[vitalsax]

if not all bs will be revealed soon

[Blue]

. . . . no.

[Caat]

if not all bs will be revealed soon

A lot of what is being posted by people who claim to have information is very similar in style to the stuff which was posted in the run up to the K20D release - 95% of which was completely untrue.

So I am going to say yes

I predict -

3.5 fps
1/4000
1/180 flash sync
2.7 inch hVGA screen
1.0x at 95%
720p video at 24fps
Live-view with contrast detect AF
SAFOX VIII with KM algorithims
Same AE system

In fact we aren't getting specs leaks at all. What we are getting is the same hyperbole we got before the K20D:

- Unique viewfinder
- Claims about a unique AF system/feature
- I'm fairly sure its been said to be of an A700/D300/50D level (which means 1/8000, 5fps etc)

I think we all need to scale back expectations and get on with our lives until the 21st of May.

[Ratmagiclady]

...No.

For one, Benjikan can actually push the envelope of what his machines can do before squalling for otherwise.

[benjikan]

...No.

For one, Benjikan can actually push the envelope of what his machines can do before squalling for otherwise.

Thanks...Does this push the envelope far enough? 'Cause I used one of those shitty non-professional non Canon/Nikon/Blad camera's called a K20D, so I was worried that this doesn't count...

PS..Added TONS of GRAIN for this effect...

[Ratmagiclady]

Added grain? Added? Film!


I mean that in earnest, though, in one way at least: My whole attitude toward doing any artsy digital (It's really to me, supposedly, primarily about absorbing the more immediate-type stuff that can't wait for me to do negs, but best-laid plans and all...) Don't style myself a great artist or anything, but films and sensors are like palettes to me. I think if you have to *add* grain, it says something. (I actually found myself having to do this once while trying to use PSE for an enlarger, to get someone a shot of their weddng where they really thought a bright white backdrop was a good idea: couldn't get it white by 'dodging' without *erasing* the grain from my negative scan, and had to put it *back...* what kind of world is that? )


People bellyache about characteristics no one will likely ever see... not being optimal out of the box, when the fact is, the thing *I* have trouble adapting to is that with digital, it's all numbers and vapor, anyway.

It's a different medium with different skillsets involved in making the images visible.


It's not actually the 'capture' that's the real problem with me, ....I find I sometimes get dissatisfied with my sharpness cause I can *chimp at fourty times the maginfication of any lupe I ever used in my life.*

If we were back in the 80's, and there were message boards, we would *mostly* be dealing with a lot of people looking for ever-finer and more invisible *grain.*


Always seemed silly to me. As long as the grain looked *good,* just give me some *acutance.* Let's know this is a photograph.

To me, and any artistic pretense, digital's like going from tempera to oils. Stuff *moves around,* ...it's never 'finished,' ...maybe it never even really *dries,* but it's an experience.

I mean, people who bellyache about what's 'pro' ...well, you'd be lucky if anyone wanted a 16x20 of that you did in your *life* ...for any purpose other than viewing from further away, if you were shooting 35mm. "Full frame."

Pro would mean mostly you'd see your stuff in newsprint or wedding albums and wish you could get a job where they gave you a Hassie and a plane ticket. Probably still is, mostly. If you want your images on billboards, I think they still make monorail 4x5 cameras.


For my part, I whine about having to deal with computers, when in fact, I wanted to be in photography cause I saw computers coming and wanted *no* part of that,

...I like to think of my cranky Luddite tendencies as being a *progressive* cranky Luddite, but still .

I think if you're *adding* grain to your photographs and getting results like that, it's possible your camera is sufficient. Or, possibly irrelevant. But we'd rather not think that.

[Philippos]

A lot of what is being posted by people who claim to have information is very similar in style to the stuff which was posted in the run up to the K20D release - 95% of which was completely untrue.

I totally agree.
According to the rumours the K20D was going to be of another world. The body of a D3 with the IQ of a PhaseOne and more. Everyone contributed to the rumours. Every single thing that gets mentioned now, was mentioned then also. A square sensor, a 16:9 sensor, a round sensor, video, 6fps, intergrated WiFi, GPS, 48 point AF, 77 zones metering, a focusing sensor and tons of other features that all cameras available today combined still can't touch. We were expecting a camera built by NASA secret laboratories using Roswell technology and of course we were so disappointed by the humble K20D, that we just didn't see what a great camera it was at first, we only saw what an impossible camera it wasn't.

In my humble opinion the rumour mill damaged the K20d and Pentax badly, so I'm very surprised to see the same thing happening again and no official trying to contain it - well Ned actually did, but he did it so lightly, that it doesn't count, plus in my eyes, he's not very official either.

I know I will buy the new camera, no matter how good it is or it isn't. But I also know that there's a great chance many others who are currently planning to buy it, might get disappointed when all the rumours prove to be just hot air, that will eventually choose something else or keep on waiting for something substantially better.

[Caat]

I totally agree.
According to the rumours the K20D was going to be of another world. The body of a D3 with the IQ of a PhaseOne and more. Everyone contributed to the rumours. Every single thing that gets mentioned now, was mentioned then also. A square sensor, a 16:9 sensor, a round sensor, video, 6fps, intergrated WiFi, GPS, 48 point AF, 77 zones metering, a focusing sensor and tons of other features that all cameras available today combined still can't touch. We were expecting a camera built by NASA secret laboratories using Roswell technology and of course we were so disappointed by the humble K20D, that we just didn't see what a great camera it was at first, we only saw what an impossible camera it wasn't.

In my humble opinion the rumour mill damaged the K20d and Pentax badly, so I'm very surprised to see the same thing happening again and no official trying to contain it - well Ned actually did, but he did it so lightly, that it doesn't count, plus in my eyes, he's not very official either.

I know I will buy the new camera, no matter how good it is or it isn't. But I also know that there's a great chance many others who are currently planning to buy it, might get disappointed when all the rumours prove to be just hot air, that will eventually choose something else or keep on waiting for something substantially better.

I agree.

Interestingly the K20D had one consistent rumour - the 14.6mp sensor - and this turned out to be true. The one consistent rumour with the K-7 is a better viewfinder. I wonder if this will be the headline improvement over the K20D on this basis.

why don't people talk about this supposed name not having a "D" at the end?

[Ratmagiclady]

why don't people talk about this supposed name not having a "D" at the end?

Cause we can't handle it.

When they start putting 'F' on camera bodies again, then we're happy.

[Acliffalay]

It would be cool if they went all the way back and started using names ending with -matic.

Spotmatic, or perhaps a more modern variant Digimatic.

No more numbers!

[SuperAkuma]

if not all bs will be revealed soon

One of them can take great pictures and have proof of it.

The other one can write about taking pictures and says he don't need to prove it.

[MSM]

I mean, people who bellyache about what's 'pro' ...well, you'd be lucky if anyone wanted a 16x20 of that you did in your *life* ...for any purpose other than viewing from further away, if you were shooting 35mm. "Full frame."
...

@RML: Well said.

[mattdm]

Gah! Someone get that model some food, quick.

[Parallax]

Thanks...Does this push the envelope far enough? 'Cause I used one of those shitty non-professional non Canon/Nikon/Blad camera's called a K20D, so I was worried that this doesn't count...

PS..Added TONS of GRAIN for this effect...

The picture is fantastic, Ben, but does the model remind anybody else of "Wednesday", the girl in The Addams Family movie?