[Nass]

Well, this is me with my commercial hat on - read again and you'll see that I wasn't actually suggesting taking anything specifically away - but building new functionality that only works with Pentax lenses (as opposed to Sigma etc) and only Pentax would have. ie a 'system' USP. The sort of thing I'm thinking of can't be done with -a or -m lenses anyway.

This is probably sacreligious - no doubt the famous backwards compatibility helped, but seems to me it might be a bit of a two edged sword from Pentax' point of view. As in the body is only part of the consumer purchase, lenses are the rest. Take me as a typical example, I've got 3 21st century Pentax lenses but 7 20th century ones. In terms of revenue that's quite a large slice not going into Pentax but into some second hand dealer's pocket. Revenues that I imagine might have supported body or technology development.

*ducks*

[Euronitzan]

I'd like the (prosumer) bodies to have a carbon fiber chassis, the outer parts can also be made out of carbon, making the body weigh around 200-300 grams. An internal GPS module would also be nice. I wouldn't like to think about the price of a carbon fiber camera body...

[Lowell Goudge]

Well, this is me with my commercial hat on - read again and you'll see that I wasn't actually suggesting taking anything specifically away - but building new functionality that only works with Pentax lenses (as opposed to Sigma etc) and only Pentax would have. ie a 'system' USP. The sort of thing I'm thinking of can't be done with -a or -m lenses anyway.

This is probably sacreligious - no doubt the famous backwards compatibility helped, but seems to me it might be a bit of a two edged sword from Pentax' point of view. As in the body is only part of the consumer purchase, lenses are the rest. Take me as a typical example, I've got 3 21st century Pentax lenses but 7 20th century ones. In terms of revenue that's quite a large slice not going into Pentax but into some second hand dealer's pocket. Revenues that I imagine might have supported body or technology development.

*ducks*

The question is, where is the line between take away and new functions. Just look at P-TTL flash. it's implementation made many many lenses obsolete because they no longer supported TTL. FUnctionally, although people argue about how good or bad TTL VS P-TTL is, for the bulk of non A lens owners, there was no other way to look at it it was a take away.

As for new features that can't be incorporated into anything but a new pentax lens, for the life of me, I can't imagine much that is there which can't be accomplished with the existing lens mount.

If you again re-read many posts here, every time the decision comes as to what is a better investment, glass or bodies, the answer almost always comes back glass, because it has a much longer product life.,

YOu are now talking about shortening the product life of what amounts to a very small percentage of a photographer's total investment.

Sure, each of my DSLR bodies cost a lot, but what about the cost of replacing all my lenses. ALL 30 OF THEM just because some marketing @$$#@!& thinks up some new fangled widget that they determine is a must have.

[Nass]

Lowell, let me explain. Nothing to do with the mount, you've got the wrong end of the stick completely. This is the sort of thing I mean - say they developed some inbuilt functionality like focus stacking. In other words imagine you're a macro nut. You'd take your super duper new Pentax lens and Pentax camera, focus on one point (say the back of the ant - let's call it Focuspoint1), press some button on the camera, then focus on some other point (say the front of our very obliging mr. ant - call it Focuspoint2), press that button again, and the camera would then programatically take 5 images - at focuspoints1 and 2 and 3 others in between, then save them to memory. Ie like bracketing but with focus points.

That way you could focus stack them on your computer. That'd be kind of handy I reckon, and pretty unique. As you know, focus on macro is a complete pig, no other word for it. And relatively straightforward because it's an adaptation of existing technology. I'd have thought because the technology to move lens focus already exists, the task is to write programming to allow the camera to remember these and be able to programatically calculate and shift to them.

But if I were Pentax I'd make that only work with Pentax lenses, not Sigma. Better value for money for Pentax lens buyers and more reason to buy Pentax. And obviously can't be done with manual lenses because they don't have the stuff inside the camera that allows the focus movement neccessary for autofocus. So, nothing to do with mounts, or making older stuff incompatible. -a and -m simply cannot do it.

[Lowell Goudge]

Lowell, let me explain. Nothing to do with the mount, you've got the wrong end of the stick completely. This is the sort of thing I mean - say they developed some inbuilt functionality like focus stacking. In other words imagine you're a macro nut. You'd take your super duper new Pentax lens and Pentax camera, focus on one point (say the back of the ant - let's call it Focuspoint1), press some button on the camera, then focus on some other point (say the front of our very obliging mr. ant - call it Focuspoint2), press that button again, and the camera would then programatically take 5 images - at focuspoints1 and 2 and 3 others in between, then save them to memory. Ie like bracketing but with focus points.

That way you could focus stack them on your computer. That'd be kind of handy I reckon, and pretty unique. As you know, focus on macro is a complete pig, no other word for it. And relatively straightforward because it's an adaptation of existing technology. I'd have thought because the technology to move lens focus already exists, the task is to write programming to allow the camera to remember these and be able to programatically calculate and shift to them.

But if I were Pentax I'd make that only work with Pentax lenses, not Sigma. Better value for money for Pentax lens buyers and more reason to buy Pentax. And obviously can't be done with manual lenses because they don't have the stuff inside the camera that allows the focus movement neccessary for autofocus.

I see what you are saying, and focus bracketing has been proposed before, so nothing new in terms of an idea, although trying to take in focus slices out of th ebracketed focus stacked image is a new idea, not sure how the PP software would work, but any way,....

As far as implementing it for only pentax lenses, i am not so sure, I do not know exactly where the boundry lies with respect to third party lens makers licencing of mount data and deliberate trade restrictive practices.

I believe micorsoft lost a case like this several years ago when they defined one software interface for third party developers but had a faster interface defined for their own products.

I would personally not like pentax to take a step like this.

[yeatzee]

i'd like a complete overhaul of the pentax flash system. Start with a higher flash sync speed like 1/250 sec. Then copy/reverse engineer everything that the nikon creative lighting system is capable of. New more robust flash units with full wireless capability, higher gn and quicker recharging, dedicated macro flash units, an off-camera wireless transmitter (sorely missing) or radio flash triggers. If necessary, work in collaboration with a studio strobe company like say elinchrom or profoto for cross product compatibility (useful for the new 645d if used in studio or location shoots). also a macro lens that goes beyond 1:1 like the canon mp-e 65mm macro lens.

this..........

[Nass]

They're already playing this card anyway - for example the automatic stuff that you can do on the K-7 but only for Pentax lenses (CA correction, FF/BF correction etc). That's just intelligent commercial thinking. Every company does it.

But wouldn't it be great if Pentax looked forward again, coming up with clever, as yet unthought of new features that became must-haves... I wouldn't profess to have any particular insight what these might be, but I bet there are things that could help all of us! in-camera metering was one of these many many many years ago, and with today's advances in computing etc anything is possible

[techmulla]

where do you find those cool "proud owner" badge?

[jct us101]

I want a wheel!

Like the Canon XXD series wheel, why can't Pentax make that? They almost had it with the K10D and the K20D, but instead moved on to a multi controller. The wheel is just so much fun though, you can spin through it and go through your pictures too!

[yeatzee]

I want a wheel!

Like the Canon XXD series wheel, why can't Pentax make that? They almost had it with the K10D and the K20D, but instead moved on to a multi controller. The wheel is just so much fun though, you can spin through it and go through your pictures too!

Probably because the vast majority hate it.... me included. Well atleast with the people I've talked to.

[guest18]

one thing I really want is better af
I have no idea it is the camera or myself

I have no oof issue when using canon d30
but I have alot of oof issue wth using kx
even when it is bright and sunny

[Nomad]

Sounds silly but a digital level in the viewfinder that I could toggle on/off.
Higher flash synch speed would be great.


Price tag under $750

[Shahmatt]

Actually, it would be nice if the K-x was offered up with a pancake kit lens. Preferably in the 30mm range.

[drogomoss]

@Lowel: #30 Lenses!!! My goodness... I have only the kit lens. *sigh

So many practical features I never dreamed of.

[BillM]

Howdy All,
Its my thought that pentax avoided planar mounted rotary selector because
of difficulty and expense of weather sealing. I like what Nass posted in regard
to autofocus, but it seems like it would be difficult to integrate into contrast based
AF system, processor overhead alone would be staggering, you would have to
crunch a whole lot of numbers and be quick about it. On the other hand, what
about Radar on a chip, Raytheon bought rights from L. Livermore Labs, has
used this in a number of apps, from maritime navigation to ground penetrating
radar. Another option I'll put out there, the ultrasonic range finder that was the
foundation of the autofocus system in the SX-70 polaroid. That thing turned
the photographic world upside down when it shipped. It does not or did not
have the resolution that contrast based system has though. what I'd like to
see, is for pentax to enter into agreement with katzeye to offer that product
as a option,cant understand how pentax can tout backward compatibility,
and not offer a split-prism.