Originally posted by Mazhe
I have been wondering and searching for a long time: did anybody do even a the draft of a study to prove the harmlessness of using EVFs?
For years, we've been told to stay a good distance from screen to avoid eye fatigue/damage, and now some people put theirs against LCD screens...
What I can tell you is, it sure does hurt my eyes to have to look at an LCD display or EVF in the dark. Trying to go from night vision to squinting into a brightly lit hole is indeed painful after just a few minutes... :-(
In broad daylight it doesn't hurt, but I don't know if there may be any long-term effects. I just know that I stare at computer screens enough in my daily life, and this is just another that I'd rather avoid if I can.
---------- Post added 08-25-15 at 05:45 PM ----------
Originally posted by Rondec
.......For similar quality/performance you will have similar size and cost between these models -- particularly once you factor in your lens, which is going to be pretty similar in size for a given sensor size and maximum aperture.....
Yup, I have this directly from the horse's mouth. I mean directly from Sony. Something along the lines of "with the high-end features we want to add to our system, (IBIS, quality EVF, 4K video in-camera...) we aren't competing on size, weight, or price. We're competing on features, and simply making better cameras / lenses, period..."
---------- Post added 08-25-15 at 05:47 PM ----------
Originally posted by IchabodCrane
Agree... it's really hard to give up a good EVF and certainly it will be even better (larger) on the FF camera. I suppose the holy grail would be on-sensor AF while maintaining viewing through an EVF. Maybe this variable transmission mirror is the key???
This would indeed be a holy grail. On-sensor phase-detect and contrast-detect AF, with focus point spread that can't be achieved by traditional off-sensor phase-detect AF.
Either that, or, Nikon is alleged to be working on some 100+ point AF system, but no word yet on if it is on-sensor or off-sensor.
We'll just have to see what the next generation of AF technology holds, and hope that Pentax can catch the wave early on.
---------- Post added 08-25-15 at 05:56 PM ----------
Originally posted by Zygonyx
Great news indeed !!!
And i don't see why Sony's last sensor would not be in the feast !
The Nikon D810 or D810 A sensor is a venerable beast; I would put more emphasis on the high ISO performance and dynamic range, than the exact number of megapixels. Although one sensor is BSI and the other is not, both do seem to achieve incredible quality. The D810 sensor does achieve greater dynamic range and roughly equal high ISO performance, though.
But I suspect this will take us back to the "why create a 'me too!' camera?" discussion we had earlier. Personally I don't think Pentax could go wrong with 24, 36, or 42 megapixel iterations at this time, as long as they balance its shooting speed and image quality accordingly. (Meaning, if it's "only" 24 MP, then they could give it 8 FPS and make a real Nikon D750 / 5D3 killer. Or if it's 36 MP, they could match high ISO and DR of the D810, but offer it for $1K less. Or if it's 42 MP, well, then it gets to ride the wave of rave reviews that the A7R II sensor is getting...)
---------- Post added 08-25-15 at 06:01 PM ----------
Originally posted by D1N0
next: FF will get old sony sensor
then: Pentax is doomed.
Sony bodies themselves are no holy grail yet; and even a 2-3 generation old Sony sensor is still far ahead of a Canon sensor in some ways. Considering Sony's body ergonomics and general body performance / likability are still not a grand slam, I think Pentax could do quite well even if they're "only" allowed to have a D810 generation sensor at this time. Pentax does many things with its bodies that Sony (nor Nikon / Canon, for that matter) do, and will still appeal to plenty of folks.
=Matt=
---------- Post added 08-25-15 at 06:11 PM ----------
Originally posted by mee
Oh I doubt they care much at all. Otherwise they'd be bankrolling DPR.
But my post was just about me personally being amused by the potential situation. I await almost as much to see their reaction than I am just to see the camera itself.
That said, DPR was instrumental in me buying a K-x when I was a beginner lost in the DSLR jungle. They gave a nice review to it way back when they were less partisan. Otherwise, I'd have went with Nikon.
DPReview has always given Pentax as much credit as they can, considering the amazing feature set they (Pentax) have put into even their beginner camera bodies. Back when Canon and Nikon were on "autopilot" with their beginner DSLRs that offered very little, Pentax was offering weather sealing and all cross-type AF points, and some other things I believe.
All in all I think the achilles heel for DPR and Pentax has been autofocus performance. When a camera like the K-3 offers everything it does, and basically trounces the Canon 7D 2 and Nikon D7100 / D7200 in every way except autofocus, it's a difficult decision to rate a camera one way or another.
One thing I can promise, that my own SLR Lounge review of a full-frame Pentax will be as fair and unbiased as possible. I've said a few times already, I'm more excited about what Pentax is doing right now, than Sony or Nikon or Canon or Fuji. And I say that as someone who has access to all of those systems for testing and reviewing, and to some extent the ability to buy into whichever system I choose.
We'll see what the future holds! I hope to have enough $$$ to be one of the first pre-orders of the FF Pentax, if it offers what I'd like to see.
=Matt=