Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-06-2013, 02:02 PM   #781
Senior Member
deus ursus's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Stårheim, Norway
Posts: 270
https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/newreply.php?do=postreply&t=214117

Just to throw a little torch into the debate on how much space a full frame sensor with SR would need inside a body: The other day I had finished a roll of film in my LX, and when I opened the lid and looked into the internals where the film does it's thing, it struck me how much space there really is around that opening the light goes through to hit the film (see attached image). It made me think: Does a full frame body really need to be any wider than an LX or a K-5 to make room for the SR movement of a full frame sensor?

The K-5 is a bit taller than the LX (96.5 mm vs. 85 mm) and the LX is a bit wider than the K-5 (144.5 mm vs. 130.5 mm). Most of the extra width on the LX I believe is on the left of the "sensor". That extra space could be used to stack away electronics to free space around the sensor. A body with the K-5's height and the LX's widht would still be a very compact body, compared to the competition.

Attached Images
 
04-06-2013, 02:32 PM   #782
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2012
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 696
Trouble making sense of what Malcolm said? No trouble at all. He is a salesman, and he wants to sell what he has available, right now.

And what he has is very, very good.

@miles -- Oy vey! I'd be afraid to drive a panzer tank, like a Panther or Tiger, through NYC. You wouldn't get far! Now, a Sherman tank, down the West Side Highway, you think? Ah, fuggedabouttit... probably fall through the roadway and scare all the Canikon guys lining up for their shots of pier whatever and the Hudson river.

Last edited by jon404; 04-06-2013 at 02:39 PM.
04-06-2013, 06:39 PM   #783
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,535
QuoteOriginally posted by deus ursus Quote
Does a full frame body really need to be any wider than an LX or a K-5 to make room for the SR movement of a full frame sensor?
I pulled apart a K10D once - the neodymium magnets were used in pairs: they were about 15mm wide and about 5mm thick, the magnets were placed in front of and behind the sensor - so yes the SR mechanism does take up quite a bit of space.Remember the shutter mechanism has to fit in the camera as well - and that takes up quite a bit of room too. especially if we want a shutter with a 1/8000 shutter speed.

IF we left out the SR mechanism, I think it would be rather easy to come out with a DSLR with a svelte form factor like the LX - but I don't see that happening.
04-06-2013, 09:13 PM   #784
Pentaxian
Uluru's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,400
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
IF we left out the SR mechanism, I think it would be rather easy to come out with a DSLR with a svelte form factor like the LX - but I don't see that happening.
I'm not sure why would Pentax be married to a SR in all of their products? In a camera form like the RX-1, Sony has not introduced in body anti shake / shake reduction. Neither Fujifilm has it in their X100s and the X series. Leica doesn't have it either. Nor Nikon and Canon.
It is nice to have, but not absolutely necessary as the differentiation factor; all others prove it.
If Pentax really thinks the LX form factor would sell, one stop light advantage of FF over the APS-C already works as a form of shake reduction. Better that, than potential users shaking off Pentax as an irrelevant player who always comes late to the game.

04-07-2013, 12:43 AM   #785
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,535
QuoteOriginally posted by Uluru Quote
I'm not sure why would Pentax be married to a SR in all of their products?

Because In body stabilisation works with every lens Pentax has made
. Leica hasn't used it because of the form factor of the M series camera bodies and the short focus flange which doesn't really give much room for complex SR mechanisms*. Canon and Nikon haven't used in body SR because they already have it in their lenses, and lenses are their primary cash cow. Fuji didn't use in body SR because they were planning on incorporating it in the lenses anyway - though now that I think of it for an RF style camera having optical stabilisation is a bit redundant. Though Having said all that Pentax didn't use in body SR with the 645D because the sensor has far too much mass for it to be practical, or effective enough to warrant the cost of implementing it.

*Leica is rumoured to be implementing optical stabilisation in their lenses for the S2.
04-07-2013, 01:06 AM   #786
Pentaxian
Uluru's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,400
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote

Because In body stabilisation works with every lens Pentax has made
.
Well, yes, at some times that may be important.
But from time to time, even an advantage may become a disadvantage.
04-07-2013, 01:51 AM   #787
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,679
A bit of extra weight and size for a permanently available and pragmatic feature? I'd buy the SR version. The K110D could have been built smaller than the K100D but wasn't. Form is still important for a solid FF dSLR - but each to their own. I guess I'm not a fan of small camera + big sensor/lens combinations. FA Limiteds are not the only lenses I'd be pairing with the (future) FF camera. The K-5 + D-BG4 grip and FA 43 is still very nicely balanced to me, despite the 43's petite form.
04-07-2013, 05:05 AM   #788
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,535
QuoteOriginally posted by Ash Quote
A bit of extra weight and size for a permanently available and pragmatic feature? I'd buy the SR version.
Same here.

QuoteOriginally posted by Uluru Quote
But from time to time, even an advantage may become a disadvantage.
Give me an example where the Pentax SR system is a disadvantage to photographers.

04-07-2013, 05:16 AM   #789
Veteran Member
filorp's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Aberdeen Scotland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 389
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
Give me an example where the Pentax SR system is a disadvantage to photographers
for instance it is very fickle when you try "panning" i found nikons sr much much better in this regard (like day and night)
04-07-2013, 05:34 AM   #790
Veteran Member
tclausen's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,399
QuoteOriginally posted by filorp Quote
for instance it is very fickle when you try "panning" i found nikons sr much much better in this regard (like day and night)
Possibly true, not great at panning myself. Alas, there's an easy to hit off-switch for SR on my K10D for such situations.

I'd have assumed that there was the same switch on the later K-20/7/5/5ii, but I just went through the "discontinued models" & current models on the Pentax site and this seems to be an exclusive feature on the K10D/K20....?

I know that SR can be disabled in the menus on the K-01, but generally fiddling with settings in menus is not very user-friendly (& something which I *hate* on recent cameras).
04-07-2013, 06:49 AM   #791
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,116
I also don't consider SR as essential, having used film cameras for 50 years without it. I also use a Leica M9 with no SR, and while it's true the RF is used most with wide angles where it doesn't matter as much, good technique is more important than SR. I use the M9 with 90 - 200 lenses also. The new Leica M with LV and EFV also uses the older Leica SLR lenses, primarily for longer lenses, and it still has no SR. Of course, there are more fast lenses available for the Leica than for the K-5, and good fast lenses are more expensive. I'd still prefer a smaller, thinner body for a Pentax FF than SR, but the lens line expects SR, so I expect Pentax will stay with it.
04-07-2013, 08:49 AM   #792
Pentaxian
gazonk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oslo area, Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,509
QuoteOriginally posted by TomB_tx Quote
I'd still prefer a smaller, thinner body for a Pentax FF than SR, but the lens line expects SR, so I expect Pentax will stay with it.
They need 24-70- and 70-200-ish lenses to go with a full frame camera, so they could of course deliver those with IS... I like SR, but if no SR really would be what made a elegant, compact FF Pentax possible, I don't think SR should be holy.
04-07-2013, 09:45 AM - 1 Like   #793
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,424
Yeah, but would you like:
A. No stabilization at all, or
B. Much larger, more expensive stabilized lenses; less reliable too (because in-lens stabilization can fail) ?
I would rather have a slightly larger body.
04-07-2013, 01:24 PM   #794
Pentaxian
gazonk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oslo area, Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,509
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Yeah, but would you like:
A. No stabilization at all, or
B. Much larger, more expensive stabilized lenses; less reliable too (because in-lens stabilization can fail) ?
I would rather have a slightly larger body.
I would then use non-stabilized primes and leave the big zooms for others to buy...
04-07-2013, 01:30 PM   #795
Ash
Community Manager
Loyal Site Supporter
Ash's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Toowoomba, Queensland
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,679
So your answer is A. But I don't see Pentax giving up SR. It's one of their core features, and as for panning, you can anticipate when you need SR to be off and switch it off yourself with just a few quick keystrokes.
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 02:20 PM. | See also: NikonForums.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