Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-16-2008, 06:38 PM   #61
Site Supporter
Mark2100's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Oklahoma
Posts: 185
The best way to focus on a person in any light, is to have the camera in AF-S with the center cross hairs on the edge of their face, arm, leg... Anything vertical or horizontal with high contrast. The edge of a black tie on a white shirt will focus in almost any light. You can focus on someones ear if there's a white wall behind them. You want their eyes in focus, back up four inches after focus lock. Try it, it works.

10-16-2008, 07:02 PM   #62
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,043
QuoteOriginally posted by RBellavance Quote
The problem here is assuming that Pentax makes a real high-performance camera. Comparing anything Pentax currently offers to the D3 is completely pointless. The Nikon is in a completely different class, performance- and price-wise.

If you need what the D3 offers, Pentax is not the place to be looking for it.



You've got that backwards. Pentax being cheaper is not a problem. Expecting a K20D to perform like a Nikon D3 is.
If you read my post, you will find that I didn't compare anything to anything, I just figured that the comment would bring out the knee jerk apologists (which it seemed to do). My last comment makes it very plain that I understand exactly what the situation is.


Carry on.
10-16-2008, 07:33 PM   #63
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,202
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
The problem here is that most of the people on this forum just don't know what a real high performance camera is. I had the pleasure of using a Nikon D3 yesterday, and then making prints from the resulting files.
To say I was impressed is an understatement. To say I was completely blown away is closer to the truth.
The camera outperformed anything I had used before on every level that I use to judge a camera's performance.

Before anyone trots out the tired old "my Pentax is cheaper" argument, remember that your Pentax being cheaper is the problem, not the solution.
You bring up a couple of extremely valid points. The first is the excellence of the Nikon D3. I have handled the D3 at the dealers and was immensely impressed. There was no doubt that I was holding a durable professional quality tool. I also handled the D60 and D80. There is no confusing the other models with the D3.

Given the obvious difference in quality and performance, why would someone purchase a D60 or the D80 over the D3?

Now, pick up a K20D. Is the perception of "professional" quality there? How about the perception of quality as compared to the D60/D80? Feature set? Image quality?

Regarding your second extremely valid point. The K20D is cheaper than a D3. A lot cheaper. I guess because of that you should expect a significant decrease in quality/features/performance. In fact, you should expect a very significant decrease.

The problem is that the most people's impression of the K20D is that it is more in the league of the D3 than that of the D80, regardless of price. Because it is Pentax's top of the line and because of its impressive build and performance, people's expectations are very high, regardless of price.

Can Pentax meet the D3 on all points for the price of a K20D? Maybe...but until such time, why would anyone expect them to?

Steve

(Would be happy to have a D700 equivalent for the price of a K20D...)

Last edited by stevebrot; 10-16-2008 at 07:40 PM. Reason: Got my Nikon models straight...
10-17-2008, 06:26 AM   #64
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 255
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
The problem here is that most of the people on this forum just don't know what a real high performance camera is. I had the pleasure of using a Nikon D3 yesterday, and then making prints from the resulting files.
To say I was impressed is an understatement. To say I was completely blown away is closer to the truth.
The camera outperformed anything I had used before on every level that I use to judge a camera's performance.

Before anyone trots out the tired old "my Pentax is cheaper" argument, remember that your Pentax being cheaper is the problem, not the solution.
What's the solution then?

10-17-2008, 07:15 AM   #65
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,043
QuoteOriginally posted by Maxington Quote
What's the solution then?
I expect that Pentax is going to have to bite the bullet and go to a full frame sensor, and I think it will have to be sooner, rather than later if they want to stay in the game.
I've maintained for a very long time that the present crop of cameras is seriously out performed by the present lens line.
Noise reduction performance can only be taken so far in a cropped sensor, and after that, the larger photosites that can be made available in a higher pixel count full frame sensor become necessary.

I invite you to look at:
A Picture
warning, 5mb file.
This is an out of camera JPEG shot on the D3 at ISO 1250. If you download the file and adjust the levels to bring up the blacks, you will see detail and no banding or noise. This is a quantum leap in quality over what can be done with a cropped sensor.
Note, I was asked to mask the child's face.

If Pentax is serious about imaging quality, they will have to go this route, at least with a high end camera.

Unfortunately, they have such an investment now in a cropped sensor, it will be a very difficult business decision to make.
Do they keep making DX sensor cameras and maintain the very excellent DA Limited lens line, do they drop the DX sensor and stop developing DX lenses.

The latter would not make anyone happy (myself included). I happen to like the compactness of the K20, and I like the fact that I can stick half a dozen lenses into a couple of pockets and go photowalking.
One thing I noted about the D3 is it's size. It is very big and very heavy, and is not something I would want to carry very far.

The answer really depends on how magnanimous Hoya is. I'd be willing to bet that the desire exists within Pentax to make another top line camera, either with the DX sized sensor or a full frame sensor (or both), and the technical expertise is certainly available to them. It really depends on what their corporate masters at Hoya allow them to do.

Before I attract any more apologists, I am aware that a D3 costs some 5 times more than a K20, and I am in no way making a comparison, in other than very general terms (IE: this is what you can do with lots of money that you can't do for a thousand dollars)
10-17-2008, 09:00 AM   #66
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 255
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
stuff
So Pentax cameras being cheaper is the problem, and your solution is for Pentax to make a big heavy expensive full frame camera. In other words, they should do a Sony, and try to be Nikon or Canon.

That is not a solution. That's corporate suicide.
10-17-2008, 10:08 AM   #67
Senior Member
Talisker's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Isle of Skye, Scotland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 262
Once upon a not-so-very-long-ago Pentax's 'big beast' (in more ways than one!) was the 67. Nikon's beast was the F Series. A 67 will blow away any 35mm camera in terms of image quality (as well as giving a good upper body workout), but nobody accused Nikon of not being interested in imaging quality because they were clearly aimed at different markets, and were market leaders in their own marketplace.

What is still not clear with the current, evolving technology and marketplace, is the level of convergence or otherwise of the 'full' frame and 'reduced' frame SLR market, a situation muddied by them both evolving from the 35mm SLRs.

A lot of people in this and other forums obsess over full frame cameras that the huge majority of the market wouldn't be interested in unless they could be made closer to the size, weight, and cost of 'reduced' frame models. If that convergence takes place, then Pentax would have a problem: if the market diverges then probably not.

For the moment the question isn't so much as to whether Pentax want to stay in the game, as much as to how many games there are going to be a couple of years down the line, and how many you need to be in to turn over a decent profit.

I'm personally more interested in improvements in the dynmic range of sensors than megapixel and size wars...
10-17-2008, 10:46 AM   #68
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,043
QuoteOriginally posted by Maxington Quote
So Pentax cameras being cheaper is the problem, and your solution is for Pentax to make a big heavy expensive full frame camera. In other words, they should do a Sony, and try to be Nikon or Canon.

That is not a solution. That's corporate suicide.
We'll put you in as a top contender for the Strawman Argument of the Year Award.

10-17-2008, 10:47 AM   #69
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,202
QuoteOriginally posted by Maxington Quote
So Pentax cameras being cheaper is the problem, and your solution is for Pentax to make a big heavy expensive full frame camera. In other words, they should do a Sony, and try to be Nikon or Canon.

That is not a solution. That's corporate suicide.
Nope...Pentax should do a Leica S (LEICA Camera AG - Aktuell).

Steve

BTW...The current Pentax bodies are large enough to accommodate a FF sensor. In addition, the price of the FF Canon/Nikon models is not so much a reflection of the cost of manufacture as it is the price the market will bear. For example, does anyone remember the original price point of the *istD?
10-17-2008, 11:53 AM   #70
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,043
QuoteOriginally posted by Talisker Quote
Once upon a not-so-very-long-ago Pentax's 'big beast' (in more ways than one!) was the 67. Nikon's beast was the F Series. A 67 will blow away any 35mm camera in terms of image quality (as well as giving a good upper body workout), but nobody accused Nikon of not being interested in imaging quality because they were clearly aimed at different markets, and were market leaders in their own marketplace.

What is still not clear with the current, evolving technology and marketplace, is the level of convergence or otherwise of the 'full' frame and 'reduced' frame SLR market, a situation muddied by them both evolving from the 35mm SLRs.

A lot of people in this and other forums obsess over full frame cameras that the huge majority of the market wouldn't be interested in unless they could be made closer to the size, weight, and cost of 'reduced' frame models. If that convergence takes place, then Pentax would have a problem: if the market diverges then probably not.

For the moment the question isn't so much as to whether Pentax want to stay in the game, as much as to how many games there are going to be a couple of years down the line, and how many you need to be in to turn over a decent profit.

I'm personally more interested in improvements in the dynmic range of sensors than megapixel and size wars...
Yes well, my large format Nikkor lenses beat the heck out of my Pentax 6x7 lenses when mounted to their respective cameras. My Tachihara is also a lot lighter to carry....

Absolutely, they need to sort out which game or games they want to be in. Right now, they are solidly in the cheap and cheerful sandbox, as well as the low end enthusiast sandbox, in other words, they are solidly in the lower end of the marketplace with their camera bodies.
At the same time, they are at or near the top end of the marketplace with their lens quality, which makes for an interesting (at least to me) conundrum, and is why I keep pushing for a D300 class camera from Pentax.
The lens quality is there, now lets get a camera body that is up to the same standard of build and performance.
One of the things that impresses my Nikon and Canon gearhead friends is the Limited lenses that I carry around so casually in my pockets.
CaNikon just don't make anything like that.
The reason for full frame to me isn't to pack more pixels into the sensor, to me it is to pack the same number of larger pixels into the sensor. This is the best way to increase dynamic range, noise levels and overall image quality. At some point, the DX sensor size is going to limit what the engineers can do WRT image quality (camera IQ), and when that happens, it's either go big or go home, if you want to stay in the same ballpark as the teams you are playing against, and don't kid yourself, Pentax is in a very tough ballgame right now, they are a couple of touchdowns behind, and it is late in the fourth quarter.
Have a look at that D3 file I posted above. It's only a 5mb download. It was shot at ISO 1250 with a Sigma zoom lens of some sort, but even hobbled by the glass, it is an impressive quality image by anyone's standard. Nikon didn't get into a megapixel war with the D3, it is a very conservative 12mp sensor. They went with dynamic range and noise control instead, and it shows.
Pentax may be best in class at the moment, but that class is steadily moving upwards, and Pentax has to make some pretty bold decisions if they want to stay in the same grade, or fall behind yet again.
10-17-2008, 11:57 AM   #71
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,043
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote

BTW...The current Pentax bodies are large enough to accommodate a FF sensor. In addition, the price of the FF Canon/Nikon models is not so much a reflection of the cost of manufacture as it is the price the market will bear. For example, does anyone remember the original price point of the *istD?
Actually yes. I walked into Don's Photo, and 15 minutes later I walked out with an *istD, the battery grip, 18-35mm kit lens, 2 sets of Kodak NiMH batteries and a wall charger for $3300.00 Canadian dollars.
If I could get a Nikon 700 class camera that said Pentax on it, I'd do the same thing again, too.
I just noticed that the D300 is now a mere $400.00 more than what I paid for my K20, too.
10-17-2008, 12:09 PM   #72
Veteran Member
RBellavance's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Near Montréal, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,716
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
[...] a D300 class camera from Pentax.
*That* would make me a very happy photographer indeed. After shooting a wedding last weekend with a D300, I am more convinced than ever than I don't need FF. That high-ISO quality in a Pentax (APS-C) body is all I want. The K20D seems close, but not quite there.
10-17-2008, 12:28 PM   #73
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,202
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
Actually yes. I walked into Don's Photo, and 15 minutes later I walked out with an *istD, the battery grip, 18-35mm kit lens, 2 sets of Kodak NiMH batteries and a wall charger for $3300.00 Canadian dollars.
If I could get a Nikon 700 class camera that said Pentax on it, I'd do the same thing again, too.
I just noticed that the D300 is now a mere $400.00 more than what I paid for my K20, too.
$3300...a little more than a new D700 with FF sensor and 5 fps.


Steve
10-17-2008, 12:59 PM   #74
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,043
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
$3300...a little more than a new D700 with FF sensor and 5 fps.


Steve
And that's when I killed him, Your Honour
10-17-2008, 09:57 PM   #75
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 255
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
We'll put you in as a top contender for the Strawman Argument of the Year Award.
Isn't that an easy way to run away from a discussion, wave the Strawman flag. Try a less obvious tactic next time when you don't have an answer and need to run away.

You stated Pentax need to introduce a FF camera, and spent a lot of time lauding the virtues of the D3.

Nikon and Canon have full frame cameras. Sony has entered the market and is competing with them head to head.

Thus for Pentax to do exactly what you said, they are going to have to do exactly what Sony is doing. Which is, funnily enough, exactly what I said.

Which is exactly what Pentax isn't doing, because they are not idiots and do not wish to commit suicide by bashing their heads against the big guys, fighting for a share of a miniscule section of the camera market.
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, d700, dslr, focus, iq, k100d, light, pentax, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Focus, Focus, Focus (or the usefulness of focus charts) GoremanX Pentax DSLR Discussion 31 12-21-2014 11:49 AM
10 Reasons why manual focus primes are better than those new auto focus zoom lenses JoepLX3 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 188 07-25-2012 03:28 PM
Trying to understand front focus/back focus thing 41ants Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 16 08-31-2010 08:42 AM
K100D Super - Focus point locked to center in Manual Focus ? JGabr Pentax DSLR Discussion 2 01-25-2010 09:41 PM
Front focus/ back focus on Manual lens. Possible? WangJianWei Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 6 04-20-2009 07:50 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:00 PM. | See also: NikonForums.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