Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-11-2007, 04:23 PM   #16
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: West Chester, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,420
These are non-trivial upgrades that you're listing, and not easily (or more importantly, inexpensively) added to the existing chassis. I saw the mock-up of the Sony pro camera and it just seems like that market is better served by the 645D. See comments below.

QuoteOriginally posted by benjikan Quote
The first issue I discussed was the lack of an input for studio flash.
Yes, I can see the utility of this.
The flash synchro could go as high as 1/250 th of a second, allowing those using fill flash outdoors to decrease their depth of field.
With the Pentax 360/540 flashes (and a modern lens) you can synch all the way down to 1/4000th. Or am I missing something?

The AWB must be improved. There is no reason that the AWB cannot be closer to 5500k when rectifying mixed sources.
Agreed. (But, setting custom white balance is stellar.)

All of the lenses manufactured by Pentax should not have any BF or FF issues.
Can *any* manufacturer say this? Especially since they've moved production out of Japan to lower-cost facilities, this is probably impossible.

There have been inconsistencies with the 21-Limited lens. This kind of insecurity associated with using this lens does not add to user confidence. The fear of the subject being out of focus while doing a pro shoot and being paid for it does not reflect well on the photographer, if the images are out of focus.
(PS - At least we don't have focus shift with a >$1,000 lens like Canon.)

A shooting speed of 5 fps for intermediate models would help to convince those photographers shooting action, not to use the 3.3 fps excuse for not switching to Pentax. The high end version could shoot up to 7 fps.
Sorry, this is where you get into a completely different model. Nikon has a dedicated high-speed model, so does Canon I think. And I think without any compelling lenses, this just doesn't make sense.

Pentax may have to compete against Sony, Nikon and Canon in the larger sensor size arena. If the norm becomes FF or perhaps a 1.25 factor and it becomes the standard across the board, Pentax must be prepared to, either take the lead and do so at a price point that is reminiscent of the pro Canon or Nikon bodies that sold for around 2k dollars. I know that if Pentax were to go FF or 1.25, many pro's would consider them. As we all know, sensor size attracts certain profiles that feel insecure unless those criteria are satisfied.
Pentax will follow because it must. I highly doubt that they will lead the pack. But this is where the 645D makes sense, no?

A Pentax body without integral flash. Most pro's use off camera flash and rarely use the flash provided with the camera. Perhaps the intermediate bodies could integrate the flash in to camera.
While I agree, I can't see a camera missing this selling much.

Improve the "SR" as well as the sensor cleaning mechanism.
I'm sure we'll see improvements. Pentax is constantly evolving.

The capacity to choose to shoot from 50-3200 iso with an option to go to 6400 iso with improved noise performance.
How about just 'improved noise performance at ISO 400-1600' first?!?

That would do nicely for my own use...You can add your own.

Other than that, the K10D is almost perfect.
For me, I just want better noise characteristics and a bigger brighter viewfinder. That's all.

Oh yeah, and custom swappable mounts allowing you to natively use M42, Nikon, and Leica lenses.

04-11-2007, 06:03 PM   #17
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 161
A built in autofocus assist lamp for lowlight photography would be great.
04-11-2007, 08:03 PM   #18
Forum Member
awjweb's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 61
Here is an *EASY* one: A version of Pentax Remote Assistant that works with the istDS and K series. There is no way they are engineering the cameras without such software so it should be pertty simple to just release it to the public.

And as Mile High stated above, better low light AF. I can buy a $150 digicam with infared AF assist that leaves my Pentax DSLR in the dust in low light.
04-11-2007, 08:51 PM   #19
Senior Member
wmmk's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Chicago
Posts: 106
QuoteOriginally posted by benjikan Quote
I use a radio remote on my hotshoe. I also have a couple of "Hama" hotshoe cubes with Flash X Synchro input.
Interesting. Any reason you don't use Pocket Wizards? I'd love to hear from a pro!
QuoteOriginally posted by Christian Quote
spot metering linked to selected focus point
Absolutely!
QuoteOriginally posted by Mile High Quote
A built in autofocus assist lamp for lowlight photography would be great.
I second this, but they'd have to make sure this didn't trigger the optical slaves in the Pentax flashes.

While some of the things that Ben mentioned don't exactly apply to young amateurs like me, I certainly would like 5fps (which is perfectly reasonable), at ISO 65 or lower. I can't see myself using ISO 6400 unless I forgot to bring my strobes to a basketball game in a gym with dim rafter lights, but I don't do that often

04-11-2007, 10:32 PM   #20
PDL
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Woodinville, WA USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,175
Same set of responses that I entered in Steve's forum.
No built in flash? Great it's about time - absolutely worthless.

ISO 50 - yeah baby - how about ISO 25

How about a real old fashioned X sync - so I can use my really old manual flash (2 inch flash tube, six second recycle time, 1/2000 flash) will burn your eyes out.

FF - don't care that much, FPS - don't use it - 5 FPS would be nice though.

P-TTL and TTL flash capability - OK I'll agree to that.

Things you did not talk about.

A B&W version - no bayer layer - no demosaic algorithm's - no interpolations - real RAW.

By default de-couple focus from the d*mn shutter button - still have AF but give me back the control. -- by default.

Lose the d*mn beep - for anything.

Give me back my DOF markings on the lenses - or give me the little circular guides a-la DOF Master.

Give me interchangeable viewfinders (like my old Exa had) push a button and the pentaprism comes off in your hand so you can look straight down into the top of the camera.

Last - give me a bottle opener - cold beer is never too far away.

PDL
04-12-2007, 01:24 AM   #21
Veteran Member
benjikan's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,312
Original Poster
Flash Synchro

QuoteOriginally posted by carpents Quote
These are non-trivial upgrades that you're listing, and not easily (or more importantly, inexpensively) added to the existing chassis. I saw the mock-up of the Sony pro camera and it just seems like that market is better served by the 645D. See comments below.



For me, I just want better noise characteristics and a bigger brighter viewfinder. That's all.

Oh yeah, and custom swappable mounts allowing you to natively use M42, Nikon, and Leica lenses.
In terms of flash synchro, I am referring to Studio off camera flash sychro, not the dedicated flash you are talking about. This need has cropped up more often than I can count. One of the reasons I used my Bronica so often as they use leaf shutter lenses that synch external flash at all speeds.
04-12-2007, 01:29 AM   #22
Veteran Member
benjikan's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,312
Original Poster
Pocket Wizards

QuoteOriginally posted by wmmk Quote
Interesting. Any reason you don't use Pocket Wizards? I'd love to hear from a pro!

Absolutely!

I second this, but they'd have to make sure this didn't trigger the optical slaves in the Pentax flashes.

While some of the things that Ben mentioned don't exactly apply to young amateurs like me, I certainly would like 5fps (which is perfectly reasonable), at ISO 65 or lower. I can't see myself using ISO 6400 unless I forgot to bring my strobes to a basketball game in a gym with dim rafter lights, but I don't do that often
I always use "Pocket Wizard" when shooting in studio...
04-12-2007, 02:52 AM   #23
Veteran Member
Matjazz's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: EU/Slovenia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 774
Besides the regular improvements (better ISO higher DR...) I'd like to have
-100 viewfinder frame coverage
-manual on-board flash (1/1, 1/2...1/16)
-support for some kind of single use batteries without the use of grip (CR2 like Nikon)




Last edited by Matjazz; 04-12-2007 at 03:17 AM.
04-12-2007, 03:07 AM   #24
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Göteborg, Sweden
Posts: 810
QuoteOriginally posted by carpents Quote
-snip

For me, I just want better noise characteristics and a bigger brighter viewfinder. That's all.

Oh yeah, and custom swappable mounts allowing you to natively use M42, Nikon, and Leica lenses.
Here we have good ideas.
For the viewfinder - it won't become bigger and brighter without a bigger sensor (or by removing the AF). Meanwhile I have taken of my little 1.2 enlarger thing from Nikon and replaced it with the KPS 1.35x enlarger. It works well, sits very secure and is of good quality (glass, coated and with eyecup if you so wish)
KPS - description, pictures
Scroll down a bit. I use it with my DS but the K10D viewfinder is the same, isn't it?

Custom swappable mounts... Oh yeah. We all know it is not gonna happen but how fun wouldn't it have been?
04-12-2007, 03:30 AM   #25
Inactive Account




Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 19
An intelligent, dedicated WB button for measuring/setting WB that works fine without a gray card (just like Canon XH A1)
Better dynamic Range (a la Fuji S5 PRO)
More megapixels (allows for more cropping)
Better looking menus
Focus assist lamp instead of flash
Better in-camera JPEG sharpness for JPEG users
More dedicated buttons
Better Auto AWB for incandescent light
Full LiveView with digital real time view of DOF and WB
Extra Function button
Recent Settings (like D200, look here: Ryan Brenizer Photography - S5 Pro Review Part II: The Bad )
Keep the small size: Small Is The New Big
04-12-2007, 03:36 AM   #26
Inactive Account




Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 19
...and Sigma SD14-like image quality /color naturalness / sharpness:
SIGMA SD14:Sample Image Gallery:Portrait

Last edited by dLight; 04-12-2007 at 03:43 AM.
04-12-2007, 05:32 AM   #27
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: West Chester, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,420
QuoteOriginally posted by dLight Quote
Better in-camera JPEG sharpness for JPEG users
Ha ha, I really think Pentax should include an 'Oversharpen and Overprocess' setting for their JPEGs. I would laugh myself silly.
04-13-2007, 06:52 AM   #28
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,934
> The first issue I discussed was the lack of an input for studio flash. That in my opinion was a flagrant oversight considering the simplicity of doing so.

It's not an oversight. Both the *ist D and the MZ-S have the PC terminal and it's very obvious Pentax intentionally do not include this feature which can only be found in upper class model camera body, which the K10D actually is not.

> The flash synchro could go as high as 1/250 th of a second, allowing those using fill flash outdoors to decrease their depth of field.

This make the flash distance farther too.

> The AWB must be improved. There is no reason that the AWB cannot be closer to 5500k when rectifying mixed sources.

It can, what do you actually mean here?

> All of the lenses manufactured by Pentax should not have any BF or FF issues. There have been inconsistencies with the 21-Limited lens. This kind of insecurity associated with using this lens does not add to user confidence. The fear of the subject being out of focus while doing a pro shoot and being paid for it does not reflect well on the photographer, if the images are out of focus.

Ideally it is but practically it is not. There is no perfect AF system on this planet. Some do better and some do not. Still there is nothing perfect. The same applies to Canon or Nikon, otherwise there new 1DMkIII need not to have a new BF/FF offset input function!

For Pentax, the MZ-S AF is very good and much better than any Pentax DSLR AF system I have used but yet it's not perfect. The second best one is that of the K100D.

> A shooting speed of 5 fps for intermediate models would help to convince those photographers shooting action, not to use the 3.3 fps excuse for not switching to Pentax. The high end version could shoot up to 7 fps.

I bet most non-pro action photographers won't need this speed and there is little of those people amongst all the users.

> Pentax may have to compete against Sony, Nikon and Canon in the larger sensor size arena. If the norm becomes FF or perhaps a 1.25 factor and it becomes the standard across the board, Pentax must be prepared to, either take the lead and do so at a price point that is reminiscent of the pro Canon or Nikon bodies that sold for around 2k dollars. I know that if Pentax were to go FF or 1.25, many pro's would consider them. As we all know, sensor size attracts certain profiles that feel insecure unless those criteria are satisfied.

For people who start from scratch, FF, 1.25/1.3, 1.5/1.6 doesn't matter, at least not of great weight.

In view of the complete lineup of Pentax lens roadmap, it will be a non-issue.

The true problem of Pentax is their really limited production plus inconsistent quality control.

> A Pentax body without integral flash. Most pro's use off camera flash and rarely use the flash provided with the camera. Perhaps the intermediate bodies could integrate the flash in to camera.

This is just a Canon concept. I can't see why an built-in flash, which is very handy for use, will downgrade a camera!

What Pentax need to do is to increase the output of the RTF back to the Z-1 days and add back the near IR focus spotbeam in body.

I do think the built-in flash is handy for day light fill flash and in occasional dark condition indoor where a flash is needed "suddenly". Of course, one can always bring a flashgun along with. But there is no harm of anykind to have one built-in!

> Improve the "SR" as well as the sensor cleaning mechanism.

Agreed.

> The capacity to choose to shoot from 50-3200 iso with an option to go to 6400 iso with improved noise performance.

100 to 1600 is already more than adequate for me (and I bet for most too). What is really needed to be improved is the DR which should be increased more.

> That would do nicely for my own use...You can add your own.

There are more problems to be eliminated, as I have summarised the reported problems from time to time my blog, including those in teh K10D:-

RiceHigh's Pentax Blog: K10D

> Other than that, the K10D is almost perfect.

I think there is no perfect or even almost perfect camera on Earth! :-) For the K10D, I would say it is far from perfect, IMHO.
04-13-2007, 07:03 AM   #29
Veteran Member
benjikan's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,312
Original Poster
My Criteria

QuoteOriginally posted by RiceHigh Quote
> The first issue I discussed was the lack of an input for studio flash. That in my opinion was a flagrant oversight considering the simplicity of doing so.

It's not an oversight. Both the *ist D and the MZ-S have the PC terminal and it's very obvious Pentax intentionally do not include this feature which can only be found in upper class model camera body, which the K10D actually is not.

> The flash synchro could go as high as 1/250 th of a second, allowing those using fill flash outdoors to decrease their depth of field.

This make the flash distance farther too.

> The AWB must be improved. There is no reason that the AWB cannot be closer to 5500k when rectifying mixed sources.

It can, what do you actually mean here?

> All of the lenses manufactured by Pentax should not have any BF or FF issues. There have been inconsistencies with the 21-Limited lens. This kind of insecurity associated with using this lens does not add to user confidence. The fear of the subject being out of focus while doing a pro shoot and being paid for it does not reflect well on the photographer, if the images are out of focus.

Ideally it is but practically it is not. There is no perfect AF system on this planet. Some do better and some do not. Still there is nothing perfect. The same applies to Canon or Nikon, otherwise there new 1DMkIII need not to have a new BF/FF offset input function!

For Pentax, the MZ-S AF is very good and much better than any Pentax DSLR AF system I have used but yet it's not perfect. The second best one is that of the K100D.

> A shooting speed of 5 fps for intermediate models would help to convince those photographers shooting action, not to use the 3.3 fps excuse for not switching to Pentax. The high end version could shoot up to 7 fps.

I bet most non-pro action photographers won't need this speed and there is little of those people amongst all the users.

> Pentax may have to compete against Sony, Nikon and Canon in the larger sensor size arena. If the norm becomes FF or perhaps a 1.25 factor and it becomes the standard across the board, Pentax must be prepared to, either take the lead and do so at a price point that is reminiscent of the pro Canon or Nikon bodies that sold for around 2k dollars. I know that if Pentax were to go FF or 1.25, many pro's would consider them. As we all know, sensor size attracts certain profiles that feel insecure unless those criteria are satisfied.

For people who start from scratch, FF, 1.25/1.3, 1.5/1.6 doesn't matter, at least not of great weight.

In view of the complete lineup of Pentax lens roadmap, it will be a non-issue.

The true problem of Pentax is their really limited production plus inconsistent quality control.

> A Pentax body without integral flash. Most pro's use off camera flash and rarely use the flash provided with the camera. Perhaps the intermediate bodies could integrate the flash in to camera.

This is just a Canon concept. I can't see why an built-in flash, which is very handy for use, will downgrade a camera!

What Pentax need to do is to increase the output of the RTF back to the Z-1 days and add back the near IR focus spotbeam in body.

I do think the built-in flash is handy for day light fill flash and in occasional dark condition indoor where a flash is needed "suddenly". Of course, one can always bring a flashgun along with. But there is no harm of anykind to have one built-in!

> Improve the "SR" as well as the sensor cleaning mechanism.

Agreed.

> The capacity to choose to shoot from 50-3200 iso with an option to go to 6400 iso with improved noise performance.

100 to 1600 is already more than adequate for me (and I bet for most too). What is really needed to be improved is the DR which should be increased more.

> That would do nicely for my own use...You can add your own.

There are more problems to be eliminated, as I have summarised the reported problems from time to time my blog, including those in teh K10D:-

RiceHigh's Pentax Blog: K10D

> Other than that, the K10D is almost perfect.

I think there is no perfect or even almost perfect camera on Earth! :-) For the K10D, I would say it is far from perfect, IMHO.
Hello;

In my discussion, the subject at hand were my needs as a professional user. Those issues were discussed as an expression of my own observations based on the experience I have garnered over the years as a professional photographer. If you feel those pointers I highlighted are not important to your needs that is understandable. However, I would prefer to have a tool that provide as many solutions as is feasible in the possible likelihood that they may be required.
04-13-2007, 09:47 AM   #30
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,934
QuoteOriginally posted by benjikan Quote
Hello;

In my discussion, the subject at hand were my needs as a professional user. Those issues were discussed as an expression of my own observations based on the experience I have garnered over the years as a professional photographer. If you feel those pointers I highlighted are not important to your needs that is understandable. However, I would prefer to have a tool that provide as many solutions as is feasible in the possible likelihood that they may be required.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying all of the features under your wishlist are not important to me or any other user.

What I wish to respond and point out is that it is NOT Pentax of not capable or "forget" to include some of the items, BUT it is simply that they have NOT included these in the K10D just BECAUSE the K10D has never been intended to be and made as an upper class or pro grade level camera by Pentax as they did with the LX, Z-1 and MZ-S. The selling price of it says it all, it is just an entry to mid level class body (fact: they are now sold at price closed to A100 and cheaper than the D80)

For the rest of the problems you mentioned, it's just that there exists technical limitations which is common to all makers or that there are more room for improvement for Pentax themselves where they need to catch up.

Honestly speaking, for some of the problems you have mentioned, actually they are not existent in other higher class Pentax bodies as well as the Canon/Nikon top of the line pro bodies. So, afterall, it is totally understandable why the K10D lacks these features or still have some of those problems.

As some people always remind me that we cannot ask too much from a body selling at this price, Pentax have to cut some corners to make it.

But I know and agree that if there is a feature or function, they should work accurately as promised/advertise. And yes, I want to see the true upper class K1D or so soonest too. But, it's unlikely to be happened in the near future!

Finally, I am not totally sure about what a "pro" would really need for different applications and different kinds of pro works as I'm not one of them, as you've pointed out. But I know well about what a camera should deliver and perform and what they can't do the job or not, as intended or just failed to deliver, as I'm at least an experienced amateur (for 29 years) plus I'm a professional engineer who knows well about the inside of a camera for how the makers designed and made the cameras.

Well, also, all in all, I do believe different pros are just/simply also different users who would ask for different things and have different judgements and requirements, aren't them? :-)
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!
bodies, camera, canon, dslr, ff, flash, fps, iso, pentax, photography, sensor, size
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax rolls out next generation of popular optios: P80 and e80 compact digital came Adam Homepage & Official Pentax News 0 08-05-2009 07:00 PM
An idea for the next generation of Pentax DSLR virgilr Photographic Technique 18 03-12-2009 12:35 AM
2nd Generation Pentax User cdeakin Welcomes and Introductions 6 08-03-2008 07:18 AM
News User CP and Pentax FAQ Improvements Adam Site Suggestions and Help 0 02-23-2007 04:57 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:12 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