[twitch]

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.

[pingflood]

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?

[TOUGEFC]

Its too bad the OM-D is 4/3 :ugh:

[Fontan]

what is with these threads where people constantly have to "prove" that Pentax is better than product X?

This is commonly known as "insecurity."

[pingflood]

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.

[ogl]

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

[Frogfish]

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

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.

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.

[TOUGEFC]

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!

[twitch]

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.

[pingflood]

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?

[bossa]

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.

[Fontan]

Having to refute BS (or whatever it maybe for that matter) may very well stem from insecurity. That is all I am saying.

[pingflood]

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!)

[TOUGEFC]

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.

[ogl]

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.