Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-10-2008, 11:36 PM   #31
Pentaxian
Asahiflex's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Netherlands
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,754
QuoteOriginally posted by RiceHigh Quote
Actually, if Pentax could have the eagle eye you have, they hadn't wasted so much time and money for the 645D project and yet still needed to shelf the project.
For all we know, Pentax *may not* have shelved the 645D project. It could be a special tactic from Hoya to be able to secretly finish the product and then suddenly *pop* it on the market, ready and finished, surprising friend and foe.

QuoteQuote:
If they made a 135 FF earlier (and not abandoned the film lens line), now that the market leader could have included Pentax, not only Canon and Nikon!
I think Pentax would have been dead by now if they continued with the MZ-D. That model would be very expensive to make, and not generate much interest on the market. IMHO Pentax made the right decision to discard the MZ-D.

And about the lenses... You are of course aware of the fact that a number of film lenses are still being produced. For instance the FA Limiteds and the FA* 600 (made on order). I have no problems with Pentax's current line-up. They only need a few more lenses to be ready for the full frame era

I believe in Pentax. They are still alive and kicking in this very competitive market, so they must be doing something right. (Although I have yet to see you admit that).

09-10-2008, 11:44 PM   #32
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,934
QuoteOriginally posted by Asahiflex Quote
For all we know, Pentax *may not* have shelved the 645D project. It could be a special tactic from Hoya to be able to secretly finish the product and then suddenly *pop* it on the market, ready and finished, surprising friend and foe.
What surprise? There is simply no market in that segment. For studio super pixel count, pro studio photographers will use MF digital back. For better mobiliity and some light studio works, many of them just use the 135 FFs.

QuoteQuote:
I think Pentax would have been dead by now if they continued with the MZ-D. That model would be very expensive to make, and not generate much interest on the market. IMHO Pentax made the right decision to discard the MZ-D.
Well, I think KingPOW and me are not talking about the MZ-D which used the junk Philips sensor which Contax used. We are talking about to use the 645D Kodak sensor(s) in a 135 Pentax Full Frame!

Note that the 645D is a cropped DSLR, NOT a 645 Full Frame!
09-11-2008, 12:00 AM   #33
Pentaxian
Asahiflex's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Netherlands
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,754
QuoteOriginally posted by RiceHigh Quote
What surprise? There is simply no market in that segment. For studio super pixel count, pro studio photographers will use MF digital back. For better mobiliity and some light studio works, many of them just use the 135 FFs.

Well, I think KingPOW and me are not talking about the MZ-D which used the junk Philips sensor which Contax used. We are talking about to use the 645D Kodak sensor(s) in a 135 Pentax Full Frame!

Note that the 645D is a cropped DSLR, NOT a 645 Full Frame!
Whether there's no market for a 645D remains to be seen. For all we know it could have an updated sensor in made in collaboration with Samsung. I think it was shelved for the time being because they wanted to wait for Samsung's sensor.

Let's see what happens on the Photokina. I'll be there from day one. I plan to ask Pentax's officials (who will be there, no doubt) about that particular model.
09-11-2008, 12:15 AM   #34
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Verona, Italy
Posts: 202
QuoteOriginally posted by RiceHigh Quote
Actually, if Pentax could have the eagle eye you have, they hadn't wasted so much time and money for the 645D project and yet still needed to shelf the project.

If they made a 135 FF earlier (and not abandoned the film lens line), now that the market leader could have included Pentax, not only Canon and Nikon!
- Contax: They did it, they failed.
- Kodak: They did it, they failed.
- Leica: they [almost] did it, they [almost] failed.
- Minolta: they only tought about doing it: they failed.

If MZ-D wasn't scrapped Pentax would surely be in this list

09-11-2008, 12:19 AM   #35
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,229
QuoteOriginally posted by KungPOW Quote
I think there is a far better chance we will see a 135 format DSLR that has a dedicated adaptor for 645 lenses, then we will see the 645D.

As I understand it, the 645D was to use a sensor that is 24mm x 36mm. So why drop it into a 645 sized body? Why not put the 645D's sensor, cpu etc into an SLR sized body, and it is the Pentax Full Frame camera. Add the adaptor for the 645 lenses, and you now cover both markets. Full Frame people, and 645D people.

Is there a reason that I am missing that the body needs to be sized and shaped like the 645? Can an adaptor not allow all the 645 lenses to be used?
No, the sensor was 48x36, two times an 'FF' sensor. And probably ten times more expensive ...
09-11-2008, 12:57 AM   #36
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,934
QuoteOriginally posted by thibs Quote
No, the sensor was 48x36, two times an 'FF' sensor. And probably ten times more expensive ...
There were many choices for the sensor size to be chosen from, not necessary to adopt the largest sensor:

The old datasheet link which is now death:

http://www.kodak.com/global/plugins/acrobat/en/digital/ccd/products/fullfram...00LongSpec.pdf

If it is still there, you can see that the sensor which was originally planned to be used in the 645D years ago, and, another smaller sensor that can be fit in the 135 DSLR but larger than APS-C (around 1.24X IIRC).
09-11-2008, 01:27 AM   #37
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,229
No and no again RH, the first sensor supposedly used was 18Mpix (not on their website anymore) but same size as the one they picked later (31Mpix):
Kodak Image Sensor Solutions - KAF-31600

"Total chip size is 46.05 mm x 35.0 mm" which is roughly two time 24x36.
09-11-2008, 02:25 AM   #38
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,934
QuoteOriginally posted by thibs Quote
No and no again RH, the first sensor supposedly used was 18Mpix (not on their website anymore) but same size as the one they picked later (31Mpix):
Kodak Image Sensor Solutions - KAF-31600

"Total chip size is 46.05 mm x 35.0 mm" which is roughly two time 24x36.
But in the *same family*, Pentax can get from Kodak a "smaller" sensor that fit, that's just what I want to point out.

09-11-2008, 02:52 AM   #39
Senior Member




Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Amsterdam
Posts: 190
Yes that's true

But agian the question, why did PENTAX USA, put those very bad 'sample' images online ?
Those are 1. Unsharp. 2. Noisy. 3. Bad Focussed.

I can't get it...this is not how you as a company show you're new products to the public.
09-11-2008, 03:26 AM   #40
Inactive Account




Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Romania
Posts: 26
QuoteOriginally posted by Priyantha Bleeker Quote
Yes that's true

But agian the question, why did PENTAX USA, put those very bad 'sample' images online ?
Those are 1. Unsharp. 2. Noisy. 3. Bad Focussed.

I can't get it...this is not how you as a company show you're new products to the public.
It's my first post here, soon I'll have my Pentax gear, coming from Fuji 6500 bridge.
- I think focus is fine, but picture 2 has horizontal and 3 vertical movement handhelded, look at pillars and childrens arms and straws respectively; they have double margins on one direction, but you have a point here Priyantha Bleeker, they must have been more carefull at advertising quality.
09-11-2008, 03:33 AM   #41
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,229
QuoteOriginally posted by RiceHigh Quote
But in the *same family*, Pentax can get from Kodak a "smaller" sensor that fit, that's just what I want to point out.
Whatwould be the point to put an 24x36 sensor in a 645 body?
09-11-2008, 05:14 AM   #42
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,934
Yes and they are wrong once again!

QuoteOriginally posted by Priyantha Bleeker Quote
Yes that's true

But agian the question, why did PENTAX USA, put those very bad 'sample' images online ?
Those are 1. Unsharp. 2. Noisy. 3. Bad Focussed.

I can't get it...this is not how you as a company show you're new products to the public.
Two more problems: strange colour rendition and color cast.

I think the worst thing they have done is to post Photoshopped images without any EXIF to show to their potential customers their "full size" "samples"!(???)
09-11-2008, 05:16 AM   #43
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,934
Nope.

QuoteOriginally posted by thibs Quote
Whatwould be the point to put an 24x36 sensor in a 645 body?
Nope, not to put in a 645 body BUT to put it in a 135 body.

There is no point to put a 48 x 36 sensor into a 60 x 45 body neither. Its just another cropped factor DSLR, not FF (or not even close to) in 645, nor FF in 135!
09-11-2008, 05:30 AM   #44
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,128
QuoteOriginally posted by KungPOW Quote
As I understand it, the 645D was to use a sensor that is 24mm x 36mm.

You understand wrong....
09-11-2008, 05:31 AM   #45
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,128
QuoteOriginally posted by RiceHigh Quote
Actually, if Pentax could have the eagle eye you have, they hadn't wasted so much time and money for the 645D project and yet still needed to shelf the project.!


It isn't shelved, but frozen.....
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!
pentax news, pentax rumors
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K-x Sony Sensor vs K-7 Samsung Sensor karl79 Video and Pentax HDSLRs 9 09-23-2010 09:35 AM
A new K7 with the KX sensor? Please? Dubious Drewski Pentax DSLR Discussion 37 11-26-2009 08:43 AM
K-7 sensor vs K20d sensor Mystic Pentax News and Rumors 33 06-21-2009 03:01 AM
Sensor cleaning: Pec-Pads or Sensor Swabs gadgetnu Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 29 09-24-2007 10:52 AM
Sensor cleaning > Sensor Swab > void warranty? Twinky Pentax DSLR Discussion 2 07-28-2007 01:10 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:36 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