Has Pentax not been forward thinking enough?

wizardsnoop · 01-15-2011, 11:56 AM

Pentax is certainly doing a good job at picking up momentum and I'm so happy that they maid a digital MF, though it is too expensive for me as of now. I really think that Pentax needs to better differentiate themselves from Canon and Nikon, which Sony, Olympus and Panasonic are all doing, but Pentax isn't. I'd like to see Pentax do something daring, I think a range finder type camera would be great, but what I really want is a FF square sensor. Square images are well known by 6x6 users and they are great because they give you tons of flexibility in aspect ratio. Also am I the only person that doesn't really care for SR? I think it is unnecessary, adds needless bulk, wastes battery power and is often not terribly effective. Now that we can push ISO so fast and still have great quality as in the K5, why do we need to retain SR? For square formats no new FF lens designs are needed and I think if Pentax simply updated the coating on the FA lens designs, use and SDM motor and all of the advances of the most recent Pentax lenses, perhaps some rounded aperture blades, Pentax would have the best glass around. Also pentax could lower sensor costs by using one sensor for all of their cameras, mitigating the increases costs associated with larger sensors.

Well that's it for my hopeful rant. Feel Free to comment.

timh · 01-15-2011, 12:28 PM

I've rarely seen someone more wrong! This must be a troll.

timh · 01-15-2011, 12:29 PM

Just in case it's not:

Pentax are as 'different' as any large Japanese camera company can be. The 645D is a revolution on the high-end, and the K-5 is the best APS-C DSLR ever made.

They don't make their own sensors, so they have to follow as far as that's concerned.

SR is great, if you don't like it you can turn it off. It's far preferable to having to buy a stabilisation system in every gigantic lens.

Have you seen the Limited series? The DFA 100 WR? Are they not different enough, would they be better with optical shake reduction and SDM?

orly_andico · 01-15-2011, 12:43 PM

SR is great. I miss it every time I pick up my Canon 40D.

Gone are the days when I could take sharp shots with my 100mm lens at 1/30 or even 1/15. With the Canon, even 1/60 - 1/125 often produces blurry shots.

Although I think the Nikon D7000 would argue about "greatest APS-C DSLR ever made." For some people, videographers I guess, the tilting screen is a killer feature.

bobmaxja · 01-15-2011, 12:43 PM

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

vinzer · 01-15-2011, 07:56 PM

Originally posted by timh

Just in case it's not:

Pentax are as 'different' as any large Japanese camera company can be. The 645D is a revolution on the high-end, and the K-5 is the best APS-C DSLR ever made.

They don't make their own sensors, so they have to follow as far as that's concerned.

SR is great, if you don't like it you can turn it off. It's far preferable to having to buy a stabilisation system in every gigantic lens.

Have you seen the Limited series? The DFA 100 WR? Are they not different enough, would they be better with optical shake reduction and SDM?

+1

The SR alone makes Pentax a good value proposition among camera models. With Olympus' move to mirrorless nearly complete (I have doubts they'll release any new 4/3 DSLR moving forward), only Sony remains as the other DSLR system with in-body stabilization.

And, if I remember correctly, Pentax is the only system to have weather-sealed kit lenses. The first iteration of Olympus' 14-54 was the first sealed kit lens, but they've since replaced it with a non-sealed 14-42.

My 2 cents.

Abstract · 01-15-2011, 09:34 PM

I have pretty steady hands and I can get a perfectly clear shot at 1/10 on the K20D. On my Nikon D40 I can go about 1/60 and if I stay really steady 1/40. This enough is a reason for me to use a Pentax. Manual lenses are now amazing to me, plus the viewfinder is clearer and easier to focus manually imo.

orly_andico · 01-15-2011, 11:04 PM - **1 Like**

one important thing about Sony is that it will only stabilize lenses that talk to the body electronically, hence you need a chipped lens adapter, whereas Pentax will stabilize a pinhole lens made from a pringles can..

Abstract · 01-15-2011, 11:18 PM

Originally posted by orly_andico

pinhole lens made from a pringles can

Yum. I want some.

RonHendriks1966 · 01-16-2011, 05:51 AM

Originally posted by wizardsnoop

I'd like to see Pentax do something daring, I think a range finder type camera would be great, but what I really want is a FF square sensor.

You simply can not have FF and square

I do make some square images so I would want one, if that is availeble and not extreem expencive.

Do I see it possible?:
- one way is to fit it in a dslr with our current K-mount FF lenses. How big can the sensor be then? Maybe even 30x30 mm size, fitting in the middle and using the maximum space. So you could make it as the K-5 with a CMos and the same pixelnumber as the 645D (6315x6315=39,8 megapixel). Just not to many lenses in production at the time.
- the second way is to make a square sensor in the 645D with a size of maybe 43x43mm (again using the maximum space). Give it the same sensorbuilt CCD and you have a 51 megapixel camera. When you make it into a CMos like K-5 you even get 81 megapixels.

So there is plenty of oppertunity, but Pentax isn't big enough as a company to have a sensor designed just for them. The numbers of camera to be sold isn't big enough.

jan rinze · 01-16-2011, 08:34 AM

Apart from others' views i like the idea of a square sensor.
There will be some vignetting at the far corners but it will be quite easy to switch from landscape to portrait without rotating the camera. Even after taking the image it will still be possible to choose the orientation without compromise.

losing the SR in a Pentax camera may sound shocking to most but it may enable a different targeted market of technical DSLR users. People used to shooting with film will remember how to ensure image quality without SR.

If Pentax would decide to make a FF camera without SR i would surely buy it if the body would be below 1500 euro's. Preferably a sensor that has about 18Mpix and similar or better characteristics than my K-5.
A square sensor FF? .. i'd pay up to 1800 euro's for such a Pentax body with similar characteristics..

Just my personal opinion of course..

Abstract · 01-17-2011, 06:40 PM

Originally posted by jan rinze

landscape to portrait without rotating the camera

Sounds like a lazy persons dream, whats so hard about rotating a camera? Not sure I get this.

Wheatfield · 01-17-2011, 07:11 PM

Originally posted by Abstract

Sounds like a lazy persons dream, whats so hard about rotating a camera? Not sure I get this.

It dates back to TLRs and SLRs that primarily were used with waist level finders.
With these cameras, dropping into vertical would be a PITA, so they were made square.
In this case, function follows form.....
I think the best solution now is to just shoot with square in mind and crop.
I suspect Katz-Eye could even be talked into custom etching a screen.

**Ash** · 01-17-2011, 08:14 PM

Originally posted by Wheatfield

I think the best solution now is to just shoot with square in mind and crop.

And end up with a photographer that just shoots landscapes in all situations.

Wheatfield · 01-17-2011, 08:22 PM

If yer shootin' square, the term landscape no longer has much meaning....

01-15-2011, 11:56 AM	#1
wizardsnoop New Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Posts: 9	Has Pentax not been forward thinking enough? Pentax is certainly doing a good job at picking up momentum and I'm so happy that they maid a digital MF, though it is too expensive for me as of now. I really think that Pentax needs to better differentiate themselves from Canon and Nikon, which Sony, Olympus and Panasonic are all doing, but Pentax isn't. I'd like to see Pentax do something daring, I think a range finder type camera would be great, but what I really want is a FF square sensor. Square images are well known by 6x6 users and they are great because they give you tons of flexibility in aspect ratio. Also am I the only person that doesn't really care for SR? I think it is unnecessary, adds needless bulk, wastes battery power and is often not terribly effective. Now that we can push ISO so fast and still have great quality as in the K5, why do we need to retain SR? For square formats no new FF lens designs are needed and I think if Pentax simply updated the coating on the FA lens designs, use and SDM motor and all of the advances of the most recent Pentax lenses, perhaps some rounded aperture blades, Pentax would have the best glass around. Also pentax could lower sensor costs by using one sensor for all of their cameras, mitigating the increases costs associated with larger sensors. Well that's it for my hopeful rant. Feel Free to comment.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K-5 Price Going Forward	GlennG	Pentax News and Rumors	47	01-31-2011 08:11 AM
Looking Forward to the K5?	Rupert	General Talk	25	09-10-2010 12:19 PM
forward thinking, discussions, and article privacy rights.	Gooshin	General Talk	27	11-06-2009 12:30 AM
Pentax Moving Forward... Into Space	denisv	Pentax News and Rumors	4	03-12-2009 06:46 AM
Film guy & collector looking forward to Pentax	PentHassyKon	Welcomes and Introductions	2	10-30-2008 09:30 PM

01-15-2011, 12:28 PM	#2
timh Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Wales Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 445	I've rarely seen someone more wrong! This must be a troll.

01-15-2011, 12:29 PM	#3
timh Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Wales Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 445	Just in case it's not: Pentax are as 'different' as any large Japanese camera company can be. The 645D is a revolution on the high-end, and the K-5 is the best APS-C DSLR ever made. They don't make their own sensors, so they have to follow as far as that's concerned. SR is great, if you don't like it you can turn it off. It's far preferable to having to buy a stabilisation system in every gigantic lens. Have you seen the Limited series? The DFA 100 WR? Are they not different enough, would they be better with optical shake reduction and SDM?

01-15-2011, 12:43 PM	#4
orly_andico Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Manila, Philippines Posts: 97	SR is great. I miss it every time I pick up my Canon 40D. Gone are the days when I could take sharp shots with my 100mm lens at 1/30 or even 1/15. With the Canon, even 1/60 - 1/125 often produces blurry shots. Although I think the Nikon D7000 would argue about "greatest APS-C DSLR ever made." For some people, videographers I guess, the tilting screen is a killer feature.

01-15-2011, 12:43 PM	#5
bobmaxja Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Laval, Quebec Canada Posts: 2,171	!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

01-15-2011, 07:56 PM	#6
vinzer Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Philippines Posts: 1,399	Originally posted by timh Just in case it's not: Pentax are as 'different' as any large Japanese camera company can be. The 645D is a revolution on the high-end, and the K-5 is the best APS-C DSLR ever made. They don't make their own sensors, so they have to follow as far as that's concerned. SR is great, if you don't like it you can turn it off. It's far preferable to having to buy a stabilisation system in every gigantic lens. Have you seen the Limited series? The DFA 100 WR? Are they not different enough, would they be better with optical shake reduction and SDM? +1 The SR alone makes Pentax a good value proposition among camera models. With Olympus' move to mirrorless nearly complete (I have doubts they'll release any new 4/3 DSLR moving forward), only Sony remains as the other DSLR system with in-body stabilization. And, if I remember correctly, Pentax is the only system to have weather-sealed kit lenses. The first iteration of Olympus' 14-54 was the first sealed kit lens, but they've since replaced it with a non-sealed 14-42. My 2 cents.

01-15-2011, 09:34 PM	#7
Abstract Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: New York Photos: Gallery Posts: 388	I have pretty steady hands and I can get a perfectly clear shot at 1/10 on the K20D. On my Nikon D40 I can go about 1/60 and if I stay really steady 1/40. This enough is a reason for me to use a Pentax. Manual lenses are now amazing to me, plus the viewfinder is clearer and easier to focus manually imo.

01-15-2011, 11:04 PM - 1 Like	#8
orly_andico Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Manila, Philippines Posts: 97	one important thing about Sony is that it will only stabilize lenses that talk to the body electronically, hence you need a chipped lens adapter, whereas Pentax will stabilize a pinhole lens made from a pringles can..

01-15-2011, 11:18 PM	#9
Abstract Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: New York Photos: Gallery Posts: 388	Originally posted by orly_andico pinhole lens made from a pringles can Yum. I want some.

01-16-2011, 05:51 AM	#10
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Originally posted by wizardsnoop I'd like to see Pentax do something daring, I think a range finder type camera would be great, but what I really want is a FF square sensor. You simply can not have FF and square I do make some square images so I would want one, if that is availeble and not extreem expencive. Do I see it possible?: - one way is to fit it in a dslr with our current K-mount FF lenses. How big can the sensor be then? Maybe even 30x30 mm size, fitting in the middle and using the maximum space. So you could make it as the K-5 with a CMos and the same pixelnumber as the 645D (6315x6315=39,8 megapixel). Just not to many lenses in production at the time. - the second way is to make a square sensor in the 645D with a size of maybe 43x43mm (again using the maximum space). Give it the same sensorbuilt CCD and you have a 51 megapixel camera. When you make it into a CMos like K-5 you even get 81 megapixels. So there is plenty of oppertunity, but Pentax isn't big enough as a company to have a sensor designed just for them. The numbers of camera to be sold isn't big enough.

01-16-2011, 08:34 AM	#11
jan rinze Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Netherlands Photos: Gallery Posts: 61	Apart from others' views i like the idea of a square sensor. There will be some vignetting at the far corners but it will be quite easy to switch from landscape to portrait without rotating the camera. Even after taking the image it will still be possible to choose the orientation without compromise. losing the SR in a Pentax camera may sound shocking to most but it may enable a different targeted market of technical DSLR users. People used to shooting with film will remember how to ensure image quality without SR. If Pentax would decide to make a FF camera without SR i would surely buy it if the body would be below 1500 euro's. Preferably a sensor that has about 18Mpix and similar or better characteristics than my K-5. A square sensor FF? .. i'd pay up to 1800 euro's for such a Pentax body with similar characteristics.. Just my personal opinion of course..

01-17-2011, 06:40 PM	#12
Abstract Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: New York Photos: Gallery Posts: 388	Originally posted by jan rinze landscape to portrait without rotating the camera Sounds like a lazy persons dream, whats so hard about rotating a camera? Not sure I get this.

01-17-2011, 07:11 PM	#13
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,981	Originally posted by Abstract Sounds like a lazy persons dream, whats so hard about rotating a camera? Not sure I get this. It dates back to TLRs and SLRs that primarily were used with waist level finders. With these cameras, dropping into vertical would be a PITA, so they were made square. In this case, function follows form..... I think the best solution now is to just shoot with square in mind and crop. I suspect Katz-Eye could even be talked into custom etching a screen.

01-17-2011, 08:14 PM	#14
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	Originally posted by Wheatfield I think the best solution now is to just shoot with square in mind and crop. And end up with a photographer that just shoots landscapes in all situations.

01-17-2011, 08:22 PM	#15
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,981	If yer shootin' square, the term landscape no longer has much meaning....