Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-01-2014, 05:40 AM   #1591
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 11,230
QuoteOriginally posted by Buckaroo50 Quote
Please, don't put words in my mouth or twist what I do say.
"Basically identical" are your words, not mine, Buckaroo!

I'm afraid at least two people who read them don't think you're correct.

10-01-2014, 06:19 AM   #1592
JPT
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Tokyo
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,428
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Buckaroo50 Quote
No I do not have any misconceptions about pixel size. I am not an expert but I do read what experts have to say. If pixel size was not a factor then I guess all full frame cameras would have the same pixel size as a point and shoot. What can hold more a 5 gallon pail or a 50 gallon barrel. Larger pixels can obtain more data to make the processing more accurate.

Printing: Since 300dpi is considered professional quality and your human eye can't detect that fine detail and actually begins to fall off around 150dpi that most people with the naked eye can't tell the difference between 150dpi and 300dpi what use is it to print at 600, 1200 etc when you can't even see the detail without a magnifying glass. Most computer screens have 100-125dpi (there are exceptions). So if things look great on your computer then printing at 300dpi are going to have 3 more times detail than what you see on your computer.

We know that companies have to stay in business and many times they will market things that really are insignificant and make a big deal out of it and tell you this is what you need because they rely on this marketing for the purpose of you selling last years technology and running out and buying today's latest and greatest. Whether you need it or not. Sony has an A57 which was replaced by the A58, in my opinion they went backwards and the A57 in my opinion is a better camera. Canon did the same thing with their superzoom SX50. Canon said look a 1000mm zoom, you need this. The SX40 having 840mm is a better lens with the respect that it is f2.7 vs f3.5 for the SX50. Which would you rather have - I prefer the f2.7 lens over the 1000mm... Then they said "Oh look you can now shoot RAW too". All camera's shoot a raw picture and then it is converted. Why didn't they program the SX40 to save a RAW image - well that was for the next latest and greatest. But the SX40 can save a RAW file if you download a free chdk file which allows you to save RAW and opens many other features not found coming from the factory (of which they could have if they wanted too)... But want to only give you certain things so that they can next year turn some of those features on and say "Hey look here, you need this. Sell your camera and get this new latest and greatest one"...

If you recall I did say that the K-S1 fills a market share and it will sell and that the individual will have to decide for themselves if the K-S1 was worth the extra bucks or would a K-50/K500 work for them.. It is their money and they can buy what they want. I also said that if a person were to consider the K-S1 would it be worth the road trip to go all the way to the K-3. Everyone will buy what they want for their own reasons and if everyone felt the same way then there would only be one camera company and one camera. And I was also trying to point out the marketing aspect that through marketing they will try to convince you that you need this latest and greatest - for the sole purpose of getting your money (which they do need in order to stay in business). Are you getting your moneys worth and do you really need what they are marketing. That is a decision only you can make.

I was pointing out what I was aware of and sharing that. If you agree that is fine, if you don't it doesn't matter to me. To make a statement (that I have a misconception) to attack me personally - well I understand that level of discussion too. The facts are - I don't have a misconception about pixel size and I guess from that standpoint you opened your own mouth and stuck your own foot in it... And I will leave it at that...
First, I should apologise if I came across argumentative or personal. I certainly didn't mean that.

There's a lot of what you said that I agree with. It's true that a lot of people, myself included, won't really gain much from a jump from 16mp to 20mp. I also think that the K-50 in particular is a really great deal at the moment. I think your criticism of the K-S1 boils down to a criticism of paying the price of being an early adopter. I can agree with that too. If I get K-S1, I certainly won't be paying the full price for it. It happens with all cameras and I don't think it applies only to the K-S1.

As for the point about pixel size, I mean that calculating the pixel size is not a reliable indicator of performance, because newer sensors are often as good as or better than their predecessors despite higher pixel counts thanks to improvements in the design. The clearest example is the Sony 12mp sensor in the K-r compared to the 16mp sensor in the K-5. The sensors we are talking about in this case can be compared using DXO (I used the A3000 for the 20mp and NEX 5R for the 16mp). They get the same overall score on Sony mirrorless bodies, with the 16mp slightly better in dynamic range and the 20mp slightly better at high ISO. I think it shows there isn't much to worry about. If what you mean is the same technology applied to higher density sensor is likely to lower the pixel-level image quality, I agree that is true.

The point about printing is that you certainly won't get visible jaggies from the downscaling of the image like you do on a computer screen or the camera's LCD, which is what I thought you were trying to say a few posts back. Whether you need more than 16mp depends on how big you want to print or whether you want to crop. I don't run into this limit much, but I did with a picture I cropped from landscape to portrait and wanted to print big to enter into a competition, so this is what I mean when I say the printers can demand quite high pixel counts.
10-01-2014, 06:25 AM   #1593
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 10,820
QuoteOriginally posted by Buckaroo50 Quote
No I do not have any misconceptions about pixel size. I am not an expert but I do read what experts have to say. If pixel size was not a factor then I guess all full frame cameras would have the same pixel size as a point and shoot. What can hold more a 5 gallon pail or a 50 gallon barrel. Larger pixels can obtain more data to make the processing more accurate.
What can hold more, a 50 gallon barrel or 10 5 gallon pails?
I see two obstacles to increase pixel count to match compact's densities:
- processing requirement for amazingly huge resolutions (over 200MP)
- people having to trade "per-pixel sharpness" for oversampling.
10-01-2014, 07:33 AM   #1594
Pentaxian
Mistral75's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Paris
Posts: 3,500
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
What can hold more, a 50 gallon barrel or 10 5 gallon pails?
I see two obstacles to increase pixel count to match compact's densities:
- processing requirement for amazingly huge resolutions (over 200MP)
- people having to trade "per-pixel sharpness" for oversampling.
...the third and technically most difficult to solve being heat dissipation.

10-01-2014, 07:53 AM   #1595
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 18,365
I think it looks like a fine camera. Cost is a little high for launch, but probably will drop down pretty quickly. I would be surprised if they can't sell this camera for a profit at 500 dollars, but they'll sell it for whatever price they can get for it.

As to the features, if it has the K3 shake reduction, then it is better than the K5 and K5 II's SR. Adjustable AA filter isn't a big deal, but just more of an indication that it shares this part with the K3. More megapixels isn't a problem as long as dynamic range doesn't decrease. K3 really doesn't lose anything to the K50, even though it has "smaller pixels." Dynamic range is the same, high iso scores are the same. Only difference is that it has a little more resolution (and bigger files).

This camera isn't for me, but I don't have a problem if there are folks out there that don't care about sealing and grip and want a smaller camera size.
10-01-2014, 03:40 PM   #1596
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 254
Camera makers have tried oddball designs over the years (Olympus another one who did this) it mostly fails and they go back to more traditional designs oddball is dangerous and alienates many buyers it's a camera they don't look that exciting and never will. The only maker who could get away with a minimal odd design is Apple, that's about it though
10-01-2014, 04:38 PM   #1597
Pentaxian
Belnan's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 481
Camera enthusiasts are an odd bunch too. The K-S1 is a good looking camera that is really refreshing compared to the typical cannikons in that price range. If it doesnt look like a traditional slr or rangefinder camera reviewers and enthusiasts complain about the looks. Maybe new dslr users are not quite as anal.
10-01-2014, 07:19 PM   #1598
Pentaxian
PiDicus Rex's Avatar

Join Date: May 2013
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 1,181
QuoteOriginally posted by Ash Quote
Originally posted by PiDicus Rex Quote But,... it doesn't bend in your pocket, and the latest firmware isn't generating recalls and hate mail. That would be like saying it doesn't survive underwater or in an oven, and firmware is not upgradable.
<sighs> Do I really need to break out the Foghorn Leghorn impersonation every time I use sarcasm ?

---------- Post added 02-10-14 at 12:32 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by dcshooter Quote
1) It's cute.
2) Girls will like this.
3) Japanese people will like this (she said this unprompted, with no knowledge that Pentax is a primarily Japanese brand)
So, it'll hit the target market, and bring more buyers to the brand, which will mean more funds available to Pentax / Ricoh for developing other products.

Why do you all think Canon sell the Ixus range? It's not to make the best cameras, it's to SELL cameras to the widest audience.
(We'll leave off arguing why the eos range are far from 'the best',..)


Last edited by PiDicus Rex; 10-01-2014 at 07:32 PM.
10-01-2014, 11:46 PM   #1599
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 11,230
QuoteOriginally posted by dcshooter Quote
and she said that it was probably a bit more than she would want to pay for a camera, but if it were a couple hundred bucks less, it would certainly be something she might be interested in
Yes, I hope it's not a repeat of the much-maligned K-01, PDR - good for what it was, but so different it should not have been given the conventional pricing strategy.

It should have launched at the prices it was to sell for a year later.
10-01-2014, 11:52 PM   #1600
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 254
QuoteOriginally posted by PiDicus Rex Quote
<sighs> Do I really need to break out the Foghorn Leghorn impersonation every time I use sarcasm ?

---------- Post added 02-10-14 at 12:32 PM ----------



So, it'll hit the target market, and bring more buyers to the brand, which will mean more funds available to Pentax / Ricoh for developing other products.

Why do you all think Canon sell the Ixus range? It's not to make the best cameras, it's to SELL cameras to the widest audience.
(We'll leave off arguing why the eos range are far from 'the best',..)


Not really the moment someone says it's "cute" means you've lost over half your potential buyers straight away (ie male)
It doesn't work never has and never will bling esp does not work on cameras and the LED's are a gimmick but no half serious shooter would be seen dead with that...
10-02-2014, 12:10 AM   #1601
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 11,230
QuoteOriginally posted by Mr Spocko Quote
Not really the moment someone says it's "cute" means you've lost over half your potential buyers straight away
Yeah, that phrase can be a kiss of death in reviews.

A codeword, like a real estate agent's "renovators' dream".
10-02-2014, 04:57 AM   #1602
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2012
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,728
QuoteOriginally posted by clackers Quote
Yes, I hope it's not a repeat of the much-maligned K-01, PDR - good for what it was, but so different it should not have been given the conventional pricing strategy.

It should have launched at the prices it was to sell for a year later
.
And if I worked for Ricoh, my biggest concern is a mis-priced product (K-S1). Can they sell some on looks? Sure, they likely will, but everyone knows that the most important property of just about anything for sale is listed on the price tag. Ricoh is running a risk that the reputation of the camera will be negative simply because of cost. Regardless of when and by how much the price ultimately falls, the reputation generally remains. Ricoh... why not price the camera now where you know will be before long and generate some real buzz for it? You won't generate it later as proven by the K-01.
10-02-2014, 05:15 AM   #1603
Pentaxian
Zygonyx's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Ile de France
Posts: 3,247
That's a good point.
Same big mistake was made with Pentax Q btw... until Q-7 and now Q-S1 that had a reasonnable selling prices at launch.
10-02-2014, 06:12 AM   #1604
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Montréal QC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,048
If they keep hammering that their advantage, for retailers, is that they are high-margin even though they are not high-volume, then we're likely to keep seeing this strategy of launch prices that are... err... optimistic... I mean, you really need to value weight/looks in order to pick a K-S1 at $750 over the more capable K-3 with a ton of goodies for $1k... But by Xmas, I think this price comparison will have moved.
10-02-2014, 06:19 AM   #1605
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,750
It isn't designed, marketed or priced to sell in the USA. I suspect they know it, they know they're not getting in Costco and BestBuy - and they just don't care.

If the product plan required USA volume the pricing strategy would be different.*


* If you want to pay less than MAP price, CALL one of the big retailers and ask. MAP is an advertised guideline.
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!
af, camera, care, colour, design, ff, flash, format, iso, k-01, k-3, k3, kit, kit lens, leds, lens, level, look, medium, pentax, pentax k-s1, pentax news, pentax rumors, performance, price, scheme, steve, value
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Some Thoughts on the K-01 and Mirrorless From Pentax Biro Pentax Mirrorless Cameras 108 06-25-2014 03:20 PM
Mirrorless K-Mount Camera Joshua A Photographic Industry and Professionals 12 08-22-2013 04:28 AM
K-mount mirrorless....FF RonHendriks1966 Pentax Full Frame 13 05-28-2013 03:13 PM
Waiting on my first mirrorless: K-01! Penta Welcomes and Introductions 2 01-30-2013 05:49 AM
New Pentax: K-5, K-r and Mirrorless models coming JohnBee Pentax News and Rumors 32 08-08-2010 01:57 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:55 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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