Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-09-2015, 08:55 PM   #76
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Calgary, AB CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 292
QuoteOriginally posted by SyncGuy Quote
Speaking of which, in all honesty, i'm just curious how is it possible to have a huge frigging VF in our film SLRs; particularly the MX, and yet it's not achievable in current DSLRs, notwithstanding brand speak?
I shot for 15 min with a buddies 5DMk2, and I was really surprised the VF wasn't as big and bright as my Pentax 135 film bodies. I'm curious as to the reason as well. Even if the reason is that since I wasn't shooting them side by side I was just remembering it wrong.

03-10-2015, 01:23 AM   #77
Veteran Member
eurostar's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Albareto, Italy
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 817
When you say "Pentax 135 mm Bodies" you say MX or Z1P? Because there is visibile differences between manual 35mm and autofocus 35mm.
03-10-2015, 03:36 AM   #78
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,267
QuoteOriginally posted by eurostar Quote
When you say "Pentax 135 mm Bodies" you say MX or Z1P? Because there is visibile differences between manual 35mm and autofocus 35mm.
Yeah, even the ME Super (0.95x 92%) people rave about here is inferior to an MX VF (0.97x, 95%).
03-10-2015, 05:17 AM   #79
Site Supporter
Stavri's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: at a Bean & Leaf
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,662
QuoteOriginally posted by thibs Quote
Yeah, even the ME Super (0.95x 92%) people rave about here is inferior to an MX VF (0.97x, 95%).
What are you doing here man, don't you have an Imaging Conference to attend? We need more info on those D-Fa lenses (much appreciated)

03-10-2015, 06:10 AM   #80
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,267
Believe me I wished I could play the whole weekend with those :'(
5 minutes is a lot better than nothing though
03-10-2015, 10:17 AM - 1 Like   #81
Pentaxian
Mistral75's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Paris
Posts: 3,003
QuoteOriginally posted by cfraz Quote
There was an interview earlier this year, maybe on Imaging Resource, in which a Ricoh official implied lenses designed for PDAF are hampered on mirrorless cameras because they generally have larger, heavier focusing element groups than lenses designed for mirrorless cameras.

CDAF requires more back and forth focusing element movement so lighter is better. Maybe that is what Saiki was referring to here, rather than just the "wasted" K-mount registration distance space. Not sure if on-sensor PDAF can mitigate this issue.
Isn't it this interview on Imaging Resource but of Mr Kazuto Yamaki, Sigma CEO, not a Ricoh official:

Sigma Q&A with Kazuto Yamaki: Why no Micro Four Thirds lenses, and is a full-frame Foveon feasible?

Excerpt cpncerning the possibility of a mirrorless version of a reflex lens, in this case their 18-300 mm:

"No, because it's made for the conventional DSLR. If we made it for the mirrorless or compact system camera, we'd have to change its optical design for focus tracking. (...) [the focus system] would have to be a stepping motor or voice coil motor. (...) In the case of the mirrorless camera, the focus has to always track the subject, because of the "wobbling", always moving a little bit. In this case, the focus glass must be very lightweight. (...) there are not many motors which have both strong power and compact size, so the lens element has to be very light." and therefore "it [would have to be] totally changed, a different design and construction."
03-10-2015, 04:35 PM - 1 Like   #82
Banned




Join Date: May 2010
Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,541
It is the same conclusion. Ricoh representative said the same by stating that current lenses won't work on a mirrorless K-mount camera.

He is right; CDAF is more lens-exhausting approach. I look forward to see users replacing first their mirrorless cameras because of the EVF that evolves, then their optics in a few years time, which will start to rattle like a broken car. Lens cannot be made in an old-fashioned way and with excellent construction because design demands otherwise — everything must be feeble, very light and made from plasticky materials.

When I held some of Oly's lenses, I was afraid to sneeze.

The whole mirrorless-system concept is a failure, from compromised optical design to everything else. It is built not to last because it cannot.
A waste of resources and people's money. It is a sad state of affairs of optical industry indeed.

That Sony is dabbling into it I can understand because they are not optics company so they don't care. But Olympus really makes me sad; how mighty have fallen, in every principle they once held dear. It would be better for them to completely exit their unfortunate venture and save the money. They cannot innovate without terrible compromises.

But Pentax can.

Last edited by Uluru; 03-10-2015 at 04:45 PM.
03-10-2015, 06:03 PM   #83
Pentaxian
philbaum's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA
Posts: 3,659
QuoteOriginally posted by Mistral75 Quote
Isn't it this interview on Imaging Resource but of Mr Kazuto Yamaki, Sigma CEO, not a Ricoh official:

Sigma Q&A with Kazuto Yamaki: Why no Micro Four Thirds lenses, and is a full-frame Foveon feasible?

Excerpt cpncerning the possibility of a mirrorless version of a reflex lens, in this case their 18-300 mm:

"No, because it's made for the conventional DSLR. If we made it for the mirrorless or compact system camera, we'd have to change its optical design for focus tracking. (...) [the focus system] would have to be a stepping motor or voice coil motor. (...) In the case of the mirrorless camera, the focus has to always track the subject, because of the "wobbling", always moving a little bit. In this case, the focus glass must be very lightweight. (...) there are not many motors which have both strong power and compact size, so the lens element has to be very light." and therefore "it [would have to be] totally changed, a different design and construction."
Thanks for the link. That explains a lot. Canikon appeared to me to be stubborn and obstuse in resisting any large sensor mirrorless. But the above discussion indicates that Canikon would have to redesign all their lenses for mirrorless use - an enormous undertaking.

03-10-2015, 07:40 PM   #84
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Manila
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,190
QuoteOriginally posted by Uluru Quote
The whole mirrorless-system concept is a failure, from compromised optical design to everything else. It is built not to last because it cannot.
A waste of resources and people's money. It is a sad state of affairs of optical industry indeed.

That Sony is dabbling into it I can understand because they are not optics company so they don't care. But Olympus really makes me sad; how mighty have fallen, in every principle they once held dear. It would be better for them to completely exit their unfortunate venture and save the money. They cannot innovate without terrible compromises.

But Pentax can.
It's hard to say that the mirrorless system is doomed; if all the above information in the interview are true, it will reveal itself in the near future- when "designed for mirrorless" lenses start breaking down due to inherent weaknesses in their construction or materials, against time and the elements. However, this might only mean that the mirrorless as a system is only bound to end up like the smartphone obsolescence: companies forced to make new, incremental models every year just to maintain income. Canikon are almost into that, even with DSLR's, replacing otherwise-still-useful models with newer ones just to keep "one step ahead" of competition.

Pentax on the other hand, while everybody else sees it as the nerd who's running behind the jocks, surely is taking careful steps in solidifying its own presence. I just hope Pentax would be more careful with the things they produce; the K-S1 was a very experimental approach to design, and the K-01 was too (albeit an excellent, useful camera). The incoming FF and its line of lenses might just prove Pentax is once again ready to become a household name (thanks to Ricoh and their faith in the brand).
03-10-2015, 08:08 PM   #85
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Nevada, USA
Posts: 486
QuoteOriginally posted by Mistral75 Quote
Isn't it this interview on Imaging Resource but of Mr Kazuto Yamaki, Sigma CEO, not a Ricoh official:

Sigma Q&A with Kazuto Yamaki: Why no Micro Four Thirds lenses, and is a full-frame Foveon feasible?

Excerpt cpncerning the possibility of a mirrorless version of a reflex lens, in this case their 18-300 mm:

"No, because it's made for the conventional DSLR. If we made it for the mirrorless or compact system camera, we'd have to change its optical design for focus tracking. (...) [the focus system] would have to be a stepping motor or voice coil motor. (...) In the case of the mirrorless camera, the focus has to always track the subject, because of the "wobbling", always moving a little bit. In this case, the focus glass must be very lightweight. (...) there are not many motors which have both strong power and compact size, so the lens element has to be very light." and therefore "it [would have to be] totally changed, a different design and construction."
Hmm... you are probably right. I'll edit my original post to correct.
03-10-2015, 08:36 PM   #86
Pentaxian
philbaum's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA
Posts: 3,659
QuoteOriginally posted by Uluru Quote
It is the same conclusion. Ricoh representative said the same by stating that current lenses won't work on a mirrorless K-mount camera.

He is right; CDAF is more lens-exhausting approach. I look forward to see users replacing first their mirrorless cameras because of the EVF that evolves, then their optics in a few years time, which will start to rattle like a broken car. Lens cannot be made in an old-fashioned way and with excellent construction because design demands otherwise everything must be feeble, very light and made from plasticky materials.

When I held some of Oly's lenses, I was afraid to sneeze.

The whole mirrorless-system concept is a failure, from compromised optical design to everything else. It is built not to last because it cannot.
A waste of resources and people's money. It is a sad state of affairs of optical industry indeed.

That Sony is dabbling into it I can understand because they are not optics company so they don't care. But Olympus really makes me sad; how mighty have fallen, in every principle they once held dear. It would be better for them to completely exit their unfortunate venture and save the money. They cannot innovate without terrible compromises.

But Pentax can.
I would be more concerned about the survival of DSLRs than of mirrorless cameras. Cell phones have mirrorless cameras and they far outnumber DSLRs in numbers and value. Mirrorless cameras are used in drones, in other "action cameras" defined by the GoPro products, in video cams, and in any number of security cameras. Obviously PS are mirrorless cameras and there are any number of them that refuse to die.

My Nex 5n dates from 2011 and i use it in an underwater enclosure. It just refuses to die. I have 4 e-lenses and they are just as sharp as when i bought them.

The only camera i've had to send in repairs has been my K3 for its flopping mirror - a bit of irony there
03-10-2015, 11:03 PM   #87
Site Supporter
geomez's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Preskitt Arizona
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,684
QuoteOriginally posted by philbaum Quote
I would be more concerned about the survival of DSLRs than of mirrorless cameras. Cell phones have mirrorless cameras and they far outnumber DSLRs in numbers and value. Mirrorless cameras are used in drones, in other "action cameras" defined by the GoPro products, in video cams, and in any number of security cameras. Obviously PS are mirrorless cameras and there are any number of them that refuse to die.

My Nex 5n dates from 2011 and i use it in an underwater enclosure. It just refuses to die. I have 4 e-lenses and they are just as sharp as when i bought them.

The only camera i've had to send in repairs has been my K3 for its flopping mirror - a bit of irony there
For the sake of this conversation, when the term "mirrorless" is used, it is in reference to mirror-less interchangeable lens cameras.
03-11-2015, 02:45 AM   #88
JPT
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Tokyo
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,252
It's not exactly correct to equate mirrorless with CDAF systems. They have to use on-sensor AF sensing of some kind, but increasingly it's in the form of PDAF pixels.

Even if the camera uses CDAF, the possibility exists for the camera to calculate the distance to correct focus and avoid the lens having to go back and forth to find focus. Panasonic's DFD (I think) system is able to do this.

Uluru suggested that the motion of CDAF could damage lenses not designed for it. I was a bit worried about that when I first got my K-01, but after a couple of firmware updates and comparing performance with the K20D I had before, I concluded that it doesn't put any more stress on the lenses. In other words, the K20D hunts about as much on average. Some lenses more, others less.

Finally, we come to Sigma. I think that good AF on mirrorless bodies may need more communication between body and lens than DSLRs. Sigma may have found that they can't get their lenses to work well on other manufacturers' mirrorless bodies. Sigma doesn't have a good record on cooperating with camera makers on AF. That doesn't mean there is any reason lenses designed for DSLRs can't work on mirrorless in principle.
03-13-2015, 04:25 PM   #89
Senior Member
Matthew Saville's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Southern California
Posts: 250
I hope that the "something extra" they're talking about includes all of the following, lol:

1.) IBS, of course,
2.) GPS built in with astro sensor shifting, (reason for the XXL prism?)
3.) Pixel-shifting technology for the ~3X megapixel images,
4.) Equal or better IQ vs the Nikon D810 or the D750, depending which sensor they decide to throw in there,

...If they do these things, I'm totally sold!
03-13-2015, 05:12 PM   #90
Banned




Join Date: May 2010
Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,541
QuoteOriginally posted by philbaum Quote
I would be more concerned about the survival of DSLRs than of mirrorless cameras. Obviously PS are mirrorless cameras and there are any number of them that refuse to die. My Nex 5n dates from 2011 and i use it in an underwater enclosure. It just refuses to die.
I don't know. My SLR from 1981 is still fine and working and I enjoy it tremendously.
K-7 from many years ago is still fine and working.
I see many istD's in perfect order. I thought of getting one.
Lenses from 1960s and 1970s and 1980s still work on my SLR and DSLR.

But any mirrorless camera I own looks obsolete the next day. Feels cheap. It is made to be expendable.

I know that my 1981 SLR will outlive any modern digital K, and any mirrorless. And that it can be repaired, made to work.
And my lenses will most likely live to be used in the next 30 or 100 years.

The reason I like K mount is that I can rely on lenses to deliver superb picture, both on digital and film cameras. In case of increased radiation that cripples EM devices, and when digital cameras simply refuse to work, film camera and a suitable lens will always be there to make a picture. Only skill needed would be to develop film.

But it would be impossible to make today's mirorless lenses to work again of a film body of any sort, even made from scratch, because they need lots of software and computing quirks to deliver any decent image quality. Mirrorless is fine for a limited time, in limited circumstances, but it is the dead end for photography.

Last edited by Uluru; 03-13-2015 at 05:29 PM.
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!
argument, bit, boring, cameras, designs, dpr, dpr interview, dslr, enemy, experience, film, food, heat, images, interview, k-01, lenses, mirrorless, mount, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, representative, ricoh, slr, space, tirade
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Imaging-Resource Interview With Ricoh luftfluss Pentax News and Rumors 61 03-08-2015 04:07 PM
Interview with head of Ricoh Imaging JPT Pentax News and Rumors 53 10-06-2014 11:46 PM
PF Interview with Ricoh Imaging at Photokina 2014 PF Staff Homepage & Official Pentax News 10 09-17-2014 06:10 AM
Imaging Resource's interview with Ricoh Kunzite Pentax News and Rumors 141 03-21-2014 02:29 AM
An Interview with Ricoh/Pentax from Imaging Resourse unkipunki Pentax News and Rumors 2 03-15-2014 01:32 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:25 AM. | 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