[vinzer]

I prefer camera that is a tool for taking photos and not a programmable multi task gizmo. Even today a digital photographer has to be familiar with computers an electronic devices in order to use camera properly. With programmable cameras we would spend even more time fiddling with computers.

being a programmer myself, i do think that having a way to program the camera a bit is something that's very enticing.

Matjazz, you don't have to fiddle with programming if you don't want to. what's good about an open API is that someone else could do the programming end and share the resulting program with other people.

i, for one, would certainly be willing to share whatever code i could come up with the rest of the Pentax community. i'm sure other programmers here in these forums are, as well.

what this whole programming thing amounts to is that people could program their own implementation of, say, how JPGs should be processed if they feel the defaults are lacking in sharpness, contrast, etc.

i doubt such an idea will surface in the short term, though, but that's an interesting feature to have.

[Bophoto]

Why is it that so many people are waiting for the 'Next Big Thing'? Even when they get it they start waiting for the 'Next next Big Thing' and then the next next next.... well you get the idea.
Most do not not make the best of the equipment they own. I know many people who buy a camera on specs and then leave it set on Auto 99% of the time!
A good photographer will produce a good image with almost any equipment - take a look at the images produced by past photographic masters.
I like my 'toys' as much as anyone but I find the constant 'nitpicking' over the smallest technical detail counter-productive - I always thought owning a camera was about taking photos of the world around us not test cards.
Everyone to their own I suppose....

I think it´s aboat having big money in their pockets that burns...

[button]

being a programmer myself, i do think that having a way to program the camera a bit is something that's very enticing.

I agree with this. Think of the possibilities: there could be a download page made available with multiple user created "function packs", tailored for specific needs. I think that making the firmware open source could bolster Pentax's reputation as photographer advocates. I just don't think that any company can reasonably expect to make any "one size fits all" product.

[Lars]

Saw a thread at dpreview (Sony DSLR forum) where it was concluded to be a 1:st of April joke!? Or is there some truth in this? (Can't find the information in your link! Regards/Lars

[Lars]

Sorry, I saw you already aware of this as a joke, but how knows, there might be more to it than just a joke. / Lars

[mutley]

i doubt such an idea will surface in the short term, though, but that's an interesting feature to have.

It will surface when a programmer good enough to hack the K10D firmware comes along and feels its worth doing.

Canon already has various firmware hacks enabling their cameras to offer more than Canon is willing to.

The K10D definitely has more potential than Pentax wants to give us.

Larry

[Phazed]

I could have used that GPS navigation with live preview this past weekend...Not LoL
I would have seen this comming...

Time to break trail!

[wjwncpro]

I was 30 miles from where I was heading at that point, but I had to turn around and go back the 120 miles the way I came...

[vinzer]

It will surface when a programmer good enough to hack the K10D firmware comes along and feels its worth doing.

Canon already has various firmware hacks enabling their cameras to offer more than Canon is willing to.

The K10D definitely has more potential than Pentax wants to give us.

Larry

You make me wanna tinker with my K10D! I'd wait for its warranty to pass, though. Haha.

I used to have a 300D, so, yeah, I was amazed by how some people could hack their way to produce firmwares that enabled the 300D to do stuff it wasn't programmed to.

Then again, the 300D is the 10D with crippled firmware, so it didn't take much for people to add functionalities (rather, enable) the 10D had that the 300D didn't.

The K10D, on the other hand, is, for now, the top camera in Pentax's line-up, so there's no easy way to add features the same way people did with the 300D, since the K10D ideally has the best features already.

I still am intrigued, though, if there's a way to override algorithms used to process images, since some people aren't all that satisfied with JPGs taken straight from the camera. Personally, I'm happy shooting JPGs with my K10D, though, but it is an interesting concept if we could program something akin to the Picture Style Canon uses in their DSLRs.

Or we could even develop small apps for Pentax's K-series DSLRs, maybe quick fixes for photos or as some have suggested, reprogramming the K10D's buttons and such.

[button]

It will surface when a programmer good enough to hack the K10D firmware comes along and feels its worth doing.

Larry

I would LOVE to see this happen. Anyone? Anyone?

[mattdm]

It will surface when a programmer good enough to hack the K10D firmware comes along and feels its worth doing.

Canon already has various firmware hacks enabling their cameras to offer more than Canon is willing to.

The K10D definitely has more potential than Pentax wants to give us.

Larry

Firmware hacks are a different animal, usually limiited to changing a value here and there. In the case of the Canon firmware hacks, it's mostly changing disabled bits to enabled, to give the lower-end cameras features intentionally left out.

I think it'd be a lot more useful (and less threatening from a business perspective) for the existing firmware to expose (in the computer sense, not the photographic one) as much capability as possible to a scripting language (or Java API). It'd be nice to have control over things from focus and metering / program exposure to image processing all the way to menu and interface setup.

I bet someone could make the auto white balance work a lot better indoors, and certainly make the jpeg output of the K10D closer in quality to RAW. If the interface were full Java (ideal since it's designed to run in a "sandbox"), one could even do things like use extended gamut colorspaces (like the new xvYCC up-and-coming in consumer video applications) and 16-bit jpeg.

[vinzer]

Firmware hacks are a different animal, usually limiited to changing a value here and there. In the case of the Canon firmware hacks, it's mostly changing disabled bits to enabled, to give the lower-end cameras features intentionally left out.

I think it'd be a lot more useful (and less threatening from a business perspective) for the existing firmware to expose (in the computer sense, not the photographic one) as much capability as possible to a scripting language (or Java API). It'd be nice to have control over things from focus and metering / program exposure to image processing all the way to menu and interface setup.

I bet someone could make the auto white balance work a lot better indoors, and certainly make the jpeg output of the K10D closer in quality to RAW. If the interface were full Java (ideal since it's designed to run in a "sandbox"), one could even do things like use extended gamut colorspaces (like the new xvYCC up-and-coming in consumer video applications) and 16-bit jpeg.

I agree that having Java in-cam will be a great help, but I wonder if the processor in the K10D is up to the task to handle an interpreted language such as Java. I'm hoping it is.

[mattdm]

I agree that having Java in-cam will be a great help, but I wonder if the processor in the K10D is up to the task to handle an interpreted language such as Java. I'm hoping it is.

Java's not an interpreted language. There's a lot of misconceptions about its speed, but actually modern implementations are as fast as typical native-compiled code. But even then, I think that, yeah, putting a more powerful processor in there would help with this idea.

[vinzer]

Java's not an interpreted language. There's a lot of misconceptions about its speed, but actually modern implementations are as fast as typical native-compiled code. But even then, I think that, yeah, putting a more powerful processor in there would help with this idea.

It is interpreted to native machine code from bytecode, but no, I'm not making an issue about Java's speed. What the camera would have a problem with, though, is that the JVM needs a fairly sizable chunk of processing power to be able to run code thrown at it.

I'm not too sure about the K10D's capabilities, but having the power to do RAW processing in-camera gives me hope that somehow, it might be able to run other apps as well. Homebrew anyone?