Pentax Q, Auto 110 digital and K-1 24x36

RonHendriks1966 · 07-25-2011, 12:47 AM

Originally posted by eurostar

I don't understand why DA*60-250/4 is always said to be full-frame. Mine is definitely not, it visibly vignettes in a film camera viewfinder.

O wow, we are just parrot's maybe.

**Rondec** · 07-25-2011, 03:21 AM

Originally posted by eurostar

I don't understand why DA*60-250/4 is always said to be full-frame. Mine is definitely not, it visibly vignettes in a film camera viewfinder.

Is that with or without the hood? Falconeye has said that it is full frame compatible, although he has not yet up loaded photos to show that fact.

froeschle · 07-25-2011, 03:45 AM

Quote:

[...] I don't understand why DA*60-250/4 is always said to be full-frame [...]

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/1046099-post134.html
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/1257659-post147.html

Originally posted by falconeye:

[...] More on that if I find the time to compile the full article. [...]

Pentax 60-250 SDM Samples: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

falconeye · 07-25-2011, 05:17 AM

Originally posted by Rondec

Is that with or without the hood? Falconeye has said that it is full frame compatible, although he has not yet up loaded photos to show that fact.

That's true. I updated the article with a few more details but still cannot find the time to write a full article.
-> https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/1590833-post150.html

Ben_Edict · 07-31-2011, 02:48 AM

Originally posted by RonHendriks1966

This is interesting. Can a new 110D (with a larger sensor then Q) have a Q-mount but with a longer flancedistance. So the lenses for Q fit on 110D with an extensiontube, but the 110D lenses don't fit on Q. Or is this a strange idea?

How many different camera systems would you expect Pentax to support? It would be plain stupid, to add yet another system, after the Q was released. The Auto 110 D was just a prototype and proved either technically invalid or not marketable at that time. The same qas true with the unlucky MZ-D. The Philips sensor was way too expensive (only Contax used it and they are dead now for a couple of years). The whole concept of the MZ-D is now obsolete and outdated. If we can expect a larger sensor DSLR from Pentax its design would surely not be based on a 10 years old sample, which never worked fully.

Ben

Ben_Edict · 07-31-2011, 02:57 AM

Originally posted by Zygonyx

Let' s add the Cosina 19-35mm f/3.5-4.5 which is used by quite a lot of Canon 5D and 5DII owner, a bunch of Zeiss (at least 8 lenses) and Voigtlander (at least 3 lenses) still for sale... even if they are to be discontinued in K mount.

For the zooms, it will depend on sensor resolution.
I hope for a start it could be contained to about 20-24 Mpix.
I my opinion; Ricoh would just need to refurbish the very good FA 24-90/3.5-4.5 boosted by a SDM engine. For a good start.

Zeiss has stopped K-mount lens productions months ago, probably because demand was too low.

The question is, why woulkd a photographer with a full-frame body opt for the poorly FA-J zooms? I cannot see any reason. Also, if I buy a pro-spec camera body, I want to look for the accompanying lenses from the body manufacturer, not from Sigma. I may buy some Sigma lenses, but I would still expect Pentax to deliver the basic set.

So, you have to think about the applications of a ff-FDSRL. For landcsape photography the existing line-up is viable - but then there is the 645D, which is aimed exactly at this clientele and is quite affordable (compared to some other MF digitals). So, for fashion, sports, studio set-ups many lenses are missing, no perspective correction lenses (shift, shift-tilt), no long glass, no fast long glass and very limited wide-angle choices.

I cannot see Pentax going into that direction. Perhaps that might change under the Ricoh umbrella.

Ben

Blue · 07-31-2011, 07:33 AM

Originally posted by Ben_Edict

Zeiss has stopped K-mount lens productions months ago, probably because demand was too low.

The question is, why woulkd a photographer with a full-frame body opt for the poorly FA-J zooms? I cannot see any reason. Also, if I buy a pro-spec camera body, I want to look for the accompanying lenses from the body manufacturer, not from Sigma. I may buy some Sigma lenses, but I would still expect Pentax to deliver the basic set.

So, you have to think about the applications of a ff-FDSRL. For landcsape photography the existing line-up is viable - but then there is the 645D, which is aimed exactly at this clientele and is quite affordable (compared to some other MF digitals). So, for fashion, sports, studio set-ups many lenses are missing, no perspective correction lenses (shift, shift-tilt), no long glass, no fast long glass and very limited wide-angle choices.

I cannot see Pentax going into that direction. Perhaps that might change under the Ricoh umbrella.

Ben

Gee Ben, we expect them to use the Philips sensor and the older AF system.

sarcasm

Blue · 07-31-2011, 07:44 AM

Originally posted by Ben_Edict

Zeiss has stopped K-mount lens productions months ago, probably because demand was too low.

The question is, why woulkd a photographer with a full-frame body opt for the poorly FA-J zooms? I cannot see any reason. Also, if I buy a pro-spec camera body, I want to look for the accompanying lenses from the body manufacturer, not from Sigma. I may buy some Sigma lenses, but I would still expect Pentax to deliver the basic set.

So, you have to think about the applications of a ff-FDSRL. For landcsape photography the existing line-up is viable - but then there is the 645D, which is aimed exactly at this clientele and is quite affordable (compared to some other MF digitals). So, for fashion, sports, studio set-ups many lenses are missing, no perspective correction lenses (shift, shift-tilt), no long glass, no fast long glass and very limited wide-angle choices.

I cannot see Pentax going into that direction. Perhaps that might change under the Ricoh umbrella.

Ben

#1: Zeiss is a Niche market. Furthermore, if it wasn't for Zeiss having the AF line of lenses for the Alpha system, their sales would not even show up on the radar . . . oh wait, they don't anyway.

The only other major manufacturers with mf lenses is Nikon with about 8 NIkkor including the 35/1.4. These can be bought from BH and Adorama. Then there are some by Cosina/Voightlander. I have felt that Pentax should maintain an assembly line for specialty products and run small batches of some items. manual focus lenses is one of those items i.e. the best of the best such as the A 15mm, K 18, K28/2, A 50/1.2, A* 85/1.4, A* 135/1.8., A* 200/2.8 and A* 200/4 macro. Put in A contacts on the K's and add Ghostless Coatings & SP. Those and a few other specialty items would keep the Specialty Assembly line going. It would be done in a sustainability fashion rather than with a goal of selling to everyone on the planet. However, selling them in different mounts might not be a bad idea.

#2: No one gives a flip about the FAJ lenses, well almost no one.

#3: The 645D is in a different ball game at $9-10K for the body. Plus the senor is somewhere between 24x36 and 645. I think many people with medium format don't have as many lenses as they did with 135 or digital 35. Pentax has been adding lenses to the 645D, but slowly which was in part due to them only releasing what was in the works and under the direction of Hoya who seems to have been in a holding pattern. We will see how that changes under Ricoh.

#4: Hassy has been sold recently so that should help level the playing field during the transition.

**Douglas_of_Sweden** · 07-31-2011, 08:13 AM

That's a clever way to get a longer distance between lens and flash and reduce red eye risk.

thibs · 07-31-2011, 09:41 AM

Originally posted by Douglas_of_Sweden

That's a clever way to get a longer distance between lens and flash and reduce red eye risk.

Agreed but most people here thought it was stupid because:
* it looks wierd
* Q is a bad idea which will be trumped anyway the sky is faling Pentax is dead.

....

**Douglas_of_Sweden** · 08-01-2011, 03:16 AM

BTW, does anyone know the registration distance for the Q?

asw66 · 08-01-2011, 04:38 AM

Originally posted by Douglas_of_Sweden

That's a clever way to get a longer distance between lens and flash and reduce red eye risk.

Yep. I'd go so far as to say that it's such a good idea that it will be widely copied soon. And when it's ubiquitous it will seem perfectly normal.

RonHendriks1966 · 08-01-2011, 07:29 AM

Originally posted by Douglas_of_Sweden

BTW, does anyone know the registration distance for the Q?

I read something of 9 mm (or was it 9,2).

froeschle · 08-02-2011, 04:19 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by falconeye

So, there was a Pentax bloggers meeting in Japan [...]

I wonder what is behind this event. Esp. as there is no real blogger scene in Japan. Or if I miss it, please point me to Japanese Pentax blogs (covering the event) ...

EDIT, ok, here is one [...]

07-31-2011, 07:44 AM	#98
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by Ben_Edict Zeiss has stopped K-mount lens productions months ago, probably because demand was too low. The question is, why woulkd a photographer with a full-frame body opt for the poorly FA-J zooms? I cannot see any reason. Also, if I buy a pro-spec camera body, I want to look for the accompanying lenses from the body manufacturer, not from Sigma. I may buy some Sigma lenses, but I would still expect Pentax to deliver the basic set. So, you have to think about the applications of a ff-FDSRL. For landcsape photography the existing line-up is viable - but then there is the 645D, which is aimed exactly at this clientele and is quite affordable (compared to some other MF digitals). So, for fashion, sports, studio set-ups many lenses are missing, no perspective correction lenses (shift, shift-tilt), no long glass, no fast long glass and very limited wide-angle choices. I cannot see Pentax going into that direction. Perhaps that might change under the Ricoh umbrella. Ben #1: Zeiss is a Niche market. Furthermore, if it wasn't for Zeiss having the AF line of lenses for the Alpha system, their sales would not even show up on the radar . . . oh wait, they don't anyway. The only other major manufacturers with mf lenses is Nikon with about 8 NIkkor including the 35/1.4. These can be bought from BH and Adorama. Then there are some by Cosina/Voightlander. I have felt that Pentax should maintain an assembly line for specialty products and run small batches of some items. manual focus lenses is one of those items i.e. the best of the best such as the A 15mm, K 18, K28/2, A 50/1.2, A* 85/1.4, A* 135/1.8., A* 200/2.8 and A* 200/4 macro. Put in A contacts on the K's and add Ghostless Coatings & SP. Those and a few other specialty items would keep the Specialty Assembly line going. It would be done in a sustainability fashion rather than with a goal of selling to everyone on the planet. However, selling them in different mounts might not be a bad idea. #2: No one gives a flip about the FAJ lenses, well almost no one. #3: The 645D is in a different ball game at $9-10K for the body. Plus the senor is somewhere between 24x36 and 645. I think many people with medium format don't have as many lenses as they did with 135 or digital 35. Pentax has been adding lenses to the 645D, but slowly which was in part due to them only releasing what was in the works and under the direction of Hoya who seems to have been in a holding pattern. We will see how that changes under Ricoh. #4: Hassy has been sold recently so that should help level the playing field during the transition. Last edited by Blue; 07-31-2011 at 07:52 AM.

08-02-2011, 04:19 AM - 1 Like	#104
froeschle Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 552	Originally posted by falconeye So, there was a Pentax bloggers meeting in Japan [...] I wonder what is behind this event. Esp. as there is no real blogger scene in Japan. Or if I miss it, please point me to Japanese Pentax blogs (covering the event) ... EDIT, ok, here is one [...] Further reading : d.hatena.ne.jp 1 d.hatena.ne.jp 2 d.hatena.ne.jp 3 sorryfull.blog8.fc2.com 1 sorryfull.blog8.fc2.com 2 detch.moe-nifty.com 1 detch.moe-nifty.com 2 www.schaft.net/n00bs 1 www.schaft.net/n00bs 2 www.schaft.net/n00bs 3 www.schaft.net/n00bs 4 mawari.cocolog-nifty.com 1 mawari.cocolog-nifty.com 2 mawari.cocolog-nifty.com 3 mawari.cocolog-nifty.com 4 shizuoka-sanpo.blogspot.com 1 shizuoka-sanpo.blogspot.com 2 ( Google Translate )

08-02-2011, 07:57 PM	#105
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 Originally posted by Douglas_of_Sweden: BTW, does anyone know the registration distance for the Q? I read something of 9 mm (or was it 9,2). 9.2mm is what I found.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
PENTAX auto 110	Ole	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	2	02-07-2011 09:21 AM
Photo Rumors: Digital Auto 110 in 2011	kevinschoenmakers	Pentax News and Rumors	60	01-22-2011 01:07 PM
Pentax auto 110 lens	fourfivesix	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	5	01-08-2011 10:00 AM
Something nice for our Pentax Auto 110 users: Auto 110 lens database	Adam	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	3	09-24-2010 06:42 AM
Pentax Auto 110	inte	Film SLRs and Compact Film Cameras	49	06-21-2010 07:23 AM

07-25-2011, 12:47 AM	#91
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Originally posted by eurostar I don't understand why DA*60-250/4 is always said to be full-frame. Mine is definitely not, it visibly vignettes in a film camera viewfinder. O wow, we are just parrot's maybe.

07-25-2011, 03:21 AM	#92
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	Originally posted by eurostar I don't understand why DA*60-250/4 is always said to be full-frame. Mine is definitely not, it visibly vignettes in a film camera viewfinder. Is that with or without the hood? Falconeye has said that it is full frame compatible, although he has not yet up loaded photos to show that fact.

07-25-2011, 03:45 AM	#93
froeschle Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 552	Quote: [...] I don't understand why DA*60-250/4 is always said to be full-frame [...] https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/1046099-post134.html https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/1257659-post147.html Originally posted by falconeye: [...] More on that if I find the time to compile the full article. [...] Pentax 60-250 SDM Samples: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

07-25-2011, 05:17 AM	#94
falconeye Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Munich, Alps, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,871	Originally posted by Rondec Is that with or without the hood? Falconeye has said that it is full frame compatible, although he has not yet up loaded photos to show that fact. That's true. I updated the article with a few more details but still cannot find the time to write a full article. -> https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/1590833-post150.html

07-31-2011, 02:48 AM	#95
Ben_Edict Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: SouthWest "Regio" Photos: Albums Posts: 3,309	Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 This is interesting. Can a new 110D (with a larger sensor then Q) have a Q-mount but with a longer flancedistance. So the lenses for Q fit on 110D with an extensiontube, but the 110D lenses don't fit on Q. Or is this a strange idea? How many different camera systems would you expect Pentax to support? It would be plain stupid, to add yet another system, after the Q was released. The Auto 110 D was just a prototype and proved either technically invalid or not marketable at that time. The same qas true with the unlucky MZ-D. The Philips sensor was way too expensive (only Contax used it and they are dead now for a couple of years). The whole concept of the MZ-D is now obsolete and outdated. If we can expect a larger sensor DSLR from Pentax its design would surely not be based on a 10 years old sample, which never worked fully. Ben

07-31-2011, 02:57 AM	#96
Ben_Edict Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: SouthWest "Regio" Photos: Albums Posts: 3,309	Originally posted by Zygonyx Let' s add the Cosina 19-35mm f/3.5-4.5 which is used by quite a lot of Canon 5D and 5DII owner, a bunch of Zeiss (at least 8 lenses) and Voigtlander (at least 3 lenses) still for sale... even if they are to be discontinued in K mount. For the zooms, it will depend on sensor resolution. I hope for a start it could be contained to about 20-24 Mpix. I my opinion; Ricoh would just need to refurbish the very good FA 24-90/3.5-4.5 boosted by a SDM engine. For a good start. Zeiss has stopped K-mount lens productions months ago, probably because demand was too low. The question is, why woulkd a photographer with a full-frame body opt for the poorly FA-J zooms? I cannot see any reason. Also, if I buy a pro-spec camera body, I want to look for the accompanying lenses from the body manufacturer, not from Sigma. I may buy some Sigma lenses, but I would still expect Pentax to deliver the basic set. So, you have to think about the applications of a ff-FDSRL. For landcsape photography the existing line-up is viable - but then there is the 645D, which is aimed exactly at this clientele and is quite affordable (compared to some other MF digitals). So, for fashion, sports, studio set-ups many lenses are missing, no perspective correction lenses (shift, shift-tilt), no long glass, no fast long glass and very limited wide-angle choices. I cannot see Pentax going into that direction. Perhaps that might change under the Ricoh umbrella. Ben

07-31-2011, 07:33 AM	#97
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by Ben_Edict Zeiss has stopped K-mount lens productions months ago, probably because demand was too low. The question is, why woulkd a photographer with a full-frame body opt for the poorly FA-J zooms? I cannot see any reason. Also, if I buy a pro-spec camera body, I want to look for the accompanying lenses from the body manufacturer, not from Sigma. I may buy some Sigma lenses, but I would still expect Pentax to deliver the basic set. So, you have to think about the applications of a ff-FDSRL. For landcsape photography the existing line-up is viable - but then there is the 645D, which is aimed exactly at this clientele and is quite affordable (compared to some other MF digitals). So, for fashion, sports, studio set-ups many lenses are missing, no perspective correction lenses (shift, shift-tilt), no long glass, no fast long glass and very limited wide-angle choices. I cannot see Pentax going into that direction. Perhaps that might change under the Ricoh umbrella. Ben Gee Ben, we expect them to use the Philips sensor and the older AF system.

07-31-2011, 08:13 AM	#99
Douglas_of_Sweden Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Stockholm Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,374	That's a clever way to get a longer distance between lens and flash and reduce red eye risk.

07-31-2011, 09:41 AM	#100
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Originally posted by Douglas_of_Sweden That's a clever way to get a longer distance between lens and flash and reduce red eye risk. Agreed but most people here thought it was stupid because: * it looks wierd * Q is a bad idea which will be trumped anyway the sky is faling Pentax is dead. ....

08-01-2011, 03:16 AM	#101
Douglas_of_Sweden Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Stockholm Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,374	BTW, does anyone know the registration distance for the Q?

08-01-2011, 04:38 AM	#102
asw66 Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 347	Originally posted by Douglas_of_Sweden That's a clever way to get a longer distance between lens and flash and reduce red eye risk. Yep. I'd go so far as to say that it's such a good idea that it will be widely copied soon. And when it's ubiquitous it will seem perfectly normal.

08-01-2011, 07:29 AM	#103
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Originally posted by Douglas_of_Sweden BTW, does anyone know the registration distance for the Q? I read something of 9 mm (or was it 9,2).