Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-06-2018, 12:24 AM - 1 Like   #1936
Pentaxian




Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Iloilo City
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,273
QuoteOriginally posted by RockvilleBob Quote
I really liked the OM system - had the OM-1 to OM-4 I also liked their lenses (for their time) and still have some lenses with mount adapters. I wish I had their original circular fisheye
If we've met during the film days I would be one of the people who would envy you. I used Canon AE-1s and the Nikon F2s during the film days. But how I envied the OM system. They were small and light. The system design and the lens were fantastic. If I had started with Olympus I would have stayed there till the film era ended. When I got back to photography my first digital DSLR was the E410 and then followed by the E30. Maybe if Olympus didn't kill the mount and improved the sensor I would've stayed with it.

I don't like to keep jumping from one system to another. It's too costly and having more than 1 system is difficult to maintain. Well maybe that's just me.

10-06-2018, 12:34 AM - 1 Like   #1937
Banned




Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 9,675
I think most weight loss can be achieved by making a new electric system inside of the camera. Pentax still uses old electronics in the way of wires and others things. Updating that would trim down the space needed and the weight it brings.
10-06-2018, 01:07 AM - 2 Likes   #1938
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Genf
Posts: 1,138
QuoteOriginally posted by H.Abendsen Quote
I really dont know, why you guys seem to have problems with the K-1's weight...? does anybody in here suffer from myatrophy... ? I dont think so, cause otherwise he would use a m43 system.

My Pentax 645N dwarfs my K-1 even when there is a prime mounted on the 645... I feel quite okay with the weight and how it balances against the DFA* 50mm 1.4 SDM AW.
Its only kinda exhausting if I take the 645 also with me in addition to the K-1.

I mean we stepped into pro-land with the Pentax K-1. Some of us even carry 2-3 cameras when shooting important events that pay off real good. So why moan about 200g plus or less.
I really dont get the point sorry.

I like the materials used and hope they keep it that way. Because i am 90% sure if they pick something else, they wouldnt pick the right material. Because the right material to replace the alloy, that would make it even more imperishable just would not look as good as one wants a camera to look like.
All of us dont have the same usage or strong back. I personnaly find K1 too big and too heavy, once you add FF compatible lens on it then it is even heavier in comparison with APSC set.
I am into macro and when you add tripod, head, ringflash sometimes, a 100 and a 200mm plus a body it is more than enough to carry... Saving 200g is important by definition.
10-06-2018, 01:37 AM   #1939
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 561
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
That was not my point.
As always, we're talking about a compromise - between build quality, weight and cost. You don't do thing just to spite your customers, you do to meet certain targets for the 3.

---------- Post added 06-10-18 at 01:55 AM ----------


Are you sure cars are getting lighter? A compact used to weight less than 1 ton, you know?

Are you sure the ultra light laptops are as sturdy as the old IBM Thinkpads?

Are you sure the weight reduction doesn't compromise build quality? Any tests to prove that?
Kudos to Sony for their ultra efficient design, but the original A7 was the first camera I've seen which required a 3rd-party reinforced mount. And the next A7 series increased in size and weight.
Yes, im absolutely positive they are looding weight. You have to consider the fact that compacts of yore are the size of subcompacts of today.
I had both the old thinkpad and new Al laptop and can say that the new one is faily better built.
Yes there are plenty of tests available online. Compare strength tests of kevlar and steel for example.

---------- Post added 10-06-18 at 10:44 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by H.Abendsen Quote
Shortly product should improve... and we are on the same side, when you say: It would make sense to use "kinda plastic" materials ... where it makes sense...
and where it doesnt leave back a bad impression of the product in its entirety.
Yep. Thats what im saying. There should be an evolution in camera design. They should be geting lighter by every new iteration not heavier.

10-06-2018, 04:34 AM   #1940
Pentaxian
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,126
QuoteOriginally posted by totsmuyco Quote
If we've met during the film days I would be one of the people who would envy you. I used Canon AE-1s and the Nikon F2s during the film days. But how I envied the OM system. They were small and light. The system design and the lens were fantastic. If I had started with Olympus I would have stayed there till the film era ended. When I got back to photography my first digital DSLR was the E410 and then followed by the E30. Maybe if Olympus didn't kill the mount and improved the sensor I would've stayed with it.

I don't like to keep jumping from one system to another. It's too costly and having more than 1 system is difficult to maintain. Well maybe that's just me.
When I had Pentax ME/SE, then Pentax Super Program, I didn't envy anyone. My camera was right size for me and took the right photo every time I aimed it at something and pressed shutter button.
10-06-2018, 05:06 AM   #1941
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 15,132
QuoteOriginally posted by Trickortreat Quote
Yes, im absolutely positive they are looding weight. You have to consider the fact that compacts of yore are the size of subcompacts of today.
You should first compare weights before being "absolutely positive".
Losing weight while increasing passive safety and loading more equipment is not an easy feat.

And in cameras, we can often see new models being heavier than the ones they replace. D850 vs. D810, for example; or the Sony A7 series which I've already mentioned. Canon's 5D series stays around the same weight (890g for the Mk IV). Olympus OMD series (1, 5, 10) increased in weight.

Ricoh Imaging might be forced to slightly increase the size and weight of their new APS-C flagship just to be able to include the desired performance features. Even for the D FA* 50mm f/1.4, they put great effort in keeping size and weight in control.
10-06-2018, 05:32 AM   #1942
Pentaxian
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,126
QuoteOriginally posted by Trickortreat Quote
Yes, im absolutely positive they are losing weight. You have to consider the fact that compacts of yore are the size of subcompacts of today.
This is a difficult, and largely pointless sub-discussion ..... largely for the reason you hint at, but are weak on the details of. My first car was a 1966 Dodge Dart, which was considered to be a 'compact' in its time, but would be a fairly large 'car' today {however, most vehicles sold in the U.S. today are 'trucks' of sorts unimagined back then}

10-06-2018, 06:35 AM   #1943
Veteran Member
RockvilleBob's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Lewes DE USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,780
QuoteOriginally posted by totsmuyco Quote
If we've met during the film days I would be one of the people who would envy you. I used Canon AE-1s and the Nikon F2s during the film days. But how I envied the OM system. They were small and light. The system design and the lens were fantastic. If I had started with Olympus I would have stayed there till the film era ended. When I got back to photography my first digital DSLR was the E410 and then followed by the E30. Maybe if Olympus didn't kill the mount and improved the sensor I would've stayed with it.

I don't like to keep jumping from one system to another. It's too costly and having more than 1 system is difficult to maintain. Well maybe that's just me.
Yeah, with better marking and customer focus in the 1970's and 80's I feel Olympus could be a large force in the camera business today.

Wow - you're within striking distance of Crater of the Moon (I have some gools panoramas for there), Yellowstone and Glacier - location envy I really enjoyed a day at Crater of the Moon.
I live in Lewes DE - lots of bird pictures

This is a tough time for changing horses. I feel mirrorless will dominate and SONY has a very big leg up. If they, along with SIGMA, come up with some solid 500/600 primes/zooms I may have to switch again. The SONY A9 just seems like a leader and my guess is that SONY, which replaces cameras quickly, already has a follow on close to ready.

I really enjoyed my years using Pentax.
10-06-2018, 07:11 AM - 3 Likes   #1944
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Oregon, USA
Posts: 521
QuoteOriginally posted by Trickortreat Quote
Dunno... but FF Nikon d750 managed to be lighter than K-3II by 50g.
QuoteOriginally posted by Trickortreat Quote
And even if we take a FF dslr - Nikon d750, it is lighter than K3.
QuoteOriginally posted by photoptimist Quote
Are you sure about the weight? Wikipedia has the D750 as 40 grams heavier than the K-3.
QuoteOriginally posted by Trickortreat Quote
Got my figures from Pentax and Nikon web sites.
QuoteOriginally posted by Trickortreat Quote
Pentax crop cameras weighting as much as d750.
QuoteOriginally posted by Trickortreat Quote
... Pentax should aim to make subsequent iterations ligher.
Like they did with the K-3 series? The K-3 II is lighter than the K-3.

Yes, Pentax cameras generally are heavier than other brands which lack IBIS and magnesium body shells.

No, the K-3 does not weigh more than a D750. No matter how many times you repeat it (and ignore another poster's reminder to check your facts). The K-3 II is 50g lighter (body only) than the D750, the K-3 is 35g lighter (body only). With battery and memory card, the differences are even greater: K-3 II is 55g lighter, and K-3 is 40g lighter than D750.

D750 from Nikon | Imaging Products | Nikon D750:
QuoteQuote:
Approx. 840 g/1 lb 13.7 oz with battery and memory card but without body cap; approx. 750 g/1 lb 10.5 oz (camera body only)
K-3 II from Specifications? PENTAX K-3 II | RICOH IMAGING:
/spec/
QuoteQuote:
Approx. 785g (Including dedicated battery and 1x SD Memory Card), Approx. 700g (body only)
K-3 from Specifications?K-3 | RICOH IMAGING:
QuoteQuote:
Approx. 800g (Including dedicated battery and 1x SD Memory Card), Approx. 715g (body only)
10-06-2018, 07:46 AM   #1945
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 561
QuoteOriginally posted by cfraz Quote
Like they did with the K-3 series? The K-3 II is lighter than the K-3.

Yes, Pentax cameras generally are heavier than other brands which lack IBIS and magnesium body shells.

No, the K-3 does not weigh more than a D750. No matter how many times you repeat it (and ignore another poster's reminder to check your facts). The K-3 II is 50g lighter (body only) than the D750, the K-3 is 35g lighter (body only). With battery and memory card, the differences are even greater: K-3 II is 55g lighter, and K-3 is 40g lighter than D750.

D750 from Nikon | Imaging Products | Nikon D750:


K-3 II from Specifications? PENTAX K-3 II | RICOH IMAGING:
/spec/


K-3 from Specifications?K-3 | RICOH IMAGING:
My bad. Didnt check all websites. There are some discrepancies between them it seems.
Anyway, 50g minus between iterations is good work if that is true. Two thumbs up.
10-06-2018, 09:56 AM - 2 Likes   #1946
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 561
Ok, now that weight is out the way is it to much to ask for next iteration to omit anything above ISO 12800 cause its pretty much useless and try to squeeze in native ISO 50?
10-06-2018, 10:13 AM - 1 Like   #1947
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 15,132
Not for you so not for anyone?
10-06-2018, 10:39 AM   #1948
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 561
Dunno. Just think ISO 50 is more useful to average Pentaxian.
10-06-2018, 10:45 AM - 1 Like   #1949
Pentaxian
photoptimist's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,113
QuoteOriginally posted by Trickortreat Quote
Ok, now that weight is out the way is it to much to ask for next iteration to omit anything above ISO 12800 cause its pretty much useless and try to squeeze in native ISO 50?
Some of us would rather go the other way. I'd prefer to they get rid of ISO 100 if it meant being able to get a more usable ISO 25600. I can always simulate ISO 50 (or ISO 0.1) with an ND filter. But there's no inverse ND filter that boosts the light.

Anyway, all of this is not really under the control of Pentax. It's mostly in the hands of Sony because it's defined by the physics of silicon and semiconductors and how much light a silicon pixel can handle without saturation. What Pentax could do is copy what Phase One did with their Trichromatic. Phase One had Sony make a denser color filter for the Bayer array. The result is much more saturated colors but at a cost of one stop of sensitivity. Thus if a standard sensor does ISO 100 to 12800, the Trichromatic does 50 to 6400.
10-06-2018, 11:29 AM - 1 Like   #1950
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 561
QuoteOriginally posted by photoptimist Quote
Anyway, all of this is not really under the control of Pentax. It's mostly in the hands of Sony because it's defined by the physics of silicon and semiconductors and how much light a silicon pixel can handle without saturation. What Pentax could do is copy what Phase One did with their Trichromatic. Phase One had Sony make a denser color filter for the Bayer array. The result is much more saturated colors but at a cost of one stop of sensitivity. Thus if a standard sensor does ISO 100 to 12800, the Trichromatic does 50 to 6400.
I know. Just dreaming here
Closed Thread

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!
50mm, 85mm, adapter, angle, aps-c, battery, camera, camera list, canikon, depth, gap, k-3 ii, k-mount, k3, lens, lenses, list, mirrorless, mount, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, pool, products, ricoh, ricoh japan, size, wonder
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
DA 18-55 WR replacement on K-3 II CharLac Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 19 04-19-2018 08:29 AM
Pentax K3ii officially discontinued dcpropilot Pentax News and Rumors 509 03-05-2018 09:25 AM
K3ii replacement 36mp? amp Pentax DSLR Discussion 35 02-21-2017 10:17 PM
Successor to K3ii - care to guess when? Spodeworld Pentax K-3 & K-3 II 178 11-12-2016 01:57 PM
Replacement K3ii also under affected serial Numbers khilla Ask B&H Photo! 2 07-23-2015 11:12 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:52 PM. | 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