Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-14-2013, 04:18 AM   #2506
Pentaxian
gazonk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oslo area, Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,509
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
Just because many people are talking about producing a high level EVF based camera body doesn't give the idea merit. Current EVF based Mirrorless cameras haven't been selling all that well...at least compared to traditional SLRs.
IMHO both the OM-D EM-5 and the NEX-6 (and NEX-7) make a whole lot of sense, if you want minimal bulk without IQ compromise. The NEX-6 with the 16-50 kit lens is simply ridiculously small compared to a Pentax K-50 with kit lens - which was why my daughter decided to abandon Pentax when her K100D was stolen. She'll have to find a replacement for her 35mm/2.4, which was stolen with the camera, but I think she'll be fine with the NEX 35mm/1.8.

The NEX-6 seems to be selling far less than the NEX-5R, though, even in Japan: I had a look at bcnranking and kakaku, and K-5 IIs, K-30 and Q10 all seem to sell better than the NEX-6.

08-14-2013, 04:32 AM   #2507
Pentaxian
Barry Pearson's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Stockport
Posts: 870
QuoteOriginally posted by IchabodCrane Quote
IIRC, it was the other way around. The PIC (pilot in charge... left seat) was wrongly pulling up on his joy stick while the first officer (right seat) was correctly pushing down on his joy stick. All studies/reviews point to the FO having no idea that the PIC was inputing the wrong command.
OK. Perhaps I remembered it wrong. I thought the captain had vacated his left seat (and left the cabin) leaving the original other officer in the right seat. And I thought it was the latter that got it wrong. But without being a pilot I could easily miss such significance and mis-remember.

Edit: But I've just read that it was the PIC who got it wrong, as you say. I don't know why I remember that it was the pilot on the right who did.

Last edited by Barry Pearson; 08-14-2013 at 04:43 AM.
08-14-2013, 04:58 AM   #2508
Pentaxian
Uluru's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,400
Can we go back to the subject?
We are two weeks away from early September, and absolutely no information of any kind, not even a leaked spec, about any Ricoh Imaging camera.
Even in GR's case we've had some clues, and two weeks before the official info about K50/500, we've had a French website leak.
What is going on?
08-14-2013, 05:07 AM   #2509
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,862
QuoteOriginally posted by Asahiflex Quote
Yet TV cameras have recorded sports for ages *without any OVF*. How did they do that?
To be fair, we must note that most of "ages" the TV cameras' EVF has not been digital.

The image was captured by tubes and with no intermediate storage and with only a few analog "in the line" processing steps, it was output to both a wire and a TV tube serving as the EVF. Therefore, the lag of analog EVFs was extremely small. Digital EVFs still have a hard time to match this.

08-14-2013, 05:31 AM   #2510
Pentaxian
Clavius's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: De Klundert
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,115
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
Just because many people are talking about producing a high level EVF based camera body doesn't give the idea merit. Current EVF based Mirrorless cameras haven't been selling all that well...at least compared to traditional SLRs.
You can't sell a beast that doesn't even exist: A pro level flagship MILC. It's like saying that there is no market for a Pentax FF DSLR based on the fact that the sales of Pentax FF DSLRs has been very slow in the past decade.



QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
I calibrate my own RF cameras and SLR cameras, I wet clean the sensor and clean the mirror box - I consider it part of the basic setup of a new camera when I buy it, especially when I plan to use manual focus lenses with it. As a working professional I consider it mandatory for all the cameras I buy.
You're actually confirming my opinion here. That an OVF per default is not good enough for proper manual focussing. Only for pointing / framing and letting the AF do it's thing. For manual focus, third party screens and shims have to be applied. That results often in focus screen and focus confirmation being misaligned and requiring extra calibration. Horrific fidgetty technical work that has very little to do with photography at all.

Imagine a dentist being distracted from his primary function by such technical knowledge and skills about his drill and being forced to overhaul his drill in this way! It's all good fun for hobbyists, but for the average pro his tools just need to work.

No calibration needed with CDAF, and it's ultra precise compared to PDAF. And for manual focussing: peaking and zooming at the press of a button. Or no information at all, also at the press of a button. Compositional aids like frames, horizons, rule of thirds, all available and customizable on the go.
08-14-2013, 05:36 AM - 4 Likes   #2511
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Wilmore, KY
Posts: 349
Reason FF or K3 Has Been Delayed

This conversation, though utterly bizarre, is so stimulating and entertaining, I almost hope Pentax NEVER releases the K3 or FF because then we'd stop having these supremely nerdy, fun, humorous and stimulating conversations and... start taking pictures… I never even knew Schrödinger even had a cat. If he did, and he ate the gerbil, would the gerbil then… no, I'm not going there.
08-14-2013, 06:17 AM   #2512
Pentaxian
johnmflores's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Somerville, NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,999
This conversation really should have happened on paper, with posts delivered via a network of pneumatic tubes. Would have been more reliable and accurate than these fiddly electrons....
08-14-2013, 06:31 AM   #2513
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,790
QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
You can't sell a beast that doesn't even exist: A pro level flagship MILC.
Leica?

QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
No calibration needed with CDAF, and it's ultra precise compared to PDAF
Mmmm....both can be ultra-precise. It's not an either/or but depends on the subject, conditions, and context.

We've had over a century of sharp photographs taken without the "benefit" of an electronic intermediary. The idea that real focus demands a CDAF compared to the inaccuracies of PDAF is false.

08-14-2013, 06:32 AM   #2514
Pentaxian
Asahiflex's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Netherlands
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,753
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
To be fair, we must note that most of "ages" the TV cameras' EVF has not been digital.

The image was captured by tubes and with no intermediate storage and with only a few analog "in the line" processing steps, it was output to both a wire and a TV tube serving as the EVF. Therefore, the lag of analog EVFs was extremely small. Digital EVFs still have a hard time to match this.
You are completely right of course. (I still remember using a video camera with burned tubes; we've come a long way since then). Nevertheless almost all broadcasting systems in use today are digital so I think my statement is still true.
08-14-2013, 06:42 AM   #2515
Pentaxian
johnmflores's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Somerville, NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,999
QuoteOriginally posted by Asahiflex Quote
You are completely right of course. (I still remember using a video camera with burned tubes; we've come a long way since then). Nevertheless almost all broadcasting systems in use today are digital so I think my statement is still true.
The difference between still and video is how they capture the "decisive moment". I won't say that it's harder with stills, but it is different.

I can understand that still photographers are worried about potential lag that a digital system can introduce:


On the other hand, mirrorless cameras with electronic shutters like the Nikon V1 can shoot full resolution RAWS as fast as 60FPS, making capturing the decisive moment easier.

At the end of the day, old techniques may not be compatible with new technology, and photogs will have to develop new techniques that take advantage of the new tech.
08-14-2013, 07:09 AM   #2516
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,409
QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
You're actually confirming my opinion here. That an OVF per default is not good enough for proper manual focussing. Only for pointing / framing and letting the AF do it's thing. For manual focus, third party screens and shims have to be applied. That results often in focus screen and focus confirmation being misaligned and requiring extra calibration. Horrific fidgetty technical work that has very little to do with photography at all.
The need for calibration doesn't make a tool "not good enough".
QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
No calibration needed with CDAF, and it's ultra precise compared to PDAF. And for manual focussing: peaking and zooming at the press of a button. Or no information at all, also at the press of a button. Compositional aids like frames, horizons, rule of thirds, all available and customizable on the go.
Is it "ultra precise" compared with a properly calibrated dedicated PDAF system? Are you sure about that?
08-14-2013, 07:18 AM   #2517
Site Supporter
Cynog Ap Brychan's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Gloucester
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,090
QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
For manual focus, third party screens and shims have to be applied.
I do all my critical focussing for macro work manually, using the standard screen. I don't see what the problem is, to be honest.
08-14-2013, 07:45 AM   #2518
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,535
QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
Imagine a dentist being distracted from his primary function by such technical knowledge and skills about his drill and being forced to overhaul his drill in this way! It's all good fun for hobbyists, but for the average pro his tools just need to work.
My dentist pays someone to repair his equipment, I'm a professional musician - I don't repair my own instruments, I pay someone to do it. And there are plenty of professionals who pay good money to get their cameras calibrated and serviced. I just happen to be able to do all my camera calibrating and adjustments myself.

QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
both can be ultra-precise. It's not an either/or but depends on the subject, conditions, and context. We've had over a century of sharp photographs taken without the "benefit" of an electronic intermediary. The idea that real focus demands a CDAF compared to the inaccuracies of PDAF is false.
+1 I agree, Photographers have managed quite well without all the creeping featurism - in the end it all comes down to skill.
08-14-2013, 08:05 AM   #2519
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,159
QuoteOriginally posted by Asahiflex Quote
You are completely right of course. (I still remember using a video camera with burned tubes; we've come a long way since then). Nevertheless almost all broadcasting systems in use today are digital so I think my statement is still true.
Indeed but those devices do not have much space and power requirements compared to cameras.
A lot of things are possible (in general way) but doing it with a couple of unavoidable constraints is different: economic (what would the device costs), power (how long the device can be powered that way) and processing power (necessary for near real time, e.g. no lag).

It is still funny to me that SLR which have an old school mechanical working stay longer with a battery than a less mechanical device (mirrorless).
Of course other things come into play: mirrorless often have crappy batteries because people expects mirrorless to be compact and if it is not, it loses one of its reasons to be in the first place.

Once EVF is lag free, with enough resolution, flickerless and its power reasonable (compared to the other power needs of the camera), it will take over OVF. Not there yet by a very large margin.
08-14-2013, 08:50 AM   #2520
Pentaxian
Barry Pearson's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Stockport
Posts: 870
QuoteOriginally posted by thibs Quote
Once EVF is lag free, with enough resolution, flickerless and its power reasonable (compared to the other power needs of the camera), it will take over OVF. Not there yet by a very large margin.
That reads rather as though there is some sort of common threshold, beyond which the whole industry will switch from OVFs to EVFs.

I believe there are different thresholds for different areas of the dSLR marketplace, and for different photographers with different needs. In fact, that is illustrated by the lack of consensus in this thread, and the fact that some manufacturers have made a start.

If Pentax continues to have 3 cameras in its K-mount range, it would be taking a massive risk with a radical change. It would "betting a third of the shop", at least. If the 3 cameras are seen as an upgrade path, it is more like "the whole shop". There will be much wailing and gnashing of teeth whatever Pentax does! (Or perhaps Pentax could try 3 OVFs and 1 niche EVF).

But Canon and Nikon would be taking less of a risk. They could make a start while still having comprehensive ranges of OVFs, with 2 or more (how many is it?) times as many models as Pentax. And if they do, I think they would still take years to complete the "take over". There would still be the upgrade market and the skeptical market who would demand OVFs, and the specialist areas for which EVFs couldn't yet get close. I have speculated that one of both will have made a start within the next 5 years. I can't imagine that either will have completely switched in that time!
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!
aps-c, body, k-5, k-7, k-7/k-5, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, reason, sensor, sony
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Speculation: What if Pentax did not go FF but rather a 1.3x? brecklundin Pentax DSLR Discussion 36 08-13-2013 10:36 PM
Any speculation on how long... Tom S. Pentax K-5 10 12-16-2010 09:19 PM
K-x price speculation SylBer Pentax DSLR Discussion 18 10-13-2010 12:29 PM
Small rant + speculation ilya80 Pentax News and Rumors 35 04-20-2010 11:42 PM
speculation about FA lenses on FF DSLR lpfonseca Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 19 11-05-2009 10:34 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:33 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