Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-08-2012, 01:21 PM   #2971
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
You don't HAVE to use an adapter ala Nex-Alpha to get PDAF. Look at how Nikon handles it on the V1/J1.

Besides, most don't seem to complain about using PDAF lenses on a K-01 body, but having an adapter to mount K-mount lenses on a more compact body that supports a new lens mount is somehow terrible?

07-08-2012, 01:51 PM   #2972
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,250
But what if no big sensor with PD-AF is available? What if it works as "fast" as the Canon 650D's one? Until we'd see the adapter we won't know how it would look.

Valid and strong arguments against that stupid idea were already made; should I repeat them, again? I'd rather like you to go back and read them, also read what that stupid idea is about. Nope, it's nothing as innocent as being able to use your lenses on some compact camera, if you wish.

You're a Canonite. I can understand why you wouldn't care if Pentax would change their mount, just because, and force all of their users to either buy ("get for free") adapters, or jump ship. But what if Canon would do it? Just because.
07-08-2012, 01:56 PM   #2973
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Where did you get the "height of the mirror is 27mm"?
Are you aware that the mirror clearance is not the "height of the mirror"? And that a lens would protrude into the body, past the registration distance? That's basic knowledge, by the way

They cannot simply change the register distance of the K-mount because we're in a.d. 2012 and the K-mount incorporates many legacy things. To go through all the hassle of changing the mount, yet doing a half-assed job, that's something you'd suggest. Haven't noticed how real world examples supports my point of view and not yours; in this case, e.g. Sony going from Alpha to Nex?
Let's not forget (a thing you're an expert to) that Sony had to include PD-AF into the adapter because otherwise the AF would be very slow (4/3 to m4/3 slow). You were talking about no limitations, few posts ago... don't ignore them!

There is no such thing as "free"; you made that up because you cannot accept an argument. The least they could do for their customers is not to change the f*cking mount; and they don't plan to. Capisci?

Indeed, monochrome, it isn't worth the effort - the "just-because, screw all customers mount" camp is very stubborn. I must be a masochist.
Simple math and there are cross section of the K5 so no that hard to measure it.
Well yes some lenses do protrude so they can't do that anymore just like with the Canon EF mount, has the same limitation.

Well the connections of the K-mount are alight, sure they can lose some for the aperture and let the adpater handle that if needed to translate it from legacy lens to the new one.
You got proof of that for the Sony adapter? For the 4/3 that is all by the wire so why the lenses focus slower is beyond me so maybe you know why? What limitations?

I have made everything up i have said so far but i can not except an argument..? The problem was that he already had many k-mount lenses so how does that work with me not excepting his argument? It surely is shit he can't use the lenses without an adapter on a different mount. What is there not to except about?
07-08-2012, 02:30 PM   #2974
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Valid and strong arguments against that stupid idea were already made; should I repeat them, again? I'd rather like you to go back and read them, also read what that stupid idea is about. Nope, it's nothing as innocent as being able to use your lenses on some compact camera, if you wish.

You're a Canonite. I can understand why you wouldn't care if Pentax would change their mount, just because, and force all of their users to either buy ("get for free") adapters, or jump ship. But what if Canon would do it? Just because.
Okay answer me this, if pentax won't make a FF camera but they do want to compete in the professional market how are they going to do that?
This is actually what started it all, lets see if you can up with an answer.

07-08-2012, 03:24 PM   #2975
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,250
Medium format; that's their professional system. They will continue it, regardless if they'll make or not a FF camera. And they don't care about your opinion on this matter, at all.
OTOH, your path was already followed by Olympus - the OM-G is exactly what you describe. But it can barely compete with top APS-C DSLRs... why would a Pentax version do so much better? Just because?

Can you show me that simple math of yours?
You want proof that Sony had to include PD-AF, thus increasing the cost and complexity, instead of doing it just because? Why am I not surprised?
And as always, you still can't comprehend we don't want another mount. Hopeless...
07-08-2012, 04:46 PM   #2976
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
medium format is different way of photographing so that's not comparable is it?

I don't know the OM series so but what do you mean precisely that it is the same?

You know the height that is needed for the mirror so just use the Pythagoras theorem, like i said basic math.

No you said that Sony had to include PD-AF into the adapter because otherwise the AF would be very slow so i like to know what you base that on, is that strange thing to ask?

"we" well there have been a few already stating they see the reason behind a new mount and i'm never advocating that we need a new mount, i only said that if Pentax won't make a FF but want to compete with them with their APS-C that they should change the lens mount so that they can get faster lenses for it. Something very else you're saying so yes it certainly is hopeless

Last edited by Anvh; 07-08-2012 at 04:59 PM.
07-08-2012, 04:58 PM   #2977
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
You know the height that is needed for the mirror so just use the Pythagoras theorem, like i said basic math.
Um, you have to design an entire mechanism to move the mirror, and fit it 'wherever' you can. It's pretty darn limiting to try to do it for the small registration distance, you could move it laterally but that's a new (to me) and unproven design. For conventional designs it's 'basic math' that a conventional design wouldn't fit in a Leica registration distance.
07-08-2012, 05:15 PM   #2978
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
Sure but that is placed above or to the side of the mirror box, not inside of it.

For simplere math canon FD is 135 SLR mount and that is 42mm so with APS-C we can go 1.5 times smaller so 42 / 1.5 = 28mm so 0,2mm short but i'm sure they can find that somewhere.

Actually the konica mount is 40.5mm so 27mm, preciesly where i came on.


Last edited by Anvh; 07-08-2012 at 05:24 PM.
07-08-2012, 05:26 PM   #2979
Pentaxian
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
Are you talking about M mount still? I'm confused now, but you do realise the silver bit of the lens is inside the registration distance? The registration distance is from bottom of black bit to sensor.

07-08-2012, 05:31 PM   #2980
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
Yes i know but is that more then 0,8mm?

Like i said a really tight fit or else they need to use a transition-metal hydride electrochromic mirror, that one can switch from reflective to translucent depending the current.
http://www.lbl.gov/tt/techs/lbnl1665.html

Last edited by Anvh; 07-08-2012 at 05:37 PM.
07-08-2012, 05:55 PM   #2981
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: 5th floor
Posts: 1,328
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
Um, you have to design an entire mechanism to move the mirror, and fit it 'wherever' you can. It's pretty darn limiting to try to do it for the small registration distance, you could move it laterally but that's a new (to me) and unproven design. For conventional designs it's 'basic math' that a conventional design wouldn't fit in a Leica registration distance.
I think we should all switch to Leica today. They have FF. But, we cannot blame slow focusing to the manufacture. That is a huge minus.
07-08-2012, 06:00 PM   #2982
Pentaxian
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
Yes i know but is that more then 0,8mm?
The leica lens is small but it's not that small.

Last edited by twitch; 07-08-2012 at 06:07 PM.
07-08-2012, 11:05 PM   #2983
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
Yes i know but is that more then 0,8mm?
Not familiar with the metric system? 0.8 mm is like 1/30 inch or so, in other words not much... Also, to put this (rather silly) discussion to bed, go take a look at the rear element of say a Leica 21/4 Super Angulon.
07-08-2012, 11:30 PM   #2984
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,250
Anvh, you like it or not, medium format is their pro system. This won't change, and your input is irrelevant.

Don't tell me you don't know about the OM-G, erm, OM-D (Oly's marketing must be affecting me, I keep calling it that way ). Is exactly what you're asking Pentax to do: short registration distance, "pro" mirrorless, can use 4/3 lenses with stinkin' adapters (which coincidentally aren't free and you'd get slow AF) and with those, you even have f/2.0 zooms. Tell me, are they competing with Canikon's pro FF?

I see you're not even sure if you used Pythagoras or not... for me, the conclusion is clear: you made that up.
By the way, one does not simply scale down the registration distance; there are many areas that are more or less constant: shutter space, the protruding part of the lens (more than 0.8mm, as you can see), tolerances...

And about your solve-it-all technology, I'll quote from that page: "Switches between reflective and transparent states in seconds"
Wow. I'm speechless.
07-09-2012, 12:39 AM   #2985
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Manila
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,190
...and we're now about to reach 200 pages. Bravo
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!
aps-c, bodies, body, dslr, full-frame, lenses, lineup, pentax, system, users
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Full frame pentax cem.kumuk Pentax DSLR Discussion 11 11-12-2010 03:13 PM
Pentax and Full Frame... Shutter-bug Photographic Technique 60 11-03-2010 10:03 AM
Pentax A 50/1.2 on Full Frame aegisphan Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 23 10-28-2010 04:16 PM
News Regarding Advertising on PentaxForums.com: An Official Statement Adam Site Suggestions and Help 5 03-24-2010 07:37 PM
Official: New DSLR Body is Coming; Full Frame Model is Under Planning! RiceHigh Pentax News and Rumors 78 08-04-2008 06:18 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:03 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