Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-29-2007, 04:16 PM   #121
Pentaxian
Arpe's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: New Zealand
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,335
QuoteOriginally posted by Duplo Quote
.. Because I handle them wearing gloves 8 month a year...
Wow - my sympathy You want a big camera and big buttons.

11-29-2007, 05:00 PM   #122
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philippines
Posts: 1,399
QuoteOriginally posted by Gruoso Quote
They are molto expensive but you can achieve limited DOF. It is a pity that the lenses were that expensive cos they are damn good.
I don't think all of them are expensive. Olympus tends to segregate their lens line-up. The "top pro" lenses are the ones that are expensive (the 300 2.8 comes to mind). The "pro" and "standard" ones are just about the same as with other DSLR systems.

In any case, Sigma makes lenses available to the 4/3 system, if one needs other options. Forget about Leica. They're always expensive.

Creampuff, I wouldn't trash 4/3 as a dead-end format. For one, it's not much smaller than APS-C and another thing is that there are other factors that contribute to noise aside from sensor size vis a vis pixel count. The system may not be able to compete with the likes of Canon and Nikon (at this point in time, no other manufacturer can, anyway), but it certainly can survive in niche markets. The two I can think of is wildlife photography and those who want to travel light.
11-29-2007, 06:21 PM   #123
Veteran Member
creampuff's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,955
QuoteOriginally posted by vinzer Quote
...
Creampuff, I wouldn't trash 4/3 as a dead-end format. For one, it's not much smaller than APS-C and another thing is that there are other factors that contribute to noise aside from sensor size vis a vis pixel count. The system may not be able to compete with the likes of Canon and Nikon (at this point in time, no other manufacturer can, anyway), but it certainly can survive in niche markets. The two I can think of is wildlife photography and those who want to travel light.
The 4/3 system may have produced compact bodies but for supposedly a smaller sensor, the lenses aren't correspondingly smaller nor any much lighter. I've found the dynamic range to be pretty poor, with highlight clipping. Maybe it's the contrasty lighting here in sunny tropical Singapore but even a Canikon or a Pentax fares better. A bigger sensor is the way to go.
11-30-2007, 12:29 AM   #124
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,189
QuoteOriginally posted by vinzer Quote
Creampuff, I wouldn't trash 4/3 as a dead-end format. For one, it's not much smaller than APS-C and another thing is that there are other factors that contribute to noise aside from sensor size vis a vis pixel count.
Same rough difference between 4/3difference than between 4/3 and FF. So between 4/3 and FF the difference isn't small anymore.

QuoteOriginally posted by vinzer Quote
The system may not be able to compete with the likes of Canon and Nikon (at this point in time, no other manufacturer can, anyway), but it certainly can survive in niche markets. The two I can think of is wildlife photography and those who want to travel light.
Nikon? you mean Sony... Nikon produce very nice camera they have not much to do when talking about sensor perofrmance (neither do Olympus of course except they created the whole 4/3 thing). As for wildlife, I dunno ifwe need DOF control for wildlife but 4/3 DOF defenitely sucks.

11-30-2007, 04:45 AM   #125
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philippines
Posts: 1,399
QuoteOriginally posted by creampuff Quote
The 4/3 system may have produced compact bodies but for supposedly a smaller sensor, the lenses aren't correspondingly smaller nor any much lighter. I've found the dynamic range to be pretty poor, with highlight clipping. Maybe it's the contrasty lighting here in sunny tropical Singapore but even a Canikon or a Pentax fares better. A bigger sensor is the way to go.
True, the only time you could explicitly see the benefit of the 4/3 system being smaller is when you see the E-410 with two-lens kit. But you can also compare some lenses with the same effective focal length. I was also curious at the prospect of comparing some lenses and saw that the 300mm 2.8 of Oly weighs in at around 7.2 lbs as compared to the 400 2.8 of Canon, which weighs at around 11 lbs (two lenses ends up being 600mm lenses with the respective crop factors). A near 2 kilos is quite a difference, in my opinion (there's about a 2-inch difference in lengths favoring the Oly lens, also, but that's near negligible for me).

I think Olympus botched up with the in-camera JPEG processing, that's why the E-x10 series fares badly with regards to DR, as I've seen processed RAW images from that camera with comparable DR to other systems. Of course, it would take some work to get good DR from those cameras, but then most cameras need to have their images tweaked some to get the best quality out of them, as a lot of us here can attest to. I hear you about needing good DR, though. I also live in tropical Philippines.

For full disclosure, I'm considering buying an E-510 just for the longer effective focal lengths. I don't really have the resources to compete in eBay for a long AF lens for the K-mount. And the possibility of using nearly all of the old lenses via adapters with infinity focus still being there intrigues me. Getting outbid in eBay a lot of times really got me thinking, I guess. LOL.
11-30-2007, 04:55 AM   #126
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philippines
Posts: 1,399
QuoteOriginally posted by thibs Quote
Same rough difference between 4/3difference than between 4/3 and FF. So between 4/3 and FF the difference isn't small anymore.

Nikon? you mean Sony... Nikon produce very nice camera they have not much to do when talking about sensor perofrmance (neither do Olympus of course except they created the whole 4/3 thing). As for wildlife, I dunno ifwe need DOF control for wildlife but 4/3 DOF defenitely sucks.
Of course, comparing 4/3 and FF is a whole different ballgame. That's probably why I keep thinking that Oly will better survive to cater to specific markets. Landscape and fashion photography would probably be better served by FF, and, I guess, sports photography where good high ISO performance is needed. 4/3 is still a good option for soccer moms, travel photography, wildlife, and possibly sports shooting, to an extent.

And good point about Sony and Nikon. I forgot that Sony does a lot of the sensor work for Nikon. I'm not sure, though, if Nikon did their own sensor for the D3. To be fair to Nikon, they did do sensors before, and even when they shifted to Sony sensors, they (as well as Pentax) managed to make better use of those sensors than Sony itself did. Even D300/A700 comparisons showed Nikon making better use of the sensor, in my opinion.
11-30-2007, 06:14 AM   #127
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 264
QuoteOriginally posted by creampuff Quote
Join forces with Olympus??? Are you serious? The 4/3 system is on the verge of an evolutionary digital dead end. They may make small DSLRs, but who wants a crappy small tunnel like viewfinder and a sensor with pretty limited dynamic range and noisy at high ISOs at that. Plus their telecentric lenses don't come cheap and small in size. Moreover with the small sensor, limited DOF shots are pretty much useless.
I thought the "laughing face" smiley should indicate that I wasn't serious. I was just making the point that Pentax make compact lenses but not equally compact bodies, and Olympus vice versa. But I am fascinated by your response, an all-out attack on the Olympus system. What did it ever do to you?

The 4/3rds system is an evolutionary dead end? A larger sensor is better? But surely that would mean that a 35x24mm sensor is better than APS-C? But my god man, you're not allowed to suggest that "full frame" might be a good thing on a Pentax forum...

Btw Canon dSLRs had crappy small tunnel-like viewfinders... come to think of it, Canon film SLRs had crappy small tunnel-like viewfinders too... didn't seem to stop them selling though.

The Olympus may be noisy at high ISOs... and Pentax dSLRs are noisy at high ISO compared to certain other cameras too... it doesn't mean I don't like using Pentax dSLRs though.

As for their tele lenses, they may not come cheap but they exist. Pentax ones don't, not beyond 150/200mm; they may be forthcoming but they're not here yet.

I'm a Pentax user and a happy one, but I don't undertstand the extreme antipathy towards Olympus or the talk of digital evolution (implying extinction)... it's pretty much the same thing Canon and Nikon users say about Pentax.

Last edited by ZaphodB; 11-30-2007 at 06:40 AM.
11-30-2007, 06:45 AM   #128
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Bangor, Maine
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,382
I don't think so

QuoteOriginally posted by creampuff Quote
Join forces with Olympus??? Are you serious? The 4/3 system is on the verge of an evolutionary digital dead end. They may make small DSLRs, but who wants a crappy small tunnel like viewfinder and a sensor with pretty limited dynamic range and noisy at high ISOs at that. Plus their telecentric lenses don't come cheap and small in size. Moreover with the small sensor, limited DOF shots are pretty much useless.
K mount and M42 lenses can be used on the 4/3 system. If Oly had allowed these lens to use the metering system I would have bought a 510 because of LV and the size. For the right type of shooter the 510 could be a better choice than the K10D. The DSLR market will evolve into a "Niche" market with many specialized bodies and the 510 is the first that fits that definition. There are at least 2 very professional K10d owners that have bought the 510 to compliment their K10D's.

Regards,

Ken

11-30-2007, 09:01 AM   #129
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,189
QuoteOriginally posted by ZaphodB Quote
As for their tele lenses, they may not come cheap but they exist. Pentax ones don't, not beyond 150/200mm; they may be forthcoming but they're not here yet.
Sure but then if we do not consider lenses not offering metering (K-mount or M42 on an Oly body with an adapter) you only have those very pricey Teles... Sure Pentax has a BIG problem with new Teles but you can go 2nd hand, even old M42 will still give you metering, although with K10 it is far from perfect. In the end the situation is mostly a draw if you do not absolutely need e.g. AF...
11-30-2007, 03:04 PM   #130
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: West Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 338
Wasn't there a story about animals going to Bremen? Have you met them? Did they have any PTX news?

Hee!
11-30-2007, 05:57 PM   #131
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 264
QuoteOriginally posted by thibs Quote
Sure but then if we do not consider lenses not offering metering (K-mount or M42 on an Oly body with an adapter) you only have those very pricey Teles... Sure Pentax has a BIG problem with new Teles but you can go 2nd hand, even old M42 will still give you metering, although with K10 it is far from perfect. In the end the situation is mostly a draw if you do not absolutely need e.g. AF...
Oh I agree, it's a draw... I wasn't trying to say Olympus has the better system. Just that there are definitely criticisms to be made of Pentax too, and some of these are the same criticisms (for example the tele lens situation, plus regarding the sensor size, plenty of people believe APS-C will be proved a dead end as 35mm sensor cameras become cheaper)... so I don't understand such harsh criticism of Olympus.
11-30-2007, 06:53 PM   #132
Veteran Member
creampuff's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,955
ZaphodB, no intention to be critical of you. Apologies.
I actually used Oly prosumers before and when I got rid of my problematic Nikon D70, I did consider the Olympus DSLRs (for a very short period, thankfully). I think the smaller sensor of the 4/3 system is a very big limitation. It's just that the cons outweigh the pros in my book.
11-30-2007, 08:24 PM   #133
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philippines
Posts: 1,399
QuoteOriginally posted by creampuff Quote
ZaphodB, no intention to be critical of you. Apologies.
I actually used Oly prosumers before and when I got rid of my problematic Nikon D70, I did consider the Olympus DSLRs (for a very short period, thankfully). I think the smaller sensor of the 4/3 system is a very big limitation. It's just that the cons outweigh the pros in my book.
True, with every DSLR, there will forever be trade-offs. I do think that *both* APS-C and 4/3 will survive, if only because not everyone would want to carry big telephoto lenses if they use full-frame, no matter how cheap FF bodies will get.

Personally, I'm giving Olympus the benefit of the doubt since they proved themselves to be an innovative company in this DSLR age.
12-01-2007, 06:47 AM   #134
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 239
QuoteQuote:
As for their tele lenses, they may not come cheap but they exist. Pentax ones don't, not beyond 150/200mm; they may be forthcoming but they're not here yet.
People, what's it all about the tele lens ptoblems with Pentax systems? I just went to online base of local optical stores and that's what I can get for my Pentax right away:
Sigma 100-300
Tamron 70-300
Pentax 75-300
Sigma 70-300
Sigma 28-300
Tamron 28-300
Sigma 135-400
Pentax FA* 400
Sigma 80-400
Sigma 170-500
Sigma 50-500

Not mentioning those, which have 250 or 200mm at the far side. Isn't it more then enough?
And I even can add seme unusual options like Russian lens Rubinar 1000/8, which WILL work with K10D (manual focus).
12-01-2007, 07:05 AM   #135
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 841
QuoteOriginally posted by Snowcat Quote
People, what's it all about the tele lens ptoblems with Pentax systems?
Pentax will, finally, introduce new telelenses spring 2008.
DA Star 200 f/2.8, 300 f/4 and 60-250 f/4 has unfortunately been delayed.
Also coming is a DA 55-300 for consumers, an upgrade of the 50-200.

Tamron has a new AF 70-200 f/2.8 coming for Pentax mount.
So, this spring looks very promising from a tele-point of view.
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!
cameras, forum, pentax news, pentax rumors
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K-X specs o_bender Pentax DSLR Discussion 17 10-09-2009 09:32 AM
k-7 specs?? houstonmacgregor Pentax News and Rumors 11 05-19-2009 05:26 PM
K-7: the specs are known already ogl Pentax News and Rumors 347 05-15-2009 01:16 PM
GX-20 Specs ricardobeat Pentax News and Rumors 5 01-24-2008 10:01 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:12 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