[knoxploration]

As a modification of a well known political remark, "It's the viewfinder, dummy! I'm going to put a Nikon DA-30 Action Finder and a Type M focusing screen on that machine. And all of the attachments that work with the Nikon F5, apply here. Not to mention that I can use the OLD AND CHEAP manual focus AIS lenses. And I think as the final trump card, there's a possibility the sensor can be changed to FF.

Wait - so now you've switched from considering a merely geriatric Kodak SLR/n (2004) in favor of a downright prehistoric DCS 760 (2001)?

Just... wow. Bet you'll get some stunning noise-filled, ISO 400-max, six megapixel images with that. They'll be world-beaters compared to APS-C cameras - *infinitely* more resolution, just like you were looking for.

And to top it off, you think you'll somehow be able to change the sensor in it to one it was never intended to use? Are you planning to pop down to Sensors-and-Image-Processors'R'Us, or to buy a more modern FF DSLR and gut it for the internals, hence making yourself a Frankencamera with ten year old ergonomics and less versatility than the more modern one?

[Shingoshi]

Wait - so now you've switched from considering a merely geriatric Kodak SLR/n (2004) in favor of a downright prehistoric DCS 760 (2001)?

Just... wow. Bet you'll get some stunning noise-filled, ISO 400-max, six megapixel images with that. They'll be world-beaters compared to APS-C cameras - *infinitely* more resolution, just like you were looking for.

And to top it off, you think you'll somehow be able to change the sensor in it to one it was never intended to use? Are you planning to pop down to Sensors-and-Image-Processors'R'Us, or to buy a more modern FF DSLR and gut it for the internals, hence making yourself a Frankencamera with ten year old ergonomics and less versatility than the more modern one?

But even if you were an accountant, you wouldn't be a very good one. Because you choose to ignore details that should not have been missed. I wouldn't want you doing my books.

You seem to approach everything from a numbers perspective. And I'm sorry to tell you this (well, no I'm not), my photography isn't subject to your woeful analysis. I stated very clearly what my reasons are, and you simply choose to ignore that. You're not curious, you're ignorant.
1.) It's the viewfinder, stupid!
2.) I'm not limited to what the camera was originally designed for.
3.) The technology exists to revamp that camera beyond anything previously imagined.
4.) I don't care about you or your attitude. I've seen enough of it through my life.

I regularly retrofit old computers with more modern technology. So I know a thing or two about what can be done inside a body of that size. And I'm beginning to think there's more room inside the 760 than there is in your head. But then again, it may just be where you keep putting it. However to you, it might seem very warm and cozy. I think you have your eyes caked over with the stuff from your skull cap!

Now I realize that you don't have the mind to comprehend this. But for others who are reading, Kodak used the same body with several different sensors. That alone means they can be changed by anyone who wants to. That is if you're not Knox and don't have the imagination of how to work out the details. Those bodies are very large by today's standards because the electronics in them were so much larger than they are now. Just imagine how many more components can fit in one of those bodies using our more advanced technology. Now, we have embedded computers small enough to fit inside. Hell, the technology of my old HTC Pocket PC Phone will fit inside of the body. And that's a complete complete computer, with far more advanced one's available now.

So Knox, keep going around in circles and dig yourself a hole in the ground. I have a different set of priorities than you do. And I am in no way obliged to explain everything to you. Besides, you couldn't comprehend it in the first place. So do you really want to keep messing with me or not. Because your endless drudgery is pointless. Now keep showing the rest of us just how immature you have to be, and keep whining about what you refuse to accept as valid for someone else. Grow up, and get over it!

Xavian-Anderson Macpherson
ShingoshiDao

[bunegg]

popcorns anyone?

[ozlizard]

So do you think there will be a FF Pentax in 2010.......?

[KungPOW]

Shingoshi,

As for the Kodak transformation project, I really don't have the tech savy to add much of anything. I wish you luck.

Here is another interesting site that is dedicated to vintage DSLR's.

Kodak DCS 100

-----------

Topic at hand:

And Pentax bringing out a FF in 2010? I still don't think they will. Pentax will need to replace the K-x next year, actually produce the 645D for sale, and bring out the K-7's replacement for photokina 2010. I don't think they have the production ability to add a fourth body to the lineup.

If Pentax does do something with FF, we might see a mock-up at Photokina. If they get the 645D on the streets, anouncing their intent to build a FF would carry some credibility. Frankly, that is a problem they have now. Pentax's 645D is seen by many as a joke. The ultimate vapor ware. They need to fix this if they expect to have anyone take a FF anouncement seriously. But with a functioning 645D in the stores, the photokina line-up could have the K-x mkii, the K-8, the 645D, and the K-2 FF mock-up. Pentax anounces the FF for release in late 2011, and this gives people a year to buy all they FF lenses they will need.

Oh wait. What about those lenses?

[Shingoshi]

Shingoshi,
As for the Kodak transformation project, I really don't have the tech savy to add much of anything. I wish you luck.

Here is another interesting site that is dedicated to vintage DSLR's.

Kodak DCS 100

That F3 was just special. Nikon delivered F4s to NASA as well. And some of my ideas come from that knowledge also. But I want you to think about something. As I've repeated numerous times, I only shoot monochrome. So I don't need any of the in camera tools to process color. That means I don't need:
1.) White Balance
2.) Saturation control.
3.) Noise Reduction: Because monochrome sensors produce less noise than color one's do.
4.) The ONLY thing I need is EXPOSURE CONTROL!! Just keeping it simple like the Leica M9.

Now think of all those little credit card-sized cameras floating around. Many of them have more memory and features in them than any of the DCS cameras. And frankly, you only need enough memory to handle one file at a time. So why would anyone in their right mind think the control cards for one of those cameras wouldn't fit inside something as huge as any of the Kodak DCS cameras? Call it a Frankencamera! Like that should really matter. What matters is what I want to have in my hands and in front of my eye. Which I also made absolutely clear. Even though I haven't held one yet, I already "know" how the camera fits in my hands. I can tell that by all of the pictures I've examined.

If someone wants to think having Gigabit connectivity is Frankencamera, so be it. Those Compact Flash cards have to fit into something in every camera. Because the DCS are so large, I could switch from PCCARD over to EXPRESSCARD instead. With those two slots side-by-side, you almost have a pack of cigarettes worth of space there. But what really gets my attention is, the possibility of having SSDs as my storage medium. I know I should just leave this alone. Because one person in particular has no or little imagination. But the fact is once I've built the camera, I'll intimately know how to modify it again as needed.

I come from the world of medium format, where you only change the body if you absolutely need to. Every time you switch bodies, you're breaking the familiarity you had with your previous camera. That's why the basic shape of the Hasselblad has changed so little over the years. It works for the hands of the photographers that use them. They have no desire to conform to the vagaries of the buying public. Amateurs are fickle by definition. Look even at the Nikon and Canon professional cameras. They don't change them much either. Professionals simply don't suffer from those vanities which drive others. They have to impress people with their work, not work to impress people with the latest thing they just brought.

And based on my experiences with my cameras and my attachment to them, I know the F5/DCS will be the most comfortable tool to work with. And like you've already said, Pentax has too much on the table to even think about producing a FF camera. So if you really want a camera in that class, you'll have to look elsewhere.

Xavian-Anderson Macpherson
ShingoshiDao

[knoxploration]

1.) It's the viewfinder, stupid!

So what changed since your previous post, which I linked to, where you said you wanted FF for the resolution? You remember, earlier in this thread: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-news-rumors/76980-ff-2010-a-28.html#post817220

2.) I'm not limited to what the camera was originally designed for.
3.) The technology exists to revamp that camera beyond anything previously imagined.

Go ahead - do enlighten me. Where are you going to get a full-frame image sensor from? Where are you planning to source the image processor to go with it? You do realise all the components in the camera have to be able to talk to each other, right? They're not plug and play, and it doesn't happen by magic.

I regularly retrofit old computers with more modern technology. So I know a thing or two about what can be done inside a body of that size.

An ability to retrofit computer by buying off-the-shelf parts bears absolutely no correlation whatsoever to an ability to redesign a digital camera to use a completely different sensor to what it was built for. Your claim is a bit like saying you regularly design and build your own motherboards from scratch.

Now I realize that you don't have the mind to comprehend this. But for others who are reading, Kodak used the same body with several different sensors. That alone means they can be changed by anyone who wants to. That is if you're not Knox and don't have the imagination of how to work out the details.

Indeed, the Kodak DCS 760 was Nikon F5 based, and so were the DCS 620, DCS 620x, DCS 660, DCS 620M, DCS 720x, DCS 760 and DCS 760M.

However, what your extensive and in-depth research for this sophisticated sensor-changing project of yours failed to tell you is that the highest-resolution of that group were the DCS 660, DCS 760 and DCS 760M (which all used the same sensor, although the M variant had the Bayer filter removed and was hence monochrome only.)

In other words, the highest resolution you could get from another Kodak camera based on the F5 would be the exact same resolution that was already in the DCS 760.

It's also enlightening that your reason for wanting the SLR/n wsa because you couldn't afford to buy a new full-frame camera from Canon, Nikon or Sony, and that you've praised the ability of the DCS 760 to use OLD AND CHEAP lenses (your emphasis), and yet you believe you'll somehow be able to afford at least two old full-frame digital SLR bodies (one DCS 760, and one donor camera from which to get your image sensor and processor, since they have to be matched, and since nobody really sells single 35mm full-frame sensors directly to the public, especially not at a cost below which you could get an entry-level FF DSLR body currently).

It feels very much like your claims are Internet bluster - nothing more. But please, do feel free to show some of the similar projects you've done in the past that qualify you to believe you could pull this off. Just remember that assembling / upgrading a PC with off-the-shelf parts doesn't count. ;-)

[Shingoshi]

What exactly is your motivation here? Because your beginning to sound like one of those people who come to your door, telling you "your way of thinking is corrupt and you have lost your way. You must follow what we say, or you will be damned.

What exactly do you think you're going to lose because someone thinks differently than you do? I'm not going to answer any of your questions, because I've already said enough for you to know what's important to me. And the fact that you're confused is your problem. In fact, it amuses me. Oh no, here comes the KnoxWitnesses again!

Xavian-Anderson Macpherson
ShingoshiDao

[knoxploration]

What exactly is your motivation here?

My motivation currently is to figure out whether you actually believe in this pipe-dream (because it has zero chance of ever happening), or whether you're just playing a game.

I'm currently tending towards the former - in which case I suggest doing your homework much, much better before wasting your money on a second-hand camera you'll never be able to achieve your goal with. And possibly, realise that if a decent FF camera is outside your budget, that APS-C is still pretty darned good for what it is. Even with a ~$1,000 APS-C camera like the K-7, you're shooting with a tool many professionals would've killed for just ten years ago - in the very same era where they were using cameras like the DCS 760 you're currently lusting after.

And yes, I've shot with Kodak's F5-based cameras, many years ago when they went for in the tens of thousands apiece. I'm fairly familiar with their capabilities, their strenghts, and their weaknesses compared to modern DSLRs.

[ozlizard]

As entertaining as this "friendly" discussion is I think it is getting a little off the original topic of this thread, so I am kindly requesting that we return to the subject at hand!

[stormcloud]

just thinking about it its not just the image processor and sensor that you would need to replace but to the computer analogy the motherboard too - so effectively your taking the old body and thats about it - so whats the point? going to cost more in the short term and have a pretty good chance of ruining both cameras and long term it has no future

[Rondec]

It does sort of make sense that Pentax is working on full frame. First of all, we haven't seen any really new lenses in a long time. What was the last one? The DA*55? The rest of the lenses we have seen have just been zooms retrofitted with weather sealing. Maybe they are working on a couple of lenses.

I agree though, that it doesn't make sense for Pentax to have four bodies. Of course, the 645D is going to be a very small production cycle, so maybe it doesn't really count. Making a thousand or two of them certainly isn't going to tie up their production lines. At the same time, Pentax's real asset right now is that they have few camera lines. They don't have to worry about adding too much to their entry level cameras, for fear that they will steal sales away from their upper end cameras.

What if they had an entry level that was between the kx and the K7 and full frame camera as their two main lines? I guess that would be possible.

[gazonk]

As for missed shots, I think I'd actually miss a lot more with AF, since AF doesn't actually "know" what to focus on and to me it's a lot more complicated and time consuming trying to "force" the gizmos to do what you want (i.e., playing with "focus points," "focus and recompose" etc.) than it is to just er, turn the focusing ring. Quite frankly, I'd be perfectly happy with a manual focus FF dSLR. I like it simple, so I can (drum roll please) focus on taking pictures.

Well, I have my K10D permanently set to SEL mode and think moving the focus point around is a piece of cake. Despite all the complaints about K10D AF, it's simply a better performer than I used to be with my LX. You have to help it find something to focus on, but so what? With my LX, I'm forced to do "focus and recompose" since instead of a lot of focus points, I have to use the split screen and microprism in the center. And to use the split prism, I need something with contrast, just like the AF does... And frankly, the AF usually works in light so dim that I it's almost impossible to focus manually, even with the much better viewfinder of the LX.

[Shingoshi]

just thinking about it its not just the image processor and sensor that you would need to replace but to the computer analogy the motherboard too - so effectively your taking the old body and thats about it - so whats the point? going to cost more in the short term and have a pretty good chance of ruining both cameras and long term it has no future

The point is having more room to do more things. I don't like living in small houses.

Code:

Point & Shoot			==		Notebooks

SLR-like				==		Laptops

DSLR (aps-c)			==		Desktops

DSLR (Full-Frame)		==		Workstations

Medium-Format DSLR		==		Servers

Large-Format Digital		==		Enterprise Servers

Not everyone wants a workstation! Not only do I want a workstation, I want one with multiple processors, like my AMD liquid-cooled quad-socket motherboard. Now that's what I'm talking about!

But then again, how many people do you know who could even conceive of doing something like this? And yeah, it's mine!


Xavian-Anderson Macpherson
ShingoshiDao
And just more of my art. I just shot this tonight.

[bunegg]

if im nt wrong lens and sensor have some precision measurement to make