"First pics taken with full frame"

wkraus · 12-12-2015, 05:12 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by foto guy

Don't know why, but Pentax never releases great sample images for their cameras or lenses. Sufficient, but not great.

They want you to think, "I can do better than that once I can get my hands on it!"

**RobA_Oz** · 12-12-2015, 05:38 AM

Originally posted by pathdoc

I can see them doing interchangeable focusing screens, but the need for the interchangeable viewfinder has passed with the coming of the tilting rear screen IMO. Besides, they will be keen to retain the weather sealed integrity of the body. Both good reasons for not having it.

Certainly, Live View and a tilt monitor screen, not to mention tethering, have reduced the need for interchangeable viewfinders, but not eliminated it entirely, for example where battery life is a concern. I doubt weather sealing is in itself a big enough challenge to not consider it, though. Anyway, I think we've seen enough of the display model to rule it out for this body, but maybe not a future one.

pathdoc · 12-12-2015, 06:15 AM

The pro who needs the interchangeable VF is probably going to have the battery grip fitted and everything charged to the limit before they start, plus spare batteries, and maybe even AC power if they're working anywhere near where it's available. I know just how long a K-5 can run on the internal battery alone.

(ETA was interrupted)

I find it hard to believe that a pro in the field who needed the capability couldn't keep their K-1 alive long enough to complete the shoot.

jarvyboy · 12-13-2015, 02:02 AM

I will buy it six months after release when it's half price and they're giving a free lens, grip and flash in the hope of boosting sales of a camera that is already five years too late!l Yes cynical and negative.

rawr · 12-13-2015, 03:11 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by jarvyboy

a camera that is already five years too late

'Too late' depends on the specs.

If it was a 12 MP CCD sensor with 9 points autofocus, you would have a case. But if it has the latest technology and advanced features, then while it may be 'late', it will be up-to-date. Hence not 'late' in any important sense.

**Digitalis** · 12-13-2015, 03:29 AM

Originally posted by normhead

I'm surprised Ron isn't here yet to explain. Usually you mention APS-h and he's here immediately.

I know, I wonder what is going on there.

Originally posted by normhead

It's a 1.7 or 1.8 crops sensor instead of 1.5,

APS-H is 1.3 crop. 1.7 crop is what the Sigma SD cameras used to use.

**Rondec** · 12-13-2015, 03:46 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by jarvyboy

I will buy it six months after release when it's half price and they're giving a free lens, grip and flash in the hope of boosting sales of a camera that is already five years too late!l Yes cynical and negative.

We'll see.

I have a feeling that Ricoh doesn't want to sell millions of these cameras and won't need to do so in order to turn a profit. The 645Z is a camera that sells in the thousands, but has definitely not been sold at half price and has generated a lot of profit for Ricoh. I'm sure they want the same sort of camera with the K-1. Whether or not they get it remains to be seen.

Sandy Hancock · 12-13-2015, 04:16 AM

Originally posted by Dave L

Yes. The 10-17mm DA fisheye should produce an "interesting" image at 10mm! >180 degrees horizontal before vignetting etc. kills it!

The DA10-17 only covers full frame from about 15mm, where its angle of view matches 10mm on APS-C.

Film @ 15mm

APS-C @10mm

At 10mm and MFD on film you get a very interesting (and quite sharp!) view of the inside of the hood

The rounded corners of the vignette are where there is complete cutaway of the petal hood, so hacking it off will not fix the problem

pathdoc · 12-13-2015, 09:09 AM

So put gold filigree around the inside of the hood and voila, an instant Victorian-era frame, SOOC.

dansamy · 12-13-2015, 09:29 AM

Originally posted by pathdoc

So put gold filigree around the inside of the hood and voila, an instant Victorian-era frame, SOOC.

Well that sounds like a great idea!

LesDMess · 12-13-2015, 10:16 AM

Originally posted by pathdoc

I can see them doing interchangeable focusing screens, but the need for the interchangeable viewfinder has passed with the coming of the tilting rear screen IMO. Besides, they will be keen to retain the weather sealed integrity of the body. Both good reasons for not having it.

A high magnification bright viewfinder - such as in the LX, is far better than even the EVF in current high end offerings and would be great to have when using manual focus lenses. Having this doesn't preclude the incorporation of a fully articulating rear screen. Of course a wireless coupled screen would be even more innovative.

Unlike the interchangeable viewfinder bodies from Canon, Minolta and Nikon of the same era, Pentax made the LX system weather sealed and production line tested to be so. However, what viewfinders to use is another matter.

---------- Post added 12-13-15 at 01:19 PM ----------

Originally posted by rawr

'Too late' depends on the specs.

If it was a 12 MP CCD sensor with 9 points autofocus, you would have a case. But if it has the latest technology and advanced features, then while it may be 'late', it will be up-to-date. Hence not 'late' in any important sense.

Releasing an up-to-date model would make it obsolete. Better release it ahead of the pack.

pathdoc · 12-13-2015, 10:20 AM

Was the weather sealing to the same standard as today, though? I don't think there's anyone who's game to try this out, seeing as failure would necessarily involve bricking an LX - and with no more being made (to our knowledge), this is something nobody wants to do if they can help it.

rawr · 12-13-2015, 10:40 AM

Originally posted by LesDMess

Better release it ahead of the pack.

That's certainly a good goal, if they have access to the latest tech. And can deploy it affordably. And it's bug-free and reliable.

Rushing too far ahead into the newest 'bleeding edge' tech can often be very risky.

pathdoc · 12-13-2015, 10:51 AM

Originally posted by rawr

Rushing too far ahead into the newest 'bleeding edge' tech can often be very risky.

Back in 1861, the Brits built an all iron warship they called "Warrior", and the initial scheme was for her steam propulsion, iron hull and iron armour to be supported by an all-breech-loading armament. However, they relented and gave her a mix of new Armstrong breechloaders and tried-and-true muzzle-loaders. This was just as well, as it turned out that the Armstrong was mechanically unreliable to the point of being unsafe (some of them exploded and killed their crews), and it pushed the Brits back to muzzle-loaders for nearly 20 years.

See also what happened to the USAF and USN in Vietnam, when missiles designed for long range interception against bombers were asked to perform as high-G visual-range dogfight missiles. The only saving grace was that the Phantom could carry eight.

LesDMess · 12-13-2015, 10:56 AM

Originally posted by pathdoc

Was the weather sealing to the same standard as today, though? I don't think there's anyone who's game to try this out, seeing as failure would necessarily involve bricking an LX - and with no more being made (to our knowledge), this is something nobody wants to do if they can help it.

Check this out -> Exceptional strength thanks to a revolutionary new design

What standards are you referring to? Keep in mind that the LX has a hybrid shutter and all shutter speeds - sync and above, are fully mechanical and therefore not susceptible to water failure that today's technology bound cameras are. Today's cameras are susceptible to a great variety of external influences far more than an LX and therefore require considerably more weatherproofing. Of course this is just a casual observation from a >30 year test engineer . . .

---------- Post added 12-13-15 at 02:00 PM ----------

Originally posted by rawr

That's certainly a good goal, if they have access to the latest tech. And can deploy it affordably. And it's bug-free and reliable.

Given my background, I always take for granted that those are all taken care of before releasing a product.

12-12-2015, 06:15 AM	#63
pathdoc Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2015 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,381 Original Poster	The pro who needs the interchangeable VF is probably going to have the battery grip fitted and everything charged to the limit before they start, plus spare batteries, and maybe even AC power if they're working anywhere near where it's available. I know just how long a K-5 can run on the internal battery alone. (ETA was interrupted) I find it hard to believe that a pro in the field who needed the capability couldn't keep their K-1 alive long enough to complete the shoot. Last edited by pathdoc; 12-12-2015 at 08:19 AM.

12-13-2015, 03:29 AM	#66
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Originally posted by normhead I'm surprised Ron isn't here yet to explain. Usually you mention APS-h and he's here immediately. I know, I wonder what is going on there. Originally posted by normhead It's a 1.7 or 1.8 crops sensor instead of 1.5, APS-H is 1.3 crop. 1.7 crop is what the Sigma SD cameras used to use. Last edited by Digitalis; 12-13-2015 at 03:35 AM.

12-13-2015, 04:16 AM	#68
Sandy Hancock Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,275	Originally posted by Dave L Yes. The 10-17mm DA fisheye should produce an "interesting" image at 10mm! >180 degrees horizontal before vignetting etc. kills it! The DA10-17 only covers full frame from about 15mm, where its angle of view matches 10mm on APS-C. Film @ 15mm APS-C @10mm At 10mm and MFD on film you get a very interesting (and quite sharp!) view of the inside of the hood The rounded corners of the vignette are where there is complete cutaway of the petal hood, so hacking it off will not fix the problem Last edited by Sandy Hancock; 12-13-2015 at 04:22 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Will You Be An "Early Adopter" of the Pentax Full Frame?	Fenwoodian	Pentax Full Frame	177	11-26-2015 11:38 AM
Attention Full Frame Shoppers: a rarish "K"	CreationBear	Pentax Price Watch	32	04-01-2015 09:07 AM
DA* 200 and 300 are formally labeled "Not compatible with full-frame"	grahame	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	22	02-22-2015 10:57 AM
First leaked "cheap" full frame Nikon D600 images	jogiba	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	9	06-14-2012 04:09 PM
First "real" photos taken with the K100D	seymop	Post Your Photos!	2	11-28-2007 07:19 PM

12-12-2015, 05:12 AM - 1 Like	#61
wkraus Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Near Vienna, Austria Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,065	Originally posted by foto guy Don't know why, but Pentax never releases great sample images for their cameras or lenses. Sufficient, but not great. They want you to think, "I can do better than that once I can get my hands on it!"

12-12-2015, 05:38 AM	#62
RobA_Oz Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Tasmania, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,209	Originally posted by pathdoc I can see them doing interchangeable focusing screens, but the need for the interchangeable viewfinder has passed with the coming of the tilting rear screen IMO. Besides, they will be keen to retain the weather sealed integrity of the body. Both good reasons for not having it. Certainly, Live View and a tilt monitor screen, not to mention tethering, have reduced the need for interchangeable viewfinders, but not eliminated it entirely, for example where battery life is a concern. I doubt weather sealing is in itself a big enough challenge to not consider it, though. Anyway, I think we've seen enough of the display model to rule it out for this body, but maybe not a future one.

12-13-2015, 02:02 AM	#64
jarvyboy Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 28	I will buy it six months after release when it's half price and they're giving a free lens, grip and flash in the hope of boosting sales of a camera that is already five years too late!l Yes cynical and negative.

12-13-2015, 03:11 AM - 1 Like	#65
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Originally posted by jarvyboy a camera that is already five years too late 'Too late' depends on the specs. If it was a 12 MP CCD sensor with 9 points autofocus, you would have a case. But if it has the latest technology and advanced features, then while it may be 'late', it will be up-to-date. Hence not 'late' in any important sense.

12-13-2015, 03:46 AM - 1 Like	#67
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,663	Originally posted by jarvyboy I will buy it six months after release when it's half price and they're giving a free lens, grip and flash in the hope of boosting sales of a camera that is already five years too late!l Yes cynical and negative. We'll see. I have a feeling that Ricoh doesn't want to sell millions of these cameras and won't need to do so in order to turn a profit. The 645Z is a camera that sells in the thousands, but has definitely not been sold at half price and has generated a lot of profit for Ricoh. I'm sure they want the same sort of camera with the K-1. Whether or not they get it remains to be seen.

12-13-2015, 09:09 AM	#69
pathdoc Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2015 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,381 Original Poster	So put gold filigree around the inside of the hood and voila, an instant Victorian-era frame, SOOC.

12-13-2015, 09:29 AM	#70
dansamy Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2013 Location: Alabama Posts: 2,450	Originally posted by pathdoc So put gold filigree around the inside of the hood and voila, an instant Victorian-era frame, SOOC. Well that sounds like a great idea!

12-13-2015, 10:16 AM	#71
LesDMess Pentaxian Join Date: May 2011 Location: Santa Cruz, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,235	Originally posted by pathdoc I can see them doing interchangeable focusing screens, but the need for the interchangeable viewfinder has passed with the coming of the tilting rear screen IMO. Besides, they will be keen to retain the weather sealed integrity of the body. Both good reasons for not having it. A high magnification bright viewfinder - such as in the LX, is far better than even the EVF in current high end offerings and would be great to have when using manual focus lenses. Having this doesn't preclude the incorporation of a fully articulating rear screen. Of course a wireless coupled screen would be even more innovative. Unlike the interchangeable viewfinder bodies from Canon, Minolta and Nikon of the same era, Pentax made the LX system weather sealed and production line tested to be so. However, what viewfinders to use is another matter. ---------- Post added 12-13-15 at 01:19 PM ---------- Originally posted by rawr 'Too late' depends on the specs. If it was a 12 MP CCD sensor with 9 points autofocus, you would have a case. But if it has the latest technology and advanced features, then while it may be 'late', it will be up-to-date. Hence not 'late' in any important sense. Releasing an up-to-date model would make it obsolete. Better release it ahead of the pack.

12-13-2015, 10:20 AM	#72
pathdoc Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2015 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,381 Original Poster	Was the weather sealing to the same standard as today, though? I don't think there's anyone who's game to try this out, seeing as failure would necessarily involve bricking an LX - and with no more being made (to our knowledge), this is something nobody wants to do if they can help it.

12-13-2015, 10:40 AM	#73
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Originally posted by LesDMess Better release it ahead of the pack. That's certainly a good goal, if they have access to the latest tech. And can deploy it affordably. And it's bug-free and reliable. Rushing too far ahead into the newest 'bleeding edge' tech can often be very risky.

12-13-2015, 10:51 AM	#74
pathdoc Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2015 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,381 Original Poster	Originally posted by rawr Rushing too far ahead into the newest 'bleeding edge' tech can often be very risky. Back in 1861, the Brits built an all iron warship they called "Warrior", and the initial scheme was for her steam propulsion, iron hull and iron armour to be supported by an all-breech-loading armament. However, they relented and gave her a mix of new Armstrong breechloaders and tried-and-true muzzle-loaders. This was just as well, as it turned out that the Armstrong was mechanically unreliable to the point of being unsafe (some of them exploded and killed their crews), and it pushed the Brits back to muzzle-loaders for nearly 20 years. See also what happened to the USAF and USN in Vietnam, when missiles designed for long range interception against bombers were asked to perform as high-G visual-range dogfight missiles. The only saving grace was that the Phantom could carry eight.

12-13-2015, 10:56 AM	#75
LesDMess Pentaxian Join Date: May 2011 Location: Santa Cruz, CA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,235	Originally posted by pathdoc Was the weather sealing to the same standard as today, though? I don't think there's anyone who's game to try this out, seeing as failure would necessarily involve bricking an LX - and with no more being made (to our knowledge), this is something nobody wants to do if they can help it. Check this out -> Exceptional strength thanks to a revolutionary new design What standards are you referring to? Keep in mind that the LX has a hybrid shutter and all shutter speeds - sync and above, are fully mechanical and therefore not susceptible to water failure that today's technology bound cameras are. Today's cameras are susceptible to a great variety of external influences far more than an LX and therefore require considerably more weatherproofing. Of course this is just a casual observation from a >30 year test engineer . . . ---------- Post added 12-13-15 at 02:00 PM ---------- Originally posted by rawr That's certainly a good goal, if they have access to the latest tech. And can deploy it affordably. And it's bug-free and reliable. Given my background, I always take for granted that those are all taken care of before releasing a product.