Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-22-2011, 04:54 PM   #436
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Taylor, Texas
Posts: 1,017
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
Right.

And half the chorus here says they will buy an FF body to use legacy glass, thereby undermining at least half those sales. The "I want a new camera body with old lenses" is a sales killer.
You are exactly correct here. This is the conundrum Pentax faces if they are looking at Full Frame body. Not criticizing, but I would say 80% of the Full Frame replies I read here have a whole lot to do with using legacy lenses. I don't think that's what people who buy Canon and Nikon Full Frames do but maybe I'm wrong.

I still think Pentax can do this right but it won't happen in the short term. They will need to have a plan for lenses first and some kind of gimmick to make the camera stand out. They aren't going to make money selling to existing customers like me with a bunch of old A, M, and FA lenses. They would lose money there.

However.....if they would be so kind as to release an MX sized Full Frame, I'd buy it.

10-22-2011, 04:57 PM   #437
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,922
QuoteOriginally posted by hcarvalhoalves Quote
From a pure product design point of view, mirrorless is the way forward:

1. Less movable parts means overall better reliability (and less money lost to warranty)UOTE]
New systems means all the kinks have not been worked out like SLR has for 50 years. The real killer movable part has still not changed: the shutter.

QuoteQuote:
2. Less energy spent moving the mirror means longer battery life
The rear and EVF LCD more than make up for that loss with their added battery use.

QuoteQuote:
3. Less components in the way to affect image quality
Not optically. Look at the Leica M9. They had to put teeny mirrors in front of the sensor to re-align the light path so legacy M-mount glass would work, especially wide angle.

QuoteQuote:
4. Reduction in production costs as the necessary electronics are produced en masse
Mirrors and prisms are made en masse and have pretty much zero new R&D necessary, whereas every single electronic system means re-tooling somewhere.

And both have to be precision aligned by hand. I would gauge the SLR takes more time, but not an assembly-line deal breaker.

QuoteQuote:
5. Allows even more compact and ergonomic bodies (a good camera is a camera you can carry with you everywhere)
They're not that small. People have been carrying DSLR's everywhere. The human hand size is still a defining limitation.

The NEX-7 is not a small camera body.

QuoteQuote:
6. Taking out the mirror leaves more room for AF motors or SR systems while keeping (or possibly increasing) the sensor size
It mostly reduces the flange distance only.

QuoteQuote:
The only downside is the EVF. Current display technology suck compared to the plain physics of mirroring light to an OVF. Which isn't saying much, as the viewfinder on current DSLRs are so small and dark they are not far from EVF either.
You forgot PDAF, which on a top-line FF camera makes mincemeat of any CDAF system.

Thos who make money from their cameras will not give that advantage up. CDAF is making strides, but it's got its issues as well. The problem with PDAF is it takes up space. If you want better AF in an SLR you need a larger body, and the most common complaint about Pentax is an inferior AF system.

QuoteQuote:
A MX-sized mirrorless PENTAX with alloy body and weather-sealing, featuring a K-mount (or adapter for it) and big & bright viewfinder would be the ultimate go everywhere camera. I think there's space in the market for a comeback to compact, sturdy old-school cameras (like demonstrated by the Fuji X100), and mirror-less is the technology that might make it possible without having to make it a rangefinder with fixed lens like the Fuji.
It would have to be an adapter to stay k-mount as you cannot both reduce the size of the flange and use the k-mount glass.

So you need a whole new mount. I'm all in favour of an adapter, but you'd still require a lot of new glass.

The smaller you want it with a bigger sensor, the larger the body. You want 10 FPS? Bigger body. 1080p video? Bigger body. Longer battery life? Bigger body. Dual SD card slots? Bigger body. WiFi/GPS? Bigger body. Fast AF? Bigger body. HDMI and USB out? Bigger body. FF SR? Bigger body. WR? Bigger body.

Most people here have a wish list that asks for more features but smaller body. They never detail what they'd give up to get there. Half the functions people want require new chips which require space and power and cooling. Most require whole new components.
10-22-2011, 06:20 PM   #438
Veteran Member
Chex's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,700
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
So you need a whole new mount. I'm all in favour of an adapter, but you'd still require a lot of new glass.
There's no reason it could not be K-mount, every 35mm film body that's K-mount is proof that you would not need a new bigger mount and then adapt it.. this is not a MF sensor.


QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
The smaller you want it with a bigger sensor, the larger the body. You want 10 FPS? Bigger body. 1080p video? Bigger body. Longer battery life? Bigger body. Dual SD card slots? Bigger body. WiFi/GPS? Bigger body. Fast AF? Bigger body. HDMI and USB out? Bigger body. FF SR? Bigger body. WR? Bigger body.
more FPS = Bigger body?? Really?? Please understand that the amount of transistors and I/O functions video card and CPU manufacturers are cramming into a small processor is becoming unfathomably large.. it's the processors ABILITY that determines this, and it's not always in line with its SIZE. Take a CPU on a cutting edge cellphone (android/Blackberry/iPhone) and then see the size of a solid state 2 or 4 GB module.. there is no real need for increase of size, heck it would probably be a DECREASE of size needed.

1080P Video = Bigger Body? ok come on now.. that's like saying.. you want more colors than 16 in your old monitor well I'm afraid it will be the size of your dishwasher... this is again, simply processor's ability.

Dual SDHC = bigger body, yes.. it's an actual physical port.. BUT they could be smarter about it and have it in the grip if they use the same camera body system as the K-7/5.. they have a spot to HOLD a card.. just make one to USE the card instead.

Wifi/GPS = Bigger Body.. possibly, again IMO this is something that could fit in the grip as well, there is a lot of wasted real estate in the grip.. so whether it's a one piece with grip or a separate grip it could be done either way. But it would also decrease battery life expectancy.

Faster AF = Same as others above, processor ability and light meters used.. it's possible it could take up more space, but considering the Nikon/Canon base model APS-C's are not really that large I can't see it adding size... still limited by the screw drive/SDM and DC motor systems, I hope they tweak this in this next generation for 2012!

HDMI/USB out = Why would it add when the K-5 already has this port?? Just purchase the proper cables and your good to go! No size addition needed from K-5!

FF SR = To move a bigger sensor, it will take some in camera real estate to mount the sensor on an SR pad, which in turn will have to have some space to move a touch.. so obviouseley it needs a bit more space, would be interested to see how much space is on the other side of my K-5's rear LCD as is.. But probably bigger size required.

WR = Bigger Body.. umm no.. putting in seals is not what makes the K-5/7 chassis as nice and beefy as it is.. it's the amazing full alloy body that add's a little size compared to cheap plastic.

I agree some items are hard to get around.. but for the most part, newer tech and good R&D can overcome a lot of adding bulk to the camera. If Pentax were to simply buy tech from a few years back to save cost, it would be doing a disservice to itself anyways by putting out a "sub-par-oversized-for-what-you-paid-for camera". I just can't see that ever being the case.
10-22-2011, 06:20 PM   #439
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Taylor, Texas
Posts: 1,017
Don't care about 10FPS does the M9 do that? Could care less about video, dual SD card slots (I only use 4GB ones), WIFI/GPS (why not throw in a toaster too), actually I mostly use a GXR and X100 so the fast AF obviously isn't a big deal.

Unfortunately, I'm sure only a company like Leica can sell something like the M9. However, Fuji seems to have done alright with the X100 so there are photographers who don't need the camera to cook lunch for them. I think it's just a matter of building it right and marketing it right. And having the understanding that it's not going to sell like a Canon Rebel. That's not the only measure of success.

I think Ricoh might surprise some people. They really do build cameras for people who like a certain type of photography. I'm not sure what they will do, but I bet it will be different than what most people expect.

I do still agree with you that they aren't going to make a camera just so people can use their legacy glass. But the more I think about it, I think there might be some kind of Pentax branded Full Frame in 2-3 years. Probably won't have a toaster oven though.

I swear most of that stuff you mentioned really isn't necessary. 10 framers per second. WOW. Usually when I go out taking pictures I maybe take 36 in two hours.

10-22-2011, 06:29 PM   #440
Veteran Member
Chex's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,700
QuoteOriginally posted by stanleyk Quote
I swear most of that stuff you mentioned really isn't necessary. 10 framers per second. WOW. Usually when I go out taking pictures I maybe take 36 in two hours.
having 2 little kids (5 & 2 1/2) I find the K-5's 7FPS is very handy! I would welcome more.. but 7 with a better buffering system to shoot until the SDHC card is full would be better than more FPS!
10-22-2011, 06:30 PM   #441
New Member




Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 4
Pro-grade APS-C the way to go?

I was just wondering,

With the demised of the Canon 1D line, there could be a existing market for pros who wanted reach and uncrippled functionality. Not all pros like a FF FOV

Will a pro-grade APS-C be better than an first foray into FF which is likely to lag behind the other FF models?

Pro-grade like a "Super model" of the existing flag ship APS-C, this means Pentax will set its sight on being the best of APS-C dslR, better than whatever nikon, canon and sony can throw with it.

Selling points will be:

Small but great Ergo,
Fast FPS (k-5 was already getting there)
Best in class AF (they got to beat the 7D on this)
Tracking in AF
WR
Twin SD card
SR
Uncrippled aperture support


Supporting functions which need to be stepped up:
Long Lens offering
Flash system
Lens to be all WR based

This could be a flagship with the normal non-super for the enthusiatics market similar to what K-5 is already doing
10-22-2011, 06:34 PM   #442
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Taylor, Texas
Posts: 1,017
QuoteOriginally posted by Chex Quote
having 2 little kids (5 & 2 1/2) I find the K-5's 7FPS is very handy! I would welcome more.. but 7 with a better buffering system to shoot until the SDHC card is full would be better than more FPS!
I only have dogs but I do understand. I guess that I started out with film (I'm pretty old) and I never really changed. It's hard when your my age adapting. I for the life of me rarely ever even use the menus on the camera. I use manual on the K5 and aperture priority on the X100. It kind of stinks getting old.
10-22-2011, 06:36 PM   #443
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Taylor, Texas
Posts: 1,017
To tell you how out of date I am, I've never used the video function on any of my cameras. Not even once.

10-22-2011, 06:53 PM   #444
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,790
If Pentax goes FF I would expect them to go after the wedding market first. That group does not need the lightning fast AF or really high frame rates. The 5D series and the A900 both have pretty average AF speed and 5fps. That is the market that has the most $$$$$, but Canon is very dominate.

Everyone always seems to argue for the specs that they want in a camera and their is no one camera design that is going to be right for everyone.
10-22-2011, 07:25 PM   #445
Veteran Member
hcarvalhoalves's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: São Paulo, Brazil
Posts: 836
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
New systems means all the kinks have not been worked out like SLR has for 50 years. The real killer movable part has still not changed: the shutter.
Still doesn't change the fact that the fewer movable parts, the better. Also, there's more room to improve mirror-less designs than SLRs, which are a dead end.

QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
The rear and EVF LCD more than make up for that loss with their added battery use.
So what? Current cameras already feature a back LCD. Getting rid of mirror just means more battery available overall. And again, there's more room to improve the energy efficiency of a LED screen than of a mirror actuator.

QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
Mirrors and prisms are made en masse and have pretty much zero new R&D necessary, whereas every single electronic system means re-tooling somewhere.

And both have to be precision aligned by hand. I would gauge the SLR takes more time, but not an assembly-line deal breaker.
Electronics production scale. Mirrors and prisms are already produced in large quantities, but production and assemblage don't scale because there's no technology on it. A chip can start costing $ 100 per unit, but once mass produced it can reach pennies as the R&D cost is diluted. And the next generation of chip builds on top of that, so it's a virtuous circle.

QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
They're not that small. People have been carrying DSLR's everywhere. The human hand size is still a defining limitation.
Can't compare a Canon 1D with a Pentax ME, despite both featuring about the same "sensor" and flange distance. DSLRs are bulky and awkard, and bulky and awkward is worse. That's undeniable. If not, people would still be carrying those Motorola bricks instead of iPhones.

QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
The NEX-7 is not a small camera body.
I referred to the Pentax MX or ME body designs, or (albeit not SLR) the Fuji X100. I don't believe NEX is the benchmark in camera body design here, though a NEX + those huge lenses are still more compact than any DSLR.

QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
You forgot PDAF, which on a top-line FF camera makes mincemeat of any CDAF system.

Thos who make money from their cameras will not give that advantage up. CDAF is making strides, but it's got its issues as well. The problem with PDAF is it takes up space. If you want better AF in an SLR you need a larger body, and the most common complaint about Pentax is an inferior AF system.
You're absolutely correct. But it's all about compromises.

Mirror-less cameras with CDAF that you can carry everywhere with killer image quality are still good enough. On the other hand, clumsy FF cameras with fast AF and long zooms are still a niche. Those who don't need such a fast AF can accept the tradeoff in favor of a better photography experience, in the same way people don't trade a Leica for a Canon for lacking AF. It all depends on how you use a camera, AF is not all it's cracked up to be.

QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
The smaller you want it with a bigger sensor, the larger the body. You want 10 FPS? Bigger body. 1080p video? Bigger body. Longer battery life? Bigger body. Dual SD card slots? Bigger body. WiFi/GPS? Bigger body. Fast AF? Bigger body. HDMI and USB out? Bigger body. FF SR? Bigger body. WR? Bigger body.

Most people here have a wish list that asks for more features but smaller body. They never detail what they'd give up to get there. Half the functions people want require new chips which require space and power and cooling. Most require whole new components.
I don't believe everything requires a bigger body. PENTAX is the biggest proof of that. They cram a mirror, APS-C sensor and SR in a body smaller than the competitors that don't offer any of these. So it's certainly possible to achieve MX-sized bodies with mirror-less technology, possibly even with a degree of K-mount compatibility, which would be perfect for PENTAX.

Last edited by hcarvalhoalves; 10-22-2011 at 07:46 PM.
10-22-2011, 07:29 PM   #446
Senior Member
j0n4hpk's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: California
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 196
Let me throw another monkey wrench to the possibly future Pentax K DSLR camera body: Can a FF sensor that acts as its own electronic shutter and seats right behind a peilicle mirror be developed? Pentax can get away with the shutter-mirror mechanism for good, provide faster fps and simplify service. Other than that, most can stay the same as in the K-5. To clarify further, here's a crude diagram:
(camera body front) [ (pellicle mirror)//(ff shutter-sensor)]
Now, it's possible that this idea may be impractical or ilogic, but it's just an idea.
By the way, if Pentax (or any other camera manufacturer) wants to use this idea, contact me first.

Correction: "Mea culpa, mea culpa": I guess that optically, it's much easier to sense the light, either at the back inner plane of the body like current designs or [here I go again] at a projection plane in the pentaprism or penta mirror, than diagonally right behind the main mirror as I proposed before. Again, If this stirs the engineer in you, I'll be glad to get a share of the royalties.

Last edited by j0n4hpk; 10-28-2011 at 07:44 PM. Reason: Correcting myself... sorta
10-22-2011, 07:51 PM   #447
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Taylor, Texas
Posts: 1,017
QuoteOriginally posted by hcarvalhoalves Quote
You're absolutely correct. But it's all about compromises.

Mirror-less cameras with CDAF that you can carry everywhere with killer image quality are still good enough. On the other hand, clumsy FF cameras with fast AF and long zooms are still a niche. Those who don't need such a fast AF can accept the tradeoff in favor of a better photography experience, in the same way people don't trade a Leica for a Canon for lacking AF. It all depends on how you use a camera, AF is not all it's cracked up to be.

I don't believe everything requires a bigger body. PENTAX is the biggest proof of that. They cram a mirror, APS-C sensor and SR in a body smaller than the competitors that don't offer any of these. So it's certainly possible to achieve MX-sized bodies with mirror-less technology, possibly even with a degree of K-mount compatibility, which would be perfect for PENTAX.
This is where I would agree with you. What I'm struck by is basically people want a Canon or Nikon camera with a Pentax logo on it. Nothing wrong with that, but I just don't see how Pentax makes this camera and makes money. They need to do something different. There are apparently a lot of people who want things cameras like the X100. I have no idea how many cameras Leica sells but not every photographer wants or needs 10 frames per second or dual slots or whatever. Besides, it would strike me that there are a lot of good cameras out there that already do all that stuff. Why not do something different?

The way I see the K5 is about as good an APS-C DSLR as you can get and did Pentax sell boatloads of them..... Just copying Canon and Nikon isn't probably isn't going to cut it. I know that won't make a lot of people happy if they don't but it may be the only way for them to stay in business.

Look how hard it is to get a Fuji X100. The only places that have them in stock are selling them for $1400+. So you can make money by selling cameras that are different. I bet the NEX 7 is going to be a big seller if they can ever get them released. I'm not saying the camera shouldn't have an OVF, but that whatever they do next they need to differentiate themselves from Canon and Nikon if sales are what the goal is.
10-22-2011, 08:21 PM   #448
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 318
QuoteOriginally posted by stanleyk Quote
I'm not saying the camera shouldn't have an OVF, but that whatever they do next they need to differentiate themselves from Canon and Nikon if sales are what the goal is.
It needs to be different *and* useful/functional.
10-22-2011, 08:21 PM   #449
Site Supporter
Clinton's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,826
I think I said two more pages. I believe we are now at 4 and we have reached full on thread sprawl. No where near the original topic, nothing of substance, I'll be unsubscribing this thread now.

@Adam, Thanks again for sending the letter to Pentax. I have high hopes. I suggest you feel free to close your thread any time.
10-22-2011, 08:33 PM   #450
Veteran Member
Chex's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,700
QuoteOriginally posted by stanleyk Quote
I only have dogs but I do understand. I guess that I started out with film (I'm pretty old) and I never really changed. It's hard when your my age adapting. I for the life of me rarely ever even use the menus on the camera. I use manual on the K5 and aperture priority on the X100. It kind of stinks getting old.
I don't think of myself as old (yet), even though my wife might disagree! I end up shooting in Manual mode about 90% of the time, and MF unless I'm shooting a moving target like the kids. I only use TAv mode or USER modes (Manual mode in those too, just Jpeg with custom settings). I find TAv mode is very handy in low light.. if only AF worked well in low light as well!
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 04:17 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