Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-12-2013, 08:15 AM   #496
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,254
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
Any indication on whether the camera will have a Bayer AA filter? From what I have heard the K5IIs outsold the K5II in the Japanese market. And we have been hearing rumors of pentax developing methods of suppressing moire in-camera.
I don't see moire in my K-5IIs.

I think that we will see this year with probability of 95%:

1. K-3 APS-C (20 or 24 MP)
2. GRD V (I hope APS-C with fast prime)
3. new lensor for GXR (or two).
4. K-300's upgrade.

And I hope we will see this cameras till July.

02-12-2013, 08:22 AM   #497
Veteran Member
VisualDarkness's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,441
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
Don't confuse me for an expert, an expert is someone who has found one thing that is more interesting than sex, and as far as I can see i'm a long way off from being an expert.
Wow, I'm an expert!
02-12-2013, 08:24 AM   #498
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 691
Asexual lol!
02-12-2013, 08:34 AM   #499
Pentaxian
Raffwal's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: 6457' North
Posts: 806
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
Don't confuse me for an expert, an expert is someone who has found one thing that is more interesting than sex, and as far as I can see i'm a long way off from being an expert.
Is that the same as "digisexual"?



02-12-2013, 08:36 AM   #500
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,336
QuoteOriginally posted by Ratmagiclady Quote
Why not? Making a whole new mount only means you've got to stick an adapter about the same size to use most lenses on the camera anyway, and if you'd have to make special lenses to take the size advantage for your mirrorless system, why not just make those so the bulk of them goes into the camera body anyway? Kind of six of one, half dozen the other, especially if you're packing a full frame sensor in there. That could only get so small to begin with.
There are 3 issues here:
1. being able to make the body small enough (and I think they can definitely do something more compact than the K-01)
2. being able to make protruding lenses which are fast enough (no idea)
3. the end result must be liked by the market
Otherwise, why not?
02-12-2013, 09:05 AM   #501
Pentaxian
Ratmagiclady's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,476
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
There are 3 issues here:
1. being able to make the body small enough (and I think they can definitely do something more compact than the K-01)

Well, that's kind of what I was addressing: why worry about how small the body is when the lenses and adapters would only stick out that much or more, anyway. The K-01 wasn't about providing a whole new lens line, anyway, and why should a full-frame worry about it, *especially.*

There's only so many lenses that'd really benefit from the smallness anyway, especially for full-frame coverage, and why hang big ones off an adapter and have two mounts involved, when if you want special lenses to take advantage of compactness, you can basically recess those into the mount more easily than making a whole new lens mount and adapter anyway. It's the same difference when it comes to the size of what you hold in your hand to shoot.

If you're worried about that difference in depth on some larger lens, then it's better to have the mount nearer the center of gravity of the rig, anyway, rather than hanging that big glass hanging further out by the end.

Basically, as much as an advertising point as it may be lately, there's little sense for Pentax in making a whole new mount to make the *body* thinner just so you can say the body's thinner and then make it bigger again in lenses and adapters. If anything, they could just as easily use the space around the thickness to pack in some electronics that would otherwise have to go somewhere else.

Also, looking ahead, as the tech progresses, we might start seeing bodies getting back down to film SLR size: no one's looking at an ME Super and going, 'The mirror box makes this too big! '

QuoteQuote:
2. being able to make protruding lenses which are fast enough (no idea)
I'm pretty sure there isn't an optical design where the rear element couldn't get through there just as easily, regardless: I think the K-mount is basically limited to 1.4 lenses, but especially in full-frame, there's little practical need to go faster with the sensor technology we've got.

QuoteQuote:
3. the end result must be liked by the market
Otherwise, why not?
Well, in the speculative 'Full frame MILC' concept, I think the reason to make other than a DSLR is simplicity and reduced cost. (I mean, all other things being equal, I'll just take the prism, thanks. I'm pretty sure that to make a proper EVF you need some prism-housing-like space in there somewhere anyway. ) If they go that way, I'm sure it'll fly. Y'know, if you need the package to be as small as it can be, you're buying new glass, anyway, make it something XS style. ...Otherwise, full lens lineup already there.

Last edited by Ratmagiclady; 02-12-2013 at 09:13 AM.
02-12-2013, 09:31 AM   #502
Pentaxian
Clavius's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: De Klundert
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,122
QuoteOriginally posted by Ratmagiclady Quote
Why not?
Because a smaller registry distance would enable the use of a lot more lenses from other manufacturers. Look at the NEX, I happily mount my M-mount Carl Zeiss lenses on it. How I wish I could do the same with an excellent camera like the K5!

QuoteOriginally posted by Ratmagiclady Quote
Making a whole new mount only means you've got to stick an adapter about the same size to use most lenses on the camera anyway, and if you'd have to make special lenses to take the size advantage for your mirrorless system, why not just make those so the bulk of them goes into the camera body anyway? Kind of six of one, half dozen the other, especially if you're packing a full frame sensor in there. That could only get so small to begin with.
Why not give those lenses a shorter registry distance, so there is no bulk to hide inside the camera?
02-12-2013, 10:08 AM   #503
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,336
QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
Because a smaller registry distance would enable the use of a lot more lenses from other manufacturers.
I don't think Pentax cares much about selling other manufacturers lenses

Ratmagiclady:
1. One of the reasons people bashed the K-01 was its size. Well, that was basically a brick - IMO it can be made smaller, and ergonomically better (e.g. a better grip).
The MILC market seems to ask for cheap, small cameras; why not give them exactly that, only in K-mount?
When size is irrelevant, a regular DSLR would do.
2. It's f/1.2, actually (there was the 50mm f/1.2 lens); I'm not sure how things could change if elements gets inside the mount.
3. I see this K-mount MILC idea rather working for an entry level product, it could be made quite cheaply by the exclusion of the mirror/OVF and PDAF systems (I think an optional EVF should be provided).
The K-01 didn't work, but I think they can do it better, smaller and cheaper.

02-12-2013, 11:00 AM   #504
Pentaxian
Ratmagiclady's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,476
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
I don't think Pentax cares much about selling other manufacturers lenses

Ratmagiclady:
1. One of the reasons people bashed the K-01 was its size. Well, that was basically a brick - IMO it can be made smaller, and ergonomically better (e.g. a better grip).
The MILC market seems to ask for cheap, small cameras; why not give them exactly that, only in K-mount?
When size is irrelevant, a regular DSLR would do.
Well, considering this was about someone's mention of making a Pentax *full frame* MILC, ...size is only going to get so small, anyway. The K-01 isn't something they were ever going to build a whole new lens lineup around, anyway, ...and it rather defeats the purpose of a cheap body if you have to buy lots of new glass. Full frame's only going to get so small, anyway, ...and in general, whether you put the bulk of the camera around a 'mirror box' area or off in some other direction's just a matter of design. I'm not really in the market for a teeny teeny camera to begin with, mind you, but I'm also not seeing a need for Pentax to go off sideways just for the sake of a 'Me, too,' MILC and whole new lens mount.

If they wanted to, later, there'd be nothing stopping them from just inserting another lens mount in the same place it would have been all along, and retain functionality via an adapter, anyway.

I'm figuring the brick design always was more to be funky than to minimize size, anyway, If they'd wanted to, they could have put plenty of that bulk into a handgrip where it'd do more good, but hey.

Like I was saying, no one really complains about the registration distance making an ME Super too big, do they?

Consider that a lot of the stuff that makes a DSLR so thick is likely to be going away very soon: for one, the tech for ultra-thin and super-durable LCDs
is pretty much on the way, if you even really needed one if, say, they got creative enough about a big-enough EVF finder.


QuoteQuote:
2. It's f/1.2, actually (there was the 50mm f/1.2 lens); I'm not sure how things could change if elements gets inside the mount.
Ah, right, misspoke, there. I think there are limitations for other focal lengths of that speed, but, same difference. Pretty sure the optical design for a lens that fast either gets through the mount or not: it's not like there's a gap with extra space between the mount and some wider piece of glass, anyway.

Again, you're at the point of 'how small is glass like that going to get, anyway,' and will people pay to buy a system around that when it's really only helpful for a couple of lens types.

QuoteQuote:
3. I see this K-mount MILC idea rather working for an entry level product, it could be made quite cheaply by the exclusion of the mirror/OVF and PDAF systems (I think an optional EVF should be provided).
The K-01 didn't work, but I think they can do it better, smaller and cheaper.
I suppose it depends, too. For full-frame, if it knocks a grand off the price and some off the size and weight to not have so many moving parts, you know, they could be making something like that Olympus OM-D on appropriate scale for full-frame (after, say, an LX with a grip or a K-5,) and you know people would be going for it. (I heard a rumor that Olympus is going to have to reintroduce their full-size 4/3rds mount if they want to go with a bigger than 2x crop sensor anyway: the reason they had to go micro in the first place was because the 4/3rds dead-ended as a full size system: the size advantage was negligible, sensor tech went the opposite way they predicted, and the peepy little viewfinders weren't so nice, either. )

So I mean, why not keep it simple, only have to keep one mount on the market (and aligned on each camera) use the K-mount compatibility, (Uncripple the K-mount, even) and make accessible what Pentax has going for em, instead of trying to catch up with what everyone else is doing. Sell some XS-style lenses for smallness, and there you are.

Last edited by Ratmagiclady; 02-12-2013 at 11:07 AM.
02-12-2013, 11:26 AM   #505
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,434
Oh man, a K5 is too small as it is. Put a FF sensor in a K10/K20-style body, give it some heft and hang some long, fast glass off it.

I know. I'm crazy.
02-12-2013, 11:30 AM   #506
Veteran Member
maxfield_photo's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 1,215
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Oh man, a K5 is too small as it is. Put a FF sensor in a K10/K20-style body, give it some heft and hang some long, fast glass off it. I know. I'm crazy.
Agreed. (x2)
02-12-2013, 11:31 AM   #507
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,336
My ideal Pentax full frame would be something like either a K-5 or a K20D body, attached to a huge pentaprism viewfinder
02-12-2013, 11:40 AM   #508
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,861
Meanwhile I picked up a D600 in the store, don't get all excited) the other day, the salesman snuck the Nikkor 85 on it ( I said "You sneak" to which she replied "did you think I was going to give it to you with a kit lens?") I was surprised at the volume, it was huge. I was thinking, if I get one of these I'm going to have to add a new pelican case to the cost of the purchase price, it definitely won't fit what I have now. I guess too small is a relative thing. Maybe they'll come out with the"K-? FF" and the "K-? FF mini", with all the dead air removed. And the viewfinder, still way to small for my old eyes!
02-12-2013, 12:20 PM   #509
Pentaxian
Ratmagiclady's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 13,476
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
My ideal Pentax full frame would be something like either a K-5 or a K20D body, attached to a huge pentaprism viewfinder
Yeah, no worries for me, there, either. That's how I like em.
02-12-2013, 01:48 PM   #510
Pentaxian
cali92rs's Avatar

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 3,346
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Oh man, a K5 is too small as it is. Put a FF sensor in a K10/K20-style body, give it some heft and hang some long, fast glass off it.

I know. I'm crazy.
Man, I am with you there...my philosophy has always been, there's a pocket camera, and there is a SLR. If you cant fit the SLR into a pocket, why and try to shrink it to the point of being not optimal?
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!
change, cp, ff, full-frame, interview, pentax, photokina, question, time, video
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax Full Frame dand33 Welcomes and Introductions 5 10-16-2012 07:50 AM
K30, K5n, K3 and maybe full-frame at Photokina... frankfanrui Pentax News and Rumors 638 09-06-2012 07:08 AM
Pentax To Announce the K-3 Full Frame DSLR At Photokina Danny Delcambre Pentax News and Rumors 662 09-04-2012 05:05 PM
Tokina plans 16-28mm F2.8 for full-frame. Is that a singht? i83N Pentax News and Rumors 20 03-03-2010 02:19 AM
Any plans for full frame soon? FrancisK7 Photographic Technique 2 09-22-2008 07:15 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:52 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