Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

View Poll Results: Will you buy Pentax EVIL in LX like body
Yes. I like LX body design. 2726.21%
No. I'd prefer another style body. 1514.56%
I don't care. I prefer DSLR. 6159.22%
Voters: 103. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-01-2010, 07:32 PM   #46
Banned




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Millstone,NJ
Posts: 6,491
QuoteOriginally posted by K7shooter Quote
The only thing Pentax less likely to release than an LX inspired body is a FF body.

Take a look at the current lens lineup. Majority of the lenses are designed/optimized for APS-C. Some of them won't even work with FF as the imaging circle is too small.

Unless Pentax has been hacking away in an underground missile silo hidden deep in the Rockies building an entire new lens lineup AND a FF body, I don't see this happening.

Sidenote: I don't understand the continued hype around FF. I've used APS-C, APS-H, and FF bodies from other manufacturers for years, and find the K-7 with it's APS-C blows the doors off a Canon 5D, and edges still a D700. What Pentax has been doing for some time now (and Canon and Nikon are just starting to do) is design lenses around a camera, rather than the other way around.
There are 10x more FF K mount lenses available than APS-C K mount lenses. I would prefer my 28-300mm work as a 28-300mm than 42-450mm IMHO.

02-01-2010, 10:41 PM   #47
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,068
QuoteOriginally posted by K7shooter Quote
Interesting. The 8x10 prints I made on Hahnemuehle Fine Art Pearl using an Epson 7800 at reasonable ISOs (100, 200, 400) showed the Pentax not only ahead of the pack in terms of IQ, but the noise most closely resembled the grain in reference prints shot on Portra NC (160 and 400) and output on a Chromira.

Could care less about ISO 3200, or pixel-peeping at 1600% onscreen.

Of course, if you'd rather spend your time shooting black cats in coal bins under a starless sky, by all means...
Well there's as ignorant post as I've ever seen.
Carry on, even though you don't know what you are talking about.
02-02-2010, 01:45 AM   #48
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,841
QuoteOriginally posted by jogiba Quote
There are 10x more FF K mount lenses available than APS-C K mount lenses. I would prefer my 28-300mm work as a 28-300mm than 42-450mm IMHO.
Look again - at the current lens line-up. Pentax can't launch a camera that isn't supported properly, with new lenses. What can they say? "This is the camera, it's very good, but we're selling it body-only; for lenses, you must search on e-bay"?
However, I think it can be done. There are few FF primes; launch 2 or 3 lenses with the camera, others would follow. But would they make a profit out of this? I have no idea.

Regarding the poll: why can't I say I like the LX body design but I also prefer DSLRs?
02-02-2010, 08:11 AM   #49
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Charlotte, NC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 886
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
However, I think it can be done. There are few FF primes; launch 2 or 3 lenses with the camera, others would follow. But would they make a profit out of this? I have no idea.
If it were billed as a high quality alternative to the Leica M9 then they currently have enough lenses to launch it. They could even bundle it with the FA 43mm f/1.9 limited as an extremely high quality kit. Based on the emphasize they've been putting on design lately (I-10 for example) it would kind of make sense to create a retro designed high quality camera at the top of their product line. I think anyone interested in a digital LX can find enough lenses in Pentax's line up to keep them happy for a year to give them time to start rolling out more glass. Thats assuming the DA55, DA200, DA300, DA60-250mm really are full frame lenses like many have speculated. Only thing they'd really HAVE to have at launch that they're currently missing is a standard zoom. Surely they could resurrect the old 24-90mm f/3.5-4.5 design to take care of that issue.

02-02-2010, 08:33 AM   #50
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,841
Going after Leica? That means higher prices, much higher prices... how many could they sell?
Btw, if we're talking about a mirrorless camera, then we should not forget there is no lens for it. An easy adaptation (of current lenses like the 43mm you mentioned) could be possible, but still - it must be done.
And if we're talking about a DSLR, what I'd like to see is the FF equivalent of the K-7, with a viewfinder as big as they can make it.
02-02-2010, 09:00 AM   #51
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Charlotte, NC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 886
Not necessarily Leica's price range, but a camera that fills the same niche at a much more reasonable price. I sold my film rangefinder after I fell in love with my LX. I realized the LX can fill pretty much the same role; a small, high quality street shooter, but with the advantage of seeing through the lens. If they could build a full frame body to match their limited lenses then it would certainly get some interest from enthusiast. Plus, having a camera like that in the line up would add instant credibility to Pentax. A lot of Canikon users are already jealous Pentax's Limited primes; they've just never had a digital body to match them.

Last edited by Art Vandelay II; 02-02-2010 at 09:10 AM.
02-02-2010, 09:23 AM   #52
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,841
Well, I was talking about going after mechanical excellence, above the level of the K-7/aluminum Limiteds. This would cost $$$$.
Styling a K-7-level body to look more like the LX would not. I'd be happy with that (I'm very happy with the Limiteds, too), as long as I won't lose modern features.
02-03-2010, 06:56 AM   #53
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by dopeytree Quote
They'd just have to work on squeezing in a small autofocus motor unless they released some sdm limited lenses
A mirrorless camera would have a K mount adapter, not a K mount itself. The AF motor would be in the adapter.

And yes, any mirrorless system camera from Pentax better is FF and has the size of a Leica M9 or I don't care.

And the killer feature for mirrorless is an AF system much more accurate and fast than possible with any parallax sensor. Of course, yet to be seen. But it will come. With 60 frames a second, a focus operation should never be more than 100ms (for small adjustments).


Last edited by falconeye; 02-03-2010 at 07:02 AM.
02-03-2010, 07:43 AM   #54
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,841
"The AF motor would be in the adapter" - that would make one big adapter
"an AF system much more accurate and fast" - more accurate, maybe (accuracy may be traded for speed). Fast? I doubt it would be faster than the classic phase detection AF. After all, that's why SLRs migrated from contrast detection to phase detection AF.
02-03-2010, 09:02 AM   #55
K7shooter
Guest




QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
Well there's as ignorant post as I've ever seen.
Carry on, even though you don't know what you are talking about.
Apparently you've never been to sites like The Luminous Landscape

How is this ignorant? And, since you claim I don't know what I'm talking about, please enlighten me. How do YOU know what YOU'RE talking about?

I'm talking about actual printed results. If there's IQ issues onscreen but they don't reproduce in the final print, it's a non-issue. An example of this is noise. People make a huge deal about it, but unless it is visible in a print, to me anyways, it isn't a problem. Even then, if it appears in a print, does it detract from it
02-03-2010, 09:12 AM   #56
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Untied States
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,882
QuoteOriginally posted by K7shooter Quote
Apparently you've never been to sites like The Luminous Landscape

How is this ignorant? And, since you claim I don't know what I'm talking about, please enlighten me. How do YOU know what YOU'RE talking about?

I'm talking about actual printed results. If there's IQ issues onscreen but they don't reproduce in the final print, it's a non-issue. An example of this is noise. People make a huge deal about it, but unless it is visible in a print, to me anyways, it isn't a problem. Even then, if it appears in a print, does it detract from it
A print always lessens the visibility of noise, because it's not as precise a representation as the pixels in the original image. Since it's a constant factor applicable to any image, it's not worth mentioning. If it works for you, and you print a lot, that's great. But it's like saying applying a gaussian blur to your entire image also lowers visible noise -- it does, but at the cost of making the entire image look out of focus.

And comparing the noise in a digital image to the grain in a film print is silly as they're entirely different animals, and makes it seem like you don't understand grain/noise. It's also pointless to say that you couldn't care less about ISO 3200, because that's like saying "I couldn't care less about an optical viewfinder" -- the vast majority of people do care about low noise at high ISOs.
02-03-2010, 09:15 AM   #57
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
"The AF motor would be in the adapter" - that would make one big adapter
"an AF system much more accurate and fast" - more accurate, maybe (accuracy may be traded for speed). Fast? I doubt it would be faster than the classic phase detection AF. After all, that's why SLRs migrated from contrast detection to phase detection AF.
An AF motor is miniscule and an USM ring driving the AF screwdrive would perfectly fit a mount adapter w/o adding any bulk.

The mount adapter is not tiny because of differences in registration distance anyway.

Phase detect is a special form of contrast detect. One where the aperture has two/four holes f/5.6 apart and where contrast is only computed over a small region of the image.

As soon as computing power paired with a non-nonsense AF algorithm is deployed will contrast AF beat the hell out of phase AF. Both in terms of accuracy and speed. For instance, because much more light is available to base computation upon (better signal). I say this as an author of a fast contrast detect AF algorithm.
02-03-2010, 09:38 AM   #58
K7shooter
Guest




QuoteOriginally posted by wallyb Quote
the vast majority of people do care about low noise at high ISOs.
Please show me where you got this nugget of data from, otherwise, it's nothing more then a broad generalization.

Also, you claim a print is not as precise as pixels? How is a monitor more precise? Are any two monitors identical? Last I checked they are still low-res devices, with non-standardized luminosities, contrast ratios, and color reproduction.
02-03-2010, 09:43 AM   #59
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Untied States
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,882
QuoteOriginally posted by K7shooter Quote
Please show me where you got this nugget of data from, otherwise, it's nothing more then a broad generalization.
Are you seriously debating whether people care about high ISO or not? Yikes...





And that's just 1 of 2 pages, and only in the DSLR section, and only on this forum, and only threads with "high ISO" in the title...
02-03-2010, 09:45 AM   #60
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: The Untied States
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,882
QuoteOriginally posted by K7shooter Quote
Also, you claim a print is not as precise as pixels? How is a monitor more precise? Are any two monitors identical? Last I checked they are still low-res devices, with non-standardized luminosities, contrast ratios, and color reproduction.
Of course a monitor is more precise. Digital images are captured in pixels, and monitors display in pixels. Prints display in dots of ink. Staying in the same medium is always going to be more precise. And color accuracy is not even close to the same thing as resolution. You look like you don't know what you're talking about when you confuse basic terms like that...
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!
body, camera, lx, mirrorless, pentax, pentax mirrorless camera, pentax news, pentax rumors
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
[RUMOR] Canon's First Mirrorless Camera! jct us101 Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 12 09-14-2010 08:08 PM
Pentax's Reply to my inquiry about a Mirrorless Camera SMPhoto Pentax News and Rumors 91 08-15-2010 01:58 PM
Pentax is investigating a mirrorless system camera falconeye Pentax News and Rumors 172 04-01-2010 01:03 PM
Samsung GX fullframe mirrorless camera system? amonsul Pentax News and Rumors 46 11-12-2009 05:37 AM
Pentax K30D body design! vitalsax Pentax DSLR Discussion 23 01-14-2009 11:32 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:43 AM. | 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