Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-24-2012, 04:56 AM   #16
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,651
QuoteOriginally posted by Fogel70 Quote
The controls of a manual mode only camera do not work well for a fully automated digital camera.

IMO Pentax current controls if just far superior to the old styling with a dedicated shutter speed dial and aperture ring. As the the two wheels used today change functions depending on what mode used the controls are better optimized for controlling the camera with the right hand and without taking your eye from OVF, or moving you finger from shutter button. With the left hand you hold/control the lens.

With retro control most of Pentax smart functions like green button, Hyper-Program, Hyper-Manual will no longer be available.

Sure retro styling might be cool, but I think Pentax already did that enough with the design on K7/K5. If the grip was removed from K5 it would look very much like a SLR from the 70s. But without a grip there will not be enough space for a battery.
i beg to disagree. I prefer the old controls. Just add an A setting to the dial. You can use the old controls blindly. The modern ones no.

But this is not doable, sadly, unless you go for EVIL. And in no way FF.

11-24-2012, 06:05 AM   #17
Pentaxian
Fogel70's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,748
QuoteOriginally posted by kadajawi Quote
i beg to disagree. I prefer the old controls. Just add an A setting to the dial. You can use the old controls blindly. The modern ones no.

But this is not doable, sadly, unless you go for EVIL. And in no way FF.
This old type of controls are just much slower to use, and you cant FI use Hyper-Program to quickly switch between Av and Tv. It would also make it impossible to use the green button in manual mode to get a good starting point of the exposure. The AE-lock in manual mode would not be possible, so changing both aperture and shutter speed using one wheel when for instance wanting to shift exposure from f/2.0 1/500s to f/5.6 1/60s would not be possible.

The problem in using dedicated controls for each exposure settings is that you need four controls on the camera instead on two on a modern interface (dedicated controls for shutter speed, aperture, iso and exp comp). This will make it difficult to place the controls on the camera to be able to change settings on the fly, or without having to change grip on the camera when changing settings. The only advantage I see in using dedicated controls is that you can set exposure without switching the camera on.

It might be easier to change settings blindly with dedicated controls, but I can't remember any situation where I had to change setting blindly on a DSLR.

One thing I would like it to have a variable control ring on the lens just like the aperture ring, but this ring should be configurable to control other things than aperture too. But I doubt Pentax will do this for K-mount cameras as it would not be compatible on older cameras.
11-24-2012, 06:13 AM   #18
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,148
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
The real caviar would be not a camera at all, but a replacement back. But, that would then be limited to cameras with enough electronics to be able, as a minimum, put the meter active and shutter release into the back , then just simply use your old body.
That would be nice. Leica did that for their R8 and R9 SLRs: the DMR digital back. Made by another company that folded - still sells for a lot in spite of not being FF, is large and heavy, etc. But some folk still prefer it to a dSLR.
11-24-2012, 08:37 AM   #19
Loyal Site Supporter
THoog's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: North Carolina
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,486
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
The real caviar would be not a camera at all, but a replacement back. But, that would then be limited to cameras with enough electronics to be able, as a minimum, put the meter active and shutter release into the back , then just simply use your old body.
THAT's what I wanted from Day 1 - a minimalist "digital film" pack to fit in the back. But as I studied it, and realized how much smaller than the current tech it would have to be, I came to the sad conclusion that we're not even close. Again, Leica could do it easily because they already had a 1cm space in the back of the camera. For a Pentax, the whole thing can't be more than 3.5mm thick, or the user wouldn't be able to get their eye to the viewfinder. That's less than half an iPhone.

11-24-2012, 09:21 AM   #20
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,212
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
The real caviar would be not a camera at all, but a replacement back. But, that would then be limited to cameras with enough electronics to be able, as a minimum, put the meter active and shutter release into the back , then just simply use your old body.

Not sure what cameras it could be used on, but I would love to see a ff digital back for my PZ1

PZ-1p, MZ-S, MZ-3, LX, K2 . . .
11-24-2012, 10:10 AM   #21
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,148
QuoteOriginally posted by THoog Quote
THAT's what I wanted from Day 1 - a minimalist "digital film" pack to fit in the back.
Agreed! Several years ago there was an attempt by a tech start-up to make such a "digital film pack" that would fit popular 35mm cameras. While the company folded in the dot-com collapse, one of the engineers involved insists they had working prototypes, and could have covered many cameras with 3-4 models. However, the rapid development and popularity of the dSLR has made the marketability of such a device impractical.
With the short life-cycle of electronics, modern camera companies make most of their money on the cameras, and so selling new models is their bread-and-butter. They would strongly resist a change to sensor-only sales. It used to be the major camera companies were optical companies that made most money on lenses, so such a device would have had appeal to them.
But to do it now would mean major investment to "thin" the technology and cheapen it, and with no one making compatible cameras today, it would only sell to us with old film cameras.
It might have made sense for a "film" company to develop as it fit their market; but they also saw that the market opportunity window had passed.
11-24-2012, 10:56 AM   #22
Site Supporter
boriscleto's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Liverpool, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 12,863
QuoteOriginally posted by TomB_tx Quote
Agreed! Several years ago there was an attempt by a tech start-up to make such a "digital film pack" that would fit popular 35mm cameras. While the company folded in the dot-com collapse, one of the engineers involved insists they had working prototypes, and could have covered many cameras with 3-4 models. However, the rapid development and popularity of the dSLR has made the marketability of such a device impractical.
With the short life-cycle of electronics, modern camera companies make most of their money on the cameras, and so selling new models is their bread-and-butter. They would strongly resist a change to sensor-only sales. It used to be the major camera companies were optical companies that made most money on lenses, so such a device would have had appeal to them.
But to do it now would mean major investment to "thin" the technology and cheapen it, and with no one making compatible cameras today, it would only sell to us with old film cameras.
It might have made sense for a "film" company to develop as it fit their market; but they also saw that the market opportunity window had passed.
Not this again...

QuoteQuote:
June 1998 - The first model of what would become Silicon Film appeared as ImageK, a subsidiary of Irvine Sensors, a company in Irvine California. The prototype of this model was an insert that they said had a 1.3 mega-pixel sensor and a 2.58x crop factor.

September 1999 - Irvine Sensors renames the product "Silicon Film"

February 2001 - The first public demo of Silicon FIlm takes place. According to those in attendance, the pictures shown in the demonstration were different from the models, causing speculation that the prototype was entirely nonfunctional and the images had been created prior to the demo.

September 2001 - Irvine Sensors announces the suspension of Silicon Film operations. The reasons cited include a supposed failure to pass European product safety (EMC) tests. The company claims however to have passed the USS (FCC) tests, but the FCC denied this claim
QuoteQuote:
The EFS-1 and its Limitations

The unit itself only had 64MB of space, leaving room for only 24 images. To upload images, there are two options. The EFS-1 can be inserted into an e-port, which as a PCMCIA connector which can then be inserted into a PCMCIA slot for download. For those who are not around a computer, the e-port can be inserted into an e-box, which then transfers the images onto compactFlash cards. The EFS-1 took two batteries that could last for several hundred shots.

The 1.3 megapixel CMOS sensor only utilized 30% of the center of the frame, meaning that when looking in the viewfinder, there is a very small field of view (marked by a supplied rub-on transfer). What results from this is a multiplication of focal length by 2.58x, making a 28mm lens become 72mm for example.

Only certain cameras were supported by the EFS-1: Nikon F5, F3, N60/N90 and Canon EOS-1N, EOS-A2, EOS-5.

Shooting an image writes an RAW file onto the EFS-1 which is then decoded by a Photoshop plugin which performs bayer interpolation, white balance, gamma and exposure compensation.
Silicon Film folded because it was increasingly difficult for a vaporware product to compete with affordable APS-C DLSRs that were by then available. By 2001 you could get a 5.3MP D1X.

Last edited by boriscleto; 11-24-2012 at 11:09 AM.
11-24-2012, 11:35 AM   #23
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,148
QuoteOriginally posted by boriscleto Quote
Silicon Film folded because it was increasingly difficult for a vaporware product to compete with affordable APS-C DLSRs that were by then available. By 2001 you could get a 5.3MP D1X.
Agreed - but those of us who hate using dSLRs (or point-and-shoots) still wish it were possible.

11-24-2012, 01:57 PM   #24
Pentaxian
deus ursus's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Stårheim, Norway
Posts: 310
So, there are others that think the same as me, then. I too would find it convenient to have a digital back on my LX. The only thing that would be inconvenient with that idea is the way the light meter is designed. I believe an OTF light meter would have to be replaced with a light meter that was tweaked a little compared to the original one to work properly with a digital sensor.
11-24-2012, 04:57 PM   #25
Pentaxian
Fogel70's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,748
QuoteOriginally posted by TomB_tx Quote
Agreed - but those of us who hate using dSLRs (or point-and-shoots) still wish it were possible.
I would rather wish for a analogue film in 135 cassette with unlimited number of frames, and that the film was developed instantaneously when shot.
11-25-2012, 10:49 AM   #26
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,039
QuoteOriginally posted by KHatfull Quote
Features:

K1000 body rebuild.
Full frame sensor.
Full autofocus capability.
Top manual shutter speed wheel.
Top exposure compensation wheel.
Typical modern rear controls with nice big LCD.

and most importantly...

Fully uncripped mount allowing full use of all legacy lenses.

It's doable...is there enough of a retro market out there?

Hmmm.......
Pentax lives in the present and designs cameras for the future.... wake up.
Why not use film with legacy lenses (what is this anyways) and keep using the standard K1000. Digital backs have so many problems that NO company kept back solutions for film cameras, btw, they did not really keep film camera alive unless you missed that part. Leica M8, M9 M-M are nice and perfect retro, but don't think Pentax will survive tying the same.
11-25-2012, 01:01 PM   #27
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,148
QuoteOriginally posted by zapp Quote
Pentax lives in the present and designs cameras for the future.... wake up.
Yup - time to do that. I had no interest in digital cameras until Leica came out with the M9; which is the only digital I enjoy using. That gave me brief hope someone would do the same for the SLR, and since Pentax was my favorite SLR for 45 years of course I wished it would be them. So I'll keep using my old SLRs with film when I need one, and the M9 the rest of the time. Nothing I see coming from Pentax appeals to me.
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!
camera, dslr, photography, wheel
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Q vs. Oly OM-D Paolo.Bosetti Pentax Q 3 10-14-2012 12:35 PM
Olympus OM-D E-M5: "World's fastest autofocus" is not a joke bwDraco Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 22 07-26-2012 06:46 PM
Anybody with an Olympus OM-D and a K-5? Raffwal Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 19 07-12-2012 07:53 AM
Do you Q? If not, why not? elho_cid Pentax Q 113 02-08-2012 03:31 PM
how do you change an olympus om lens to a k-mount lguckert79 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 41 08-27-2011 12:23 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:33 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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