLR Discussion 17 01-16-2009 06:02 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:14 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