[Aristophanes]

I wish they'd put dual wheels on everything and stop burying M under TAv - but I guess that's a differentiating feature.

They didn't bury M. Auto ISO alters the nature of M compared to the filmic era. That's why M switches to TAv when Auto ISO is on and reverts back to M when fixing the ISO.

Pentax's TAv mode (along with the green button) is far superior to the competition. It's really what M mode is with digital.The difference between ISO 100 and 400 is almost non-existent in current sensors.

Now if only Pentax would do in digital what they did with the MZ-S and allow for a minimum shutter speed lock in any and all modes. It's a simple firmware adjustment. Nikon does it and it works very well for newbies who are trying to avoid blur by accident. You could even program it so that it followed the rule of shutter speed being no lower than the FL.

[Pål Jensen]

I think they have a more immediate short term tactical issue vs a long term strategy issue.. Product announcements are needed to keep the money rolling. I like that that they announced both the K-50 and K-500, however, is it enough to bring in new blood and to stop the bleeding of the current base.

Is there any bleeding of the current base? I don't think so. Pentax share has been fairly constant or on the increase.

[monochrome]

They didn't bury M. Auto ISO alters the nature of M compared to the filmic era. That's why M switches to TAv when Auto ISO is on and reverts back to M when fixing the ISO.

I just typed it backwards. On my K-01 and Q TAv is under M, controlled by whether ISO is set to Auto or Fixed. There's only one wheel so I have to change from Shutter speed to Aperture by switching the +/- button, so (unless I've never understood these cameras which is always possible) i give up EV control.

Not the case on a K10D and I presume K20, K-7 K5, etc. DK about K-30, K50, K500 K-x,r, m, etc., though trumpeting dual wheels might be a giveaway...

Even the GR has a discreet TAv setting on the Control Dial.

[Aristophanes]

TAv only acknowledges the obvious in digital compared to film....you can change ISO between shots instead of between rolls!

It allows M to stay M. I did not realize Pentax wen the way of Nikon making Tav a subset of M with the auto-ISO variation.

I gave up guesstimating EV control whenI realized my PP was usually undoing the damage I'd done! I hate guessing when EV is going to move shutter. TAv is the genius that effectively uses ISO in place of altering shutter speed and it is NOT M mode (dumb Nikon).

EV would be more effective if Pentax would allow users to set an all-mode, min. shutter speed. This would pair with SR so well. So well. It was the one feature of the MZ-S that knocked my socks off.

I see little need for Sv mode, however.Seems like such an esoteric mode it contributes to the cluttered interface.

[Kunzite]

I agree: M mode should be manual, period. It's for when you want to control the exposure, and you obviously can't do that if ISO is changing.
Pentax' solution of having a separate TAv mode is the most elegant and functional.

Is there any bleeding of the current base? I don't think so. Pentax share has been fairly constant or on the increase.

Shhh... that's a secret. When the user base will grow to be 10x as it currently is, the competition would still think it's shrinking.
They won't even know what hit them

I think the base is probably bled out by now. I mean, my number here is 5967 and I hardly see anyone posting today who was when I started.

Me! Me! Me!

I think they have a more immediate short term tactical issue vs a long term strategy issue.. Product announcements are needed to keep the money rolling. I like that that they announced both the K-50 and K-500, however, is it enough to bring in new blood and to stop the bleeding of the current base.

They're not supposed to be enough, they're just the beginning. Be patient, other products will follow.

[tclausen]

They didn't bury M. Auto ISO alters the nature of M compared to the filmic era. That's why M switches to TAv when Auto ISO is on and reverts back to M when fixing the ISO.

Pentax's TAv mode (along with the green button) is far superior to the competition. It's really what M mode is with digital.The difference between ISO 100 and 400 is almost non-existent in current sensors.

Now if only Pentax would do in digital what they did with the MZ-S and allow for a minimum shutter speed lock in any and all modes. It's a simple firmware adjustment. Nikon does it and it works very well for newbies who are trying to avoid blur by accident. You could even program it so that it followed the rule of shutter speed being no lower than the FL.

Wait, you're saying that my MZ-S can do that???? That's awesome, but I hadn't got the foggiest idea that I could, despite having had that camera for well more than a decade by now.

I'm going to have to go poke around the manual, it seems, unless you have a 3-step instruction to share here?

[Aristophanes]

Wait, you're saying that my MZ-S can do that???? That's awesome, but I hadn't got the foggiest idea that I could, despite having had that camera for well more than a decade by now.

I'm going to have to go poke around the manual, it seems, unless you have a 3-step instruction to share here?

The MZ-S has a physical switch dedicated only to minimum shutter speed. It's the HOLD switch, right on the back. It lets you adjust the aperture without ever needing to worry about camera shake for whatever FL you have mounted.

[Old Film Guy]

Greetings...Earlier I posted some comments which cause a mild kerfuffle. I did sell cameras. It was a small chain of three stores, and it was nearly 40 years ago. Some of the details have faded with time. During the decade I worked at the shop, as a retailer, it seemed to those selling the gear, that Pentax sort of lost their focus on 35mm cameras while working to develop better roll film models. Perhaps we were mistaken. Someone here was correct. I had left the business before the K 1000 was on the market.

However, as to my other comment that cell phones with multiple photographic features are, indeed, the future...

Cell Phones and Smartphones - Nokia - USA

This Nokia has a 41 megapixel sensor with a mildly incredible digital zoom. The zoom also allows cropping and some processing. I don't own one. My son, the IT guy, told me about it.

With nearly 50 years experience with film (I developed my first B&W roll at age 15.), I've been through all this trauma before. It's not fun, that I understand. I also realize that the larger market is for camera phones, not necessarily "real" cameras.

Again, just a thought...

Old Film Guy...

[RussV]

This Nokia has a 41 megapixel sensor with a mildly incredible digital zoom. The zoom also allows cropping and some processing. I don't own one. My son, the IT guy, told me about it.

I think this is Nokia playing to the gallery, many people equate Mp total with quality. It still has the tiny lens typical of a smart phone. I don't think Pentax, Nikon etc have anything to worry about in terms of picture quality. Nokia have had a hard time in recent years and obviously need attention grabbing features. But you are right for casual snappers, phones will dominate.

[snake]

I think this is Nokia playing to the gallery, many people equate Mp total with quality. It still has the tiny lens typical of a smart phone. I don't think Pentax, Nikon etc have anything to worry about in terms of picture quality. Nokia have had a hard time in recent years and obviously need attention grabbing features. But you are right for casual snappers, phones will dominate.

Incorrect; Nokia has been focusing on the oversampled modes quite a bit. Sure, they are listing the "41MP" prominently, but since the beginning, they've focused on the 5/8MP modes as the optimals.

It's not their fault that the industry has been programmed for more than a decade to follow MP. In fact, they're one of the only companies and certainly the first to have made mention that MP count isn't always better. Nikon tried and abandoned that years ago, answering MP count frustrations about the D3.

As far as the "tiny lens typical of a smartphone", you're not understanding the size of glass needed for sensors. For instance, look at how little class the DA40, when shrunken to the XS dimensions, requires. ANd that works with FF. This is a smaller sensor, though not that small, really.

And to knock it might prove you haven't used one. I'm on an N8 and these Zeiss lenses really are sharp.

As far as quality goes, remains to be seen, but if my N8 was any indication (and it's still among the best, several years later), which has produced PAID pieces for me, then the 1020 should be not only class-leading for smartphones, but one of the better ones against compacts.

They're not for casual snappers anymore, as we're seeing pros using smartphones for special work, when they don't have an SLR on them, and so on. And it proves that the person behind the device is most important.

[RussV]

I'll be sticking to my DSLR, there's are a lot of different cameras that take sharp pictures but there's more to photography than just sharpness. I browsed their web pages but couldn't find a single downloadable shot to show what it could do.

[altopiet]

Nokia Lumia 1020 ? Low Light photos samples and comparison shots to Lumia 920, 925 | Windows Phone Central

[Clavius]

The small sensors with the huge amounts of mp's are all nice and dandy... but why wouldn't larger sensored camers, like for example, with an APS-C sensor with the same pixel density and the same technology, have the same advantages? The advantage of larger sensor size, remains the same.

[gazonk]

The small sensors with the huge amounts of mp's are all nice and dandy... but why wouldn't larger sensored camers, like for example, with an APS-C sensor with the same pixel density and the same technology, have the same advantages? The advantage of larger sensor size, remains the same.

I guess how useful it is depends on whether you make the lenses sharp enough (at least in the center) to take advantage of the insane cropping possibilities?

Suppose Pentax released a 144mp FF camera and the FA77 is sharp enough in the centre for 4x crop (any Q users who could comment on that?).
Then the FA77 could be used as a 77-308mm zoom with 9-144mp variable resolution

[lytrytyr]

Suppose . . . the FA77 is sharp enough in the centre for 4x crop (any Q users who could comment on that?).

I don't have an FA 77,
but my Voigtlaender Apo-Lanthar 90/3.5 is certainly sharp enough,
and that's on the original "crop sensor" Q.
The CAs on the FA 77 are about the same as on the Apo-Lanthar.