[thibs]

I would favour the MZ-1, which is from the same period and has shared the same destiny.

I'd sell a kidney for one.

[thibs]

I'm certain it would not.
The K-1 body works amazingly well. It makes no sense to go back to the early franken-camera designs (film camera adapted for digital).

Agreed. I'd still buy it though

[thibs]

That body is way, way too large for me.
My Super Program {left side of my signature photo} remains the camera I measure all others against.

In the context of those years, the size is normal. Of course now, it's quite large. And I totally agree, a grip allows everybody to be happy. Most serious dslrs cams at the time were this size though...

[RGlasel]

you could equally make that claim about people and virtually anything they make .... but this is not a philosophy forum.

But I think how we go about taking photographs is an appropriate thing to discuss here. Photography was invented as a permanent way of recording what our eyes can see and all of our discussions about gear and technique revolve around taking photographs suitable for viewing at a later time that doesn't have an expiry date. That's why photo albums were invented and why we put so much effort into taking better pictures.

For all the attention given to the quality of smartphone cameras, taking a photograph with a cellphone isn't much different than writing something down on a napkin or on the back of your hand. (For me, that's the only reason I take pictures with my phone, because I can't draw and I'm too lazy to write) Even though Polaroid photos had a limited lifespan and you couldn't make reprints, their expiry date was far enough in the future that people didn't immediately throw all of them away. Typically, they went into a storage container of some sort to be forgotten and eventually thrown out, but there was still an expectation that if you wanted to, you could still retrieve one of them six months later.

[solitudebound]

Pentax K-3 Warpdigivolve To!.... MEGA K4 ! ... Mega K4 Burstmode! 40fps RAW pixelshift hand held laser and lidar guided AF.

Relax it's just a silly parody. This place could use a little levity.

[reh321]

But I think how we go about taking photographs is an appropriate thing to discuss here. Photography was invented as a permanent way of recording what our eyes can see and all of our discussions about gear and technique revolve around taking photographs suitable for viewing at a later time that doesn't have an expiry date. That's why photo albums were invented and why we put so much effort into taking better pictures.

certainly

For all the attention given to the quality of smartphone cameras, taking a photograph with a cellphone isn't much different than writing something down on a napkin or on the back of your hand. (For me, that's the only reason I take pictures with my phone, because I can't draw and I'm too lazy to write) Even though Polaroid photos had a limited lifespan and you couldn't make reprints, their expiry date was far enough in the future that people didn't immediately throw all of them away. Typically, they went into a storage container of some sort to be forgotten and eventually thrown out, but there was still an expectation that if you wanted to, you could still retrieve one of them six months later.

People sometimes make the comparison between cell phones and 'instant film', but personally I don't believe that comparison works very well - personally I believe that a cell phone camera is more like an Instamatic. For years I had some kind of Instamatic .... in 1976 I even purchased a 110 Instamatic (*) that I carried everywhere with me for five years until I purchased an Olympus 'clamshell' camera. I did keep the negatives, some of which I scanned as part of my nine-year 'turn everything into digital' project'. I have no idea what my daughters will do with my photography, but I have documented everything as well as I can, and they get to decide, just as they get to decide what to do with the sculpture in wax I made in the 8th grade and was at my mother's bedside until the day she died. My father-in-law had kept a New York Times from the day my wife was born, but we recycled it because of the way it was deteriorating, and each generation will make decisions like that - because of space if nothing else - but digital photographs have the possibility of lasting many years because they take up very little space and have the potential of being continually renewed.

(*) Yes, 110 film photos are worse than 35mm film photos, but 35mm film photos are 'worse than' what is produced by almost any modern digital camera. My photography is motivated by an understanding that my world is constantly changing, so I "photograph today before tomorrow comes and everything changes", and I don't have a 'way back' machine.

[Larrymc]

it's not sad, it's just the easiest way for pentax users to get the shot using modern technology.

Well get used to it.

[biz-engineer]

The physical size of the AF sensor unit does in no way relate to AF speed. The latter is a question of processing speed.

Are you sure of that? Let's ask ourselves some question about the timings of sections of the servo signal chain.

- How much is the integration time from the phase detect sensing (analog) behind the collimator? [unit = ms]
- How much is the conversion time of the analog signal to digital? [unit = us or ms]
- How long does processing time from CPU takes before it can send actuation command to the lens motor driver? [unit = us, (a few hundred operation @ 200MIPS)]
- What is the slowest of those time values in the complete loop?

For reference see the three F2.8 horizontal line sensors here: https://us.ricoh-imaging.com/images/k1-landing-page/K1-AF-Sensor.jpg

Since my job is EE (member of IEEE), I usually don't rely on marketing flyer for engineering works, because the content of marketing flyers is usually stripped from detailed content so that it's understandable by broad audience.

[Breakfastographer]

In one photo, there is what appears to be one 11-18 sample attached to a K1. This lens seens bigger than I thought for one DA lens.

DC motor, f/2.8 and then there's the filter thread making the front look huge.


---------- Post added 12-19-18 at 04:23 AM ----------

Contax N - right name. It was not bad sensor for 2000 year.
Contax N Digital Review - Luminous Landscape

Yes, ISO400 was no good, but first users of Contax N Digital liked this camera. It was made like camera under film tradition,
it had ISO25 and 50. [...]

But were those sensitivities even planned for the Pentax?

[sungibr]

I'm certain it would not.
The K-1 body works amazingly well. It makes no sense to go back to the early franken-camera designs (film camera adapted for digital).

Agreed with your point on franken-cameras, but I can see some design similarities between the MZ-1 and KP.


Remove the flash, put some retro design dials and ban!, we will end up with something like the MZ-1.


I think manny would buy it.

---------- Post added 12-19-18 at 10:57 AM ----------

DC motor, f/2.8 and then there's the filter thread making the front look huge.

hum...you seems right.

And, pulling by the memory, I had the Tamrom 10-24, and that lens wasn't all that small also...

[Mistral75]

(...)
But were those sensitivities even planned for the Pentax?

Most probably so since (i) the Contax N Digital and Pentax MR52 / MZ-D / K-1 shared the same Philips sensor (FTF3020-C) and (ii) at that time, the Bayer filter array came with the sensor (the IR filter did not but its impact of the ISO sensitivity is marginal)..

Philips - datasheet pdf

[Not a Number]

Are you sure of that? Let's ask ourselves some question about the timings of sections of the servo signal chain.

- How much is the integration time from the phase detect sensing (analog) behind the collimator? [unit = ms]
- How much is the conversion time of the analog signal to digital? [unit = us or ms]
- How long does processing time from CPU takes before it can send actuation command to the lens motor driver? [unit = us, (a few hundred operation @ 200MIPS)]
- What is the slowest of those time values in the complete loop?


Since my job is EE (member of IEEE), I usually don't rely on marketing flyer for engineering works, because the content of marketing flyers is usually stripped from detailed content so that it's understandable by broad audience.

Even simpler. Larger sensor = larger lenses = more mass to move = more inertia = more time to overcome the inertia

[biz-engineer]

Even simpler. Larger sensor = larger lenses = more mass to move = more inertia = more time to overcome the inertia

Really? On the larger sensor, for same integration time, there is less noise => more precision, or alternatively so the same precision less time is needed, hence faster detection of phase difference on the larger AF sensor.

[Pentaxke]

Contax N - right name. It was not bad sensor for 2000 year.
Contax N Digital Review - Luminous Landscape

Yes, ISO400 was no good, but first users of Contax N Digital liked this camera. It was made like camera under film tradition,
it had ISO25 and 50.

Pentax hadn't released MZ-D because of economic and marketing reasons. Not IQ. The sensor was too expensive and the camera too.

Kyocera photo division was died very quick after Contax N release.

You have to get your facts right.
The Contax N was a disaster, plain and simple. Batteries drained like there was no tomorrow, the digital side had quirks and (the most important reason) IQ was miserable: ISO 100 was usable at best, anything higher was drained in noise. It is quite telling that the Contax was never reviewed in the US (outside of LL), but Chasseurs d'Images reviewed it and gave it a delicious 1/5.

The sole reason that Pentax didn't release the MZ-D (although development was in a very far stage, maybe ready for release) was they felt that the Philips sensor couldn't deliver the goods (and Pentax couldn't remedy it.)

If you want to read more:
1N-Digital Non Review - Luminous Landscape

[reh321]

First real rumor in months, with little news, but at least some signs of life.

Back to the subject of this thread - we should be getting some real news in another month or so.
Then we can talk about the future instead of reminiscing about the past.