[clackers]

It may run contrary to the prevailing theme in this thread, (scarcity) but it seems that down here in Oz we are blessed (?) with the highest concentration of Pentaxians around (perhaps excluding Japan).

Yes, Wiz, eems a little more mindshare, even if sightings in the wild are still uncommon.

Perhaps because the local distributors (CR Kennedy in Port Melbourne) have been doing it for a long time, and have so many other things they do (Hasselblad, Sigma, surveying stuff) they can persist with a marginal business.

[rod_grant]

Wiz & clackers.
You might be able to buy Pentax in the metropolitan area: but just try up here in the country!

[clackers]

Very easy, Rod, to have Digidirect or whoever deliver, or even get Hong Kong prices from eBay (check DC Expert's postings ... CRK warranty).

[kadajawi]

Ok, this is an odd one:
https://twitter.com/bqreaders

bq readers is a smartphone maker from Spain that does budget smartphones (though they seem overpriced to me... the phones are pretty outdated). And their twitter account features a Pentax next to their phone?!

[Nicolas06]

No matter what the reason is, offering different sensors in essentially the same camera is brilliant, and a move Pentax could (should?) adopt too. Imagine a K-3 for those who want good high ISO performance... 12 MP. And one for people who are more into resolution... 24 or 36 MP. And if it's 36, then something with 20 MP would slot in nicely for people who want a compromise.

(Also, I doubt the improved photosites are all that turns the A7s into a low light monster... I think it's more the pixel count, though having better photosites would be nice, because that would benefit everyone. And the A7s does have better video capabilities, not all of them coming from the better sensor).

There can be difference from the pixel density but it look very small to me:

- D600 (24MP), D800 (36MP) and D4 (16MP) have the same high iso performance and where introduced at the same time (more or less)
- Now D4s is a bit better on high iso and Df even a bit more. They both have lower dynamic range to compensate. Thoses 2 body are been introduced earlier. It look the improvement in performance was from different tweaking in software and maybe a different sensor tech. But not from the number of pixel they share with D4.

I don't think then if there is no much difference for same generation 36 vs 16MP sensor that going down to 12 is the key differenciator. it could but for me it is unlikely.

The 24 & 36 MP Sony weren't able to get as much high isos as the Nikon. I think that Sony did 2 things. First they improved their software and their processing of sensor data to get more out of it. It got them some like the D4s or Df performance. That already half the increase they got with A7s. The other half was from the improved photosites they discribe and got them the other half.

Maybe the big photosites have less problem than small photosite at very high isos like 52000+... What ever they said this is not enough to get good result at thoses isos. You still want to avoid to shoot most of the time more than 6400 even through you may have some occasionnal acceptable 12800 isos photos and some will be happy with their 25600. But for a good photo you'd want to not go past 3200 iso or maybe even 1600isos.

[kadajawi]

Interesting. Improved photosites... then we should see that on upcoming, higher resolution cameras soon, right? However AFAIK base ISO is 3200 on the A7s... that's the NATIVE ISO. Anything below that, say ISO 200, and you lose dynamic range. So really it seams that ideally you'd be shooting at ISO 3200, and use a ND filter if necessary...

[rod_grant]

Thanks Clackers.
As you know, it is impossible to hold or try something on the internet.
Both my *ist DS and K5 were bought on the 'net because of no local support.
With the K5 I tried the Camera House franchises in Albury, Shepparton and Bendigo and none of then stocked one and wouldn't get one in unless on order.
Two of the stores had a solitary Kr on display but no Pentax lenses.
Clem Kennedy was surprised that the Bendigo bloke didn't/wouldn't stock a K5 because he knew him as a good operator.

[Nicolas06]

Interesting. Improved photosites... then we should see that on upcoming, higher resolution cameras soon, right? However AFAIK base ISO is 3200 on the A7s... that's the NATIVE ISO. Anything below that, say ISO 200, and you lose dynamic range. So really it seams that ideally you'd be shooting at ISO 3200, and use a ND filter if necessary...

I think you messed-up this part, the A7s is best at 100isos and has a "fake" 50 iso mode. Look on DxOMark for example.

[kadajawi]

I think you messed-up this part, the A7s is best at 100isos and has a "fake" 50 iso mode. Look on DxOMark for example.

Different sources, different info... it's all a bit confusing.

A7s has less noise at ISO 3200 than ISO 100 for photos & video: Sony Alpha/NEX E-mount Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

Here Dynamic Range - Sony A7S vs. Arri, Canon, Panasonic & more someone says that the ISO 3200 that SLOG2 forces you to is actually something like 200 that is pushed quite a bit...

News Shooter | The Sony a7S – A true World Camera?

[Nicolas06]

Different sources, different info... it's all a bit confusing.

A7s has less noise at ISO 3200 than ISO 100 for photos & video: Sony Alpha/NEX E-mount Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

Here Dynamic Range - Sony A7S vs. Arri, Canon, Panasonic & more someone says that the ISO 3200 that SLOG2 forces you to is actually something like 200 that is pushed quite a bit...

News Shooter | The Sony a7S – A true World Camera?

What they compare in the link is taking a photo at isos 100 on full night and get a full black picture then use the settings of they raw editing software to push exposure to +5EV to get equivalent of 1600iso shoot.

The digital amplifier of the raw editing software is obviously not as good as the analog+digital amplified on board of the camera and so the fake 1600 isos are worse than the native 3200 isos.

What this just mean is that it is quite stupid to do such thing and that it is better to directly trust the in camera body iso. If you want a 1600 image, select 1600 isos. Do not select iso 100 and mutliply signal by 16 digitally.

You can be sure that the iso 100 performance of the A7r if FAR FAR FAR better than what we see on that 1600 isos shoot. And it really have too. Otherwise it would perform worse than an cellphone when working in daylight. Not exactly a selling point or what you'd except from an high end camera. Isn't it?

[kadajawi]

What they compare in the link is taking a photo at isos 100 on full night and get a full black picture then use the settings of they raw editing software to push exposure to +5EV to get equivalent of 1600iso shoot.

The digital amplifier of the raw editing software is obviously not as good as the analog+digital amplified on board of the camera and so the fake 1600 isos are worse than the native 3200 isos.

What this just mean is that it is quite stupid to do such thing and that it is better to directly trust the in camera body iso. If you want a 1600 image, select 1600 isos. Do not select iso 100 and mutliply signal by 16 digitally.

You can be sure that the iso 100 performance of the A7r if FAR FAR FAR better than what we see on that 1600 isos shoot. And it really have too. Otherwise it would perform worse than an cellphone when working in daylight. Not exactly a selling point or what you'd except from an high end camera. Isn't it?

Oh. Didn't look close enough. Fair enough You're right.

[grhazelton]

I'm taking a course in digital photography at a local Senior Center. As an "old fart" I am welcome! The class is taught by a very capable retired Army Master Sergeant who has shot professionally; the students range from grizzled veterans to relative newbies. All Canikon, except for me and a guy with an old Sony machine. Most of the veterans know of Pentax, the Spotmatic was lusted after by several, but then....they took the Dark Path to Canon and Nikon. The TVS mode on my K 5 is admired by many. Why haven't Canon and Nikon implemented this? Or is only Pentax designed with photographers in mind, not just sales? Would be nice to have an articulated LCD panel, though....

[SpecialK]

No Pentax to be seen (including me) at last weekend's airshow.

[wizofoz]

Thanks Clackers.
As you know, it is impossible to hold or try something on the internet.
Both my *ist DS and K5 were bought on the 'net because of no local support.
With the K5 I tried the Camera House franchises in Albury, Shepparton and Bendigo and none of then stocked one and wouldn't get one in unless on order.
Two of the stores had a solitary Kr on display but no Pentax lenses.
Clem Kennedy was surprised that the Bendigo bloke didn't/wouldn't stock a K5 because he knew him as a good operator.

Rod, you obviously don't get down to Melbourne too often..It's only what?? 2 1/2 hrs drive from Wang. I live in the Dandenong's, so it is still a 90 minute trip for me to get to 'camera central' in Elizabeth st. I often drive to Echuca or Ballarat or Maryborough etc and back in a day for my work. Surely it cant be that hard to sit on the freeway and come down to the 'smoke' on a camera quest.
Even so, I bought my k-3 without seeing one first. I didn't have to I knew the quality an ergonomics would be spot on - and they are. I think the same holds true for the k-5 that preceded it. Then again, these are all basically derivative of the K-7 shape, so I knew what I would be holding would feel good.

I agree its disappointing that major towns like Bendigo have no Pentax presence, but there isn't much of a camera shop in Bendigo at all is there? The only one I know of is in the street running parallel to Pall Mall (Hargeaves St?) and they seem to be more about prints and frames with a few token canikon entry level bodies and lenses thrown in.

I guess its the price one pays for living the utopian dream up there in the bush.

[rod_grant]

Hi Wiz.
The Camera House franchise is well stocked with CaniKon. I'm not sure that it's the same shop you refer to: this one is in an arcade off Queen St.
I lived in Melb for 10 years or so and was happy for the opportunity to get out (you can take the boy out of the country, but can't take the country out of the boy!)
I do go back occasionally, and find the best view of Melbourne is in the rear vision mirror.