[ogl]

It is. Check the MTF curves, Ogl. It's got monstrous performance.

MTF? it's for film testing. Does it better than Zeiss?

[Kunzite]

MTF? it's for film testing

What???
Introduction to Modulation Transfer Function | Edmund Optics

[ogl]

Yes, it is monstrous alright - I'm not sure there is room in my camera bag for it - certainly not in my budget.

Yes, edge-to-edge sharpness is how we rate lenses today. In the past, when the Takumar 50mm f/1.4 reigned supreme, people were more interested in center micro-contrast, color rendition, and other factors. I don't know what people will focus on tomorrow.

Yes...I saw PF"s review of DFA*50/1.4 (and many others) - is it sharp lens? Yes...Is it anything special or interesting? I can hardly say yes...
Special bokeh? As for me, FA50/1.4 has more interesting bokeh...

[biz-engineer]

Think more of 2020 then this year.....

Depends if the 70-200 f4 is from Tamron or not. If the 70-200 is a RI design, chances are they won't be able to make the 85 at the same time. But , if the 70-200 is the Tamron, then you may see the 85 this year.

---------- Post added 04-01-19 at 17:29 ----------

As for me, FA50/1.4 has more interesting bokeh...

For me, the FA50 1.4 has a more interesting price. But the pixels are sharper on the DFA*50. The K1 II accelerator will round the pixel corners so that photographer don't cut their eyes when opening up the raw files.

[Winder]

Firstly, happy new year to everyone.

The January edition of Nippon Camera magazine came out on December 20 and it has an interview with Ricoh Pentax about their plans for 2019. I’ve been a bit busy over Christmas and New Year, so I haven’t had the time to write a summary until now. I hope it is useful.

Please remember when reading this that my Japanese reading is fairly good these days but not perfect. It’s especially difficult to interpret how definite things are and when technical matters are discussed. Having said that, I’m pretty sure I’ve understood most of this.

Anything in brackets is my added comment.

————

About their direction for 2019
They’re not the kind of company that can come out with large numbers of cameras. They plan to continue prioritizing cameras and the photographic process with customers in mind. The first topic for 2019 will be the all new GR III.

Quite a lot of the interview was about the GR III, and I’ll just refer you to the thread in the GR III, where I already posted about this. Post #499 of the following thread.
Ricoh GR III - Page 34 - PentaxForums.com

Pentax centenary
- It’s actually the centenary of the optical company that was the precursor to Pentax that celebrates it’s centenary this year.
- The actual date is in November
- They are considering how to celebrate the event, but cannot share details yet.
- They don’t think that merely putting a 100-year logo on products is what their customers are hoping for. (The implication is they will do something more)

About Q and 645
- Q has been highly valued for it’s compact size by core users. They are looking at the situation with the Q, and it is not accurate to say development in discontinued. (I think this should be taken with a pinch of salt, because in Japan, Q bodies are only available from Ricoh direct, some shops list the lenses as “production ended”, and that macro disappeared from the roadmap)
- Regarding 645, the next model is currently being considered. 645 is a very important product to the company and they are not stopping the line. (Resolute answer)

Lenses
- The interviewer mentioned that 645 users are worried about the lack of new lenses. They have not stopped development. However, for now their priority is for FF K-mount lenses.
- They have a lot of demands from full frame users, especially for lightweight tele zooms.
- They 85mm on the roadmap has been put back, but it is still coming (the strong implication is that prioritizing the tele zooms pushed back the 85mm).
- The DA* 11-18 is in the final stages of development. They expect to make an announcement before CP+.
- They are also planning a “surprise” for next year. (I take this to mean a lens not on the roadmap, because of the context of the comment)

About FF/MF mirrorless
- They expressed respect for the competing FF mirrorless systems, saying that they have many good points.
- However, they are more interested in serving their customers than following trends. They will listen to user requirements, not be swayed. (This was difficult to understand, but I think this means they are going to stick to their judgement, rather than caving in to peer pressure)
- They seem positive about Fuji’s entry into the MF market, because they think it will draw more attention to the MF market.

The K-1 upgrade
- They are proud of their achievement in clearing the logistical hurdles to making this possible.
- The reaction has been positive.
- (I can’t understand what they say about noise reduction, but it seems that they are aware that opinion is divided on the approach to noise reduction in the K-1 mark II)

The SDK
- They haven’t seen much development yet, but the reaction was greater than expected. They are currently gathering information. and looking forward to what users do with it.

———————

Any discussion of future K-mount cameras was notably absent. The interview script did not have any question about it, neither were there any comments in answers to other questions. I think this topic must be understood to be off limits for the interview, so I would not read anything into it.

Thanks for the update.

Sad to hear the D-FA* 85mm has been pushed back, but delays seem to be the norm for Ricoh lens production. I guess this means the D-FA* 35mm will also be delayed. Maybe 2020 will be the year lens.... or was that last year?

[ogl]

What???
Introduction to Modulation Transfer Function | Edmund Optics

Modulation Transfer Function is for film testing, new digital time just uses old term. The modern testing like IMATEST and old MTF testing are different methods, because of different light receiver. You had read the article and understand nothing?

A practical way of understanding line-pairs is to think of them as pixels on a camera sensor, where a single line-pair corresponds to two pixels (Figure 2). Two camera sensor pixels are needed for each line-pair of resolution: one pixel is dedicated to the red line and the other to the blank space between pixels. Using the aforementioned metaphor, image resolution of the camera can now be specified as equal to twice its pixel size.

It's just rough try of comparison and explanation for modern people. it's metaphor

NO pair of lines in sensors.

[Kunzite]

I believe the push back is the one which happened last year - when the D FA 70-200 f/4 appeared on the public roadmap.
Don't panic... yet. We'll have an update end of February.

Depends if the 70-200 f4 is from Tamron or not. If the 70-200 is a RI design, chances are they won't be able to make the 85 at the same time. But , if the 70-200 is the Tamron, then you may see the 85 this year.

You probably mean Tokina, as Tamron doesn't have a 70-200 f/4.
According to the still current roadmap, 3 lenses are scheduled for 2019:
- D FA 70-200 f/4 (for Spring, so it's quite certain)
- DA* 11-18mm f/2.8
- D FA* 85mm f/1.4
The others are "2019 or later".

---------- Post added 04-01-19 at 06:47 PM ----------

Modulation Transfer Function is for film testing, new digital time just uses old term. The modern testing like IMATEST and old MTF testing are different methods, because of different light receiver. You had read the article and understand nothing?

A practical way of understanding line-pairs is to think of them as pixels on a camera sensor, where a single line-pair corresponds to two pixels (Figure 2). Two camera sensor pixels are needed for each line-pair of resolution: one pixel is dedicated to the red line and the other to the blank space between pixels. Using the aforementioned metaphor, image resolution of the camera can now be specified as equal to twice its pixel size.

It's just rough try of comparison and explanation for modern people. it's metaphor

NO pair of lines in sensors.

It would be nice if you would tune down your claims. Noise won't pass for knowledge.

Why are you even quoting a metaphor?

By the way, film doesn't have line pairs either. And lenses can be measured on optical benches; using cameras is just a shortcut.

[Trickortreat]

By the way, film doesn't have line pairs either. And lenses can be measured on optical benches; using cameras is just a shortcut.

Testing a lens on a cemera isnt a shortcut. It shows a lot more to an end user than a optical bench.
Heres a comparison - is testing an engine in a driving car to display co2 emission a shortcut to mesuring that emission from an engine in lab on a table?

[photoptimist]

Modulation Transfer Function is for film testing, new digital time just uses old term. The modern testing like IMATEST and old MTF testing are different methods, because of different light receiver. You had read the article and understand nothing?

A practical way of understanding line-pairs is to think of them as pixels on a camera sensor, where a single line-pair corresponds to two pixels (Figure 2). Two camera sensor pixels are needed for each line-pair of resolution: one pixel is dedicated to the red line and the other to the blank space between pixels. Using the aforementioned metaphor, image resolution of the camera can now be specified as equal to twice its pixel size.

It's just rough try of comparison and explanation for modern people. it's metaphor

NO pair of lines in sensors.

And there are no pairs of lines on film, either. You've entirely missed what MTF is about and the fact that it can be used to measure performance of any kind of signal transfer and measurement system (e.g., a lens and camera).

On both film and digital sensors, one can certainly image a scene that has pairs of dark and light lines of some spacing and judge whether one can resolve said pairs of lines in the film or digital image and then measure the dark-to-light amplitude of the image relative to the dark-to-light amplitude of the original scene. The MTF curve is simply the ratio of measured amplitude variation as a percentage of the true scene amplitude variation either done at some fixed line pair frequency and measured across the frame or measured at some point in the frame across a range of line frequencies.

It is true that the sensor grid and Bayer filter of a digital camera have some unusual effects on the simple measured MTF curve as the line pair frequency approaches and exceeds the Nyquist frequency, but even this can be compensated for to estimate the MTF of the lens.

[Kunzite]

Testing a lens on a cemera isnt a shortcut. It shows a lot more to an end user than a optical bench.
Heres a comparison - is testing an engine in a driving car to display co2 emission a shortcut to mesuring that emission from an engine in lab on a table?

It is a "shortcut" in the sense that it's easier (requires less specialized equipment)
It's also not as good as testing on an optical bench, if what you want to test is the lens and not the camera+lens combination.

"Lens" tests on the Internet are too often influenced by the camera used, and even different processing.

[reh321]

Testing a lens on a camera isnt a shortcut. It shows a lot more to an end user than a optical bench.
Heres a comparison - is testing an engine in a lab to display co2 emission a shortcut to comparing that emission from an engine in a driving car?

Actually it is a short-cut - also gives more consistent testing.

Lab allows tester to define environment exactly; not so much on real road, where various unexpected circumstances {like being 'cut off' by another driver} might randomly occur.

[Trickortreat]

It is a "shortcut" in the sense that it's easier (requires less specialized equipment)
It's also not as good as testing on an optical bench, if what you want to test is the lens and not the camera+lens combination.

"Lens" tests on the Internet are too often influenced by the camera used, and even different processing.

But that is how it needs to be tested. Testing a lens without a camera means a diddly squat.
Only by testing the complete system, camera+lens one can get the whole picture (photo)

[virusn3t]

Think more of 2020 then this year.....

More time to save for the lens i guess..... still, it may come faster than the Mirrorles FF Pentax camera

[Trickortreat]

Actually it is a short-cut - also gives more consistent testing.

Lab allows tester to define environment exactly; not so much on real road, where various unexpected circumstances {like being 'cut off' by another driver} might randomly occur.

Exactly. Real world experience. That is the only thing worth to the end user. Lab results can be indicative but also deceptive.

[Kunzite]

It's real world experience if you have exactly the camera tested.
Otherwise it isn't; and you cannot directly compare the results with those on any other camera.