Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-31-2016, 11:46 AM - 1 Like   #1
Pentaxian
kooks's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: San Josť, Costa Rica
Photos: Albums
Posts: 627
For the people that wanted to see a mirrorless K1 because of size..

Looking at this images and thread at the FUJIX forum, the reduced size of the mirrorless system is not as impressive as many think it is, some people were complaining that they wanted to go mirrorless because of a size matter.

Why Sony Full Frame Professional Mirrorless was a Fatal Mistake | Fuji X Forum









The real difference might be only real with the pancakes.

http://i1078.photobucket.com/albums/w497/SATOR-Photography/a7RIIvsa99_20mmf2.8_zpsxje6umbm.jpg

03-31-2016, 11:53 AM   #2
Veteran Member
i5_david's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 331
Wow, love this, mate! Great find!

Love this Quote

QuoteQuote:
The next answer you will hear is that full frame mirrorless is better because of IBIS. That's like saying that Sony mirrorless is better because of the steak knives that they throw in. IBIS is hardly any more a unique technical feature inherent to the design of mirrorless cameras than either wifi or steak knives. Pentax have just incorporated IBIS into their K-1 DSLR, and Sony could have put IBIS into their A mount DSLT system. So IBIS gives full frame mirrorless no inherent technical advantage over other systems, but people are suckered in by the offer of steak knives.
What we now have is Pentax as the third company that produces Full Frame DSLRs, but the very only one that produces a full frame DSLR with an IBIS wooopwooop
I see great things for Pentax in upcoming months and years!
03-31-2016, 12:03 PM   #3
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Albuquerque
Posts: 1,120
"Fatal mistake" is a little over the top, but I agree with the basic point.

What is hilarious to me is that the new G Master lenses look like they were designed for DSLR/T bodies, and then had an adapter glued on the back.
03-31-2016, 12:06 PM   #4
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Aug 2011
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,726
True, for those need G grade lenses for their E-mount cameras. Not that easy to design highest grade glass with so short flange distance, so all G lenses are actually regular SLR lenses with an adapter. I guess those use E mount as their only camera system and wished high IQ and light weight and small size will be a little disappointed.
But when you step down a little, sony still makes some small and fine lenses for E mount, such as FE 28, 35...That is what the A7 for.
A7 serial is still the best camera for adapting. I can mount almost any lens onto it, that is good enough for me. In my bag, sony cameras were always the most expensive ones (NEX-7, A6000, A7), BUT never was the main camera when I need best image or get job done. When I need best IQ, I still take Pentax. A7 with all these old lenses are just for fun, for special effects.

03-31-2016, 12:07 PM   #5
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Poole
Posts: 1,486
can somebody explain this to me - it;s stated as if a well known fact, but I wasn't aware oft the problem:

"From this you can that see Sony were better off putting IBIS into their A mount, which has a wider diameter, because it is more of a dedicated full frame mount, not an APS-C mount. You can also see that both Sony and Pentax are adding IBIS to excessively narrow mounts purely as a marketing ploy, with flagrant disregard towards optical fundamentals. It represents the victory of advertising over engineering. For the credulous it represents Sony's triumph over the laws of physics (although Pentax is no better given the K mount is only 44mm wide, because it is historically derived from the M42 mount). "

thanks
03-31-2016, 12:08 PM   #6
Forum Member




Join Date: Jul 2014
Posts: 62
The only size you save by going mirrorless is the mirror space in the mirror box of an SLR, all other design restraints stay the same, so if the mechanical design of the mirror lift is reliable their is absolutely no gain by mirrorless, and the draw back is the capture chip has to run for longer to transmit the viewfinder image, and this may cause hot spots and banding burns after some time.
03-31-2016, 12:13 PM   #7
Pentaxian
pete-tarmigan's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Conception Bay South, New-fun-land
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 944
QuoteOriginally posted by kooks Quote
Looking at this images and thread at the FUJIX forum, the reduced size of the mirrorless system is not as impressive as many think it is, some people were complaining that they wanted to go mirrorless because of a size matter.
It surprised me, although that's because I've never looked at a 36 x 24 mirrorless closely. To quote the original web page:
"Sony has failed to overcome the laws of physics. If you take something from the camera body, you have to give it back to the lens, and by the same amount."
Even the combination of the Zeiss 55mm f/1.8 on the a7RII is still longer than the Canon 5DsR with 50mm f/1.8.
03-31-2016, 12:15 PM   #8
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North East of England
Posts: 5,548
I agree with the basic point to some extent, however... Despite being a Pentaxian at heart, I do have an interest in Sony's developments, as my Hasselblad HV is basically a Sony SLT-A99V. I love the EVF technology in it - way more than I expected I would, being mainly a fan of OVFs. I never thought I'd say this, but I often prefer using that camera purely because the EVF is so good. Anyway... at a recent show I tried a couple of the A7-series cameras for the first time, and the form factor - which doesn't really come across in these pictures - is much more compact and light-weight than my HV... and, hence, most full frame DSLRs. Yes, some of the lenses are just as big, but there are plenty of smaller, lighter lenses too. I don't ever see myself being in the market for an A7-series camera, or anything similar - but I can fully understand why those who have them love them. That compact form factor, along with the really excellent EVF, is quite impressive.


Last edited by BigMackCam; 03-31-2016 at 12:45 PM.
03-31-2016, 12:18 PM   #9
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Aug 2011
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,726
I will still defend (a little) for Sony. Emount was led to "professional" grade, which is not it should be, at least at this time.
If you don't mind a little less perfect optical performance, and if you don't need E-MOUNT to cover the entire range, for super wide to super long, it is still a perfect 2nd camera to carry with, or when you play with a camera just for fun, not for a paid project.
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
SLT-A99V  Photo 
03-31-2016, 12:33 PM - 1 Like   #10
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2013
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 264
QuoteOriginally posted by ffking Quote
"From this you can that see Sony were better off putting IBIS into their A mount, which has a wider diameter, because it is more of a dedicated full frame mount, not an APS-C mount. You can also see that both Sony and Pentax are adding IBIS to excessively narrow mounts purely as a marketing ploy, with flagrant disregard towards optical fundamentals. It represents the victory of advertising over engineering. For the credulous it represents Sony's triumph over the laws of physics (although Pentax is no better given the K mount is only 44mm wide, because it is historically derived from the M42 mount). "
I'm no optics expert, but any feature that allows me to get handheld shots like this and this?

I can only call that the best "marketing ploy" ever.
03-31-2016, 12:51 PM   #11
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North East of England
Posts: 5,548
QuoteOriginally posted by Scintilla Quote
I'm no optics expert, but any feature that allows me to get handheld shots like this and this?

I can only call that the best "marketing ploy" ever.
+1. Pentax SR is one of my favourite features. Since my thirties, I've noticed I'm less and less able to hold things steady (I first noticed it when shooting), even using good techniques for stance and grip. If it weren't for SR, a lot of my photos wouldn't have turned out very well, or I'd have been forced to use shutter speeds that would have required unappetisingly high ISO settings.

My Hasselblad has Sony's "SteadyCam" IBIS, and it's also very good - though not quite as good as Pentax's implementation...
03-31-2016, 12:52 PM   #12
Site Supporter
W.j.christy's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2015
Location: Texas
Photos: Albums
Posts: 444
QuoteOriginally posted by ffking Quote
can somebody explain this to me - it;s stated as if a well known fact, but I wasn't aware oft the problem:

"From this you can that see Sony were better off putting IBIS into their A mount, which has a wider diameter, because it is more of a dedicated full frame mount, not an APS-C mount. You can also see that both Sony and Pentax are adding IBIS to excessively narrow mounts purely as a marketing ploy, with flagrant disregard towards optical fundamentals. It represents the victory of advertising over engineering. For the credulous it represents Sony's triumph over the laws of physics (although Pentax is no better given the K mount is only 44mm wide, because it is historically derived from the M42 mount). "

thanks


I am confused by this too. From my perspective it seems the IBIS has the same capabilities that in lens stabilization does (optical image stabilization?). The main difference being the image in the viewfinder is "shaky" with the IBIS and "still" with lens stabilization. Any one know if there is any truth to this or is it just this guy blowing smoke?
03-31-2016, 01:24 PM   #13
Pentaxian
RobA_Oz's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,123
To be fair, most of us have only used IBIS on APS-C Pentax DSLRs, where throat diameter of the body mount isn't a limitation. Back when the Pentax 35FF was still a unicorn, we had members here pouring scorn on the ability of the Pentax mount to accommodate what they saw as the large sensor shifts needed for effective SR on a FF sensor. I don't see many of those around here, anymore (they're the wide-mouth frogs of PF...).

Back to the point: we're still waiting to see what, if any limitations there are on using older FF lenses with SR on the K-1, and if any are related to the throat size of the K-mount, although I can only imagine the lens image circle as being a limiting factor.
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!
dslr, forum, full frame, full-frame, k-1, k1, mirrorless, mirrorless k1, pentax k-1, people, size
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
To K1 or not K1 - that is the question? interested_observer Pentax K-1 52 06-25-2016 11:05 PM
Full moon or is it because of the pending K1? noelpolar General Talk 8 01-10-2016 01:52 PM
Question Selling to a buyer who lists a wanted item in the Wanted Items forum fwcetus Site Suggestions and Help 11 08-22-2015 08:10 PM
Ever wanted to quickly see the histogram for an image on the web? interested_observer Photographic Industry and Professionals 3 12-31-2012 08:22 PM
Appreciating a photo because its good, or because of a technicality Gooshin General Talk 19 08-20-2008 01:59 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:27 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