Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-03-2009, 05:45 PM   #1801
jay
Inactive Account




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Lincoln, Nebraska, USA
Posts: 65
QuoteOriginally posted by Jodokast96 Quote
Jay, that is one seriously f****d up post, but I agree, lol.
I'm one seriously f****d up dude.

QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
But ...

For shorter focal lengths, it becomes harder (and at some point impossible) to build a lens of similiar size (i.e., sharp below f/2). And smaller sensor needs shorter focal length.

That's the only sacrifice. But it is there.
Damn, falconeye -- you always get me with your "science."

That's why you're one of my favorite members on the forum.

That is totally true. I took an optics class last semester, and it's interesting to look at optical design from a broader perspective than just still photography. If we didn't have to worry about a uniform mount or focus, it would be so much easier to design lenses. Haha.

But, yes, in particular, wide angle lenses are very difficult to make fast and sharp -- this is mainly because of the retrofocal designs they require. If we could only get rid of that f***ing mirror, we'd be able to make gorgeous wide-angle lenses. (That's one reason the Samsung NX is particularly interesting to me)

So, in that sense, you can look at full-frame versus crop-frame, and see their advantages and disadvantages:

Full-frame has bigger, longer glass to get the same telephoto perspective as crop-frame -- while crop-frame has bigger, more expensive glass to get the same wide angle perspective as full-frame.

So, it depends what you shoot, I suppose.

But, I will say this -- the Tokina 11-17 f/2.8 is a gorgeous wide-angle lens, and I don't think many shooters would need to go much wider than that on APS-C.

Compare its weight and price tag to full-frame lenses of the same perspective, field-of-view and depth-of-field, and I think APS-C still wins out.

QuoteOriginally posted by mabelsound Quote
But I do very much want a metal body, because it feels good to hold.
It's funny -- when the advanced plastics started finding their way into lenses and bodies in the 80s, it was heralded as a feature -- plastics offered superior thermal-resistant designs that didn't expand and contract with temperature changes as much as metals did -- and they were much stronger than metal. And lighter, too.

But people still have a weird association between "heavy" and "quality" -- they think a camera, to be built like a tank, must weigh the same as one, too.

My friend's carbon fiber bike cost more than $8000 USD, and it feels REALLY cheap. Why? it's so light. It feels like I could break it if i sat on it. But, in reality, it's a far superior material.

I'd rather have a better-quality material in my camera and focus on re-training my brain than have an outdated, old material (magnesium alloy), which is heavy and inferior to PVCs -- even if it feels intuitively stronger.

The only reason magnesium alloy construction is still seen is because people perceive it to be superior to plastic construction -- it's the marketing department telling the product engineers what to do. The product engineers role their eyes, knowing that a solid PVC body (even without a magnesium skeleton) is far superior.

Heh... oh photographers. They're an odd bunch.


Last edited by jay; 05-03-2009 at 06:02 PM.
05-03-2009, 06:12 PM   #1802
Nubi
Guest




Metal or not metal, I don't care as long as the weight of the camera feels "right" for me. Nowadays with shake reduction systems, it is not as much an issue as it used to be, but if the camera body was too light, it would contribute to focusing problems because it was harder to hold the camera still. In a long shooting session it could cause more arm fatigue, being more conscious of the possible blur. Now, I don't know what the "right" weight is, as I imagine it is different for everybody because of the hand size, preference, etc. But Pentax believes that it should get smaller. I am not all that sure about it, especially after holding a k-m in my hand with that kit lens of theirs. It felt a tad small to me and almost too light, and didn't want to imagine what it would feel like to put a *50-135. I think smaller is still ok, but lighter i may have some issues with.
05-03-2009, 06:29 PM   #1803
Pentaxian
er1kksen's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Staten Island, NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,672
As long as the grip isn't too pricey, there's a solution to the "not enough weight/size" problem. I know especially if the grip has extra SD storage (a rumor based on the jump from 12 to 22 contact pins on the new grip) I'll be getting one for sure.
05-03-2009, 06:30 PM   #1804
Nubi
Guest




QuoteOriginally posted by er1kksen Quote
As long as the grip isn't too pricey, there's a solution to the "not enough weight/size" problem. I know especially if the grip has extra SD storage (a rumor based on the jump from 12 to 22 contact pins on the new grip) I'll be getting one for sure.
Perfectly agree with you. I never even shot my K10 or 20 without a grip.

05-03-2009, 07:03 PM   #1805
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 975
QuoteOriginally posted by jay Quote
I'm one seriously f****d up dude.



Damn, falconeye -- you always get me with your "science."
(...)

I'd rather have a better-quality material in my camera and focus on re-training my brain than have an outdated, old material (magnesium alloy), which is heavy and inferior to PVCs -- even if it feels intuitively stronger.

The only reason magnesium alloy construction is still seen is because people perceive it to be superior to plastic construction -- it's the marketing department telling the product engineers what to do. The product engineers role their eyes, knowing that a solid PVC body (even without a magnesium skeleton) is far superior.

Heh... oh photographers. They're an odd bunch.
you are indeed. what a rant earlyer on, i think you made many people sigh (who wanted to say it, but were too "controlled"). i know it made me smile.

metal is outdated since the last century imho. the sad thing is that it is also expensive now compared to good composites, and in most cases has no advantages.

i shoot landscape, for most people thermal conductivity of the body might not mean much, but ofr me it does: i do not appreciate my hand freezing on the camera body in about 3 seconds. even worse, i am often away from power outlets in the mountains: shooting with a k100d, with the dreaded nimh acumulators, and having no trouble at all (in the winter), while my good friend with a canon 20d and liion was switching batteries every hour or so (at best), warming them in his gloves, and so on, maybe was funny for me, but was not for him. later on we met again, same story for him, and still no problems for me with the k20d. now the canon 20d might be old tech and power hungry, but three bateryes while i have only one (and in the case of the liion, it went on for days) is a bit hard to explain still. but when you think of how quickly that metal alloy body lets the heat out and brings everything in the camera to bellow zero, it starts to make sense. might be good for cooling the sensor for astrophotography, but i am not sure i care.

metal was good while we were young and foolish, and could not understand how wastefull they are, and were to dumb as a species to look at a tree and understand what a "smart" material should be designed like. we have discovered composites more than half a century ago, metal should now be used for jewelery, conductors, and so on, not for camera body, car body, and so on. our blind inertia is osmetimes ubelievable.

"heavy is good, heavy is reliable... if it does not work, you can always hit him with it" boris (yeah, i just love this quote)
05-03-2009, 11:33 PM   #1806
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,906
Yeah… I still want it to be metal.
The strength of composite material is not the point, it’s not like the K10/20 is ultra strong thanks to its paper-thin plastic shell. It cracks like an eggshell in the corners almost by it self. I believe the inferior material metal works as well, actually just about any material is strong enough. It’s all about the design being adapted to the material used.
05-03-2009, 11:42 PM   #1807
Nubi
Guest




QuoteOriginally posted by Gimbal Quote
Yeah… I still want it to be metal.
The strength of composite material is not the point, it’s not like the K10/20 is ultra strong thanks to its paper-thin plastic shell. It cracks like an eggshell in the corners almost by it self. I believe the inferior material metal works as well, actually just about any material is strong enough. It’s all about the design being adapted to the material used.
Hm...... Just about any material. I see. :ugh:
05-04-2009, 01:05 AM   #1808
jay
Inactive Account




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Lincoln, Nebraska, USA
Posts: 65
QuoteOriginally posted by Gimbal Quote
Yeah… I still want it to be metal...
Weird. Why?

QuoteOriginally posted by Gimbal Quote
The strength of composite material is not the point..
...?

QuoteOriginally posted by Gimbal Quote
I believe the inferior material metal works as well, actually just about any material is strong enough.
.........?

You're as bad as the crazies that think fossils were planted in the ground by the divine to test our faith.

It seems like you aren't trying to refute the fact that composite materials are stronger than most metal alloys. Yet, you still want a metal body? When composites are clearly a better choice, economically, environmentally, and structurally?

I'm sorry for being insanely rude, but really -- did I miss something?

05-04-2009, 01:21 AM   #1809
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Umeĺ, Sweden
Posts: 755
QuoteOriginally posted by Gimbal Quote
actually just about any material is strong enough. .
Why wait for the K-7? Your new camera is here: ???: ???????MX
05-04-2009, 01:23 AM   #1810
Veteran Member
ytterbium's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,076
QuoteOriginally posted by RuiC Quote
Sorry for the joke. As for the circled items they have been discussed thoroughly, the lock in mode dial and room for mirror motor.
Mirror motor? I didn't know they use an actual mirror motor in dslr's. I imagined it to be some electromagnetic return-release system. Do they kind of "wind up" the mirror between shots, or you just called electromagnetic mechanism that way?
Makes me think of rotating mirror viewfinders .

Guess you have to make bumps like that to make overall camera size smaller (where in k20d this part could be hidden under the curves of body).

2009-1810=199 posts to go.
05-04-2009, 02:06 AM   #1811
Forum Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 60
Circled "buttons"

QuoteOriginally posted by ytterbium Quote

So the thing i circled.. it has to be button.. too odd for a simple body curve. Logically it would be optical preview or something along these lines.

Could be a body curve preventing your fingers to cover the AF Assist lamp?
/Mats
05-04-2009, 02:09 AM   #1812
jay
Inactive Account




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Lincoln, Nebraska, USA
Posts: 65
QuoteOriginally posted by ytterbium Quote
Mirror motor? I didn't know they use an actual mirror motor in dslr's. I imagined it to be some electromagnetic return-release system. Do they kind of "wind up" the mirror between shots, or you just called electromagnetic mechanism that way?
Makes me think of rotating mirror viewfinders .

Guess you have to make bumps like that to make overall camera size smaller (where in k20d this part could be hidden under the curves of body).

2009-1810=199 posts to go.
It's all spring-loaded -- but the motor cocks it.

Something like this:


Excuse my Canon reference image -- in the 5 seconds I spent googling, the Pentax shutter system didn't pop-up.

There's a link to a Pentax patent for a imaging display built into the ground glass. If that were to surface in the K-7 (which I highly, highly doubt), it wouldn't affect any of the mirror/shutter drive system -- so that diagram should be accurate, regardless.
05-04-2009, 02:24 AM   #1813
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Netherlands
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 908
QuoteOriginally posted by ytterbium Quote
Sounds quite reasonable... only i've never accidentally turned that dial on my k100d (it seems stiff enough to me).
As for accidental stuff.. dont you ever accidentaly eject batteries? With my k100d it happened numerous times, when just touching camera bottom during handling (or when small finger goes under camera).. several times i almost lost my batteries (after that i removed the spring that pushes the lid open).
No, I only managed to accidentally knock the dial on my K20D....
05-04-2009, 02:50 AM   #1814
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,114
My friend got the specs. He said that it's revolution for PENTAX. For
digital time. The competitors has some similiar features too, but K-7 is
ALL-IN-ONE, and has a lot of NEW, and it's the first Pentax real semi-pro camera for the last 10 year.
05-04-2009, 02:51 AM   #1815
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Sweden, Umea
Posts: 870
less than 3 weeks to go

oh and btw +1
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
POST A PIC TO OWN THE PIC ABOVE! (Game) ll_coffee_lP Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories 788 08-01-2015 01:01 AM
Who out there would prefer a K30D? Ben Hunt Pentax DSLR Discussion 45 11-05-2010 06:48 AM
What would we want from the K30D? offertonhatter Pentax News and Rumors 102 04-22-2009 02:30 AM
So... is the K30D actually going to have autofocus? SupremeMoFo Pentax News and Rumors 88 01-03-2009 05:53 PM
Iso 1600 pic and a Butterfly Pic... Eastern Shore Charlie Post Your Photos! 5 07-06-2008 10:27 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:40 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