[Asahiflex]

Are you confusing the exposure metering with the AF?

The AF sensors are at the bottom of the mirror box.

Indeed: the viewfinder has NOTHING to do with the AF system. There's only the AF points which are illuminated, but those are only visual.

(This is not the first time that Roland got his facts wrong; he once kept telling us that our K-mount lenses are always wide open when not mounted on a camera - no; they're always closed to the f/stop on the diaphragm ring or fully closed to the smallest f/stop in the case of lenses without diaphragm ring or diaphragm ring in the A position)

[StigVidar]

I(This is not the first time that Roland got his facts wrong; he once kept telling us that our K-mount lenses are always wide open when not mounted on a camera - no; they're always closed to the f/stop on the diaphragm ring or fully closed to the smallest f/stop in the case of lenses without diaphragm ring or diaphragm ring in the A position)

I was wondering why you are digging up this now? Would you like Roland to stop posting here? Should everyone else who now and then make some errors also stop posting? My opinion about your post is that you are moving away from discussing technical matter to discussion of Roland as a person and that is not a good path to move along. And not very interesting either.

SV

[Asahiflex]

I was wondering why you are digging up this now? Would you like Roland to stop posting here? Should everyone else who now and then make some errors also stop posting? My opinion about your post is that you are moving away from discussing technical matter to discussion of Roland as a person and that is not a good path to move along. And not very interesting either.

You are right, but I must admit that Roland *really* is the only guy on the whole WWW who really irritates me. Not even RiceHigh irritates me as much. Why? Because Roland continuously acts like he's Pentax's official spokesperson/insider, writing long -seemingly informative and at first glance even logical- posts, which at the same time are full of just thin air and/or partly incorrect. That's OK, not all of my posts are informative or correct either, but please don't act like an official or spread false technical information with a veil of authority. Writing like an expert about the Pentax AF system but not knowing that the AF sensors are at the bottom of the mirror box...

I might go as far as saying that Pentax doesn't need a worst enemy when they already have Roland Mabo

And those are my last words on the subject "Roland Mabo"

[StigVidar]

but I must admit that Roland *really* is the only guy on the whole WWW who really irritates me. Not even RiceHigh irritates me as much.

OK, I don't understand, but that's me. Everyone has to make their own opinion about people here, but I think it's a good idea to keep it for ourselves.

I agree that wrong information should not stand uncorrected, but it is always wise to keep it at a polite level.

---

Last edited by StigVidar; 05-26-2010 at 06:00 AM.

[RMabo]

You are right, but I must admit that Roland *really* is the only guy on the whole WWW who really irritates me.

If you don't like being irritated, then stop being it. You can always choose not to be irritated. Just take a deep breath, let it sink, calm down and irritation is gone.

Because Roland continuously acts like he's Pentax's official spokesperson/insider

Ok, but if you weren't thinking that I act like that, would you still be irritated?
How about then to change your thinking?
Why do you choose thinking in a way that makes you irritated?
If you thought about me as a nice, friendly guy, would you still feel irritated?
Our thinking creates our feelings.
So if you wishes to feel differently, then think in a different way.

I work as a writer, it is natural for me to write long. I enjoy writing, it is my passion, my work and my hobby.
To me it is a strange concept to become irritated about length. I don't care about the length, I care about the information in the text.

When it comes to acting - no I am not an actor. I don't "act" in forums, I write.
My intention is to spread information. So yes I spread factual information. I also spread my opinion about things.

I have never said that I was an official spokesman from Pentax and of course I am not. Your beliefs sounds very strange and odd to me.

I am myself, that is all. I am simply a simple guy enjoying sharing information.
Sometimes I get things wrong of course. I am not perfect, I am not a machine nor a robot. I am human. Everyone can make mistakes sometimes.
If you are upset about me making mistakes, then you must come from a belief that I am perfect but I am not. I must be allowed to make mistakes as everyone else, of course. I am only a human being.
Most of the times I get things correct, but not all the time. Of course, that is only natural for human beings. So I don't understand how you can be so upset when I make a mistake. Did you really believed I was perfect? No such human exist.

I am sorry to make a mistake, of course I am.
Shame on me shame on me.
But I am only a human, that is my defense. I am not perfect.

Should I not be allowed to post because I am not perfect?
Are you perfect?

[Asahiflex]

Should I not be allowed to post because I am not perfect?
Are you perfect?

Of course, nobody is perfect. I am the best example of that

You made me think about it. But anyway, thanks for the clarification and although I think we'll never be friends, let's shake hands and go on with our lives like we've always been doing

[ManuH]

Ok, but if you weren't thinking that I act like that, would you still be irritated?
How about then to change your thinking?

But how about changing your acting? Asahiflex is not the first one to be irritated by the way you write as if you were a Pentax spokesperson. When everyone is running in a way contrary to yours maybe it's time to realize that *you* are in the wrong way.

How about then to change your thinking?
Why do you choose thinking in a way that makes you irritated?
If you thought about me as a nice, friendly guy, would you still feel irritated?

Are you into a cult or something similar? Seriously I don't doubt you're a nice guy. You help a lot of people on the forums, etc. But you're still irritating when you play the "Pentax spokesperson" role.

[RMabo]

I simply shares a mix of information and my opinion and my experience with Pentax. I share this in the very best way that I can. Those that disagrees with me, with my opinion or the information I share, calls me many different things. To get upset by what someone writes is an interesting and very common phenomenia on the internet and I think people really should calm down a bit because it is not a big thing really. I don't understand how anyone can believe or think that I am a spokesperson for Pentax. Of course I am not.
I see this as silly things people say that comes from they disagreeing with my opinion on things.

I don't understand those that are focused on persons instead of information and the ideas expressed. I come to forums like this to discuss photographic related things, not persons. The obsession some has with some persons pussles me, I don't find it interesting.

Seems to me some take things too personal.
I write what I believe in. If others are disagreeing with me so let them be disagreeing then. Feel free, it is not a big deal. Some loves me, some hates me, some are in-between. That is the way life is simply.
We are all different individuals and we all cannot be the same, this coloured multiculture creates an exciting mix of ideas and information, and that is what fascinates me. Not discussing persons.

There is a saying where I come from - "When one runs out of arguments, personal attacks begins".
Now, shall we go back to our regular programme here?

[Pål Jensen]

It is very simple for Pentax to design an FF camera. Designing a FF viewfinder and mirrorbox is a simple task and cost peanuts in R&D compared to everything else in a digital camera. The camera electronics and imaging pipeline can be moved more or less wholesale from existing bodies; in fact this is what they have done with the 645D which is essentially a K-7 with a larger sensor. Designing the circuitry to fit another circuitry board is basically just a touch on a computer done with software. The challenge for Pentax is to sell enough of the camera to make it profitable; not engineering. What costs money is readying it for production, not R&D. The lens line needed for it complicates matter further.

[RMabo]

Well the interviews published when the K-m was new, showed a bit different story about how easy things are. And one would think that the K-m was simple to design, but it wasn't... It may sound simple re-designing circuit boards but remember Pentax also tries to avoid making things big. So they trim everything down. It is also about cost cutting. Making the most of as little money as possible. This is time consuming and takes resources. Finding the right balance of things.
I don't have the links to these interviews, but they may be still available?
Seems to me that it would be interesting to be reminded of them again, the everyday life of a camera engineer.
Well perhaps they are saying things was complicated just so they could keep their job, but that is a bit cynical thinking... From the interviews I "hear" passion and pride. Typical Japanese in a way.

[WMBP]

It is very simple for Pentax to design an FF camera....

This sort of statement always makes me smile.

Years ago I was rather close for a while to one of the major companies that make software exclusively for the Mac OS. Small but great company, brilliant programmers. One of their programs lacked a feature that some people thought it really ought to have. Instead of moving to programs from other companies that DID have this feature, these folks got on to the company forums and kvetched about the lack of the feature in what (they claimed) was otherwise their favorite program. And then they started to insist that it would be easy to add this feature. One day, the owner and CEO of the company couldn't stand it any more, got on the forums (which he seldom did) and responded to a user (= customer!), "If it's so d*mned easy, why don't you do it yourself?"

I don't think it's all THAT easy for Pentax to redesign their packaging.

Will

[RMabo]

One thing, to name but a few, is the power handling.
You have a certain target first that you define - how many shots are the camera supposed to be able to take on one charge. So you set this goal.
Now, you must balance the power output so that the camera gives enough performance without draining performance too much.
With larger files, such as high Mp 24x36 digital images, the image processor works more so it drains more batteries.
Let's say that the designers simply puts the K-7 battery in. Now, by a system that drains batteries more the camera won't be able to shoot as much on one charge, so here some clever ideas from the engineers needed... some power saving things. Or change battery. Or...

This is one area where the user could say "this must be dead easy to do!" but it may not be so easy. I don't believe in those "taking things from K-7, it is so easy and inexpensive to do" and that this is all there is to it.

The K20D was basically a K10D with a new sensor and imaging pipeline. Why took it so long? They even used the body again with a few minor tweaks. Still, it was more to it than just putting in a new sensor...

[youky63]

One thing, to name but a few, is the power handling.
You have a certain target first that you define - how many shots are the camera supposed to be able to take on one charge. So you set this goal.
Now, you must balance the power output so that the camera gives enough performance without draining performance too much.
With larger files, such as high Mp 24x36 digital images, the image processor works more so it drains more batteries.
Let's say that the designers simply puts the K-7 battery in. Now, by a system that drains batteries more the camera won't be able to shoot as much on one charge, so here some clever ideas from the engineers needed... some power saving things. Or change battery. Or...

This is one area where the user could say "this must be dead easy to do!" but it may not be so easy. I don't believe in those "taking things from K-7, it is so easy and inexpensive to do" and that this is all there is to it.

The K20D was basically a K10D with a new sensor and imaging pipeline. Why took it so long? They even used the body again with a few minor tweaks. Still, it was more to it than just putting in a new sensor...

K20D was "so long" because it was the life cycle time to release it. Even if the K20D was ready 3 months after K10D (which was not, since they had to wait for the new sensor, improved AF, electronics, etc... a bigger move that what people imagine just because it is in the same "shell") thhey just gave enough time for the very successful K10 to become outdated. The same between K20D and K7. And now the same between K7 and the new body this fall. R&D programs are planned long time in advance, corresponding to the commercial release dates...
About K7 electronics, sure it can be reused for a FF body. It works fine in a MF, why not in a FF? By the way, power consumption of the MF (also much bigger sensor than any FF, right?) doesn't seem to suck up the battery in 50 shots. So I guess a FF sensor will not change the face of the battery life. And even so, once I did more than 750 shot in 3 hours with 1 battery on my K20D (with AF and maybe 30% flash) and after that still no sign of low power (indicator still full). So if new sensor cost 100 shots, I will not cry for that. People that need can just buy a second battery, or even better a grip.
Also, several people mentioned that if Pentax release a FF as their "new professional camera" (cf interview) they will have to develop many new electronics for it: image pipeline to treat faster and have faster framerate, new AF to match C and N, etc... In my opinion, if Pentax release a FF camera, it will be in extenso a professional camera for their product line (a simple professional one), but they will not try to fight any other FF body, the target is not the same. And they can just keep the new AF module from 645D, the processors from K7 (already quite fast with the 14MPixels sensor, 4 more Mpixels from the new sony FF sensor is not that big difference) so finally reuse K7 electronics and same a lot of R&D money.
If the new Professional body is APS-C, there they will have to develop all of this things to be hyper efficient to match C and N. Would be very expensive (even if usefull for the next many years) and require time and lot of engineers.
In your guess, which body is easier to develop? And with a 1500 dollars "new K7", a professional camera above it would reach 2000 dollars at least, which is the price of... D700!

[nosnoop]

I don't think it's all THAT easy for Pentax to redesign their packaging.

With Pentax's experience, it really should be "easy" for them to produce a FF camera. It is no different from designing a APS-C camera - just in different specs. The main barrier is the budget and whether such a camera makes any economic sense for Hoya.

OTOH, Pentax would find it more challenging designing an EVIL/SLD camera. They would need to design a new lens mount, decide about backward compatibility, packaging and perfect the contrast AF system.

[nosnoop]

But how about changing your acting? Asahiflex is not the first one to be irritated by the way you write as if you were a Pentax spokesperson..

Why should he?
I have absolutely no complaints about what and how Roland wrote his messages. And I don't get any impression that he tried to "act" as Pentax spokesperson at all. Seriously, if you don't like any poster's messages, just put him/her on your ignore list - done!