Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-02-2014, 10:09 PM   #286
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,022
QuoteOriginally posted by osv Quote
oh, you mean the thread where you didn't know that the lea4 had pdaf?
Please produce a quote of me saying that, Osv ... I would very much like to see it.

In the 'Why I'm Staying With Pentax' thread I mentioned all the Sonys that lacked PDAF, like your A7R, and you responded with saying we could buy some crap adapter that worked with old Alpha and Minolta lenses!

QuoteOriginally posted by osv Quote

from your link:

"Leica's (and other manufacturers') wide-angle rangefinder lenses (those with a focal length shorter than approximately 35mm) tend to have a quite short exit-pupil-to-imaging-plane distance."

who cares about wide rangefinder lenses? you certainly aren't going to be using 'em on your k-3.
Because the Sony E-mount also has a short flange distance - 18mm.

It's exactly the same problem.

Like the rangefinder lenses, the Sony wide angles can do without the heavy retrofocal elements designed in a DSLR wide angle, but the cost is light falling at angles that don't hit the pixel sensor wells and are lost - not a problem in film, but in digital, that's detail and light gone,


Last edited by clackers; 12-02-2014 at 10:17 PM.
12-02-2014, 10:14 PM   #287
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,022
QuoteOriginally posted by osv Quote
"Restructuring and lay-offs have also returned Imaging Products and Solutions, as well as Home Entertainment and Sound, to profitability despite low revenue growth -
Can you read your own Sony PDF?

IPS revenue in the time of the E-mount cameras has fallen from 756 billion yen in 2012 to 710 billion in 2014, and by their own projections will drop to perhaps 650 billion by 2017.

And remember what this document is - propaganda for nervous shareholders. Check out the standard disclaimers on the last page.

There is no camera led recovery in the wake of smashings in the TV, phone and computer units - bleeding from many orifices.

The division has been able to keep its head above the water by sacking employees and the very low yen during all this time.

Again, Osv, aren't you better off at SonyAlphaRumors than Pentax bashing here?

Last edited by clackers; 12-03-2014 at 12:39 AM.
12-03-2014, 12:14 AM   #288
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,703
QuoteOriginally posted by osv Quote
which affected *all* camera manufacturers, not just sony.

whatever tweaked math that you think that you are pointing at sony applies to all of 'em, and is therefore irrelevant.
1) This is not tweaked math this is what happened to them... They managed to be positive out of luck with foreign exchange rate. Still they go 2% decrease in sale for the division holding the cameras activity.

2) We didn't speak of other manufacturers net income here, but for example I just checked Canon. They sale increased by 3.1% to 1,448.9 billions yens for their "IMAGING SYSTEM BUSINESS UNIT" . Compared to Sony that had 2% decrease for sure Canon managed to do far better. Still they are far less invested in mirorless products than Sony.

I don't get what you try to achieve here? Some sony product are quite good, some other not. Sony is not that much of cash machine anymore and it has been for yeasr and overall, not just the camera sales but for most of their business. It is likely they don't even really try to have a good net income in the end but try to sell more products to gain market share. It did goes that well until know, but at least they tried.

The market is difficult to everybody and apparently Sony while not maybe in the worst position overall is far from being the company that got the best results here. That just how it is. I don't know why you think they should... Like you know the product you choosed as to be the best from the best company that of course will to take all over the world.

Who care? I mean apparently you own Pentax glass and this company hasn't been that fashionnable for many years now. It doesn't mean its products are bad or nobody should buy theses. I have no issue with that neither and I don't try to convince everybody that next year everybody will finally wake up and decide to all buy Pentax bodies and limited lenses because it was my own choice. I don't need to get the approval of the world to choose my camera or to justify my choices as being the smartest by explaining that in the future everybody will finally understand and make the sames choices as I did early as an early adopter.
12-03-2014, 12:18 AM   #289
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Nelson B.C.
Posts: 3,267
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
I don't know, T-stop is more something they care of in video where apparently the key aspect is to have enough light... On photos, it seems we care more of the apperture than the T-stop because we are more after the creativity than the ultimate low light performance.
My understanding is that video needs the T-stop value so that they can expose consistently. I can adjust exposure easily on a single frame, and in the same conditions one lens or another can be adjusted to match post, but for video I imagine it isn't trivial. If you have two video cameras with different lenses shooting the same scene, you need to match the exposure on both. F-stop is a mathematical ratio. T-stop is the actual light that gets through the lens.

12-03-2014, 01:07 AM   #290
Pentaxian
philbaum's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA
Posts: 3,659
Camera Mounts Sorted by Register

With regard to short registration distances, i hadn't realized that Fujifilm XF, Sony e-mount and even micro4/3 registration distances are not that far apart. Since there are an unlimited number of registration distances, all the about 18mm registration distances must have been chosen for a reason - i assume because it minimizes lens dimensions.
12-03-2014, 01:45 AM   #291
Pentaxian
Clavius's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: De Klundert
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,122
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
1) This is not tweaked math this is what happened to them... They managed to be positive out of luck with foreign exchange rate. Still they go 2% decrease in sale for the division holding the cameras activity.
Exchange rates don't discriminate. If the one Japanese company lucks out on it, then the other ones does the same.


QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
2) We didn't speak of other manufacturers net income here, but for example I just checked Canon. They sale increased by 3.1% to 1,448.9 billions yens for their "IMAGING SYSTEM BUSINESS UNIT" . Compared to Sony that had 2% decrease for sure Canon managed to do far better. Still they are far less invested in mirorless products than Sony.

I don't get what you try to achieve here? Some sony product are quite good, some other not. Sony is not that much of cash machine anymore and it has been for yeasr and overall, not just the camera sales but for most of their business. It is likely they don't even really try to have a good net income in the end but try to sell more products to gain market share. It did goes that well until know, but at least they tried.

The market is difficult to everybody and apparently Sony while not maybe in the worst position overall is far from being the company that got the best results here. That just how it is. I don't know why you think they should... Like you know the product you choosed as to be the best from the best company that of course will to take all over the world.

Ontopic, the new mirrorless line is what's saving Sony's behind.
Reuters:
QuoteQuote:
Fitch revises Sony from negative to stable.
Reuters Japan:
QuoteQuote:
Sony revised upwards the camera sales plan for 2014. While Canon and Nikon digital camera sales are falling Sony reported a growth. While for Sony there is a decrease in numbers of sold camera the earnings are increasing. Mainly because Sony is selling much less non profitable fixed lens budget compacts but it’s gaining shares in the profitable interchangeable camera market.
And what I discovered from the latest Sony release presentation:

About the mirrorless market:
QuoteQuote:
- The mirrorless system camera market is growing everywhere (although very slowly in US).
– Half of the system cameras sold in Japan and Korea are mirrorless (see blue bars on the image on top)
– In Germany the share now is 29%

And what's even more interesting:
QuoteQuote:
Half of the A7/r/s camera owners never owned a Sony camera before that camera
Sony is doing something that's making people jump ship. Leaving their trusted gear.

This is only going to increase. It's not suddenly going to be really cool again by the end of next year to be buying grandpa-DSLRs. It'll be 20 or 30 years before DSLRs are old and forgotten enough to become 'retro' and get rediscovered again.
12-03-2014, 01:54 AM   #292
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,022
QuoteOriginally posted by philbaum Quote

With regard to short registration distances, i hadn't realized that Fujifilm XF, Sony e-mount and even micro4/3 registration distances are not that far apart.
Phil, note that in designing lenses for Panasonic and Olympus you haven't got the same extent of problem because the m4/3 sensor covers less area than that of Fuji and Sony.

But there are still plenty of corrections done. Lens profiles are built into the m43 lenses for the camera's firmware to act on.
12-03-2014, 03:08 AM   #293
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,703
QuoteOriginally posted by philbaum Quote
Camera Mounts Sorted by Register

With regard to short registration distances, i hadn't realized that Fujifilm XF, Sony e-mount and even micro4/3 registration distances are not that far apart. Since there are an unlimited number of registration distances, all the about 18mm registration distances must have been chosen for a reason - i assume because it minimizes lens dimensions.
Beware that all theses mount are APSC only except for Sony E that is now extended to support FF through FE mount.

The registration distance we have on most APSC DSLR was made with FF in mind where the registration distance was an interresting compromize in the end. It is easy to design small lenses from 35 to 70mm. And even lenses of 100 or 135mm can be quite small (see DFA100 macro for an example).

On APSC, it seems logical to apply the crop factor to the registration distance if you design a dedicated mount or maybe even a bit shorter. That good for Fuji or Sony Nex.

Sony decided to keep the Nex E mount for it latest FF FE lenses. For me it was more a practical design to allow to use natively FE lenses on E mount and to keep the body quite small. The obvious implication is that tele lenses are bigger and that to really benefit of shorter registration distance wide angle lenses have light rays at bigger angle that the digital sensor have trouble to catch, especially for wide appertures.

FE mount to me look a little like K-mount to APSC. There no proof obviously and Sony will deny it, saying it was made for the begining to be perfect for FF... But it was made with APSC and small body size first. FF support was secondary in the design.

12-03-2014, 03:50 AM   #294
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,243
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by philbaum Quote
Camera Mounts Sorted by Register

With regard to short registration distances, i hadn't realized that Fujifilm XF, Sony e-mount and even micro4/3 registration distances are not that far apart. Since there are an unlimited number of registration distances, all the about 18mm registration distances must have been chosen for a reason - i assume because it minimizes lens dimensions.
I don't know a whole lot about lens design, but my understanding is that it is possible to create the smallest lenses for a given registration distance when they are close to their focal length is close to that registration distance. So, for Pentax, the smallest lenses will be around 40mm. For FE Mount, 20mm should be pretty small.

When it comes to significantly longer lenses and zooms, the size difference will not be significant and will be dependent a lot more on the speed of the lens, the materials use (plastic versus metal, etc), and how well corrected the lens is. Sony is relying more on these factors to try to create smaller lenses, but their zooms really aren't that small, when you factor in how fast their apertures are.
12-03-2014, 04:12 AM   #295
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,652
QuoteOriginally posted by clackers Quote
Like the rangefinder lenses, the Sony wide angles can do without the heavy retrofocal elements designed in a DSLR wide angle, but the cost is light falling at angles that don't hit the pixel sensor wells and are lost - not a problem in film, but in digital, that's detail and light gone,
Again... new sensor tech. Samsung already has it, Sony will too. Samsung's latest sensor is able to capture that light that hits the sensor at angles. Not as good as film, I suppose, but the angles that are possible get wider and wider.


Canon could put a Canon badge on a pile of horse shit and sell it.


Consistent exposure seems much more important in video than in stills. If 2 stills don't match exactly... who cares. But in video, they are cut one after another, so differences are much more noticeable.


The OVF does look more natural, but it has less in common with what the camera will actually record. It's tricking you. With a good EVF what you see is what you get. That makes things easier, IMHO (though some might want the challenge of an OVF of course).
12-03-2014, 04:27 AM - 1 Like   #296
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,795
Mirrorless nothing short of a revolution, a wonder of the 21st century. Make no mistake they are sleeker, they have faster, more accurate AF, fewer moving parts and most importantly they smaller than ancient DSLRs...



..oh, nevermind.
12-03-2014, 06:53 AM   #297
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,270
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
Mirrorless nothing short of a revolution, a wonder of the 21st century. Make no mistake they are sleeker, they have faster, more accurate AF, fewer moving parts and most importantly they smaller than ancient DSLRs...



..oh, nevermind.
Nice hahaha, shows well where Mirrorless fails, though I love them for smaller primes.
12-03-2014, 07:29 AM   #298
Pentaxian
Clavius's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: De Klundert
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,122
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
Mirrorless nothing short of a revolution, a wonder of the 21st century. Make no mistake they are sleeker, they have faster, more accurate AF, fewer moving parts and most importantly they smaller than ancient DSLRs...


..oh, nevermind.
Should there be picture in there?

Edit: Nevermind, I discovered the link in your post and looked it up in your album. I have no idea why it doesn't show the picture when I view the forum.

Now, when I imagine a big fat DSLR in place of that mirrorless camera, the contraption still doesn't make much sense. Secondly, you can't slim down a DSLR when needed, but you can upsize a tiny mirrorless when needed though. Think of the battery grip in case of the A7 series. Or think of old fashioned brackets with stylish wooden grips. (Not that I would ever do that, but you get the point.)

Last edited by Clavius; 12-03-2014 at 07:36 AM.
12-03-2014, 07:38 AM   #299
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,243
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
Should there be picture in there?

Edit: Nevermind, I discovered the link and looked it up in your album.

Now, when I imagine a big fat DSLR in place of that mirrorless camera, the contraption still doesn't make much sense. Secondly, you can't slim down a DSLR when needed, but you can upsize a tiny mirrorless when needed. Think of the battery grip in case of the A7 series. Or think of old fashioned brackets with stylish wooden grips.
If you plan on shooting f2.8 zooms, then the A7 series is probably not your best bet. The lens will be the biggest part of the package at that point and pretty unwieldy on such a camera.

It does seem like if you want small and portable, having a four thirds size sensor helps, as the lenses are more reasonable in size as compared to the camera body.
12-03-2014, 07:43 AM   #300
Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 103
QuoteOriginally posted by osv Quote
so tell us, dear clackers... if mirrorless mount designs are so bad, how come the a6000 demolishes the k-3 in actual testing?

the bare sensor comparisons between those two cameras are nearly equal...

the fa50 costs nearly $100 more than the sony e50mm lens?
I'm always a little dubious about the overall scoring that DxO publishes. Case in point: in their smartphone testing, the overall score given to the iPhone 6 is way better than the Nokia Lumia 1020, even though the Lumia 1020 has a way bigger sensor, 41MP and OIS.

Also, keep in mind that you're comparing a lens designed in the 1980s to one designed in the 2010s. Lens technology and coatings have progressed considerably since then.
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!
35mm, camera, cameras, canon, compromise, dslr, evf, frame, kit, lcd, lenses, market, mirrorless, ovf, pentax, photography, pm, post, rangefinder, sensor, size, slr, slrs, sony, steve, system, weight
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Nature Dying Flowers Dr Orloff Photo Critique 3 02-02-2014 07:36 PM
Landscape The living and dying. BigJPR Photo Critique 25 05-09-2013 05:51 AM
Dying voice of reason.... jeffkrol General Talk 3 12-14-2012 11:25 AM
GOP problem: 'Their voters are white, aging and dying off' jeffkrol General Talk 42 05-22-2012 08:40 AM
Are all FILM SLRs safe with older flashes? ismaelg Flashes, Lighting, and Studio 5 03-29-2012 08:53 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:04 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