Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-29-2019, 10:17 PM - 1 Like   #16
Pentaxian
Zygonyx's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Ile de France
Posts: 3,298
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
Adding a periscope on top would be nice.
And usefull if combined with a submersible box.

05-30-2019, 12:04 AM   #17
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 11,621
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
You don't have to go to another forum for that suggestion. It has been suggested numerous times on this one by several people. The first one a decade ago at least.
I suggested many years ago that this was a way to make a mirrorless Pentax without discarding the OVF, but as an option; with a EVF on the camera the mirror stays in the up-position transforming the camera for all practical purposes into a mirrorless.
Right; we remember the LX and various people thought of applying the interchangeable viewfinder concept to a digital camera - and EVFs.

As always, there are tradeoffs:
- the affordable camera would be more complex than a fixed viewfinder one.
- with the EVF on, it would make a poor mirrorless - larger than necessary.
But actually what makes me unsure about this idea, is that unlike with the LX a DSLR's pentaprism housing contains much more than a viewfinder system - the metering system being most essential (but there are also some ancillary components like the GPS antenna). At least some solutions, like a waist level finders, won't work because of that; and optical viewfinders would have to include each its own metering system.
The LX managed because of its OTF metering.

This being said, I'm not particularly against this; even though I wouldn't buy the EVF.
Two viewfinders on the camera, now that's something I'd definitely avoid.
05-30-2019, 01:09 AM   #18
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 10,051
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
- the affordable camera would be more complex than a fixed viewfinder one.
It wouldn't be more complex to the customer and the increased cost of producing it (compared to a traditional one) should be amortised by reusing the same body across all camera variations.

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
- with the EVF on, it would make a poor mirrorless - larger than necessary.
MILCS are getting larger and in many cases the small mirrobox advantage they have is negated by the same space being transferred to the lens (cf. Sigma using the same optical designs for DSRLs and MILCs). Having the equivalent of a mirrorbox in the lens is worse when you start carrying multiple of these lenses around. In any event, most modern lenses are so big and heavy that the small reduction of depth by omitting a mirrorbox isn't really making much of a difference.

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
unlike with the LX a DSLR's pentaprism housing contains much more than a viewfinder system - the metering system being most essential (but there are also some ancillary components like the GPS antenna).
The GPS antenna could be placed elsewhere or could just be integrated in each viewfinder alternative (except perhaps in the most basic one).

Same for the metering system. Where is the problem in integrating the metering system in each viewfinder? On the contrary, this distribution of hardware components would mean that a basic viewfinder could come with a basic metering chip while the more capable ones (enabling eye-AF, etc.) would be reserved to the high-end and more expensive viewfinder models.
05-30-2019, 02:33 AM   #19
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 11,621
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
It wouldn't be more complex to the customer and the increased cost of producing it (compared to a traditional one) should be amortised by reusing the same body across all camera variations.
Of course it would. A sliding/locking mechanism, contacts for power and electronic communication, weather sealing - things would be more complex.
It might be feasible in a FF DSLR or high-end APS-C; I'm not saying it can't work.

QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
The GPS antenna could be placed elsewhere or could just be integrated in each viewfinder alternative (except perhaps in the most basic one).

Same for the metering system. Where is the problem in integrating the metering system in each viewfinder? On the contrary, this distribution of hardware components would mean that a basic viewfinder could come with a basic metering chip while the more capable ones (enabling eye-AF, etc.) would be reserved to the high-end and more expensive viewfinder models.
Cost.
If the viewfinder accessory is too pricey, few would buy it.

05-30-2019, 03:30 AM   #20
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,478
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
If the viewfinder accessory is too pricey, few would buy it.
Very often, it's the available accessories that make people buy the camera even if they never buy the accessories, it's like for lenses, many people complain about lack of lenses but do not buy any when they are released.

---------- Post added 30-05-19 at 12:35 ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
camera without compromise?
It's a camera with infinite mega pixels, depth of field programmable with a dial (without changing the lens aperture), unlimited dynamic range, unlimited burst rate, perfect autofocus, not too big for people with small hands, not too small for people with large hands, and very cheap.

Last edited by biz-engineer; 05-30-2019 at 03:36 AM.
05-30-2019, 03:43 AM - 1 Like   #21
Moderator
Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
MarkJerling's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: Wairarapa, New Zealand
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,908
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
Very often, it's the available accessories that make people buy the camera even if they never buy the accessories, it's like for lenses, many people complain about lack of lenses but do not buy any when they are released.

It's a camera with infinite mega pixels, depth of field programmable with a dial (without changing the lens aperture), unlimited dynamic range, unlimited burst rate, perfect autofocus, not too big for people with small hands, not too small for people with large hands, and very cheap.
You forgot to add: "And 8K Video."
05-30-2019, 04:06 AM - 3 Likes   #22
Pentaxian
deus ursus's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Stårheim, Norway
Posts: 418
QuoteOriginally posted by MarkJerling Quote
You forgot to add: "And 8K Video."
I agree if you lay down that '8'. ;-)
05-30-2019, 05:54 AM   #23
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,397
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote

As always, there are tradeoffs:
- the affordable camera would be more complex than a fixed viewfinder one.
- with the EVF on, it would make a poor mirrorless - larger than necessary.
But actually what makes me unsure about this idea, is that unlike with the LX a DSLR's pentaprism housing contains much more than a viewfinder system - the metering system being most essential (but there are also some ancillary components like the GPS antenna). At least some solutions, like a waist level finders, won't work because of that; and optical viewfinders would have to include each its own metering system.
The LX managed because of its OTF metering..


True. It might be cheaper to make a hybrid viewfinder provided such a concept is technically feasible...

05-30-2019, 06:20 AM   #24
Pentaxian
mecrox's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,359
It's an intriguing idea but I wonder who would buy it or whether there'd be enough interested Pentax-owners to make it feasible? I suppose this would be selling customers on from the K1 level to the next and newest level, a kind of K1 Mark III with a newer sensor et al inside it too. Presumably Ricoh would do some market research first.
05-30-2019, 07:47 AM - 3 Likes   #25
Pentaxian
photoptimist's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,363
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
In the past I suggested that Ricoh could make a camera with dual VF: one OVF in the center, and one EVF in the corner, so that the user can use both eyes, some kind of stereo VF. The user wouldn't even have the change the view finder, he would be able to switch between the two different view finder tech with the blink of an eye.
Love it!

And Pentax makes really nice binoculars - the back end of the camera could use the eyepeices from those binoculars.

I've often thought that a binocular-shaped camera body that is held more like binoculars with straight wrists and both hands supporting the body and lens would be more ergonomic than the traditional DSLR/MILC design which forces the right wrist to bend nearly 90° to hold the grip. It's amusing that after 2 decades of digital cameras, camera bodies still use the same shape that was dictated by the geometry of the 35mm film cartridge system.

Why are digital cameras still shaped like film cameras?????
05-30-2019, 08:12 AM - 1 Like   #26
On Hiatus. Back Later.
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Flyover Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 24,427
The diopter adjustment(s) and eye separation mechanics would be interesting. I recall the earliest digital cameras were essentially a box with a rear porthole and a 3.5” floppy disk slot.
QuoteOriginally posted by photoptimist Quote
Love it!

And Pentax makes really nice binoculars - the back end of the camera could use the eyepeices from those binoculars.

I've often thought that a binocular-shaped camera body that is held more like binoculars with straight wrists and both hands supporting the body and lens would be more ergonomic than the traditional DSLR/MILC design which forces the right wrist to bend nearly 90° to hold the grip. It's amusing that after 2 decades of digital cameras, camera bodies still use the same shape that was dictated by the geometry of the 35mm film cartridge system.

Why are digital cameras still shaped like film cameras?????
05-30-2019, 08:17 AM - 1 Like   #27
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 11,621
I don't think looking with one eye through an OVF and with another through an EVF would be comfortable, or practical.
05-30-2019, 10:17 AM - 2 Likes   #28
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 186
QuoteOriginally posted by photoptimist Quote
Love it!

And Pentax makes really nice binoculars - the back end of the camera could use the eyepeices from those binoculars.

I've often thought that a binocular-shaped camera body that is held more like binoculars with straight wrists and both hands supporting the body and lens would be more ergonomic than the traditional DSLR/MILC design which forces the right wrist to bend nearly 90° to hold the grip. It's amusing that after 2 decades of digital cameras, camera bodies still use the same shape that was dictated by the geometry of the 35mm film cartridge system.

Why are digital cameras still shaped like film cameras?????
There was a super 8mm camera like that:Kodak XL 55 - Super8wiki

Imagine that shape of camera with the DFA 150-450 hanging off the front... ...not sure ergonomic is the word to use.

;-)
Attached Images
 
05-30-2019, 10:42 AM - 1 Like   #29
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2015
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,121
QuoteOriginally posted by photoptimist Quote

Why are digital cameras still shaped like film cameras?????
Like the Canon Photura?
PHOTURA - Canon Camera Museum

I also own a dial 35 half-frame that is unique, ergonomically speaking...

-Eric
05-30-2019, 12:13 PM - 1 Like   #30
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,625
OptioMX was shaped as such as well.
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!
accessories, af, camera, cd, electronic viewfinder, hands, hybrid viewfinder, lenses, milc, milcs, mirrorless, optical viewfinder, ovf, patent, pentax news, pentax rumors, people, ricoh
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
16-50 gross AF inaccuracy in PDAF - only in some AF points? rrstuff Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 9 11-19-2016 11:29 AM
Ricoh Patent: IR sensors to improve AF accuracy JPT Pentax News and Rumors 96 02-04-2016 08:54 AM
Ricoh patent: Sensor AF using subpixel pattern JPT Pentax News and Rumors 7 12-30-2015 10:53 AM
Sony PDAF Patent Winder Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 7 09-24-2015 11:16 AM
Comparing PDAF & CDAF and other AF stuff dosdan General Photography 4 04-27-2015 06:17 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:03 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