Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-11-2014, 06:22 AM   #31
Pentaxian
JimmyDranox's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Ploiesti, Romania
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,585
QuoteOriginally posted by kadajawi Quote
CMOS sensors are bad for video. CCD are better. At least when it comes to rolling shutter. Also, 2 sensors in a camera?


Cooling the camera... well, that would be nice for video, but how to deal with the shake reduction? Have a fan cool down the sensor? What about dust then? And noise, perhaps?.
Cooling camera with Peltier units and fans is used from a long time in astronomy amateur camera with very good result. No shake, no noise, no dust, but with a big improvement in signal/noise ratio. The downside is big consumption, and big price.

08-11-2014, 06:37 AM   #32
Pentaxian
fs999's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Luxembourg
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,454
QuoteOriginally posted by Na Horuk Quote
I think it is wrong to assume that Sony sensors are the only (or best) option
Should they go back to Samsung ?
08-11-2014, 06:45 AM   #33
Pentaxian
Na Horuk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Slovenia, probably
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,331
QuoteOriginally posted by fs999 Quote
Should they go back to Samsung ?
haha sure, and there are many other brands. Truesense, Aptina, Toshiba, Samsung, Panasonic,.. There are interesting rumours about Canon sensors, but I doubt they would sell to Pentax. I'm just saying, in visual arts "different" often translates to "outstanding" and "unique."
Not to derail the thread, but here is an interesting article I just found on this topic:
Is Sony Going to be the Digital Kodak?
08-11-2014, 06:45 AM - 1 Like   #34
Site Supporter
Sandy Hancock's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,250
What *we* should do is wait and see what Pentax actually *does*.
In the meantime, enjoy what we have.

08-11-2014, 06:51 AM   #35
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,426
QuoteOriginally posted by Na Horuk Quote
Yep, two sensors in one camera. This is what the patent that I mentioned was about. Why use the 16MP or 24MP sensor for the tiny live view screen? Just exposing it to dust and heating it up for nothing.
Sony did it, and the result wasn't that good. The result was a compromised Live View and a compromised optical viewfinder.

QuoteOriginally posted by Na Horuk Quote
Not sure they are "the best", though they may be pretty good and fairly affordable.
Check DXOMark
Going back to Sony (with the excellent 16MP sensor first used in the K-5) was the best thing they could do. Sure, if they can find a competitive non-Sony sensor, perhaps cheaper or "better" in some way, I don't see why they wouldn't use it. But making a goal in moving away from Sony, really?
08-11-2014, 07:13 AM   #36
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,790
QuoteOriginally posted by konraDarnok Quote
A new K-mount mirrorless APS-c with a viewfinder, flip-out rear screen, and a hybrid contrast detect / SR based phase detect AF system. It also shouldn't be crippled in anyway -- like the K-01 was with no on-board wireless flash, etc.
No point in mirrorless and subsequent EVF is using K-mount. It would be the same as a Fuji XT except much bigger.
08-11-2014, 07:24 AM   #37
Pentaxian
konraDarnok's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2007
Photos: Albums
Posts: 960
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
No point in mirrorless and subsequent EVF is using K-mount. It would be the same as a Fuji XT except much bigger.
of course there's a point, to get rid of the mirror box, an expensive, fickle, and outdated solution to the problem of exposing film. It needs to go. There's so much more that can be done with a live viewfinder. The K-01 and sony's Nex cameras have convinced me of that.

Camera size is overstated. Modern mirrorless cameras are no smaller than an SLR from the 70s.
08-11-2014, 07:25 AM   #38
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Photos: Albums
Posts: 616
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Sony did it, and the result wasn't that good. The result was a compromised Live View and a compromised optical viewfinder.
I can attest to this, I used to own a Sony A330 and the live view was very poor resolution and grainy, and the ovf was the smallest one on the market. It still took great photos though

08-11-2014, 07:37 AM   #39
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,426
QuoteOriginally posted by konraDarnok Quote
of course there's a point, to get rid of the mirror box, an expensive, fickle, and outdated solution to the problem of exposing film. It needs to go. There's so much more that can be done with a live viewfinder. The K-01 and sony's Nex cameras have convinced me of that.
The mirror is a solution for TTL optical viewing, not for exposing film. You might like EVFs, but for many (me included) the EVF has severe drawbacks - the reflex OVFs is a superior solution despite the need for a movable mirror.
You have plenty of large sensor mirrorless solutions from other makers. OTOH, only 3 camera makers are still making small format DSLRs.
08-11-2014, 07:45 AM - 3 Likes   #40
Veteran Member
Imageman's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2013
Photos: Albums
Posts: 461
The kids have no more idea than anyone else where money is to be made in this sector.


Digital cameras were a 2 edged sword, apart from being the only way forward as the market demands shifted away from film. Digital cameras were a welcome shot in the arm for manufacturers, everybody wanted digital and many cameras were sold. Fabulous.


Film cameras were long lived, models typically having a 10 year life span before a new model was introduced, and they were all much the same, the technology was very much low tech with low investment with low R and D.


Digital sold in huge numbers as people scrambled to buy into the technology. Once that bubble burst and everyone had a digital camera, smartphones unexpectedly came in and swallowed huge chunks of the digital market in point and shoot. This made existing sales forecasts binworthy.


Manufacturers found not only catastrophic collapse in demand due to saturation, but what market there was left was depleted due to the smartphone competition. A double whammy and severe blow to profits.


The only choice then was to convince existing camera owners that they had to upgrade regularly to keep some profits rolling in, so manufacturers have been delivering new products year on year in an attempt to generate new sales ever since.


This in a low tech product might work to the advantage of the manufacturer, but digital cameras are very high tech and the development costs are consequently high as well.


Manufacturers find themselves spending huge amounts creating product after product keeping product life cycles short to keep sales up, and at the same time trying to cap expenditure, while all the time facing a dwindling market.


Its a bubble that is unsustainable, and I see many people suggesting even higher investment in new products as a way forward, while all the time pentax as well as the other manufacturers, has its financial back to the wall, facing ever more meagre profits and a future that can only be described as uncertain.


You only have to look at the position canon have taken. They have ceased point and shoot digital camera manufacture. Theres not enough of a market for them to trade in.


What real options exist.


I don't have a crystal ball but I know about markets and manufacturing.


These are the rules pentax must obey to survive in this market


Consolidate your base.
protect your customers.
don't over extend,
offer innovation that is affordable in development,
diversify into new markets if you can,
protect your market share,
offer products your customers want,
don't be left behind by the competition,
reduce operating costs,
increase operating efficiency,
incorporate new advances,
reduce assembly costs,
increase return on investment


Is it any wonder pentax is under pressure. Im just grateful that Ricoh is so supportive and investing heavily in a truly innovative and well run business with excellent products.
08-11-2014, 07:46 AM - 2 Likes   #41
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Photos: Albums
Posts: 616
QuoteOriginally posted by konraDarnok Quote
of course there's a point, to get rid of the mirror box, an expensive, fickle, and outdated solution to the problem of exposing film. It needs to go. There's so much more that can be done with a live viewfinder. The K-01 and sony's Nex cameras have convinced me of that.
Having used a Sony DSLT I found that a Pentax OVF delivers a more pure, traditional, battery saving, and just overall enjoyable photography experience which is why I switched to Pentax in the first place. Some people like OFV's, and after many first hand experiences I am one of those people.

Last edited by stillshot2; 08-19-2014 at 08:22 AM.
08-11-2014, 07:51 AM   #42
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,790
I do not see a catastrophic collapse in demand. I see mid to higher end cameras being replaced about on par with other digital electronics.
08-11-2014, 07:52 AM   #43
Pentaxian
konraDarnok's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2007
Photos: Albums
Posts: 960
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
The mirror is a solution for TTL optical viewing, not for exposing film. You might like EVFs, but for many (me included) the EVF has severe drawbacks - the reflex OVFs is a superior solution despite the need for a movable mirror.
You have plenty of large sensor mirrorless solutions from other makers. OTOH, only 3 camera makers are still making small format DSLRs.
Yes, we disagree on this issue.
08-11-2014, 08:03 AM   #44
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,790
QuoteOriginally posted by konraDarnok Quote
Yes, we disagree on this issue.

I suspect mirrorless k-mount is a non-starter bit only for optical performance reasons but also for issues like screw drive. Mirrorless really = a whole new design optically.
08-11-2014, 08:06 AM - 1 Like   #45
Emperor and Senpai
VoiceOfReason's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Nashville, IN
Posts: 5,128
Imagine a mirrorless MF with adapters that allow the use of all K mount lenses while retaining auto aperture and autofocus and an automatic cropping mode that also does 4k video. Nah, that's way too expensive.
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!
645z, ad, camera, cameras, canon, display, dslr, evf, features, ff, film, full-frame, glass, lens, lenses, market, mirror, mirrorless, money, nikon, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, results, sensor, time, value, vs
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
This is what Pentax should do Rekusu Pentax Medium Format 19 01-12-2015 01:10 AM
What should I do? kodai84 Photographic Industry and Professionals 4 01-05-2014 08:49 AM
Focusing on Pentax K-Mount only - Or what should I do with my M42s antipattern Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 01-30-2013 10:26 AM
What Should I Do? tabl10s Pentax K-5 8 10-16-2012 03:55 AM
what Pentax should do nathancombs Pentax DSLR Discussion 12 07-06-2007 01:39 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:36 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