Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-20-2014, 06:03 PM   #211
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2013
Photos: Albums
Posts: 128
QuoteOriginally posted by John Poirier Quote
Would you mind explaining that statement? I too am confused. Have I been practicing unsafe lens insertion for the last 35 years?
Sorry, that was really lazy of me. The apertures on the m lenses don't engage until you take the picture, which messes up live view and metering. If you set your aperture and look into your lens, then disconnect your lens, you'll see that's the case. You can also see this in video mode: the aperture won't take your setting until you start recording. The work around would be to use some kind of teleconverter or speed booster, if only there was one. It's always struck me as a weird problem: you can probably get a better light reading on a k mount manual lens if you're using an adapter that lets you set your aperture without the interference of the camera, which means your lens is on a competitor's body.

QuoteOriginally posted by jatrax Quote
I think what is disingenuous is you blaming Ricoh for rumors.
Didn't the rumors come from Pentax France?

09-20-2014, 06:14 PM   #212
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Gabriola Island
Posts: 579
QuoteOriginally posted by Paul MaudDib Quote
He probably meant M42 - many lenses don't have an auto/manual switch, and those lenses need an adapter or else you can't get aperture control.

The "other" pentax mount.
Yes, the official Pentax M42/K adapter doesn't engage the stop-down pin, so for lenses without the switch you have to use some sort of third-party contraption to get manual diaphragm function on a k-mount body.

Speaking of third-party contraptions, most adapters for M42 to E-mount etc seem to have a built-in ring that engages the stop-down pin. This is good in terms of making sure all M42 lenses have diaphragm control, but not so good if you want the A/M switch to work.

One workaround is to use an official Pentax M42 adapter on a K-mount to E-mount adapter. I have also found one M42 to E-mount adapter without the stop-down function.

I enjoy using my older lenses on an A7r, but would be happy to see Pentax come out with a FF body optimized for the Pentax's registration distance.

---------- Post added 09-20-2014 at 06:27 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by easyreeder Quote
Sorry, that was really lazy of me. The apertures on the m lenses don't engage until you take the picture, which messes up live view and metering. If you set your aperture and look into your lens, then disconnect your lens, you'll see that's the case. You can also see this in video mode: the aperture won't take your setting until you start recording. The work around would be to use some kind of teleconverter or speed booster, if only there was one. It's always struck me as a weird problem: you can probably get a better light reading on a k mount manual lens if you're using an adapter that lets you set your aperture without the interference of the camera, which means your lens is on a competitor's body.



Didn't the rumors come from Pentax France?
Thanks for the clarification. I've been using an A7r for several months and find the EVF, which automatically adjusts brightness as you stop down, very nice. I can see how what you are encountering could be frustrating.

I'm wondering whether there is a workaround for some of your issues. I have a K20, which has a switch that allows you to do either manual DOF preview or really crappy Live View. No idea how newer bodies work. Anyone else have a suggestion?

(Being an old fart, I think Pentax should incorporate an "uncrippled" K-mount, with perhaps a mechanical stop-down function that can operate independently of video and Live View.)
09-21-2014, 02:58 PM   #213
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2013
Photos: Albums
Posts: 128
QuoteOriginally posted by John Poirier Quote
(Being an old fart, I think Pentax should incorporate an "uncrippled" K-mount, with perhaps a mechanical stop-down function that can operate independently of video and Live View.)
Ha, well, I might be an old fart too, but an uncrippled K mount would be great for video and live view. The manual k mount lenses work quite nicely for video. The lack of sharpness isn't a problem, and the manual focus is comfortable and low profile. Maybe ha, if they ever get into video they'll do it. That would be a welcome change.

QuoteOriginally posted by John Poirier Quote
Speaking of third-party contraptions, most adapters for M42 to E-mount etc seem to have a built-in ring that engages the stop-down pin. This is good in terms of making sure all M42 lenses have diaphragm control, but not so good if you want the A/M switch to work.

One workaround is to use an official Pentax M42 adapter on a K-mount to E-mount adapter. I have also found one M42 to E-mount adapter without the stop-down function.
I think I have seen some of these. I've also read in the forums that this issue can be addressed by blocking part of the coupling of the K mount with a piece of tape or paper, but that's not something I've had the courage to try on my cherished K3. Ha.
09-22-2014, 08:05 AM   #214
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,892
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
IIRC from my earl;y days on the Forum, when Hoya ran the show, their man-in-place told the optical engineers to design lenses that would win the 'test' platforms (maybe it was DXO, maybe something else). The engineers, the story goes, argued strongly in favor of 'ethereal' qualities such as rendering (the Pentax Pixie Dust). Shortly there were fewer optical engineers at Hoya Pentax.

You may draw your own conclusions whether 'optical engineers' is code for Hirakawa Jun.

...who is now at Tamron, winning optical tests.

---------- Post added 09-22-14 at 08:14 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by jatrax Quote
So if I understand this right, if I am happy with a K-3 image @ 1200 ISO, the image quality from a like image taken with a Sony A7 @ 3700 would be about the same? In other words a little more than 1 stop advantage?
That's the goal of the metric, yup. The ISO value with a given minimum IQ.

09-22-2014, 08:38 AM   #215
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,288
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
That's the goal of the metric, yup. The ISO value with a given minimum IQ.
Interesting thank you. Not sure a one stop improvement would make any difference for me, but I can see for some it would. I just don't very often shoot at the edges of current capability. But at least now I understand.
10-01-2014, 10:08 PM   #216
Forum Member
Beaugrand's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 63
Some time in the next 18 months I'll be upgrading to a full-frame dSLR. Since I have mostly PK and EOS glass, it's going to be either a Pentax or a Canon. For practical as well as sentimental reasons (I have more PK glass than EOS) I would prefer it to be a Pentax, but I won't be dreadfully sad if it's a Canon.
10-02-2014, 10:54 PM - 1 Like   #217
Site Supporter
cyberjunkie's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Bologna, Amsterdam, Chiang Mai
Posts: 267
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Beaugrand Quote
Some time in the next 18 months I'll be upgrading to a full-frame dSLR. Since I have mostly PK and EOS glass, it's going to be either a Pentax or a Canon. For practical as well as sentimental reasons (I have more PK glass than EOS) I would prefer it to be a Pentax, but I won't be dreadfully sad if it's a Canon.
I have the same kind of feeling. Just substitute Sony for Canon...
I never thought i would go for another brand. Never.
I've always been a loyal Pentax customer, since i switched from Nikkormat to Pentax MX, and from Bronica 6x6 to Pentax 6x7 (one decade later).
When it came the time of my first digital camera, it was a no brainer. I had only Pentax lenses, and some of them were top class.There was no other reasonable choice.
Now i have even more lenses, and some of the "keepers" are AF. I have even less reasons to switch brand... unfortunately digital photography is not like film photography.
Not long ago the image was made by the lens and the film (the camera was just a dark box with shutter and film advancing capabilities). Now it's made by the lens and the sensor. The sensor resides in the camera...
It's not about resolution, it's about sensor size. I want to use my lenses (most of them are FF) the way they were meant for. A wide-angle must be a wide. I want to use the full coverage of a soft-focus lens. If a lens shows some swirly bokeh, i want to actually see it!
In the last couple of years i was so sure that Pentax couldn't do without a full frame, that i swapped a few Pentax-M wides for their Pentax-A counterparts, cause they are more "ergonomic" with modern digital cameras. Not anymore, i'm even buying some M42... i've come to terms with the simple notion that all of them will go on adapters, fully manual, on a Sony camera. I am just waiting for a second-hand Sony AR7 at the right price.

It is a bit sad, but that's not a tragedy. At least we have a choice now.
Travel photography, wildlife, AF > Pentax
Old primes, macro, MF > Sony

cheers

Paolo
11-02-2014, 07:44 AM - 1 Like   #218
Forum Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Maryland
Posts: 78
Saved my old FA zooms for Full Frame

Thanks for this original post. I have been waiting patiently with my FA 28-70 and FA 80-200 2.8 zooms for introduction of a Pentax/Ricoh full frame. I suspect I am not alone in that. While these lenses are great on my Pz-1p film camera, I really look forward to using them on full frame digital. I am curious how many others are in a similar boat.


11-02-2014, 08:31 AM - 1 Like   #219
Pentaxian
JimmyDranox's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Ploiesti, Romania
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,585
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentax Syntax Quote
Thanks for this original post. I have been waiting patiently with my FA 28-70 and FA 80-200 2.8 zooms for introduction of a Pentax/Ricoh full frame. I suspect I am not alone in that. While these lenses are great on my Pz-1p film camera, I really look forward to using them on full frame digital. I am curious how many others are in a similar boat.
Many.
11-02-2014, 09:20 AM   #220
Loyal Site Supporter
dadipentak's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Baltimore, Maryland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,073
I haven't been among the "Desperate for FF" crowd but now I'm kind of curious about what it will offer. I do have a number of FF lenses, after all ;~)
11-02-2014, 02:46 PM   #221
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,288
I have a full set of film era FF lenses. But I am increasingly concerned about whether they will actually perform well on a high MP FF sensor. Particularly when Ricoh makes such a point of their new (very complicated 16-85 16 elements in 12 groups) being designed to work with high resolution sensors.

I love my old glass, I just wonder if after waiting all these years to use it on FF we will be disappointed in the performance and end up having to buy new anyway.
11-02-2014, 03:01 PM   #222
osv
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: So Cal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,080
legacy glass on ff sensors has been covered ad naseam on this forum, by the a7x crowd, with multiple examples posted.

why not go rent an a7r, and test your own glass on it? post up the results, and provide some feedback.
11-02-2014, 03:11 PM   #223
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,585
QuoteOriginally posted by jatrax Quote
I just wonder if after waiting all these years to use it on FF we will be disappointed in the performance and end up having to buy new anyway.
I think the experience of Pentax users with the A7/A7r who have been mounting their K-mount glass on their Sony's has generally been positive. There seems little to fear.

Of course if you have any doubts about the optical quality of your old glass, Pentax would no doubt be very happy to sell you all new lenses. Some new ones will likely become available when a FF is released. There will probably also be a lineup of older design lenses that have been 'FF optimised' with new coatings and a red ring that you could probably buy in future too.
12-03-2014, 02:06 AM   #224
Inactive Account




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: California
Posts: 12
QuoteOriginally posted by cyberjunkie Quote
I've read with interest and attention the post titled "Dear Pentax: Never Build a "Full Frame" Camera", linked on this site homepage. It is an interesting article, well written, but extremely subjective.
It should have no place on the home page. I am asking myself why it does...
The experiences of the author are in no way special. I have the same: I don't have the A* 135mm, but i do have the 85mm, the 200mm, the 300mm, and most of the best A glasses. Many of those who would actually buy a full frame body have high performance old lenses, with a wonderful build quality. But i suspect that the active posters on pentaxforums.com do not represent a statistically credible example of the advanced amateurs who are still interested in a FF body (many gave up already).
After reading many, many forum posts, with a reasonable level of attention, i've made up my mind: a good part of the active users is made by fanboys, newcomers, and old farts loyal to the brand. For example i am of the latter type, i am just 56 but i started taking pictures when i was 10 y.o., and sold my Nikkormat for a Pentax, as soon as it was possible to find the first MX bodies second-hand. Then i purchased the LX, the Super Program, the K2, the 6x7, all of them second-hand. The only two new bodies i ever bought (Sfx-n and Z-1p) were brought from the USA at a price competitive with a good used body in Italy!.
After that i waited for the digital. When it came i deemed it not good enough... i wanted the full frame, to use all my fantastic wides!
I got so fed up of waiting, that i decided that if i had to use analog, at least i had to get the maximum quality, so i restarted with large format (4x5" and 5x7") and lately embraced 8x10".
A big change in my private life brought me back to small cameras, usable for travel photography.
I finally bent to Pentax, and got a K10D and K200D (both used).Since then, i added a K-5 II and a K-01, bought at 1/4 the original price. I guess i'm not an impulsive buyer, or a big spender... but i do love lenses!
During all this time i took advantage of every occasion i found, exchanging old K and M glasses for more ergonomic (and often better) A and F/FA ones. The only DA i own is the pancake Limited... which happens to cover the FF
My personal opinion is that most of the enthusiasts who would consider to buy a Pentax full frame have some (often plenty of) good old glasses, and that would be the main reason to buy one. Some of them already own different equipments, but some have enough money to invest in a body which will allow them to shoot with the lenses they kept for all this time, those old wonderful glasses they didn't feel to sell.
I've posted a comment to the original post (maybe it's more an article), but there is a limit in the allowed characters. That's why i'm posting here a more articulated reply.
I've browsed all the comments, a great number of them, and i have been impressed by them. I think i decided to write about my personal view on the matter, after reading some of them.
Most of the comments i've read are unrealistic, or just "pour parler". That's true about both sides, i guess. Pentax FF is a divisive issue...
I'd really want to know how many people would really want (and afford) to buy a decently complete 645 digital outfit. Com'on, please!
There was a time when Asahi Pentax was the second player, very innovative, and sold the best affordable cameras for reportage. Canon was in no way at the same level.
Now, after two horribly wrong choices (late switch to bayonet; no pro camera after the LX), Pentax is struggling to remain relevant, after the disaster of the Hoya tenure.
Now Pentax is smaller than ever, there have been insufficient investments in R&D, and most of the inventory had been sold. I have some hope, but i don't think Ricoh has enough cash to compete with the big players, at least not at any level of the market. When Pentax concentrated on compact cameras, at least you could see them in supermarkets. I don't see them since long, and the choice has proven totally wrong. If it sounds vaguely familiar... it's because Kodak and Polaroid tried to compete in the low end market as well!
There was a time when Apple was in real danger, Steve Jobs was called and the trend changed in a short amount of time. It can happen only in a way. Building on your assets and innovating, thinking out of the box.
Pentax has a base, a signature: SR and WR bodies, plus camera menus and ergonomics conceived for real photographer's needs (well... not the K-01!). Then it has an asset, just one. Fortunately is huge: an immense number of good (and sometimes very good) lenses in K mount, built during a long span of time and diffused in any corner of the world. Most of the good ones are primes, some are fast, and some have an optical signature which sets them apart from the mass of AF zooms sold today.
It is NOT true that Pentax has to invest a huge amount of money in the project of a brand new full line of lenses made for FF. Some cover already, many zooms could be provided by third parties (Canikon owners buy wonderful Tokina lenses, which we call Pentax... Tamron could be the ideal substitute of Tokina), and a few specialty lenses could be assigned to Cosina (they have the know-how, just think about the price/performance ratio of the fake-Voigtlanders in M/LTM mount!).
The big money is made with amateurs nowadays. The real professional is broke. They get less and less money, big stock agencies shut down, and many good professionals quit their job to do something else or to retire before time. How many pros buy the new digital medium format? Very, very few, trust me, other way the used 645 lenses made in the film days would cost four time their price.
What makes a FF camera desirable? The sensor and the glass. The glass is already there, plenty of it. Those who are so happy with APS-C can't be as happy to see the best new third party lenses made in any other mount but Pentax! I don't. It's my MAIN complaint. No Tokinas at all. Not the best new Sigmas. The Tamrons are available only in their old version... when the stock will be emptied, do you really think they will make a new batch for PKAF?
I am happy with my K-5 II and (for a particular use) with my K-01, but i would never buy Pentax if i had to start afresh, today. When i purchased the K10D i had already a dozen of the best MF Pentax lenses ever. That was my reason. I would have been crazy to buy any other brand!
So the glass is already there... if a sensor allowing in-body SR is already available, better move your ass Pentax! Tomorrow is too late.
No need to be extremely innovative, just copy what the others did well. Nikon has different level of compatibility with vintage glasses, the more expensive bodies are more flexible. A down-to-earth FF version of the K-3, with limited improvements and an UNCRIPPLED mount, would sell by itself. Provided that the price is competitive... but at this stage even selling under cost could be an option, at least initially. It would be more effective than a planetary advertising campaign, it would get all the interest of the main sites, the attention of the growing numbers of MF vintage lenses enthusiasts (especially the new crowds from the countries of the rising sun), of collectors of K and M42 lenses, and would get the Pentax name once again in the radar of third party lens makers. I think it would also sell to all those rich old farts who shoot Canon/Nikon/Sony but still own their old Takumar or SMC Pentax glasses.
You don't have to trust me cause i've been a pro, or because i'm a collector and have 250/300 lenses at home... i'm nobody. It's just common sense. The advanced amateur, the one who makes the fortune of Leica, Nikon and Canon, buying highly profitable products, consider APS-C a second choice. Most of them would never spend good money on something perceived as inferior. The fact that this kind of user don't care about Internet, or just lurks every now and then, means nothing. The market speaks, and speaks volume.

cheers

Paolo
A bit long, but I agree with you. A Ricoh Pentax FF, say a "K-3" with a 36MP ~23.5x35.5mm Sensor ASAP. And with the old K(K) / K(M) aperture ring body lever/flange back. I have a bunch of Pentax / Takumar "film" camera glass that I use all the time on my three digital APS-C Pentax digital bodies as well as my three Pentax film bodies. Out of 22+ Pentax branded lenses I only have three DA or DA* ones. I'm all set for FF with K(K), K(M), K(A), and M42 mount lenses. Wish I could find some affordable F & FA lenses. I find the metering with my K(K) & K(M) lenses gets very confusing on the digital cameras.

Many of my beginner hobbyist friends are buying FF Canon 5DmkIII and Nikon D810 cameras. These are not pro photographers. Pentax needs to get with it. I've been using Pentax since 1978.
12-03-2014, 03:23 AM   #225
Pentaxian
Clavius's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: De Klundert
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,115
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentax-K Quote
A bit long, but I agree with you. A Ricoh Pentax FF, say a "K-3" with a 36MP ~23.5x35.5mm Sensor ASAP. And with the old K(K) / K(M) aperture ring body lever/flange back. I have a bunch of Pentax / Takumar "film" camera glass that I use all the time on my three digital APS-C Pentax digital bodies as well as my three Pentax film bodies. Out of 22+ Pentax branded lenses I only have three DA or DA* ones. I'm all set for FF with K(K), K(M), K(A), and M42 mount lenses. Wish I could find some affordable F & FA lenses. I find the metering with my K(K) & K(M) lenses gets very confusing on the digital cameras.
So, what you're saying here is: "Pentax, please build a camera for me despite the fact that you will not earn any (or not much) money on lenses, because I'm already fully set."? Do you see the problem with that business case?
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!
24x36mm, analysis, bodies, body, camera, da*, discussions, dslr, ff, focus, forum, frame, full-frame, glass, glasses, lenses, level, line, money, pentax, people, photography, premium, price, sony, tamron, time
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
why is a full frame Pentax such a holy grail? adwb Pentax Full Frame 427 07-24-2015 12:32 PM
From Full-Frame Sony... to Pentax... to Full-Frame Canon Mr_Canuck Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 42 01-21-2014 12:50 AM
Interesting link on full frame vs film ChopperCharles Pentax DSLR Discussion 7 09-14-2012 09:26 AM
Is a full frame camera worth $1k to $1.3k feasible to make? mannyquinto Pentax DSLR Discussion 17 04-19-2012 01:36 PM
Is a full frame lens on an aps-c, a negative? outsider Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 36 03-30-2011 09:34 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:48 AM. | 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