'Be patient and wait' (Kimio Tanaka)

Kunzite · 10-20-2020, 12:03 AM

Originally posted by thibs

Not baseless, completely circumstancial though. As a rumor I mean, not as a fact.

What do you mean, not baseless? Do you have any sort of information, hint, anything that would point toward a Nikon-licensed AF? Does Mistral?
If not, it is baseless.

thibs · 10-20-2020, 12:41 AM - **1 Like**

It is not baseless (as a rumour I insist) : rumoured AF points being the same ballpark of Nikon's AF and Nikon introducing SR in their own MILC.
Both at mostly the same time, it is a strange coincidence, hence to be labelled as rumour. Nothing else.

It IS plausible.
That being said, such kind of things AFAICT has never happened before (that we know of). So I'd be a bit surprised. It would make sense though.

Kunzite · 10-20-2020, 02:12 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by thibs

It is not baseless (as a rumour I insist) : rumoured AF points being the same ballpark of Nikon's AF and Nikon introducing SR in their own MILC.
Both at mostly the same time, it is a strange coincidence, hence to be labelled as rumour. Nothing else.

It IS plausible.
That being said, such kind of things AFAICT has never happened before (that we know of). So I'd be a bit surprised. It would make sense though.

I disagree.

And it is not plausible, not with the information we have (which is basically nothing).
Rumored AF points being the same ballpark? You don't know that. Maybe the Pentax AF has 101 AF points, or 199, or 999 for that matter - they're all "more than 99".
Nikon is not the only one to introduce IBIS on their camera. And Pentax did develop quite a few AF systems on their own.

Now, if the K-new had a 153-points AF with a suspiciously familiar layout... that would be a basis for such a rumor!
But as things are, this is weaker than the "D FA* 85mm f/1.4 is just a rebadged Sigma!" thing.

Mistral75 · 10-20-2020, 02:19 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

(...)
But as things are, this is weaker than the "D FA* 85mm f/1.4 is just a rebadged Sigma!" thing.

'As things are', this cannot be weaker than something proven wrong (by different optical formulas, for instance).

Kunzite · 10-20-2020, 02:28 AM

Originally posted by Mistral75

'As things are', this cannot be weaker than something proven wrong (by different optical formulas, for instance).

That thing started before we knew the optical formula for the Pentax. Was it plausible back then?

Mistral75 · 10-20-2020, 02:32 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

That thing started before we knew the optical formula for the Pentax. Was it plausible back then?

]Moving the goalposts, aren't we?

**Serkevan** · 10-20-2020, 02:37 AM - **4 Likes**

I think what's plausible, possible and even probable is a good old thread lock

Kunzite · 10-20-2020, 02:47 AM

@Mistral75: Wrong. It's you who's trying to set the goalpost so my analogy wouldn't work.

The point is, both theories were launched before we knew any information which might've hinted towards or against said theory, and both were "supported" by a very weak argument: a vague resemblance for the lens, and a "more than 99" AF points for the camera.

Mistral75 · 10-20-2020, 02:59 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

@Mistral75: Wrong. It's you who's trying to set the goalpost so my analogy wouldn't work.

(...)

I'm afraid you set the goalposts when you wrote 'as things are, this is weaker than the "D FA* 85mm f/1.4 is just a rebadged Sigma!" thing' and not 'this is weaker than the "D FA* 85mm f/1.4 is just a rebadged Sigma!" thing was when the mock-up was showcased' or anything similar.

Let's say you initially didn't write what you intended to.

Kunzite · 10-20-2020, 03:16 AM

I'm not guilty for you misinterpreting my posts. It's not a fault to assume others' good intentions and willingness to understand you, rather than trying to cover all possibilities where your own words might be twisted against you.
I wrote what I meant to wrote, and if that aspect was unclear I provided an explanation.
And this will be my last post on this subject.

Mistral75 · 10-20-2020, 03:37 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

I'm not guilty for you misinterpreting my posts. (...)

...nor am I for you not writing what you intended to.

Anyway, the concepts of guilt and fault have nothing to do here. This is neither a trial nor a debate on moral philosophy, just a gear forum.

**Pål Jensen** · 10-20-2020, 04:11 AM

Originally posted by thibs

That being said, such kind of things AFAICT has never happened before (that we know of). So I'd be a bit surprised. It would make sense though.

It has happened before. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I vividly remember that Pentax 11-point AF was identical to some Nikon model. I can't remember now which.....
It was alos said at the time that Nikon AF developers were former Pentax employees.

---------- Post added 10-20-20 at 01:13 PM ----------

Originally posted by Kunzite

What do you mean, not baseless? Do you have any sort of information, hint, anything that would point toward a Nikon-licensed AF? Does Mistral?
If not, it is baseless.

Who knows? But I cannot imagine how you can implement features like AF and SR without getting licenses from someone for at least parts of the system. You can't reinvent the wheel several times over.....

MMVIII · 10-20-2020, 04:59 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

I disagree.

And it is not plausible, not with the information we have (which is basically nothing).
Rumored AF points being the same ballpark? You don't know that. Maybe the Pentax AF has 101 AF points, or 199, or 999 for that matter - they're all "more than 99".
Nikon is not the only one to introduce IBIS on their camera. And Pentax did develop quite a few AF systems on their own.

Now, if the K-new had a 153-points AF with a suspiciously familiar layout... that would be a basis for such a rumor!
But as things are, this is weaker than the "D FA* 85mm f/1.4 is just a rebadged Sigma!" thing.

Originally posted by thibs

It is not baseless (as a rumour I insist) : rumoured AF points being the same ballpark of Nikon's AF and Nikon introducing SR in their own MILC.
Both at mostly the same time, it is a strange coincidence, hence to be labelled as rumour. Nothing else.

It IS plausible.
That being said, such kind of things AFAICT has never happened before (that we know of). So I'd be a bit surprised. It would make sense though.

This forum is news and rumours. I'm not a native speaker in english, but maybe some semantics on the type of "talk" here might be necessary?
Rumors can be described as "public communications that are infused with private hypotheses about how the world works (Rosnow, 1991)". In this case, the subsample of the world we discuss about. The idea, that there might be an exchange between Nikon and Ricoh can be called a hypothesis. As far as I see it there is nothing that could support it beyond an observation of the appearance of one technology at Nikon where Ricoh has an undoubted expertise within. The type and technology of the new technology in the new Pentax is still almost unknown. A hypothesis about a cooperation is very weak and not supported by anything reliable. It will probably also be easy to falsify it as soon as the new camera would be announced. I would not call an exchange between Ricoh and Nikon a rumor, because it is not based on any evidence and pure extrapolation from a hypothesis. It would be different if the hypothesis could be backed up (some statement by one of the involved, clear similarity in details of the technology beyound the pure concept of it...). This could happen when we have something to compare, but for now, there is nothing substantial.

**fs999** · 10-20-2020, 05:11 AM

I can understand the "delay" : perhaps Sony gave them a super duper 45Mpix sensor in place...

thibs · 10-20-2020, 05:34 AM

Originally posted by MMVIII

This forum is news and rumours. I'm not a native speaker in english, but maybe some semantics on the type of "talk" here might be necessary?
Rumors can be described as "public communications that are infused with private hypotheses about how the world works (Rosnow, 1991)". In this case, the subsample of the world we discuss about. The idea, that there might be an exchange between Nikon and Ricoh can be called a hypothesis. As far as I see it there is nothing that could support it beyond an observation of the appearance of one technology at Nikon where Ricoh has an undoubted expertise within. The type and technology of the new technology in the new Pentax is still almost unknown. A hypothesis about a cooperation is very weak and not supported by anything reliable. It will probably also be easy to falsify it as soon as the new camera would be announced. I would not call an exchange between Ricoh and Nikon a rumor, because it is not based on any evidence and pure extrapolation from a hypothesis. It would be different if the hypothesis could be backed up (some statement by one of the involved, clear similarity in details of the technology beyound the pure concept of it...). This could happen when we have something to compare, but for now, there is nothing substantial.

Which is why we need to know about Nikon's SR. If it is magnet-based, there will be some ground.

As for Alex argument of the DFA*85, no it never was possible. rebadged never get a * designation.

10-20-2020, 02:32 AM	#126
Mistral75 Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Paris, France Posts: 7,527 Original Poster	Originally posted by Kunzite That thing started before we knew the optical formula for the Pentax. Was it plausible back then? ]Moving the goalposts, aren't we? Attached Images

10-20-2020, 03:16 AM	#130
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	I'm not guilty for you misinterpreting my posts. It's not a fault to assume others' good intentions and willingness to understand you, rather than trying to cover all possibilities where your own words might be twisted against you. I wrote what I meant to wrote, and if that aspect was unclear I provided an explanation. And this will be my last post on this subject. Last edited by Kunzite; 10-20-2020 at 03:23 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Nature The Patient Dragonfly	selfnoise	Post Your Photos!	3	08-03-2019 05:08 AM
Wait, wait, wait	PhotoPoet	Monthly Photo Contests	5	08-02-2015 10:57 PM
ISO Fluent and Patient Arabic Speaker	Heie	General Talk	3	03-07-2015 11:24 AM
Wait wait wait...Pentax Q vs K-r?	noaslplease	Pentax DSLR Discussion	37	06-27-2011 07:22 AM
Macro Proof that Mantids are patient	arpaagent	Post Your Photos!	2	06-01-2010 08:08 PM

10-20-2020, 12:03 AM	#121
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by thibs Not baseless, completely circumstancial though. As a rumor I mean, not as a fact. What do you mean, not baseless? Do you have any sort of information, hint, anything that would point toward a Nikon-licensed AF? Does Mistral? If not, it is baseless.

10-20-2020, 12:41 AM - 1 Like	#122
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	It is not baseless (as a rumour I insist) : rumoured AF points being the same ballpark of Nikon's AF and Nikon introducing SR in their own MILC. Both at mostly the same time, it is a strange coincidence, hence to be labelled as rumour. Nothing else. It IS plausible. That being said, such kind of things AFAICT has never happened before (that we know of). So I'd be a bit surprised. It would make sense though.

10-20-2020, 02:12 AM - 1 Like	#123
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by thibs It is not baseless (as a rumour I insist) : rumoured AF points being the same ballpark of Nikon's AF and Nikon introducing SR in their own MILC. Both at mostly the same time, it is a strange coincidence, hence to be labelled as rumour. Nothing else. It IS plausible. That being said, such kind of things AFAICT has never happened before (that we know of). So I'd be a bit surprised. It would make sense though. I disagree. And it is not plausible, not with the information we have (which is basically nothing). Rumored AF points being the same ballpark? You don't know that. Maybe the Pentax AF has 101 AF points, or 199, or 999 for that matter - they're all "more than 99". Nikon is not the only one to introduce IBIS on their camera. And Pentax did develop quite a few AF systems on their own. Now, if the K-new had a 153-points AF with a suspiciously familiar layout... that would be a basis for such a rumor! But as things are, this is weaker than the "D FA* 85mm f/1.4 is just a rebadged Sigma!" thing.

10-20-2020, 02:19 AM	#124
Mistral75 Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Paris, France Posts: 7,527 Original Poster	Originally posted by Kunzite (...) But as things are, this is weaker than the "D FA* 85mm f/1.4 is just a rebadged Sigma!" thing. 'As things are', this cannot be weaker than something proven wrong (by different optical formulas, for instance).

10-20-2020, 02:28 AM	#125
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by Mistral75 'As things are', this cannot be weaker than something proven wrong (by different optical formulas, for instance). That thing started before we knew the optical formula for the Pentax. Was it plausible back then?

10-20-2020, 02:37 AM - 4 Likes	#127
Serkevan Site Supporter Join Date: May 2019 Photos: Albums Posts: 5,976	I think what's plausible, possible and even probable is a good old thread lock

10-20-2020, 02:47 AM	#128
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	@Mistral75: Wrong. It's you who's trying to set the goalpost so my analogy wouldn't work. The point is, both theories were launched before we knew any information which might've hinted towards or against said theory, and both were "supported" by a very weak argument: a vague resemblance for the lens, and a "more than 99" AF points for the camera.

10-20-2020, 02:59 AM	#129
Mistral75 Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Paris, France Posts: 7,527 Original Poster	Originally posted by Kunzite @Mistral75: Wrong. It's you who's trying to set the goalpost so my analogy wouldn't work. (...) I'm afraid you set the goalposts when you wrote 'as things are, this is weaker than the "D FA* 85mm f/1.4 is just a rebadged Sigma!" thing' and not 'this is weaker than the "D FA* 85mm f/1.4 is just a rebadged Sigma!" thing was when the mock-up was showcased' or anything similar. Let's say you initially didn't write what you intended to.

10-20-2020, 03:37 AM	#131
Mistral75 Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Paris, France Posts: 7,527 Original Poster	Originally posted by Kunzite I'm not guilty for you misinterpreting my posts. (...) ...nor am I for you not writing what you intended to. Anyway, the concepts of guilt and fault have nothing to do here. This is neither a trial nor a debate on moral philosophy, just a gear forum.

10-20-2020, 04:11 AM	#132
Pål Jensen Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 4,371	Originally posted by thibs That being said, such kind of things AFAICT has never happened before (that we know of). So I'd be a bit surprised. It would make sense though. It has happened before. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I vividly remember that Pentax 11-point AF was identical to some Nikon model. I can't remember now which..... It was alos said at the time that Nikon AF developers were former Pentax employees. ---------- Post added 10-20-20 at 01:13 PM ---------- Originally posted by Kunzite What do you mean, not baseless? Do you have any sort of information, hint, anything that would point toward a Nikon-licensed AF? Does Mistral? If not, it is baseless. Who knows? But I cannot imagine how you can implement features like AF and SR without getting licenses from someone for at least parts of the system. You can't reinvent the wheel several times over.....

10-20-2020, 04:59 AM	#133
MMVIII Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: EU Posts: 1,121	Originally posted by Kunzite I disagree. And it is not plausible, not with the information we have (which is basically nothing). Rumored AF points being the same ballpark? You don't know that. Maybe the Pentax AF has 101 AF points, or 199, or 999 for that matter - they're all "more than 99". Nikon is not the only one to introduce IBIS on their camera. And Pentax did develop quite a few AF systems on their own. Now, if the K-new had a 153-points AF with a suspiciously familiar layout... that would be a basis for such a rumor! But as things are, this is weaker than the "D FA* 85mm f/1.4 is just a rebadged Sigma!" thing. Originally posted by thibs It is not baseless (as a rumour I insist) : rumoured AF points being the same ballpark of Nikon's AF and Nikon introducing SR in their own MILC. Both at mostly the same time, it is a strange coincidence, hence to be labelled as rumour. Nothing else. It IS plausible. That being said, such kind of things AFAICT has never happened before (that we know of). So I'd be a bit surprised. It would make sense though. This forum is news and rumours. I'm not a native speaker in english, but maybe some semantics on the type of "talk" here might be necessary? Rumors can be described as "public communications that are infused with private hypotheses about how the world works (Rosnow, 1991)". In this case, the subsample of the world we discuss about. The idea, that there might be an exchange between Nikon and Ricoh can be called a hypothesis. As far as I see it there is nothing that could support it beyond an observation of the appearance of one technology at Nikon where Ricoh has an undoubted expertise within. The type and technology of the new technology in the new Pentax is still almost unknown. A hypothesis about a cooperation is very weak and not supported by anything reliable. It will probably also be easy to falsify it as soon as the new camera would be announced. I would not call an exchange between Ricoh and Nikon a rumor, because it is not based on any evidence and pure extrapolation from a hypothesis. It would be different if the hypothesis could be backed up (some statement by one of the involved, clear similarity in details of the technology beyound the pure concept of it...). This could happen when we have something to compare, but for now, there is nothing substantial.

10-20-2020, 05:11 AM	#134
fs999 Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Luxembourg Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,639	I can understand the "delay" : perhaps Sony gave them a super duper 45Mpix sensor in place...

10-20-2020, 05:34 AM	#135
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Originally posted by MMVIII This forum is news and rumours. I'm not a native speaker in english, but maybe some semantics on the type of "talk" here might be necessary? Rumors can be described as "public communications that are infused with private hypotheses about how the world works (Rosnow, 1991)". In this case, the subsample of the world we discuss about. The idea, that there might be an exchange between Nikon and Ricoh can be called a hypothesis. As far as I see it there is nothing that could support it beyond an observation of the appearance of one technology at Nikon where Ricoh has an undoubted expertise within. The type and technology of the new technology in the new Pentax is still almost unknown. A hypothesis about a cooperation is very weak and not supported by anything reliable. It will probably also be easy to falsify it as soon as the new camera would be announced. I would not call an exchange between Ricoh and Nikon a rumor, because it is not based on any evidence and pure extrapolation from a hypothesis. It would be different if the hypothesis could be backed up (some statement by one of the involved, clear similarity in details of the technology beyound the pure concept of it...). This could happen when we have something to compare, but for now, there is nothing substantial. Which is why we need to know about Nikon's SR. If it is magnet-based, there will be some ground. As for Alex argument of the DFA85, no it never was possible. rebadged never get a designation.