Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-17-2008, 07:51 AM   #46
Veteran Member
eurostar's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Albareto, Italy
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 813
QuoteOriginally posted by benjikan Quote
I would love to see a 645D. Compact, Ergonomically Sound, Mobile, Great Lens Choices and Resolution.
You know that because you are using it, right?

04-18-2008, 05:33 AM   #47
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,222
Even if smaller formats like the Olympus match the quality of larger ones there is a reason to not go smaller. The slr view finder also gets smaller and darker. In the future chip size may have little to do with image quality. The "right" format may be based on how it fits humans. Olympus could make a camera smaller than the E420. It would be too small for many. Makes no sense to put small chip in too large a camera for decent ergonomics. Not bashing Olympus (have E300 & 330).
thanks
barondla
04-18-2008, 07:22 AM   #48
Veteran Member
mattdm's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Boston, MA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,964
QuoteOriginally posted by barondla Quote
Even if smaller formats like the Olympus match the quality of larger ones there is a reason to not go smaller. The slr view finder also gets smaller and darker.
In general, yes. But the E3 has a 100% coverage viewfinder with 1.15× magnification. I haven't actually used it in person, but that should make it about equivalent to the K10D/K20D's 1.5×crop/95%/0.95× coverage viewfinder.
04-18-2008, 07:44 AM   #49
Veteran Member
simons-photography's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Northamptonshire - England
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 497
the kit lens and tamron 70-300 will fit a full frame I made a rought test on my MTL5

04-18-2008, 09:39 AM   #50
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Verona, Italy
Posts: 202
QuoteOriginally posted by simons-photography Quote
the kit lens and tamron 70-300 will fit a full frame I made a rought test on my MTL5
How to fit a K lens on a Praktica? [btw i have a "Super TL 1000"]
04-18-2008, 12:43 PM   #51
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Boston, PRofMA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,053
And if you still don't believe FF has better performance, check out the dynamic range of the D3 in the DPR review in 14-bit RAW:
Nikon D3 Review: 20. Photographic tests: Digital Photography Review

I'm hoping the Samsung FF can do better but I'd settle for at least as well :-)
04-18-2008, 12:55 PM   #52
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 126
QuoteOriginally posted by Matjazz Quote
Judging from interview of Pentax executives old Pentax lenses aren't suitable for digital 35 camera. They don't plan 35, but if once it will happen it will be after 645.
Judging from their use by Canon users on the full frame 5D, Pentax lenses are very much suitable for digital full frame SLR cameras.
04-19-2008, 01:12 AM   #53
Veteran Member
simons-photography's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Northamptonshire - England
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 497
QuoteOriginally posted by zntgrg Quote
How to fit a K lens on a Praktica? [btw i have a "Super TL 1000"]
I just held the lenses up to the camera and checked they didn't block any of the image out

04-19-2008, 01:18 PM   #54
Veteran Member
simons-photography's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Northamptonshire - England
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 497
wish I had 10 K to spend (£s that is)
04-19-2008, 08:14 PM   #55
Veteran Member
heatherslightbox's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Gainesville, FL
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,594
Anymore, I'm not sure that FF matters that much to me, personally, as I've learned to deal with the cropping factor of the APS-C. If a Pentax FF body were to be similar to the D3 in size and price, I wouldn't want it anyway. Even if I had the money, it would just be too big for me to carry around. If I were to ever get something that big, it would have to be MedF.

Heather
04-20-2008, 06:54 PM   #56
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,222
While the E3 may match our viewfinder (haven't seen one yet) look at the price camera it took. Oly pulled out all the tricks to achieve this. So we took a smaller format camera and made it bigger than our camera to achieve what? What Oly did to achieve this, APSc can do also. So APSc viewfinder will be closer to FF. With many electronic items the problem isn't how small can it be, but how small can it be and people work it. The mechanical/biological interface is the holdup. Don't see this changing drastically. Neither of my 2 Olys have a finder even close to the K100D never mind the Prismed K10 & 20D.
thanks
barondla
04-20-2008, 09:29 PM   #57
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Grand Junction Colorado
Posts: 212
QuoteOriginally posted by barondla Quote
While the E3 may match our viewfinder (haven't seen one yet) look at the price camera it took. Oly pulled out all the tricks to achieve this. So we took a smaller format camera and made it bigger than our camera to achieve what? What Oly did to achieve this, APSc can do also. So APSc viewfinder will be closer to FF. With many electronic items the problem isn't how small can it be, but how small can it be and people work it. The mechanical/biological interface is the holdup. Don't see this changing drastically. Neither of my 2 Olys have a finder even close to the K100D never mind the Prismed K10 & 20D.
thanks
barondla
Think of the 4/3rds as the "110" format of DSLRs (sensor almost matches the size of 110 film format). However, that format does have some advantages due to the increased depth of field for any field of view. This means that it would do a better job in macro photography.

To expect the same viewfinder image size would call for increased magnification and the resulting loss of brightness.

Bob
Loyal Pentax ("Funtax") user since 1968.
04-21-2008, 08:02 AM   #58
Veteran Member
Matjazz's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: EU/Slovenia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 774
QuoteOriginally posted by bobrapp Quote
To expect the same viewfinder image size would call for increased magnification and the resulting loss of brightness.
Perhaps a better design of viewfinder optics can gather more light from focusing screen. Just like f2.8 lens can gather more light than f4 lens from the same scene.
04-21-2008, 08:45 AM   #59
Veteran Member
*isteve's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,187
QuoteOriginally posted by Matjazz Quote
Perhaps a better design of viewfinder optics can gather more light from focusing screen. Just like f2.8 lens can gather more light than f4 lens from the same scene.
The same amount of light enters all of the cameras at the same fstop, the question of it is how much of it do you capture and how much do you divert to the AF sensor? The problem with the 4/3 cameras is the smaller mirror.

The E3 probably uses a very high quality pentaprism and slightly overize mirror with a magnifying eyepeice that reduces the view angle to match the sensor size. This oversize mirror would compensate for the light loss due to magnification and would compete on even terms with good APSC finders.

There is no substitute for the bigger mirror if you want a brighter larger finder.
04-21-2008, 09:57 AM   #60
and
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,471
QuoteOriginally posted by *isteve Quote
The same amount of light enters all of the cameras at the same fstop, the question of it is how much of it do you capture and how much do you divert to the AF sensor? The problem with the 4/3 cameras is the smaller mirror.

The E3 probably uses a very high quality pentaprism and slightly overize mirror with a magnifying eyepeice that reduces the view angle to match the sensor size. This oversize mirror would compensate for the light loss due to magnification and would compete on even terms with good APSC finders.

There is no substitute for the bigger mirror if you want a brighter larger finder.
Interesting, if this is the case, then wouldnt it be possible to make a Pentax APS-C camera but with a FF mirror since the lens mount is FF, and get brighter viewfinder? or are they arleady doing that. And if the mirror is FF, the lenses cover more than APS-C then should it be a big probelm to get 100% of the APS-C FOV in the VF. if its like taking a FF VF and then just cropping it down to 1.5x then why make it smaller so u dont get 100%.

Heh am sure its not so easy. Actually I wasnt sure 100% was possible with APS-C but then came the D300 and now I want to too

Id love FF, actually the ISO performance of k20d seems fine to me, I stick to lower ISO. I want the more shallow DOF, especially with f2.8 zooms, and the big VF.
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!
barney, camera, dslr, full-frame, gx-20, hints, market, pentax news, pentax rumors, samsung, sensor, size
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How Many Megapixels Do You Want in a Full-Frame Pentax Camera Miserere Pentax DSLR Discussion 72 02-04-2010 01:55 PM
Full frame Samsung Camera? jadedrakerider Pentax DSLR Discussion 4 06-04-2009 04:13 PM
Samsung Full Frame Camera dopeytree Pentax News and Rumors 31 05-04-2009 01:14 PM
Full frame camera 12divizija Post Your Photos! 0 01-26-2009 03:29 AM
DA Lenses on a Full-Frame 35mm Camera YarPcola Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 8 04-26-2008 10:47 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:11 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