Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-21-2016, 05:16 AM   #196
Site Supporter
beachgardener's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,005
QuoteOriginally posted by D1N0 Quote
my Takumars will skyrocket!
yes and I'd probably buy a couple more

09-21-2016, 05:34 AM   #197
Pentaxian
photoptimist's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 999
QuoteOriginally posted by MJKoski Quote
Dof does not matter. To get any use from PS you have to nail your focus on the subject you wish to pop in your photo. This is why PS gets negative feedback so often. It requires extreme care to succeed.

It is the hidden jewel of K-1 and a good example of need for modern focusing system. New Phase MF backs have retina grade display to help getting most out of available detail. The higher the resolution, the less an optical VF will help. You either rely on AF or magnified MF.
Yep!

One issue with focus is that the noticeable circle of confusion for a PS image is smaller than for a non-PS image. PS has potentially double the resolution in the R & B channels and about 41% more resolution in the G channel.

In a pixel-peeper analysis, the DoF of a PS image will be about half that of a regular image which certainly means using more careful focusing.
09-21-2016, 05:41 AM   #198
Forum Member
rbelyell's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 95
QuoteOriginally posted by Fogel70 Quote
IMO retro controls would impose limitations, and one reason why I mention limitations on these retro cameras is because these cameras are more limited than Pentax cameras I use.
If Pentax would implement retro interface they would most likely have to make their interface less flexible than today. No more green button, no more Hyper-P, no more Hyper-M...

Another thing is that those that ask for K1000-D, Spotmatic-D or LX-D usually also want less complex controls than on most Japanese cameras of today. They want cameras with bare minimum controls. It's not a K1 with extra retro controls they want.

Here is one example how a camera like this could be designed.
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/6-pentax-dslr-discussion/229728-spotmatic...nyone-saw.html
It's often for nostalgic reasons they want a camera like this.
interesting. i have a ks2. ive used a fuji xp1, xt1 and still have an x100. ive used a kodak slr/n and a canon 5d. after all this experience, i find the 'green button' itself the major limitation of the system, and one of the biggest limitations ive come across in any camera. on any of the above cameras ive used, 'analouge' controlled, mirrorless or slr, they all were able to autometer non native lenses. not being able to perform that simple function my friend baffles me every day when i look at that green button. that is actually day to day limiting. again, you and i will have to agree to disagree, as i see nothing 'complex' in the turning of an analogue knob. as for simple, nothing can be simpler than avoiding 'interfaces' altogether by physically turning a couple of knobs. my epson rd1 is simply put the simplest digital camera ive ever used: 3 dials and auto iso-i set the menus one time and virtually never looked at a menu again in over five years use. thats simple for the most simple.

Last edited by rbelyell; 09-21-2016 at 05:48 AM.
09-21-2016, 05:48 AM   #199
Pentaxian
D1N0's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: ---
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,996
QuoteOriginally posted by rbelyell Quote
interesting. i have a ks2. ive used a fuji xp1, xt1 and still have an x100. ive used a kodak slr/n and a canon 5d. after all this experience, i find the 'green button' itself the major limitation of the system, and one of the biggest limitations ive come across in any camera. on any of the above cameras ive used, 'analouge' controlled, mirrorless or slr, they all were able to autometer non native lenses. not being able to perform that simple function my friend baffles me every day when i look at that green button. that is actually day to day limiting. again, you and i will have to agree to disagree, as i see nothing 'complex' in the turning of an analogue knob.
You are now referring to stop down metering for k/m lenses. The green button is enabling that. It is not a limitation it's a feature expanding the use of the camera with older lenses. In other modes the green button will serve as a reset for shutter and or aperture and iso adjustments which is pretty darn cool. To frame it as a limitation when the actual limitation is not being able to feel out the set aperture is false.

09-21-2016, 05:53 AM - 3 Likes   #200
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,501
Fact: the MX is overall as compact as just about any interchangeable-lens camera currently out there.

Fact: They have a K mount with the appropriate registry distance for the Pentax lens environment.

Fact: They are single-lens reflex cameras which are set up to project an image from a K-mount lens onto a full-frame image space.

Question: what is the absolute minimum of internals required in order to put the K-1's sensor into the appropriate place on the film plane?

Necessities:
1) Power to the electronics (but not the shutter or mirror; those are mechanical).
2) A processor sufficient in size and capability to absorb the data from that sensor and write a RAW file to a card, possibly a micro SD card given the size restrictions.
3) Synchronising sensor capture readiness to shutter actuation.
4) Metering (surely a current exposure sensor should be at least as accurate as the old, while taking up the same or less space for the electronics and interfacing with the existing mechanicals).
5) A means of setting ISO sensitivity at the sensor, arguably by taking data pickoffs from the metering system (ASA dial on the shutter speed knob).


Question: Is there enough space in the camera for all of this once the film transport equipment has been stripped out? If not, how big do you need to go? Is a P3 body big enough? SV? Or do you need a full-size Spotmatic or K-series shell?

Leica have shown that people WILL buy a digital camera that does not have a rear screen. The issue is how much you are prepared to do without. For some people, not only post-shot review but also AF and IBIS are negotiable. Because the less you ask of that camera, besides writing a .DNG file to a card when the sensor is exposed, the less power you need and the smaller the battery compartment has to be, especially if the battery does not have to move the shutter or the mirror, power an AF module or turn a screwdrive motor.

I think Ricoh should seriously consider putting a couple of junior designers onto an MX-D or SV-D proof-of-concept project, if for no other reason than to see if it is physically feasible and to give them design experience in making engineering compromises.
09-21-2016, 06:02 AM   #201
Pentaxian
Fogel70's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,738
QuoteOriginally posted by rbelyell Quote
interesting. i have a ks2. ive used a fuji xp1, xt1 and still have an x100. ive used a kodak slr/n and a canon 5d. after all this experience, i find the 'green button' itself the major limitation of the system, and one of the biggest limitations ive come across in any camera. on any of the above cameras ive used, 'analouge' controlled, mirrorless or slr, they all were able to autometer non native lenses. not being able to perform that simple function my friend baffles me every day when i look at that green button. that is actually day to day limiting. again, you and i will have to agree to disagree, as i see nothing 'complex' in the turning of an analogue knob. as for simple, nothing can be simpler than avoiding 'interfaces' altogether by physically turning a couple of knobs. my epson rd1 is simply put the simplest digital camera ive ever used: 3 dials and auto iso-i set the menus one time and virtually never looked at a menu again in over five years use. thats simple for the most simple.
Pentax K-mount cameras also autometer when used with non native lenses, FI when using m42 lenses. The big difference is that the other cameras do not have 40 years old native lenses.
The limitation K-mount cameras is only with native lenses that do no communicate electronically with the camera. The limitation is because K-mount lenses are kept wide open when stopped down until shutter is pressed.
Green button is used for much more than when using old manual lenses. FI for reset ISO to auto, or to set exposure when using spot meter in manual mode.

Try setting exposure compensation on Nikon Df using a heavy lens while looking though the viewfinder.
Retro interface may work well when not in a hurry, but is not as flexible as modern interface that is quicker to use, and fewer controls has to be used so you do not have to change grip to set exposure.
So modern interface can better fit for all types of shooting situations.

The Epson RD1 is retro done the right way. a manual focus camera with aperture ring on all native lenses, with very limited controls and no dual interface.
On RD1 you can even reverse the LCD and all button on the back to complete the retro experience.

Last edited by Fogel70; 09-21-2016 at 06:29 AM.
09-21-2016, 07:03 AM   #202
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2016
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 228
QuoteOriginally posted by gazonk Quote
That pretty much sums up that you still prefer DSLRs, doesn't it?
Yes. I chose K-1 over a mirrorless system for many reasons. But just because they were shortcoming when I was in the market doesn't mean they can't improve.

I'm not sure what the rationale for the power zoom and fly by wire focusing is. I assume it was to make a more compact lens. But I would gladly sacrifice some size to get that functionality back.

My other hobby is custom built computers and VR has been a big thing the last 3-4 years. Much like EVF the HUGE issue is resolution, screen refresh rate and input lag. VR has come a long way. I'm convinced EVF could do the same. It will be easier in some ways; And harder in other ways. Will it be better or comparable to OVF? no idea.

But like I said in other posts, if some of these shortcomings where fixed, a small pentax mirrorless system would make for an excellent backup/second camera for me.
09-21-2016, 07:27 AM   #203
Pentaxian
photoptimist's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 999
QuoteOriginally posted by pathdoc Quote
Fact: the MX is overall as compact as just about any interchangeable-lens camera currently out there.

Fact: They have a K mount with the appropriate registry distance for the Pentax lens environment.

Fact: They are single-lens reflex cameras which are set up to project an image from a K-mount lens onto a full-frame image space.

Question: what is the absolute minimum of internals required in order to put the K-1's sensor into the appropriate place on the film plane?

Necessities:
1) Power to the electronics (but not the shutter or mirror; those are mechanical).
2) A processor sufficient in size and capability to absorb the data from that sensor and write a RAW file to a card, possibly a micro SD card given the size restrictions.
3) Synchronising sensor capture readiness to shutter actuation.
4) Metering (surely a current exposure sensor should be at least as accurate as the old, while taking up the same or less space for the electronics and interfacing with the existing mechanicals).
5) A means of setting ISO sensitivity at the sensor, arguably by taking data pickoffs from the metering system (ASA dial on the shutter speed knob).


Question: Is there enough space in the camera for all of this once the film transport equipment has been stripped out? If not, how big do you need to go? Is a P3 body big enough? SV? Or do you need a full-size Spotmatic or K-series shell?

Leica have shown that people WILL buy a digital camera that does not have a rear screen. The issue is how much you are prepared to do without. For some people, not only post-shot review but also AF and IBIS are negotiable. Because the less you ask of that camera, besides writing a .DNG file to a card when the sensor is exposed, the less power you need and the smaller the battery compartment has to be, especially if the battery does not have to move the shutter or the mirror, power an AF module or turn a screwdrive motor.

I think Ricoh should seriously consider putting a couple of junior designers onto an MX-D or SV-D proof-of-concept project, if for no other reason than to see if it is physically feasible and to give them design experience in making engineering compromises.
Interesting idea!

(Don't forget the physical space needed for the shutter/mirror winder crank, gears, clock spring, and various linkages that deliver mechanical power to the mirror and shutter)

Looking at the size of the circuitry in an Apple iPhone, it seems quite feasible to build a very powerful CPU in a thin blade circuitboard that can reside inside the bottom plate of the MX or as a multilayer sandwich packed into the empty space that held the film take-up spool.

And the battery (probably a two-cell 7.4V LiPo) doesn't need to be much bigger than the now-removed 135 film cassette especially if it doesn't have to power a big bright back panel display.

09-21-2016, 08:06 AM   #204
Pentaxian
ChristianRock's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Marietta, GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,235
So I was thinking about the feasibility aspect of this.

If the Q line is really dead, the new mirrorless system could just be replacing it. Instead of a new Q body, just make a new APS-C body. Yes it will need a new mount and a new registration distance (I suppose) but it can be based on the Q mount otherwise. They could move the shutter to the body since the body will have to be bigger.

Then hire Copal, or whatever other vendor, to do a few new lenses - just like we found out that they did with the Q system. Pentax didn't build those lenses, Copal did, Pentax just designed them. That way we could have a new system going pretty fast by just managing the existing resources.

Too bad for the Q system users though...
09-21-2016, 11:45 AM   #205
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,501
QuoteOriginally posted by photoptimist Quote
(Don't forget the physical space needed for the shutter/mirror winder crank, gears, clock spring, and various linkages that deliver mechanical power to the mirror and shutter)
I'm not, but all that stuff is already neatly packed away inside the original camera anyway, out of view when you open the back. However, if you are converting to digital you can (I would hope) remove the film takeup spool, its connection to the external winding mechanism, the rewind knob and all its internal protuberances, the film-back pressure plate, the exposure counter and anything else which has as its sole purpose the manipulation and guidance of the emulsion strip. This is basically the vaunted "drop-in digital film substitute", but integrated with a modified body in such a way as to optimise use of the internal space that isn't already handling the mirror and metering.
09-21-2016, 11:54 AM   #206
Veteran Member
MJKoski's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 761
Why not insert pump-action shotgun sample from Doom to K-1 every time you press shutter? Instant frame advance satisfaction. It would be as useful as such mechanic apparition.
09-21-2016, 12:16 PM   #207
Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,866
QuoteOriginally posted by ChristianRock Quote
If the Q line is really dead, the new mirrorless system could just be replacing it. Instead of a new Q body, just make a new APS-C body. Yes it will need a new mount and a new registration distance (I suppose) but it can be based on the Q mount otherwise. They could move the shutter to the body since the body will have to be bigger.
Why move the shutter to the body?? I like the {very quiet} leaf shutter in the Q much much better.
09-21-2016, 12:28 PM   #208
Pentaxian
ChristianRock's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Marietta, GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,235
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
Why move the shutter to the body?? I like the {very quiet} leaf shutter in the Q much much better.
It was just an idea, to make the lenses more affordable, plus I think leaf shutters don't last as long. I don't mind either way, I'll stick with DSLRs
09-21-2016, 02:19 PM   #209
Site Supporter
beachgardener's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,005
QuoteOriginally posted by pathdoc Quote
Question: Is there enough space in the camera for all of this once the film transport equipment has been stripped out? If not, how big do you need to go? Is a P3 body big enough? SV? Or do you need a full-size Spotmatic or K-series shell? Leica have shown that people WILL buy a digital camera that does not have a rear screen. The issue is how much you are prepared to do without. For some people, not only post-shot review but also AF and IBIS are negotiable. Because the less you ask of that camera, besides writing a .DNG file to a card when the sensor is exposed, the less power you need and the smaller the battery compartment has to be, especially if the battery does not have to move the shutter or the mirror, power an AF module or turn a screwdrive motor. I think Ricoh should seriously consider putting a couple of junior designers onto an MX-D or SV-D proof-of-concept project, if for no other reason than to see if it is physically feasible and to give them design experience in making engineering compromises
K-mount, manual, no video, no screen, minimum controls would suit me fine for a digital camera, long battery time, whether retro looking or not, use older manual lenses and/or a new selection of fast manual primes
09-21-2016, 04:36 PM   #210
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,997
Meh. After all this, K-1 trumps everything for me. I realize this is quite a change - I'll probably sell most of my retro retro cameras except the real collectible shelf queens and just keep the lenses. I can operate K-1 completely manually as long as the lens has an aperture ring; who says I have to touch the video button ever? I haven't used it yet . . . .

Unless a new retro-looking camera can produce a better image file, what's the point?
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!
adapter, aps-c, bunch, camera, comment, company, doubt, evf, fa, ff, ff and apsc, flange, fuji, k1, lens, lenses, line, mirrorless, money, nx, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, ricoh, rumors, samsung, sensor, sensors
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New Day New Rumor FF Slide (no rice) D1N0 Pentax News and Rumors 129 10-18-2015 06:15 AM
Rumor: Pentax FF new Limited lenses coming soon? Stavri Pentax News and Rumors 253 09-27-2015 10:40 AM
Top 5 lens pick for a Pentax APSC and FF shooter AtitG Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 36 03-02-2015 12:20 PM
Pentax FF Mirrorless Rumor Winder Pentax Full Frame 37 05-04-2013 11:01 PM
After Nikon D600 rumor, Canon entry level FF camera rumor ... LFLee Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 17 05-16-2012 08:41 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:33 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