Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

View Poll Results: Would you consider to buy the described camera in the post?
I would consider the ME-D 1022.73%
I would consider the LX-D 1125.00%
Like it but price to high 2454.55%
No i want full auto camera 920.45%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 44. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-14-2008, 09:53 AM   #16
Veteran Member
Mike Cash's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Japan
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,952
I have two medium format cameras which fit in my pocket, give fantastic quality and detail, and cost me somewhere around 70~80 bucks each. Why on earth would I want to pay $3800 for something like you propose?

Strip it down a bit more and make it essentially a K1000 or Spotmatic F with a digital back and you can sell me one. But it ought run no more than $300~400. Much of what you suggest for specs I wouldn't care to have.

What's the difference between what you suggest and the current (and coming soon) offerings from Pentax which justifies a price higher than Scandinavian taxes?

02-14-2008, 10:06 AM   #17
Veteran Member
stewart_photo's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Heidelberg, Germany
Posts: 1,864
Rigged polls result in rigged results.

QuoteOriginally posted by Kiss Quote
Of 32 voters, only 9 (28%) did not like the concept, that means support from 23 (72%) if we disregard the price.

A majority, ... (snip)....

Results from a poll nicely worded to avoid the real questions. Obviously, I would consider any camera, just as I suspect most others would. But the real questions are whether anyone here (most owners of comparatively inexpensive cameras) would actually, honestly, buy either of the cameras mentioned.

After all, the more expensive LX is basically a K10D made of metal, selling at nearly eight times the price, with the rear screen separated and live-view added, and auto-focus, the flash, program modes (shutter priority, etc), and the flexibility provided by menus, removed.

Of course, asking the real questions might not have garnished the answers you obviously desire.

stewart
02-14-2008, 10:38 AM   #18
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,399
QuoteOriginally posted by stewart_photo Quote
Results from a poll nicely worded to avoid the real questions. ..........
Of course, asking the real questions might not have garnished the answers you obviously desire.

stewart
Isn't that the purpose of a poll, to generate something to give you the answer you want even though it is false.

I quote Williams and Holland's Law

"if enough data is collected, anything may be proven by statistical methods"
02-14-2008, 10:40 AM   #19
Inactive Account




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Folsom, CA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 322
Why not just make a sensor module in the shape of a 35mm film canister with the sensor hanging out behind the shutter that would just fit inside one of these old cameras? Obviously there would be no programablity, just capture. Seems like then you could have all the controls you want with the body you already have

02-14-2008, 01:32 PM   #20
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,399
QuoteOriginally posted by ccallana Quote
Why not just make a sensor module in the shape of a 35mm film canister with the sensor hanging out behind the shutter that would just fit inside one of these old cameras? Obviously there would be no programablity, just capture. Seems like then you could have all the controls you want with the body you already have
There used to be adds for something like this, but it never became commercial.

If it did, I would love one for my KX, my ricoh XR-2s, but mostly for my PZ-1

Ideally, what you would get would be a replacement back, that fit in place, and attached through the tripod socket.

For the PZ-1 it would add all the buttons and connections, and work just like a DSLR.

For the XR-2S it would connect to the contacts on the bottom, for shutter release etc, and power the electronics when metering is powered, and trigger the shutter when pressed all the way.

For the KX where nothing is available, it would essentually be be powered full time, and save the image when you wind the shutter, using a mechanical interlock.

I would expect that there would be a ton of noise due to the powered time.
02-14-2008, 05:29 PM   #21
Inactive Account




Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 36
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by stewart_photo Quote
Of course, asking the real questions might not have garnished the answers you obviously desire.
The questions where made as short as possible, the point is to read the post where it is explained in detail and then answer the poll. The camera described is something like a digital version of the SLR cameras from late seveties. Not a cheapo plastic one, but really high quality insted, ment to be used manually with manual lenses. The same "think" behind it as a Leica M8, but SLR instead. Yes, it is niche camera, not ment for anyone or beginners. And since it is a niche, like the M8, the price will be high to be able to get profit from the small volume. I guess the same is true for the FA Limited lenses.

What i do not understand is why people get offensive by the idea and writes comments like this. What are you afraid of?
02-14-2008, 05:44 PM   #22
Inactive Account




Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 36
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by ccallana Quote
Why not just make a sensor module in the shape of a 35mm film canister with the sensor hanging out behind the shutter that would just fit inside one of these old cameras? Obviously there would be no programablity, just capture. Seems like then you could have all the controls you want with the body you already have
A company named Silicon film had that idea back in 2000. They never managed to make any products until their money ran out. But they where anyway too early, sensors where too small at that time, making a terrible crop factor. I found their site at the wayback machine, a page from mars 2002 with a nice picture of ther e-film cartridge loaded in a camera:

http://web.archive.org/web/20020326103823/http://siliconfilm.com/

At that time 2000-2001 i also think their innovation posed a threat to Nikon and Canon that was well on their way developing DSLR cameras. If Silicon film had succeeded, with a reasonable crop sensor. I would not have bought my first DSLR.
02-14-2008, 05:53 PM   #23
Inactive Account




Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 36
Original Poster
BTW.
Today i think this is much more doable than it was back then. I followed most new around that e-film around 2001-2002, and as i understand they did really make some fully working prototypes. I think they had some patents too. But those patents is probably a reason why it cannot be done today, i remeber that some of the big guns bought the patens when Silicon film went bankrupt. So, maybe 2020 it can be done again, when the patents run out...

02-14-2008, 05:59 PM   #24
Inactive Account




Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 36
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Mike Cash Quote
What's the difference between what you suggest and the current (and coming soon) offerings from Pentax which justifies a price higher than Scandinavian taxes?
The same that justifies the even higher price of a Leica M8.
02-14-2008, 06:59 PM   #25
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Ontario
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 630
QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
- the desire for a fully compatible M42 screw mount, which not even pentax K bodies offered in 1976 when they came out, and which is not a realistic expectation,
Why is this unrealistic? They are making $1500+ ultra high quality lenses for m42 mount...why not a body to use them? Zeiss, Voigtlander and Cosina are big players and an m42 body would mean they'd be selling more lenses.

QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
If you consider that it is the cost of the camera that makes the pictures and not the quality, I would suggest going to CaNikon.

You can spend all you want there.
Oh come on. We're discussing a hypothetical camera here. I do NOT consider that camera cost is directly related to picture quality, nor do I appreciate the implication.

This is the first time someone has suggested to me that I leave pentax. No thanks, I don't think I'll switch systems, but perhaps I'll go find another forum.
02-14-2008, 08:26 PM   #26
Veteran Member
stewart_photo's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Heidelberg, Germany
Posts: 1,864
QuoteOriginally posted by Kiss Quote
The questions where made as short as possible, ...(snip).... What i do not understand is why people get offensive by the idea and writes comments like this. What are you afraid of?

Since the word "buy" is shorter than "consider," the questions (would you buy...) would have been shorter. Regardless, neither offensive nor fear, just realistic - for the reasons given in my prior message, including limited feature set and high price resulting in very few buyers (why few own the esoteric Leica M8).

However, if there is any defensiveness involved, it may be due to your rejection of features many of us consider worthwhile, including auto-focus, menu options, built-in flash, program modes (shutter priority, etc), and so on. Or your attempts to define "high quality," with our cameras obviously falling short of that in your eyes. Or the elitist aspects of your message in defining a "quality" camera as one only "fully manual with manual lenses," "not aimed at beginners" "unless they really want to learn" - as in anything else is for beginners who can really only learn using a fully manual camera (the archaic nonsense so often spread by those promoting themselves as superior to others today).

But, enough said (not worth further comment). Your camera will not be built (certainly not by Pentax) simply because there is no substantial market for it. Instead, if trends remain the same, cameras in the foreseeable future will likely be even more featured ladened, not less.

stewart
02-14-2008, 08:36 PM   #27
Veteran Member
stewart_photo's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Heidelberg, Germany
Posts: 1,864
QuoteOriginally posted by d.bradley Quote
...(snip)... This is the first time someone has suggested to me that I leave pentax. ...(snip)

I don't think he made any such suggestion. He said "if you consider," then "I suggest." Since you've already said you don't consider that, there is no suggestion following which applies to you.

stewart
02-15-2008, 01:33 AM   #28
Veteran Member
KungPOW's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,702
I think this esoteric little camera should ONLY work with limited lenses. The silver ones! The black ones look to modern and cause timeshift malfunctions.

Seriously, KISS, tell me what feature in the K10D would you consider useless? Why would you want to strip out features like the SCREEN!!!???. I have yet to find a feature on the K10D that is useless. Everytime I think I have located the "useless feature", I learn what it is for, and I am even more impressed by how well thought out the camera is. The K100D on the otherhand...it has a Scene Mode to shoot pets....Come on...useless feature. (To those that are offended that I am bashing their K100D, I am not. It is the best entry level camera on the market. It has every feature you need to learn, and to grow as a photographer. But no camera needs a pet mode!)

I you really want a trimmed down, you gotta know how to shoot, little sex machine of a camera, you need to show a little disipline when becoming a minimalist. You are close. But you need to take it further (farther?). No screen of any kind. No autofocus. No AE lock. Spot and centerweighted ok, but you only get a needle (K1000, Spotmatic style), Shoots Raw only. White balence is manual only. No hot shoe ( the original Spotmatic didn't have a hot shoe). No focus points.

But to sell, it would have to be sexy. You know, the kind on design and material combo that makes you want to steal it. Phillip Stark kind of style. You pick it up and you don't want to put it back down. I picture a raw titanium finish, no hand grip, wraped in very dark red leather. Kind of a 1930's deco style, but modern enough to make ipod rethink their style.

For controls, you get ISO dial, shutter speed dial, aperture is on lens, focus is on lens, white balence set button, shutter release and meter mode switch. It turns on when you remove the lens cap.

And I am serioius. Silver limited lenses only.
02-15-2008, 02:13 AM   #29
Senior Member
benplaut's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Central NY
Posts: 268
Well... the RAW button is useless for people who shoot RAW anyway
02-15-2008, 02:21 AM   #30
Inactive Account




Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 36
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by KungPOW Quote
But to sell, it would have to be sexy. You know, the kind on design and material combo that makes you want to steal it. Phillip Stark kind of style. You pick it up and you don't want to put it back down. I picture a raw titanium finish, no hand grip, wraped in very dark red leather. Kind of a 1930's deco style, but modern enough to make ipod rethink their style.

For controls, you get ISO dial, shutter speed dial, aperture is on lens, focus is on lens, white balence set button, shutter release and meter mode switch. It turns on when you remove the lens cap.
That is quite close to what i want.

But i think it is better to have the on/off on the shutter spreed dial.
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!
cable, camera, crop, dslr, lenses, live-view, lx, pentax, photography, screen, sensor, viewfinder
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Poll - $2500 low end FF or Hi-spec APS-C? - Please read initial post before voting Richard Day Pentax News and Rumors 126 02-15-2010 03:08 PM
A higher high-end from Pentax? Please? Dubious Drewski Pentax DSLR Discussion 23 11-05-2009 01:11 PM
Powerful High-end color correction software wildman Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 7 05-22-2009 08:10 AM
high end raw converters Gooshin Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 5 03-01-2008 08:59 AM
High end commercial print source SCGushue Photographic Technique 6 03-15-2007 09:26 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:32 AM. | 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