News at CES 2015?

**Erictator** · 01-29-2015, 07:25 AM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by richandfleur

But that's the thing, Retro cameras didn't need batteries, so they didn't have big chunky grips. Nowadays people rubbish anything not having a DSLR grip as being uncomfortable, but people survived for years with heavy rectangular metal boxes, often with killer sharp edges, with heavy solid manual focus lenses etc.

I'd like a retro camera actually if I'm honest. I miss the experience that came with the historical film cameras, the weight, the cold metal, the smell of the leather bag, the manual focussing and the massive bright optical viewfinders and cool focussing screens. I'd be up for that again, but I wouldn't want a plastic modern version of an older retro camera.

So yeah, do it right and it will be cool, as it's mostly about the interface I reckon. Put a DSLR grip on it and it's now some form of crappy retro hybrid and you might as well go full DSLR styles as a K-3FF.

Rich - It really depends on the era you are talking about... some "grips" were just full of batteries in the later film days because by then the motors were built into the body, but earlier, many housed the auto film advance motor on pro camera's and also give the vertical shutter release, extra tripod socket, etc etc. as well as a better hold with heavy pro lenses.

Once again, the only reason I brought up the idea about Ricoh releasing a "retro" camera right off the bat instead of a souped up K-3 was for laughs because no one has said it wouldn't be.

The only thing that has been confirmed by those "in the know" so far is that it will be a DSLR, it won't be EVF only, will have an OVF, and be FF and have Pentax's uniqueness.

So... I guess I was just stirring the pot because I follow the Nikon forums still (was a Nikon user back in my paid days) and I see all the discontent over the DF retro camera. That's all... I'm not predicting or asking for it, just saying it hasn't been ruled out yet.

My smart money is still on a souped up K-3 style FF, because they already have used the same tech in the 645z, and the K-3 platform is very robust and could handle the extra data throughput, etc, and would prolly just have a slightly bigger OVF bulge, maybe a little larger over all size frame dimension, etc.

Eric

Clothears · 01-29-2015, 08:58 AM

Originally posted by richandfleur

I'd like a retro camera actually if I'm honest. I miss the experience that came with the historical film cameras, the weight, the cold metal, the smell of the leather bag, the manual focussing and the massive bright optical viewfinders and cool focussing screens. I'd be up for that again, but I wouldn't want a plastic modern version of an older retro camera.

Hey I can prolly arrange that. We're clearing out the FiL's attic of ancient camera gear - easily a dozen cameras, a dozen flash guns, some electronic but quite a number of the old type taking bulbs, some of those "cubes" that contained four flash bulbs, any amount of old film, some unexposed (Pan-F with a develop date of 1966 anybody?), some unused (still in original packing) glass plates used for mounting slides, even a magic lantern, a quite heavy Weston Master II Universal Exposure Meter in a nice leather carrying case ...

And of course a commensurate amount of developing enlarging gear to go with it. It'll take quite a while to go through all this and see what is junk and what might fetch a bob or two on ebay.

**woodywesty** · 01-29-2015, 11:05 AM

Originally posted by Erictator

Rich - It really depends on the era you are talking about... some "grips" were just full of batteries in the later film days because by then the motors were built into the body, but earlier, many housed the auto film advance motor on pro camera's and also give the vertical shutter release, extra tripod socket, etc etc. as well as a better hold with heavy pro lenses.

Once again, the only reason I brought up the idea about Ricoh releasing a "retro" camera right off the bat instead of a souped up K-3 was for laughs because no one has said it wouldn't be.

The only thing that has been confirmed by those "in the know" so far is that it will be a DSLR, it won't be EVF only, will have an OVF, and be FF and have Pentax's uniqueness.

So... I guess I was just stirring the pot because I follow the Nikon forums still (was a Nikon user back in my paid days) and I see all the discontent over the DF retro camera. That's all... I'm not predicting or asking for it, just saying it hasn't been ruled out yet.

My smart money is still on a souped up K-3 style FF, because they already have used the same tech in the 645z, and the K-3 platform is very robust and could handle the extra data throughput, etc, and would prolly just have a slightly bigger OVF bulge, maybe a little larger over all size frame dimension, etc.

Eric

Well, "for laughs" I'm hoping for the new full frame to be metal, retroish... and say Spotmatic D on it for "digital"... ;-)
I know..... not a chance but since we're dreaming.... ;-)

**WPRESTO** · 01-29-2015, 12:51 PM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by woodywesty

Well, "for laughs" I'm hoping for the new full frame to be metal, retroish... and say Spotmatic D on it for "digital"... ;-)
I know..... not a chance but since we're dreaming.... ;-)

Spotmatic D? Let's wish for an LX-D.

---------- Post added 01-29-15 at 02:56 PM ----------

This thread and others concerning a FF Pentax confirm the science dictum: "always base the most revolutionary theory where there is the least possible evidence." Holds for UFO, ancient aliens, Sasquatch and Holy Grail enthusiasts, has all the verisimilitude of Tarot card predictions.

Last edited by WPRESTO; 01-29-2015 at 12:57 PM.

Kunzite · 01-29-2015, 01:21 PM

Shoebox camera D

**WPRESTO** · 01-29-2015, 01:37 PM - **1 Like**

How about a waste-level Ricoh Rollei with 2.25 inch square 100mp sensor, interchangeable Zeiss Planar normal lens, live-view EVF instead of second lens with mirror or mirror box? So long as we're speculating on rumors built on hearsay from tertiary sources of dubious reliability. Second thought, it would be too similar to a 645.

**woodywesty** · 01-29-2015, 01:56 PM

Originally posted by WPRESTO

Spotmatic D? Let's wish for an LX-D.

---------- Post added 01-29-15 at 02:56 PM ----------

This thread and others concerning a FF Pentax confirm the science dictum: "always base the most revolutionary theory where there is the least possible evidence." Holds for UFO, ancient aliens, Sasquatch and Holy Grail enthusiasts, has all the verisimilitude of Tarot card predictions.

oooh... I could sure go for that in digital!!

http://www.aohc.it/_old/cameras/lx02.jpg

y0chang · 01-29-2015, 07:23 PM

I want a ME-Super Digital, it still feels like a solid chunk of metal in my hands.

totsmuyco · 01-30-2015, 01:24 AM

A retro style 24-36 mpx, with the size of the actual ME and a battery grip for it to look mean. One unit for FF lovers and one for us APS-C users. I like to dream.

Mistral75 · 01-30-2015, 08:06 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by totsmuyco

A retro style 24-36 mpx, with the size of the actual ME and a battery grip for it to look mean. One unit for FF lovers and one for us APS-C users. I like to dream.

24-36 mpx is so 2014! In 2015 you need at least 50.6 Mpx

drypenn · 01-30-2015, 08:24 AM

I just want a simple camera, even a rehash of a K3, as K3II or K3IIs, but with bundled kit lens of 16-50 f/1.2 WR and as thin as a DA 21, around 100grams, when collapsed. Too much?

Cynog Ap Brychan · 01-30-2015, 08:38 AM

Originally posted by drypenn

I just want a simple camera, even a rehash of a K3, as K3II or K3IIs, but with bundled kit lens of 16-50 f/1.2 WR and as thin as a DA 21, around 100grams, when collapsed. Too much?

No, too little!

Uluru · 01-30-2015, 08:18 PM

Originally posted by Mistral75

24-36 mpx is so 2014! In 2015 you need at least 50.6 Mpx

As I understand it, that number of 50MP comes from using the same tech available for 24MP APS-C, but on the wafer with 135 format sensors dies?
So practically, the pathetic "FF revolution" means getting the second best tech after 2+ years of wait, when the cost has made it possible all thanks to 100,000s of crop cameras sold before that. Switch fully to FF wafers, and the whole serious imaging industry (not smartphone joke industry) goes down like the Titanic because a) the cost skyrockets and b) people don't give a damn for a chunky FF capable camera when a modern 1/1.7 sensor camera like the MX-1 delivers same or better quality image than 35mm film on an average 5x7 or 8x10.

Zygonyx · 01-30-2015, 10:43 PM

+ Pentax never will endanger its 645 line with equal or aproaching 35mm resolutions.

richandfleur · 01-30-2015, 11:27 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Zygonyx

+ Pentax never will endanger its 645 line with equal or aproaching 35mm resolutions.

I agree but resolutions arent what it should be about. Larger and smaller sensor sizes each have different characteristics. DOF and low light ability (for a given resolution) change for example.

Pentax needs to push the strengths of each, as presently FF is considered the top/holy grail to canikon customers.

Anything zoomage is going to be expensive on FF and MF, whereas anything wide or narrow DOF/fast is expensive on apps-c.

Resolutions are all very similar now between the sizes. Nokia did a 40mp phone camera didn't they? It's not about the MP race.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Ricoh's Booth at CP+ 2015	Docrwm	Pentax News and Rumors	80	02-10-2015 04:37 AM
Pentax / Ricoh Full Frame at CES	ClinchShots	Pentax Full Frame	44	01-01-2015 02:44 PM
Pentax at CES	i83N	Photographic Industry and Professionals	38	01-10-2014 10:34 AM
Where is the Pentax news from CES 2010?	KungPOW	Pentax News and Rumors	29	01-19-2010 11:31 AM
Pentax at Jan 7th 2010 CES ?	Samsungian	Pentax News and Rumors	34	01-08-2010 03:58 PM

01-29-2015, 07:25 AM - 2 Likes	#856
Erictator Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2011 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,349	Originally posted by richandfleur But that's the thing, Retro cameras didn't need batteries, so they didn't have big chunky grips. Nowadays people rubbish anything not having a DSLR grip as being uncomfortable, but people survived for years with heavy rectangular metal boxes, often with killer sharp edges, with heavy solid manual focus lenses etc. I'd like a retro camera actually if I'm honest. I miss the experience that came with the historical film cameras, the weight, the cold metal, the smell of the leather bag, the manual focussing and the massive bright optical viewfinders and cool focussing screens. I'd be up for that again, but I wouldn't want a plastic modern version of an older retro camera. So yeah, do it right and it will be cool, as it's mostly about the interface I reckon. Put a DSLR grip on it and it's now some form of crappy retro hybrid and you might as well go full DSLR styles as a K-3FF. Rich - It really depends on the era you are talking about... some "grips" were just full of batteries in the later film days because by then the motors were built into the body, but earlier, many housed the auto film advance motor on pro camera's and also give the vertical shutter release, extra tripod socket, etc etc. as well as a better hold with heavy pro lenses. Once again, the only reason I brought up the idea about Ricoh releasing a "retro" camera right off the bat instead of a souped up K-3 was for laughs because no one has said it wouldn't be. The only thing that has been confirmed by those "in the know" so far is that it will be a DSLR, it won't be EVF only, will have an OVF, and be FF and have Pentax's uniqueness. So... I guess I was just stirring the pot because I follow the Nikon forums still (was a Nikon user back in my paid days) and I see all the discontent over the DF retro camera. That's all... I'm not predicting or asking for it, just saying it hasn't been ruled out yet. My smart money is still on a souped up K-3 style FF, because they already have used the same tech in the 645z, and the K-3 platform is very robust and could handle the extra data throughput, etc, and would prolly just have a slightly bigger OVF bulge, maybe a little larger over all size frame dimension, etc. Eric

01-29-2015, 08:58 AM	#857
Clothears Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Canterbury Posts: 170	Originally posted by richandfleur I'd like a retro camera actually if I'm honest. I miss the experience that came with the historical film cameras, the weight, the cold metal, the smell of the leather bag, the manual focussing and the massive bright optical viewfinders and cool focussing screens. I'd be up for that again, but I wouldn't want a plastic modern version of an older retro camera. Hey I can prolly arrange that. We're clearing out the FiL's attic of ancient camera gear - easily a dozen cameras, a dozen flash guns, some electronic but quite a number of the old type taking bulbs, some of those "cubes" that contained four flash bulbs, any amount of old film, some unexposed (Pan-F with a develop date of 1966 anybody?), some unused (still in original packing) glass plates used for mounting slides, even a magic lantern, a quite heavy Weston Master II Universal Exposure Meter in a nice leather carrying case ... And of course a commensurate amount of developing enlarging gear to go with it. It'll take quite a while to go through all this and see what is junk and what might fetch a bob or two on ebay.

01-29-2015, 11:05 AM	#858
woodywesty Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Northern Wisconsin Posts: 725	Originally posted by Erictator Rich - It really depends on the era you are talking about... some "grips" were just full of batteries in the later film days because by then the motors were built into the body, but earlier, many housed the auto film advance motor on pro camera's and also give the vertical shutter release, extra tripod socket, etc etc. as well as a better hold with heavy pro lenses. Once again, the only reason I brought up the idea about Ricoh releasing a "retro" camera right off the bat instead of a souped up K-3 was for laughs because no one has said it wouldn't be. The only thing that has been confirmed by those "in the know" so far is that it will be a DSLR, it won't be EVF only, will have an OVF, and be FF and have Pentax's uniqueness. So... I guess I was just stirring the pot because I follow the Nikon forums still (was a Nikon user back in my paid days) and I see all the discontent over the DF retro camera. That's all... I'm not predicting or asking for it, just saying it hasn't been ruled out yet. My smart money is still on a souped up K-3 style FF, because they already have used the same tech in the 645z, and the K-3 platform is very robust and could handle the extra data throughput, etc, and would prolly just have a slightly bigger OVF bulge, maybe a little larger over all size frame dimension, etc. Eric Well, "for laughs" I'm hoping for the new full frame to be metal, retroish... and say Spotmatic D on it for "digital"... ;-) I know..... not a chance but since we're dreaming.... ;-)

01-29-2015, 12:51 PM - 2 Likes	#859
WPRESTO Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Massachusetts Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 59,138	Originally posted by woodywesty Well, "for laughs" I'm hoping for the new full frame to be metal, retroish... and say Spotmatic D on it for "digital"... ;-) I know..... not a chance but since we're dreaming.... ;-) Spotmatic D? Let's wish for an LX-D. ---------- Post added 01-29-15 at 02:56 PM ---------- This thread and others concerning a FF Pentax confirm the science dictum: "always base the most revolutionary theory where there is the least possible evidence." Holds for UFO, ancient aliens, Sasquatch and Holy Grail enthusiasts, has all the verisimilitude of Tarot card predictions. Last edited by WPRESTO; 01-29-2015 at 12:57 PM.

01-29-2015, 01:21 PM	#860
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Shoebox camera D

01-29-2015, 01:37 PM - 1 Like	#861
WPRESTO Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Massachusetts Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 59,138	How about a waste-level Ricoh Rollei with 2.25 inch square 100mp sensor, interchangeable Zeiss Planar normal lens, live-view EVF instead of second lens with mirror or mirror box? So long as we're speculating on rumors built on hearsay from tertiary sources of dubious reliability. Second thought, it would be too similar to a 645.

01-29-2015, 01:56 PM	#862
woodywesty Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Northern Wisconsin Posts: 725	Originally posted by WPRESTO Spotmatic D? Let's wish for an LX-D. ---------- Post added 01-29-15 at 02:56 PM ---------- This thread and others concerning a FF Pentax confirm the science dictum: "always base the most revolutionary theory where there is the least possible evidence." Holds for UFO, ancient aliens, Sasquatch and Holy Grail enthusiasts, has all the verisimilitude of Tarot card predictions. oooh... I could sure go for that in digital!! http://www.aohc.it/_old/cameras/lx02.jpg

01-29-2015, 07:23 PM	#863
y0chang Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: United States Posts: 793	I want a ME-Super Digital, it still feels like a solid chunk of metal in my hands.

01-30-2015, 01:24 AM	#864
totsmuyco Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2013 Location: Iloilo City Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,276	A retro style 24-36 mpx, with the size of the actual ME and a battery grip for it to look mean. One unit for FF lovers and one for us APS-C users. I like to dream.

01-30-2015, 08:06 AM - 1 Like	#865
Mistral75 Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Paris, France Posts: 7,527	Originally posted by totsmuyco A retro style 24-36 mpx, with the size of the actual ME and a battery grip for it to look mean. One unit for FF lovers and one for us APS-C users. I like to dream. 24-36 mpx is so 2014! In 2015 you need at least 50.6 Mpx

01-30-2015, 08:24 AM	#866
drypenn Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2012 Photos: Albums Posts: 963	I just want a simple camera, even a rehash of a K3, as K3II or K3IIs, but with bundled kit lens of 16-50 f/1.2 WR and as thin as a DA 21, around 100grams, when collapsed. Too much?

01-30-2015, 08:38 AM	#867
Cynog Ap Brychan Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: Gloucester Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,199	Originally posted by drypenn I just want a simple camera, even a rehash of a K3, as K3II or K3IIs, but with bundled kit lens of 16-50 f/1.2 WR and as thin as a DA 21, around 100grams, when collapsed. Too much? No, too little!

01-30-2015, 08:18 PM	#868
Uluru Banned Join Date: May 2010 Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,535	Originally posted by Mistral75 24-36 mpx is so 2014! In 2015 you need at least 50.6 Mpx As I understand it, that number of 50MP comes from using the same tech available for 24MP APS-C, but on the wafer with 135 format sensors dies? So practically, the pathetic "FF revolution" means getting the second best tech after 2+ years of wait, when the cost has made it possible all thanks to 100,000s of crop cameras sold before that. Switch fully to FF wafers, and the whole serious imaging industry (not smartphone joke industry) goes down like the Titanic because a) the cost skyrockets and b) people don't give a damn for a chunky FF capable camera when a modern 1/1.7 sensor camera like the MX-1 delivers same or better quality image than 35mm film on an average 5x7 or 8x10.

01-30-2015, 10:43 PM	#869
Zygonyx Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Ile de France Posts: 4,033	+ Pentax never will endanger its 645 line with equal or aproaching 35mm resolutions.

01-30-2015, 11:27 PM - 1 Like	#870
richandfleur Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2014 Location: Palmerston North, New Zealand Photos: Albums Posts: 1,788	Originally posted by Zygonyx + Pentax never will endanger its 645 line with equal or aproaching 35mm resolutions. I agree but resolutions arent what it should be about. Larger and smaller sensor sizes each have different characteristics. DOF and low light ability (for a given resolution) change for example. Pentax needs to push the strengths of each, as presently FF is considered the top/holy grail to canikon customers. Anything zoomage is going to be expensive on FF and MF, whereas anything wide or narrow DOF/fast is expensive on apps-c. Resolutions are all very similar now between the sizes. Nokia did a 40mp phone camera didn't they? It's not about the MP race.