Nikon D700

**Pål Jensen** · 07-01-2008, 08:02 AM

Originally posted by ogl

But...No hopes and no rumors from Pentax.

Huh? You obviously haven't heard the rumors....

Okami · 07-01-2008, 08:10 AM

It's going to be awhile before Pentax puts in a FF Cam. But i'll be eagerly waiting. :P

Does anyone have a tested list of all the DA's that will work with FF?

Art Vandelay II · 07-01-2008, 09:02 AM

Originally posted by Okami

Does anyone have a tested list of all the DA's that will work with FF?

Here is a test of the DA Limiteds:

DA Limited on Film | PentaxLife

The 40mm and 70mm work fine, but the 21mm does not. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the new DA 35 will work on FF either. Both the DA200mm and 300mm are FF capable and obviously all the FA lens will work. I'm not sure about any of the zooms.

Since Pentax isn't at all clear which lenses are FF capable and which ones aren't now that they are "unofficially" making FF DA lenses someone needs to pin a thread to the top of the lens discussion forum with a list of all compatible lens and corresponding tests. It's a pain to do a search and dg through all the threads on this subject just to get to the verdict on each lens.

Anastigmat · 07-01-2008, 09:30 AM

Originally posted by thibs

Well they can use the Sony sensor when it comes out but something tells me they will avoid it if they can ...

Sure they can, but the sensor would be in short supply initially, and Sony, then Nikon (Sony's biggest customer for APS-C sensors) will have priority. And the sensor won't be cheap because Sony would not want Pentax to undercut the prices of its flagship. Can Pentax sell a full frame for $3,000-$5,000? Will buyers buy a full frame that shoots at a leisurely 3fps or even less for that kind of money?

If Pentax and Samsung were smart, they should forget about the megapixel race, and design a 16-18mp full frame to keep file size and noise low, and try to compete in the $2,000-$3,000 range. A 16mp 5fps full frame that sells for $2,000-2,500 would stand a chance against the D700. A $5,000 25mp 3fps full frame would not stand a chance against the D3X.

Last edited by Anastigmat; 07-01-2008 at 09:41 AM.

and · 07-01-2008, 09:39 AM

The thing is, with the k20d where they had some technology that gave bigger pixels thus less noise, instead of using that to create a new 10mpix k10d with iso performance to beat nikon and canon and the rest of the lot in that class, they used that advantage to get more pixels in with the same amount of noise. So they choose more pixels over high iso ability.

something is telling me that if they wanted to make an ff sensor they would make it 25-30mpix or sth crazy like that, pretty much using the density of the k20d.

BrendanPK · 07-01-2008, 10:25 AM

If you note in all reviews of the K20D comparing it to other cameras, they all (almost all) note that though the K20D has more visable noise/grain at ISO 3200+ than its competitors, its consistantly more detailed/sharp because pentax does not do asmuch in-camera softening to hide noise like the others. Esp like the Nikon D300, looks great at ISO 3200-6400, but only if you like a photo thats been shot threw pantyhoes

Also to thoes who want noise free images and "refuse" to shoot above ISO xxx because of it I say your just missing good shots. I look back at old photos from the 50-70's of sporting events like boxing where they were pushing ISO 50 or 100 (B&W of course) to ubsored levels like 3-4+ stops, the guys would leave the film in the developer for an hour o get something, and guess what they still sold, and some are iconic images today.
Noise/grain is not bad in all cases. I would rather have the photo w/ noise than nothing.

And as to the FF, I reiterate, where is the lens support from the manufacture! Lets just get stable first, and if you really need to shoot your 15mm at 15mm and have a full 15mm angle of view than buy a 5D or D700, sor me, I'll just get a DA 12mm, or correct a fish-eyed lens if I must get that angle of shot. Heck back in film days many did not shoot wider than 28mm, and rarely even 24mm let alone 20mm or less

**Pål Jensen** · 07-01-2008, 10:27 AM

Originally posted by Anastigmat

If Pentax and Samsung were smart, they should forget about the megapixel race, and design a 16-18mp full frame to keep file size and noise low, and try to compete in the $2,000-$3,000 range. A 16mp 5fps full frame that sells for $2,000-2,500 would stand a chance against the D700. A $5,000 25mp 3fps full frame would not stand a chance against the D3X.

A 16mp FF Pentax would be a disaster. Nikon can selll such a camera; Pentax can't. I hardly has better image quality than the K20D. High ISO perfromance is a niche market and I have no doubt that when Nikon put out a 24mp FF camera it will grossly outsell the 12mp version.
The only reason for Pentax into FF is resolution. 30mp is about right. Then you can crop as well and still have good image quality.
There's no reason a Pentax 30mp FF camera should cost more than the D700....

BrendanPK · 07-01-2008, 10:32 AM

Darn-it, just put the next "pro/mid-pro" model in the MZ-s body with 6-9fps, IS 6400 and new/fast AF and I will buy it tomorrow, thats all I want. FF or APS-C I do not care

Confused · 07-01-2008, 10:38 AM

Hi BrendanPK

Just loved your amusing observation:

Quote:

Esp like the Nikon D300, looks great at ISO 3200-6400, but only if you like a photo that's been shot through panty-hose

Maybe you could flog this phrase to Nikon's Ad agency....surely that's gotta be worth megabucks to their PR dept.......lol !

Best regards
Richard

BrendanPK · 07-01-2008, 10:49 AM

lol

Okami · 07-01-2008, 11:06 AM

Originally posted by Art Vandelay II

Here is a test of the DA Limiteds:

DA Limited on Film | PentaxLife

The 40mm and 70mm work fine, but the 21mm does not. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the new DA 35 will work on FF either. Both the DA200mm and 300mm are FF capable and obviously all the FA lens will work. I'm not sure about any of the zooms.

Since Pentax isn't at all clear which lenses are FF capable and which ones aren't now that they are "unofficially" making FF DA lenses someone needs to pin a thread to the top of the lens discussion forum with a list of all compatible lens and corresponding tests. It's a pain to do a search and dg through all the threads on this subject just to get to the verdict on each lens.

I second this and mentioned this in the past too... Can a mod make a thread about this?

creampuff · 07-01-2008, 05:07 PM

FF will come for Pentax, but it will be better later rather than sooner.
Pentax was a late entrant in the DSLRs and remains a small player in terms of market share. There is no need to keep up with the industry giants of Canon and Nikon to produce a flagship, proof of concept FF camera NOW because Pentax could better use their smaller resources in other ways.

FF cameras will never be cheap at this stage because sensor production yields haven't reached a stage where economies of scale can translate into better and cheaper sensors. That's why I'm not putting any hope to see a digital 645 coming out so soon because the camera will cost a a bomb and from a marketing perspective, I'm not sure the camera will sell in numbers. Most working pros who used MF on film have already migrated to high end DSLRs, so the potential pool of buyers is likely to be pretty small.

Canon and Nikon have a large number of working pros using their gear and it is really this segment that the FF camera race is all about. FF cameras like the D3 probably don't make a lot of money for Nikon because at their price point, they definitely aren't volume sellers and many pros under sponsorship don't even pay for them.

Their value lies in the pyramid of influence marketing that encourages serious enthusiasts and newbies alike to have brand affinity and aspire to buy equipment simply because the pros use them. It also allows Nikon and Canon to add a price premium for their products. This is really where the D700 market segment is aimed at, but it remains a big gamble if Canon and Nikon users in general will embrace FF/FX format because there is a price premium; coming at a time where there is belt tightening in the world economy.

Pentax's best move is to wait and see consumer acceptance of FF and give themselves the time to come from behind and offer a product that exploits the gaps in the market. Pentax has other priorities that are more pressing like better marketing, product rollout, branding, etc.

We all need to have a reality check. How many of us would plonk down 2500 Euros or thereabouts for a Pentax FF version of the D700 today? Probably very few of us. Even at today's low prices, why aren't people buying the excellent K20D in numbers? Because of money, or the lack of it.

Whether Pentax remains at 1.5 crop, something close to FF or FF itself, I am sure Pentax will address the lens issue at that time. If they can have a Version II of the kit lens, they can just as easily have redesigned Version II of the DA lenses to have a wider image circle, or just have a new range of compatible lenses. The question is whether Pentax users are willing to spend much more for future gear down the road.

philmorley · 07-01-2008, 05:19 PM

ouch, bet there are few unhappy campers who bought d3's last week...

falconeye · 07-01-2008, 05:55 PM

Originally posted by benjikan

I need megapixels for my work and a 12 megapixel camera although being a FF is not what I would consider news breaking. If it was a 16+ MP camera yes, but this is not the case.

Fortunately for you, it seems that the Samsung/Pentax approach to FF is driven by technology. Ie., the fab cuts the wafers into larger chunks and Samsung wants to sell those at a premium.

Their current process (14.6 MP @ 23,4mm x 15,6mm) translates to 34.5 MP in true FF. Should become your favorite toy, Ben

**Pål Jensen** · 07-01-2008, 06:28 PM

Originally posted by creampuff

FF will come for Pentax, but it will be better later rather than sooner.
Pentax was a late entrant in the DSLRs and remains a small player in terms of market share. There is no need to keep up with the industry giants of Canon and Nikon to produce a flagship, proof of concept FF camera NOW because Pentax could better use their smaller resources in other ways.

FF cameras will never be cheap at this stage because sensor production yields haven't reached a stage where economies of scale can translate into better and cheaper sensors. That's why I'm not putting any hope to see a digital 645 coming out so soon because the camera will cost a a bomb and from a marketing perspective, I'm not sure the camera will sell in numbers. Most working pros who used MF on film have already migrated to high end DSLRs, so the potential pool of buyers is likely to be pretty small.

Canon and Nikon have a large number of working pros using their gear and it is really this segment that the FF camera race is all about. FF cameras like the D3 probably don't make a lot of money for Nikon because at their price point, they definitely aren't volume sellers and many pros under sponsorship don't even pay for them.

Their value lies in the pyramid of influence marketing that encourages serious enthusiasts and newbies alike to have brand affinity and aspire to buy equipment simply because the pros use them. It also allows Nikon and Canon to add a price premium for their products. This is really where the D700 market segment is aimed at, but it remains a big gamble if Canon and Nikon users in general will embrace FF/FX format because there is a price premium; coming at a time where there is belt tightening in the world economy.

Pentax's best move is to wait and see consumer acceptance of FF and give themselves the time to come from behind and offer a product that exploits the gaps in the market. Pentax has other priorities that are more pressing like better marketing, product rollout, branding, etc.

We all need to have a reality check. How many of us would plonk down 2500 Euros or thereabouts for a Pentax FF version of the D700 today? Probably very few of us. Even at today's low prices, why aren't people buying the excellent K20D in numbers? Because of money, or the lack of it.

Whether Pentax remains at 1.5 crop, something close to FF or FF itself, I am sure Pentax will address the lens issue at that time. If they can have a Version II of the kit lens, they can just as easily have redesigned Version II of the DA lenses to have a wider image circle, or just have a new range of compatible lenses. The question is whether Pentax users are willing to spend much more for future gear down the road.

You forget that Pentax have a pro and semi pro user based that is more concerned about high resolution photography than Nikon and Canon have ever had. The medium format lines have been very popular and Pentax primes K-mount lenses have reached lengendary staus in image quality. I have no doubt that Pentax will target this market. Anything else will be a gross mistake.
If you look at Nikons FF it is about speed, not resolution. Nikon is also targeting their core group; the photo journalists.

07-01-2008, 05:07 PM	#57
creampuff Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: Singapore Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,953	FF will come for Pentax, but it will be better later rather than sooner. Pentax was a late entrant in the DSLRs and remains a small player in terms of market share. There is no need to keep up with the industry giants of Canon and Nikon to produce a flagship, proof of concept FF camera NOW because Pentax could better use their smaller resources in other ways. FF cameras will never be cheap at this stage because sensor production yields haven't reached a stage where economies of scale can translate into better and cheaper sensors. That's why I'm not putting any hope to see a digital 645 coming out so soon because the camera will cost a a bomb and from a marketing perspective, I'm not sure the camera will sell in numbers. Most working pros who used MF on film have already migrated to high end DSLRs, so the potential pool of buyers is likely to be pretty small. Canon and Nikon have a large number of working pros using their gear and it is really this segment that the FF camera race is all about. FF cameras like the D3 probably don't make a lot of money for Nikon because at their price point, they definitely aren't volume sellers and many pros under sponsorship don't even pay for them. Their value lies in the pyramid of influence marketing that encourages serious enthusiasts and newbies alike to have brand affinity and aspire to buy equipment simply because the pros use them. It also allows Nikon and Canon to add a price premium for their products. This is really where the D700 market segment is aimed at, but it remains a big gamble if Canon and Nikon users in general will embrace FF/FX format because there is a price premium; coming at a time where there is belt tightening in the world economy. Pentax's best move is to wait and see consumer acceptance of FF and give themselves the time to come from behind and offer a product that exploits the gaps in the market. Pentax has other priorities that are more pressing like better marketing, product rollout, branding, etc. We all need to have a reality check. How many of us would plonk down 2500 Euros or thereabouts for a Pentax FF version of the D700 today? Probably very few of us. Even at today's low prices, why aren't people buying the excellent K20D in numbers? Because of money, or the lack of it. Whether Pentax remains at 1.5 crop, something close to FF or FF itself, I am sure Pentax will address the lens issue at that time. If they can have a Version II of the kit lens, they can just as easily have redesigned Version II of the DA lenses to have a wider image circle, or just have a new range of compatible lenses. The question is whether Pentax users are willing to spend much more for future gear down the road. Last edited by creampuff; 07-01-2008 at 05:15 PM. Reason: spelling

07-01-2008, 05:19 PM	#58
philmorley Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: in a house in Armidale, Australia Posts: 472	ouch, bet there are few unhappy campers who bought d3's last week... Last edited by philmorley; 07-01-2008 at 06:49 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Nikon D700	dylansalt	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	38	01-16-2024 01:13 AM
K20 vs. Nikon D700	FWW56	Pentax DSLR Discussion	19	11-18-2020 12:23 AM
For Sale - Sold: Nikon D700 w/Nikon Battery Grip, Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 16-35mm f/4G ED VR II (US)	luke0622	Sold Items	1	11-04-2010 10:41 AM
Nikon D700 as a backup!!!	luke0622	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	29	03-31-2010 07:58 AM

07-01-2008, 08:02 AM	#46
Pål Jensen Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 4,371	Originally posted by ogl But...No hopes and no rumors from Pentax. Huh? You obviously haven't heard the rumors....

07-01-2008, 08:10 AM	#47
Okami Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Georgia Posts: 376	It's going to be awhile before Pentax puts in a FF Cam. But i'll be eagerly waiting. :P Does anyone have a tested list of all the DA's that will work with FF?

07-01-2008, 09:02 AM	#48
Art Vandelay II Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Charlotte, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 886	Originally posted by Okami Does anyone have a tested list of all the DA's that will work with FF? Here is a test of the DA Limiteds: DA Limited on Film \| PentaxLife The 40mm and 70mm work fine, but the 21mm does not. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the new DA 35 will work on FF either. Both the DA200mm and 300mm are FF capable and obviously all the FA lens will work. I'm not sure about any of the zooms. Since Pentax isn't at all clear which lenses are FF capable and which ones aren't now that they are "unofficially" making FF DA lenses someone needs to pin a thread to the top of the lens discussion forum with a list of all compatible lens and corresponding tests. It's a pain to do a search and dg through all the threads on this subject just to get to the verdict on each lens.

07-01-2008, 09:30 AM	#49
Anastigmat Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: USA Posts: 126	Originally posted by thibs Well they can use the Sony sensor when it comes out but something tells me they will avoid it if they can ... Sure they can, but the sensor would be in short supply initially, and Sony, then Nikon (Sony's biggest customer for APS-C sensors) will have priority. And the sensor won't be cheap because Sony would not want Pentax to undercut the prices of its flagship. Can Pentax sell a full frame for $3,000-$5,000? Will buyers buy a full frame that shoots at a leisurely 3fps or even less for that kind of money? If Pentax and Samsung were smart, they should forget about the megapixel race, and design a 16-18mp full frame to keep file size and noise low, and try to compete in the $2,000-$3,000 range. A 16mp 5fps full frame that sells for $2,000-2,500 would stand a chance against the D700. A $5,000 25mp 3fps full frame would not stand a chance against the D3X. Last edited by Anastigmat; 07-01-2008 at 09:41 AM.

07-01-2008, 09:39 AM	#50
and Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,476	The thing is, with the k20d where they had some technology that gave bigger pixels thus less noise, instead of using that to create a new 10mpix k10d with iso performance to beat nikon and canon and the rest of the lot in that class, they used that advantage to get more pixels in with the same amount of noise. So they choose more pixels over high iso ability. something is telling me that if they wanted to make an ff sensor they would make it 25-30mpix or sth crazy like that, pretty much using the density of the k20d.

07-01-2008, 10:25 AM	#51
BrendanPK Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Maryland Photos: Gallery Posts: 735	If you note in all reviews of the K20D comparing it to other cameras, they all (almost all) note that though the K20D has more visable noise/grain at ISO 3200+ than its competitors, its consistantly more detailed/sharp because pentax does not do asmuch in-camera softening to hide noise like the others. Esp like the Nikon D300, looks great at ISO 3200-6400, but only if you like a photo thats been shot threw pantyhoes Also to thoes who want noise free images and "refuse" to shoot above ISO xxx because of it I say your just missing good shots. I look back at old photos from the 50-70's of sporting events like boxing where they were pushing ISO 50 or 100 (B&W of course) to ubsored levels like 3-4+ stops, the guys would leave the film in the developer for an hour o get something, and guess what they still sold, and some are iconic images today. Noise/grain is not bad in all cases. I would rather have the photo w/ noise than nothing. And as to the FF, I reiterate, where is the lens support from the manufacture! Lets just get stable first, and if you really need to shoot your 15mm at 15mm and have a full 15mm angle of view than buy a 5D or D700, sor me, I'll just get a DA 12mm, or correct a fish-eyed lens if I must get that angle of shot. Heck back in film days many did not shoot wider than 28mm, and rarely even 24mm let alone 20mm or less

07-01-2008, 10:27 AM	#52
Pål Jensen Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 4,371	Originally posted by Anastigmat If Pentax and Samsung were smart, they should forget about the megapixel race, and design a 16-18mp full frame to keep file size and noise low, and try to compete in the $2,000-$3,000 range. A 16mp 5fps full frame that sells for $2,000-2,500 would stand a chance against the D700. A $5,000 25mp 3fps full frame would not stand a chance against the D3X. A 16mp FF Pentax would be a disaster. Nikon can selll such a camera; Pentax can't. I hardly has better image quality than the K20D. High ISO perfromance is a niche market and I have no doubt that when Nikon put out a 24mp FF camera it will grossly outsell the 12mp version. The only reason for Pentax into FF is resolution. 30mp is about right. Then you can crop as well and still have good image quality. There's no reason a Pentax 30mp FF camera should cost more than the D700....

07-01-2008, 10:32 AM	#53
BrendanPK Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Maryland Photos: Gallery Posts: 735	Darn-it, just put the next "pro/mid-pro" model in the MZ-s body with 6-9fps, IS 6400 and new/fast AF and I will buy it tomorrow, thats all I want. FF or APS-C I do not care

07-01-2008, 10:38 AM	#54
Confused Inactive Account Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: London Posts: 1,067	Hi BrendanPK Just loved your amusing observation: Quote: Esp like the Nikon D300, looks great at ISO 3200-6400, but only if you like a photo that's been shot through panty-hose Maybe you could flog this phrase to Nikon's Ad agency....surely that's gotta be worth megabucks to their PR dept.......lol ! Best regards Richard

07-01-2008, 10:49 AM	#55
BrendanPK Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Maryland Photos: Gallery Posts: 735	lol

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-01-2008, 11:06 AM	#56
Okami Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Georgia Posts: 376	Originally posted by Art Vandelay II Here is a test of the DA Limiteds: DA Limited on Film \| PentaxLife The 40mm and 70mm work fine, but the 21mm does not. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the new DA 35 will work on FF either. Both the DA200mm and 300mm are FF capable and obviously all the FA lens will work. I'm not sure about any of the zooms. Since Pentax isn't at all clear which lenses are FF capable and which ones aren't now that they are "unofficially" making FF DA lenses someone needs to pin a thread to the top of the lens discussion forum with a list of all compatible lens and corresponding tests. It's a pain to do a search and dg through all the threads on this subject just to get to the verdict on each lens. I second this and mentioned this in the past too... Can a mod make a thread about this?

07-01-2008, 05:55 PM	#59
falconeye Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Munich, Alps, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,871	Originally posted by benjikan I need megapixels for my work and a 12 megapixel camera although being a FF is not what I would consider news breaking. If it was a 16+ MP camera yes, but this is not the case. Fortunately for you, it seems that the Samsung/Pentax approach to FF is driven by technology. Ie., the fab cuts the wafers into larger chunks and Samsung wants to sell those at a premium. Their current process (14.6 MP @ 23,4mm x 15,6mm) translates to 34.5 MP in true FF. Should become your favorite toy, Ben

07-01-2008, 06:28 PM	#60
Pål Jensen Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 4,371	Originally posted by creampuff FF will come for Pentax, but it will be better later rather than sooner. Pentax was a late entrant in the DSLRs and remains a small player in terms of market share. There is no need to keep up with the industry giants of Canon and Nikon to produce a flagship, proof of concept FF camera NOW because Pentax could better use their smaller resources in other ways. FF cameras will never be cheap at this stage because sensor production yields haven't reached a stage where economies of scale can translate into better and cheaper sensors. That's why I'm not putting any hope to see a digital 645 coming out so soon because the camera will cost a a bomb and from a marketing perspective, I'm not sure the camera will sell in numbers. Most working pros who used MF on film have already migrated to high end DSLRs, so the potential pool of buyers is likely to be pretty small. Canon and Nikon have a large number of working pros using their gear and it is really this segment that the FF camera race is all about. FF cameras like the D3 probably don't make a lot of money for Nikon because at their price point, they definitely aren't volume sellers and many pros under sponsorship don't even pay for them. Their value lies in the pyramid of influence marketing that encourages serious enthusiasts and newbies alike to have brand affinity and aspire to buy equipment simply because the pros use them. It also allows Nikon and Canon to add a price premium for their products. This is really where the D700 market segment is aimed at, but it remains a big gamble if Canon and Nikon users in general will embrace FF/FX format because there is a price premium; coming at a time where there is belt tightening in the world economy. Pentax's best move is to wait and see consumer acceptance of FF and give themselves the time to come from behind and offer a product that exploits the gaps in the market. Pentax has other priorities that are more pressing like better marketing, product rollout, branding, etc. We all need to have a reality check. How many of us would plonk down 2500 Euros or thereabouts for a Pentax FF version of the D700 today? Probably very few of us. Even at today's low prices, why aren't people buying the excellent K20D in numbers? Because of money, or the lack of it. Whether Pentax remains at 1.5 crop, something close to FF or FF itself, I am sure Pentax will address the lens issue at that time. If they can have a Version II of the kit lens, they can just as easily have redesigned Version II of the DA lenses to have a wider image circle, or just have a new range of compatible lenses. The question is whether Pentax users are willing to spend much more for future gear down the road. You forget that Pentax have a pro and semi pro user based that is more concerned about high resolution photography than Nikon and Canon have ever had. The medium format lines have been very popular and Pentax primes K-mount lenses have reached lengendary staus in image quality. I have no doubt that Pentax will target this market. Anything else will be a gross mistake. If you look at Nikons FF it is about speed, not resolution. Nikon is also targeting their core group; the photo journalists.