The New Pentax Camera...'s

TaoMaas · 12-20-2007, 12:30 PM

Originally posted by button

I was pondering this solution some time ago and wondered how many years away such a development lies. It's only a matter of time until the line between still photography and video is blurred and ultimately erased. Envision a camera that cranks out 20-30 fps at between 10-20 megapixel resolution. You almost wouldn't even need auto focus, as you could manually get close enough and then focus through an area at that frame rate- you could easily get 3-5 keeper shots out of 30 and dump the rest (imagine using a 31mm limited in MF mode or any A* lens- think of the colors!). Cumbersome, perhaps, but you just wouldn't miss the shot. After all, isn't that what matters, getting the shot? How many times have you seen something remarkable that only lasted a second or two? These fleeting moments could finally become captured with relative ease. If Pentax has moved us significantly in that direction this soon, then we can almost consider ourselves touched by angels

. I would just about pay whatever they asked for such a privalege.

John

Well, there WERE video capture devices on that list of products and Ben DID say he was stocking up on 8 gig memory cards.

For what it's worth, I work in television and the latest HD cameras essentially use big memory cards, so maybe we're closer than we think....like only a month away. lol

jeffkrol · 12-20-2007, 12:33 PM

Originally posted by benjikan

Ummm..Cannot answer directly. But may I ask? Would it be considered more Pro?

Ben

Maybe this time Pentax will make it CLEAR how many volts there flash socket can take before it's considered dangerous. Something they have been quite sloppy, evasive, and when they answered questions at all, they were in conflict w/ each other (MOSTLY they completely ignored the question) from various Pentax centers around the world......... I've personally asked both Pentax USA and Canada and NEVER received a response from either. This was in regard to the istD so the issue goes WAY back... any help here Ben?
Transparency would make a camera a bit more "pro"

BTW: When they answered at all it was from 30-200V....... not a small range. Maybe they don't know or want to take any liability but that is also un-professional.....

RBellavance · 12-20-2007, 12:34 PM

Originally posted by button

I was pondering this solution some time ago and wondered how many years away such a development lies. It's only a matter of time until the line between still photography and video is blurred and ultimately erased. Envision a camera that cranks out 20-30 fps at between 10-20 megapixel resolution.

I agree with you that we will eventually get such a camera, and I can see seom activities that will benefit from it (sports reporters and photojournalists, for example). But to me, that is not photography. I maybe naive or some sort of "purist", but a big part of photography has to do with "when you press the button". Machine-gunning it a 30fps to ensure you get "the" shot is just not the same thing.

button · 12-20-2007, 12:55 PM

Originally posted by RBellavance

I agree with you that we will eventually get such a camera, and I can see seom activities that will benefit from it (sports reporters and photojournalists, for example). But to me, that is not photography. I maybe naive or some sort of "purist", but a big part of photography has to do with "when you press the button". Machine-gunning it a 30fps to ensure you get "the" shot is just not the same thing.

I respect that opinion. But for me, photography is all about capturing a memory- how I get there is irrelevant. If I can buy a device that facilitates my stealing that one in a million shot of my 14 month old, in the perfect light, with the perfect mood, then I'll pay the money. If I need a machine-gun approach to do so, then so be it. Such a machine won't tell me when and where those moments are, and I believe that finding them is what makes a photographer (and I still need lots of work in that department, BTW). I think many of us just want the shot, no matter what it takes. On the other hand, I fully appreciate the elegance of technical mastery. I like woodworking with handplanes- can a machine outperform me? Absolutely. However, I like the idea of making something with my own hands.

John

anomaly · 12-20-2007, 01:05 PM

I can get accustomed to a camera which shoots like that. I probably wouldn't use that rate most of the time though.

Storage nightmare!

And unless you can review it as a video it would take forever to find the one you want.

button · 12-20-2007, 01:07 PM

Originally posted by TaoMaas

Well, there WERE video capture devices on that list of products and Ben DID say he was stocking up on 8 gig memory cards.

For what it's worth, I work in television and the latest HD cameras essentially use big memory cards, so maybe we're closer than we think....like only a month away. lol

HV20 High Definition Camcorder

TaoMaas, I just realized that this little cam has a 2.96 mp sensor and can produce HD at 1920 x 1080 pixels, interlaced, at 60 fps. Drop the frame rate and boost the pixel count, and we may very well be close to a near-video speed "still" camera. I guess we'll just have to see

. There are rumors of a preview-through-the-view finder on the next Pentax.... this is getting VERY interesting.

John

button · 12-20-2007, 01:08 PM

Originally posted by anomaly

I can get accustomed to a camera which shoots like that. I probably wouldn't use that rate most of the time though.

Storage nightmare!

And unless you can review it as a video it would take forever to find the one you want.

True. Used judiciously in bursts, though, it could be a godsend.

gawan · 12-20-2007, 02:33 PM

Originally posted by benjikan

You have noted some important points. But there are other user specific features that will "Thrill" all of you who have had issues with the present configuration. The amount of user specific control has been enhanced. These new features will allow you to control your camera based on your personal specific needs...Nuf Said.

Ben

Sounds like this new camera will be truly user programmable, i.e. not just user configurable. Maybe it will let users manipulate also the more inner workings, "hidden algorithms". It would be great to let users create their own profiles on how their camera will process, for example choosing between texture and/or edge sharpenig degree etc.

This in addition to the hardware enhancements of course..

schufosi777 · 12-20-2007, 06:02 PM

I read on stock photo blogspotPentax K20D on show at PMA 2008 - Stock Photo market and Creative Digital Photography guidethat the K20D is rumored to have an LCD display like Nikon. I assume they mean the D300. So this would give it the highest resolution display of any camera other than D300 and A700. But I also read somewhere else that this higher resolution can compromise the functionality of liveview....I think they were comparing the 40d with lower res to the D300. Will higher res compromise liveview???

clawhammer · 12-20-2007, 07:11 PM

can't see why it would- D3, D300, and 40D all have Live view, and the D3/300 does it very well on their high-res screens. boy those screens look gorgeous.

button · 12-21-2007, 06:30 AM

Originally posted by gawan

Sounds like this new camera will be truly user programmable, i.e. not just user configurable. Maybe it will let users manipulate also the more inner workings, "hidden algorithms". It would be great to let users create their own profiles on how their camera will process, for example choosing between texture and/or edge sharpenig degree etc.

This in addition to the hardware enhancements of course..

Or, how about being able to chose the megapixel count and related ISO performance? Assuming a 14 megapixel sensor, I could see something like this:

Let's say I choose 7 megapixels, which might give me an ISO ceiling of 12,800-25,600, for moving subjects in low light. Later in the day, I switch to 14 megapixles, giving me an ISO ceiling of 3200. Maybe the camera could offer multiple combinations. Maybe the user could configure it on the fly without having to take his/her eye from the viewfinder! I would certainly prefer a super clean 7 megapixels to a noisy 14 in dim light, for a moving subject (ironically, the lower megapixel image in this scenario would look better in large print). I suspect that we'll see some really unexpected innovation like this in late January.

John

JMS · 12-21-2007, 08:00 AM

Originally posted by button

Or, how about being able to chose the megapixel count and related ISO performance? Assuming a 14 megapixel sensor, I could see something like this:

Let's say I choose 7 megapixels, which might give me an ISO ceiling of 12,800-25,600, for moving subjects in low light. Later in the day, I switch to 14 megapixles, giving me an ISO ceiling of 3200. Maybe the camera could offer multiple combinations. Maybe the user could configure it on the fly without having to take his/her eye from the viewfinder! I would certainly prefer a super clean 7 megapixels to a noisy 14 in dim light, for a moving subject (ironically, the lower megapixel image in this scenario would look better in large print). I suspect that we'll see some really unexpected innovation like this in late January.

John

I think you're confused. Changing the number of recorded pixels does not change the noise level.

button · 12-21-2007, 08:45 AM

Originally posted by JMS

I think you're confused. Changing the number of recorded pixels does not change the noise level.

I was imagining a method whereby adjacent pixels could be somehow linked electronically to serve as a larger pixel, upping the photosite well size. I don't know if this is possible.

John

**Ray Pulley** · 12-21-2007, 09:59 AM

Originally posted by button

I was imagining a method whereby adjacent pixels could be somehow linked electronically to serve as a larger pixel, upping the photosite well size. I don't know if this is possible.

John

Yes, this is often called "binning" and it can result in an image that has lower noise at the expense of lower resolution, of course.

Ray

JMS · 12-21-2007, 10:18 AM

Originally posted by Ray Pulley

Yes, this is often called "binning" and it can result in an image that has lower noise at the expense of lower resolution, of course.

Ray

That is absolutely incorrect. Binning is simply software interpolation of the image to make it smaller. Noise will have less resolution, but it will have the same proportional area.

The only method I know of for that type of combination is in the Foveon X3 sensor.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For Sale - Sold: Pentax F 70-210mm 4-5.6 and Pentax F 35-70mm 3.5-4.5 Macro and SF1 camera Body	jjdgti	Sold Items	5	12-30-2009 12:25 PM
For Sale - Sold: Classic Excellent + Chrome ME Camera Body + Original Pentax Leatherette Camera	yyyzzz	Sold Items	8	11-08-2009 07:53 PM
Hi - from camera newby, Beta - Pentax Optio W60 waterproof camera review	beta	Welcomes and Introductions	2	03-24-2009 09:44 PM
New camera: Pentax K10D, Nikon D80, Canon 450D, Pentax K200D ???	go4java	Photographic Technique	3	03-30-2008 05:36 PM

12-20-2007, 12:30 PM	#76
TaoMaas Pentaxian Join Date: May 2007 Location: Oklahoma City Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,574	Originally posted by button I was pondering this solution some time ago and wondered how many years away such a development lies. It's only a matter of time until the line between still photography and video is blurred and ultimately erased. Envision a camera that cranks out 20-30 fps at between 10-20 megapixel resolution. You almost wouldn't even need auto focus, as you could manually get close enough and then focus through an area at that frame rate- you could easily get 3-5 keeper shots out of 30 and dump the rest (imagine using a 31mm limited in MF mode or any A* lens- think of the colors!). Cumbersome, perhaps, but you just wouldn't miss the shot. After all, isn't that what matters, getting the shot? How many times have you seen something remarkable that only lasted a second or two? These fleeting moments could finally become captured with relative ease. If Pentax has moved us significantly in that direction this soon, then we can almost consider ourselves touched by angels . I would just about pay whatever they asked for such a privalege. John Well, there WERE video capture devices on that list of products and Ben DID say he was stocking up on 8 gig memory cards. For what it's worth, I work in television and the latest HD cameras essentially use big memory cards, so maybe we're closer than we think....like only a month away. lol

12-20-2007, 12:33 PM	#77
jeffkrol Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Wisconsin USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,434	Originally posted by benjikan Ummm..Cannot answer directly. But may I ask? Would it be considered more Pro? Ben Maybe this time Pentax will make it CLEAR how many volts there flash socket can take before it's considered dangerous. Something they have been quite sloppy, evasive, and when they answered questions at all, they were in conflict w/ each other (MOSTLY they completely ignored the question) from various Pentax centers around the world......... I've personally asked both Pentax USA and Canada and NEVER received a response from either. This was in regard to the istD so the issue goes WAY back... any help here Ben? Transparency would make a camera a bit more "pro" BTW: When they answered at all it was from 30-200V....... not a small range. Maybe they don't know or want to take any liability but that is also un-professional.....

12-20-2007, 12:34 PM	#78
RBellavance Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Near Montréal, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,716	Originally posted by button I was pondering this solution some time ago and wondered how many years away such a development lies. It's only a matter of time until the line between still photography and video is blurred and ultimately erased. Envision a camera that cranks out 20-30 fps at between 10-20 megapixel resolution. I agree with you that we will eventually get such a camera, and I can see seom activities that will benefit from it (sports reporters and photojournalists, for example). But to me, that is not photography. I maybe naive or some sort of "purist", but a big part of photography has to do with "when you press the button". Machine-gunning it a 30fps to ensure you get "the" shot is just not the same thing.

12-20-2007, 12:55 PM	#79
button Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Nashville, TN Posts: 241	Originally posted by RBellavance I agree with you that we will eventually get such a camera, and I can see seom activities that will benefit from it (sports reporters and photojournalists, for example). But to me, that is not photography. I maybe naive or some sort of "purist", but a big part of photography has to do with "when you press the button". Machine-gunning it a 30fps to ensure you get "the" shot is just not the same thing. I respect that opinion. But for me, photography is all about capturing a memory- how I get there is irrelevant. If I can buy a device that facilitates my stealing that one in a million shot of my 14 month old, in the perfect light, with the perfect mood, then I'll pay the money. If I need a machine-gun approach to do so, then so be it. Such a machine won't tell me when and where those moments are, and I believe that finding them is what makes a photographer (and I still need lots of work in that department, BTW). I think many of us just want the shot, no matter what it takes. On the other hand, I fully appreciate the elegance of technical mastery. I like woodworking with handplanes- can a machine outperform me? Absolutely. However, I like the idea of making something with my own hands. John

12-20-2007, 01:05 PM	#80
anomaly Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Barbados Photos: Gallery Posts: 264	I can get accustomed to a camera which shoots like that. I probably wouldn't use that rate most of the time though. Storage nightmare! And unless you can review it as a video it would take forever to find the one you want.

12-20-2007, 01:07 PM	#81
button Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Nashville, TN Posts: 241	Originally posted by TaoMaas Well, there WERE video capture devices on that list of products and Ben DID say he was stocking up on 8 gig memory cards. For what it's worth, I work in television and the latest HD cameras essentially use big memory cards, so maybe we're closer than we think....like only a month away. lol HV20 High Definition Camcorder TaoMaas, I just realized that this little cam has a 2.96 mp sensor and can produce HD at 1920 x 1080 pixels, interlaced, at 60 fps. Drop the frame rate and boost the pixel count, and we may very well be close to a near-video speed "still" camera. I guess we'll just have to see . There are rumors of a preview-through-the-view finder on the next Pentax.... this is getting VERY interesting. John

12-20-2007, 01:08 PM	#82
button Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Nashville, TN Posts: 241	Originally posted by anomaly I can get accustomed to a camera which shoots like that. I probably wouldn't use that rate most of the time though. Storage nightmare! And unless you can review it as a video it would take forever to find the one you want. True. Used judiciously in bursts, though, it could be a godsend.

12-20-2007, 02:33 PM	#83
gawan Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Helsinki Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,400	Originally posted by benjikan You have noted some important points. But there are other user specific features that will "Thrill" all of you who have had issues with the present configuration. The amount of user specific control has been enhanced. These new features will allow you to control your camera based on your personal specific needs...Nuf Said. Ben Sounds like this new camera will be truly user programmable, i.e. not just user configurable. Maybe it will let users manipulate also the more inner workings, "hidden algorithms". It would be great to let users create their own profiles on how their camera will process, for example choosing between texture and/or edge sharpenig degree etc. This in addition to the hardware enhancements of course..

12-20-2007, 06:02 PM	#84
schufosi777 Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Kitakyushu Posts: 186	I read on stock photo blogspotPentax K20D on show at PMA 2008 - Stock Photo market and Creative Digital Photography guidethat the K20D is rumored to have an LCD display like Nikon. I assume they mean the D300. So this would give it the highest resolution display of any camera other than D300 and A700. But I also read somewhere else that this higher resolution can compromise the functionality of liveview....I think they were comparing the 40d with lower res to the D300. Will higher res compromise liveview???

12-20-2007, 07:11 PM	#85
clawhammer Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Logan, Utah Photos: Gallery Posts: 971	can't see why it would- D3, D300, and 40D all have Live view, and the D3/300 does it very well on their high-res screens. boy those screens look gorgeous.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-21-2007, 06:30 AM	#86
button Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Nashville, TN Posts: 241	Originally posted by gawan Sounds like this new camera will be truly user programmable, i.e. not just user configurable. Maybe it will let users manipulate also the more inner workings, "hidden algorithms". It would be great to let users create their own profiles on how their camera will process, for example choosing between texture and/or edge sharpenig degree etc. This in addition to the hardware enhancements of course.. Or, how about being able to chose the megapixel count and related ISO performance? Assuming a 14 megapixel sensor, I could see something like this: Let's say I choose 7 megapixels, which might give me an ISO ceiling of 12,800-25,600, for moving subjects in low light. Later in the day, I switch to 14 megapixles, giving me an ISO ceiling of 3200. Maybe the camera could offer multiple combinations. Maybe the user could configure it on the fly without having to take his/her eye from the viewfinder! I would certainly prefer a super clean 7 megapixels to a noisy 14 in dim light, for a moving subject (ironically, the lower megapixel image in this scenario would look better in large print). I suspect that we'll see some really unexpected innovation like this in late January. John

12-21-2007, 08:00 AM	#87
JMS Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 273	Originally posted by button Or, how about being able to chose the megapixel count and related ISO performance? Assuming a 14 megapixel sensor, I could see something like this: Let's say I choose 7 megapixels, which might give me an ISO ceiling of 12,800-25,600, for moving subjects in low light. Later in the day, I switch to 14 megapixles, giving me an ISO ceiling of 3200. Maybe the camera could offer multiple combinations. Maybe the user could configure it on the fly without having to take his/her eye from the viewfinder! I would certainly prefer a super clean 7 megapixels to a noisy 14 in dim light, for a moving subject (ironically, the lower megapixel image in this scenario would look better in large print). I suspect that we'll see some really unexpected innovation like this in late January. John I think you're confused. Changing the number of recorded pixels does not change the noise level.

12-21-2007, 08:45 AM	#88
button Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Nashville, TN Posts: 241	Originally posted by JMS I think you're confused. Changing the number of recorded pixels does not change the noise level. I was imagining a method whereby adjacent pixels could be somehow linked electronically to serve as a larger pixel, upping the photosite well size. I don't know if this is possible. John

12-21-2007, 09:59 AM	#89
Ray Pulley Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Fallon Nevada Photos: Albums Posts: 504	Originally posted by button I was imagining a method whereby adjacent pixels could be somehow linked electronically to serve as a larger pixel, upping the photosite well size. I don't know if this is possible. John Yes, this is often called "binning" and it can result in an image that has lower noise at the expense of lower resolution, of course. Ray

12-21-2007, 10:18 AM	#90
JMS Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Wisconsin Posts: 273	Originally posted by Ray Pulley Yes, this is often called "binning" and it can result in an image that has lower noise at the expense of lower resolution, of course. Ray That is absolutely incorrect. Binning is simply software interpolation of the image to make it smaller. Noise will have less resolution, but it will have the same proportional area. The only method I know of for that type of combination is in the Foveon X3 sensor.