Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-11-2010, 08:20 PM   #241
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,922
QuoteOriginally posted by Angevinn Quote
The idea that the Pentax K-X can match the performance of the D700 is laughable.
For value the K-x is pretty close at 1/6 the price...with a lens!

The K-x cannot crank the ISO as high nor AF in the dark like the the D700, but it's pretty amazing what it can do from ISO 400-1600, which, even 3 years ago we'd have been sceptical.

Yes, the technological growth says that FF is coming down the pipe and Pentax had better be ready or the brand will lose customers, but many customers are not there yet. Canikon will educate them through marketing and competition to get there.

08-11-2010, 08:33 PM   #242
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,212
QuoteOriginally posted by dnaseigel Quote
. . .

You might say that Pentax has some knowledge of how that feels, but there is a key difference that serves to further falconeye's point. At that time Canon had entry level products like the T50 and T60, and they also had pro cameras at a couple of levels like the New F1 and the T90. It was a pretty short leap from a full line of manual focus product to a complete auto focus line. There was no headache due to a new line of lenses for a new film format, etc.

. . .
Actually, Canon switched from the FD mount to the EF mount. They sold out their existing base, and gambled that they could rebuild it. That gamble worked. I had some FD macro gear and was so mad I could catch fire. Canon gave me an FD-EOS macro adapter and an EOS 10s with and an EF 50mm macro lens and matching tube to shut me up and the dealer even threw in a Tamron EOS-M Adaptall-2 mount. However, I have never bought a thing from Canon since then. I have contemplated a few times about getting a digital body to use the Macro lenses which include a FD-Bellows and matching 20mm/3.5 macro lens. However, I have decided to get an FD to K-mount adapter and remove the glass. I am going to sell my Canon RingLite, 10s and EF 50mm and matching tube. I have bought 4 digital bodies and a film body since then, all Pentax or Nikon. I don't think Pentax is in as bad of shape as some people think. A bad decision that blows away 75% of their core base would be catastrophic.
08-11-2010, 08:43 PM   #243
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Saint-Petersburg, Russia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 410
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
Go here and test your answer. Remember to keep every thing the same except the sensor size.

Online Depth of Field Calculator
He means that if you are already at the minimum focus distance, FF wont give you any more advantage if the subject already filled all your FOV on APS-C. You`ll get the same picture ( in terms of DOF ) plus some extra surroundings.

This is if I understand correctly.
08-11-2010, 08:50 PM   #244
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,775
I, for one, would be very surprised to see a roadmap to FF announced the same year as the 645d is introduced. As Pal noted, the 645 has been the only successful Pentax pro line in many years. There is a significant base of professional users with 645 lenses which can be used on the 645d. I think Pal has hit the nail on the head with the 645d as the more logical path to pro for Pentax in the near term.

Announcing another "pro" line could very well stunt the growth of the 645d as well as the APS-c equipment. This is quite a complicated puzzle, as announcements could leave users of both formats as deer in the headlights for several years.


Last edited by GeneV; 08-11-2010 at 09:06 PM.
08-11-2010, 09:31 PM   #245
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,212
QuoteOriginally posted by ilya80 Quote
He means that if you are already at the minimum focus distance, FF wont give you any more advantage if the subject already filled all your FOV on APS-C. You`ll get the same picture ( in terms of DOF ) plus some extra surroundings.

This is if I understand correctly.
He didn't say anything about the background or FOV. He specifically stated the depth of field. Pick a lens 50mm in the above calculator and put in the known minimum focus distance for the FA 1.4 and change the sensor size from the k20d to film.
08-11-2010, 10:28 PM   #246
Senior Member
Angevinn's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Chicago, Ill.
Posts: 205
Bail Out

Didn't Hoya bailout Pentax? Pentax was in bad shape when Hoya took them over. Hoya's influence is responsible for the release of the 645D and can be seen in the K-7.

Ford was planning on bringing back a vintage coupe but really missed the mark with the revised T-Bird. That was a really strange vehicle. I believe Ford killed the vintage coupe project in 2002 or 2003 which was a shame. The vintage coupe was to be rear wheel drive and have a decent V8. The picture I saw of it looked cool, a lot more tastefully done than the last T-bird.


QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
I like Pentax being compared to Ford. Ford didn't have to be bailed out like Government Motors did and Crappler Corp is on its second bailout in less than 30 years. If they were to roll out a Deuce Coup tomorrow, I'd consider buying one.
08-12-2010, 12:23 AM   #247
Pentaxian
gazonk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oslo area, Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,512
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
For value the K-x is pretty close at 1/6 the price...with a lens!

The K-x cannot crank the ISO as high nor AF in the dark like the the D700, but it's pretty amazing what it can do from ISO 400-1600, which, even 3 years ago we'd have been sceptical.
Suppose Pentax is able to deliver a 16mp APS-C camera with the same noise and DR characteristics as the K-x. Suppose that they also provide an even better viewfinder than on the K-7. Then IMHO the FF advantage starts to diminish - until new FF cameras are announced - probably around the same time as the "K-5", of course But still, if I could have a camera with usable ISO 3200 and a better viewfinder (this is what would make me consider FF, after years of using LX and ME Super, I find the VF of my K10D almost useless for MF, most of the time the supposedly bad AF of the K10D does better than I manage) - why would I really want an FF camera? After all, FF means more weight and less tele reach. Just think of what you have to lug around to match the DA 55-300 on FF...
08-12-2010, 12:51 AM   #248
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,310
QuoteOriginally posted by Peter Zack Quote
Since I don't have access to his photo library, I can't of course. But I read an interview some time ago that he was so happy with the high ISO abilities of the new Canon, that it had changed his shooting. Does he regularly shoot over 12,800. I bet not. Any smart shooter would still stay as low as possible whenever possible.
Being happy with the high ISO capabilities is one thing, using ISO102400 and getting good results is another. High ISO doesn't start with 12800.

But I had the chance to shoot a wedding in a church I shot in last summer. it's dark and the only light is stained glass windows. Very dim indoor lights high in a vaulted ceiling. With the K20D, I had only one choice. Flash for everything. It meant timing each shot very carefully for a number of reasons. Worked but not the way I'd like to shoot.
I know very well how the K20D performs, I have one. And our (orthodox) churches are most likely darker than yours.
Get the tool that does the job. It's that easy


Last weekend, I could do the same thing at 6400 and 12,800 without the flash and get what I wanted. A lot less disruption to the service and a lot more shots were keepers.
Yeah, and your point is? Are you trying to prove we can't live with ISO6400, and after some time when APS-C will have usable ISO6400, just raise the bar?

Your second statement has me totally baffeled.
I fail to see how only at noon on a sunny day could I use shutter speeds faster than 1 second@ISO100.


1 second in a sunny situation? what are you trying to say?
Let me see... that you were exaggerating with your example? The eagle in daylight, that requires an exposure equivalent to 1 second@ISO 100?

What I've tried to say several times is this. It's dawn, you are at the lake and see a deer walking along the edge of the misty water. At 6AM the light is beautiful but at ISO 1600 (that's about as high as the K20D or K-7D can do well), the shutter speed is 1/30th. Too slow to freeze the shot and with a long lens, far to slow for even SR to keep it steady. In fact even with a tripod, you are probably going to miss the shot or loose a lot of detail.

So if you could get a clean shot that is properly exposed at 6400, same aperture and 1/125th, then you might have a fighting chance. That's what I'm saying.
So, in certain situations there are advantages of having a higher usable ISO. Did I ever disputed that?
There are advantages of having a higher quality low ISO, too, btw. It all depends on what we're doing.


Lets take that another way. You are at the soccer pitch and the action is moving fast. You want f8 or f11 and a minimum of 1/2000. Unless it is really bright, this may not be possible. Crank up the ISO and you've got the shutter speed and depth to nail the shots.
OK, I'll trust you that we absolutely need to go 1/2000 or even faster.

You seem to think I'm dissing Pentax. That I've taken it upon myself to trash the brand. Far, far from it. I want the brand to be better in every way. To offer me and many others more than 2 cameras that have more than we've ever had before. In fact I'm in the middle of buying a K-7 for certain needs. I'll probably always have a Pentax for some things. At least I hope so.
No, it's just that you're demanding unreasonable things from them. I.e. to launch a professional (small format) system, going neck to neck with Canikon on such a difficult market.

Look at the competition. Sony has 6 cameras, Nikon and Canon have at least this many or more. Even Oly has around 5 or more. We have 2 and we're always playing catch up. I really do not understand this tendancy to defend a brand that once was a leader and ever since the world went digital has always been at least a year behind.
You should let Sony out of this, since their strategy is something Pentax should never do. How about, seeing at Photokina 4 variants of the K-x - crippled, just change the grip a little, and on 2 of them cripple the viewfinder as hard as they can? Of course, Sony can make good cameras, too; but their entry levels are...
And btw, we have 3 DSLRs now, not 2. Soon, we'll most likely see more - and I bet, not all current models will be immediately retired
Pentax being a leader, is ancient history, dating well before the digital era.


Yes I've gotten some Nikon gear. I have no choice. If I want to pay the rent, I need a camera that can pay the bills and Pentax isn't there. To be fair, they don't pretend to be either. I'm not their customer.
Then, be happy and please, stop asking for Pentax to become Nikon.
In wild west saloons, they wrote: "Don't shoot the piano player; he's doing the best he can". So is Pentax.


But if they would at least listen to the shooters like me who need gear like this to stay on top of the market, then we'd "come home" in a heartbeat.
Being more reasonable helps. Asking to serve the $12000++ small format market is not reasonable, IMO.

I've shot Pentax for 30 years and been happy for the most part. I wanted the K-7 to be a whole lot more than it was in terms of the sensor. I can't wait any longer. We've lost some top notch shooters in the last 2 years and that sucks. I see zero effort from Pentax to even try to bring anyone back.
Well, they're trying their best. The D300s is not that good at high ISO, either; but we're expecting a new generation of APS-C sensors.
Their purpose is not to bring you back; nor is to keep me in - but so far I like what they're doing.


At ISO 400 and below, it's probably the best sensor available. But I don't make any money with flower shots.
The K-7 sensor is good at ISO400 and below, and a "FF" can be used at ISO102400? Talking about double standards...

So don't take me as trashing the line. Far from it. What I want is BETTER. MUCH BETTER cameras and lenses (optically they are fine, SDM is another issue).
What I want is what they'll show us at Photokina. I trust them it'll be good.
Angevinn: no, Hoya didn't bailout for Pentax; Pentax was profitable back then (right after the K10D) and in a much better shape than Minolta/Konica-Minolta.
In fact, many from the Pentax's board believed they were able to go alone; in the end, they had to give in, due to strong pressure from certain shareholders.

08-12-2010, 01:15 AM   #249
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,311
A change from FF to APS-C

This doenst matter to any of you but....

I know i guy from the swedish photo forum i hang in.

He recently surprized us all making a jump from a D700 to K-7?

The first comments from him was:
"Wow, this is a mindblowing litle tank of a camera"

"I just love the RAW files coming straight from the camera, they're so clean and crisp"

The rest of us wondered if he really was healthy, because the D700 is one hell of a great camera. But he just said that:
"I have recently felt so "unstable" in my system, so i just did it"

Well....fine for him!
08-12-2010, 02:06 AM   #250
Veteran Member
stanic's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: PB
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 380
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
Go here and test your answer. Remember to keep every thing the same except the sensor size.

Online Depth of Field Calculator
this is common mistake just as the one with the magnification ratio being higher on aps-c
the site you linked sais also this (http://www.dofmaster.com/charts.html) roll down to the eqation and tell me please, where is the sensor size in that eqation?
DoF changes with various formats because it is not the format size that matters but the size of the circle of confusion, what I mean is if you print contacts from APS-C, full frame or 8x10, with the same lens and focus distance, there will be always the same DoF
the difference shows if we print (magnify) the APS-C and FF to 8x10, therefore the need to "stop down", because all of the circles of confusion get magnifyied as well and appear no more as spots but as circles to human eye (they are always circles)
I was just trying to rectify the statement: "narrow DOF that you can only get from a full frame camera at the moment" it is not right, what Urkeldaedalus needs is a field of view offered by full frame


edit: just check out some more on this than one website with some calculator first
http://www.photozone.de/dof-confusion
http://www.normankoren.com/Tutorials/MTF6.html
http://www.trenholm.org/hmmerk/DOFR.html
http://www.luminous-landscape.com/tutorials/dof2.shtml

Last edited by stanic; 08-12-2010 at 04:27 AM.
08-12-2010, 02:28 AM   #251
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,257
QuoteOriginally posted by Angevinn Quote
Didn't Hoya bailout Pentax? Pentax was in bad shape when Hoya took them over. Hoya's influence is responsible for the release of the 645D and can be seen in the K-7.
But Hoya is also responsible (partly) for the delay of 645D since Hoya put it on hold. It may be a good thing in the end (645D sharing tech with the K-7 rather than the K10).
08-12-2010, 04:37 AM   #252
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,213
Full frame as done by the D700 has pros and cons. On the pro side, you can shoot pretty amazing high iso photos, keeping decent DR up to, say, iso 2000. On the con side, it is only 12 megapixels and so to fill the frame with your eagle, you need a 600 mm lens on a very sturdy tripod, because you can only crop so much. Most birders I know use crop frame cameras, just for "the extra reach."

A lot depends on what your tolerance for noise is. Looking at some of the photos from camera phones these days, iso 6400 on the K7 looks pretty good, but I certainly wouldn't think about trying to sell prints from it.

I think that Pentax will release full frame at the end of next year, as a sequel to the high end APS C camera. It would be nice if they would give some indication of that fact to those who are hanging in there for full frame, for whatever reason, but I doubt it. Hoya has been awfully tight lipped on discussions of future direction.
08-12-2010, 04:57 AM   #253
Pentaxian
Moderator Emeritus




Join Date: May 2007
Location: Edmonton Alberta, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,648
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
Go here and test your answer. Remember to keep every thing the same except the sensor size.

Online Depth of Field Calculator
Perfect answer. Having shot a 6x7MF for several years, I know that there's a big difference between that and 35mm. It's one of the reasons Landscape Photographers used MF cameras.
08-12-2010, 05:25 AM   #254
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,922
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
Full frame as done by the D700 has pros and cons. On the pro side, you can shoot pretty amazing high iso photos, keeping decent DR up to, say, iso 2000. On the con side, it is only 12 megapixels and so to fill the frame with your eagle, you need a 600 mm lens on a very sturdy tripod, because you can only crop so much. Most birders I know use crop frame cameras, just for "the extra reach."

A lot depends on what your tolerance for noise is. Looking at some of the photos from camera phones these days, iso 6400 on the K7 looks pretty good, but I certainly wouldn't think about trying to sell prints from it.

I think that Pentax will release full frame at the end of next year, as a sequel to the high end APS C camera. It would be nice if they would give some indication of that fact to those who are hanging in there for full frame, for whatever reason, but I doubt it. Hoya has been awfully tight lipped on discussions of future direction.
A D700 with 14-24, 24-70, and a long lens with VR plus an SBxxx super-flash is a serious pro kit. Throw in a fast prime or 2, the necessary tripod, and an APS-C D300 you can now do wildlife with mor res. More reach? Get an excellent Nikon TC.

Nikon fully expects its top shooters to own more than one body.

The issue/decision about FF is not really up to Pentax. It will entirely be determined by Canikon and Sony's pricing for their FF systems relative to APS-C. It's possible that Nikon will do what it usually does with its models, and put out a successor to the D700 (D800 likely), but keep manufacturing the D700 selling it at a lower price point (see note about Nikon getting its crowd to buy multiple bodies).

If the D700 falls to a $1,700 street price, every APS-C/M43 flagship within $500 is going to have a serious problem competing. Canon might do the same with its line; use redundant legacy product sales to drive price points lower. Eventually by doing so Canikon will create a much more cost-effective FF ecosystem leading to the FF domination of the $1,500+ market. This will allow Canikon to scale back their APS-C production and lengthen the advances there, allowing them to put even more capital into FF, driving down the costs even further.

It is perfectly, even preferable, for Pentax to follow here. So long as they are ready. I suspect they are. This is a good time to be cautious, but Pentax's moneyed users and pros who stick it out will very soon need to know if they should stay loyal or jump to another brand.
08-12-2010, 05:30 AM   #255
Pentaxian
Moderator Emeritus




Join Date: May 2007
Location: Edmonton Alberta, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,648
Kunzite for C***t sakes I give up. You're right. I want Pentax to be better and appeal to a wider audience and you want it to stay put.

You're right, I haven't a clue what I'm talking about. Please send me your shipping address and your head size so I can deliver a bucket of sand to you.
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!
frame, k-5, lenses, mystery, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, photokina, release
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Full frame pentax cem.kumuk Pentax DSLR Discussion 11 11-12-2010 03:13 PM
I think the Pentax FF will be announced at Photokina 2010 whatever7 Pentax News and Rumors 106 02-04-2010 12:45 AM
Expired Theme Theme: Contest #41, January, 2010 (Frame within a Frame) Adam Monthly Photo Contests 11 01-21-2010 12:33 AM
The almost full frame Pentax? denisv Photographic Technique 44 01-19-2009 04:01 AM
New Pentax k18D - Full Frame ebooks4pentax Pentax DSLR Discussion 17 10-31-2007 05:46 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:50 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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