Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 
Log in or register to remove ads.

Showing results 1 to 25 of 65 Search:
Forum: Video Recording and Processing 05-20-2009, 08:57 PM  
Quality of K-7 video
Posted By jay
Replies: 997
Views: 164,616
I'm still really concerned about MJPEG as a compression format.... But, of course, I have to wait until we can see some real, full-resolution, straight-from-the-camera video first.
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 05-19-2009, 07:03 PM  
K-7 Viewfinder explained
Posted By jay
Replies: 28
Views: 10,913
My Pentax ME Super has Live View in realtime through the eyepiece. It's great. I can see what I'm about to shoot, through the lens. That way, if I have filters and stuff in front of the lens, I see what they do. It's especially great with polarizes.

It shouldn't be too hard for the K-7 to gain the ability to do live view through the eyepiece. I drew up a diagram that I hope they implement (though obviously it's too late to squeeze it into the K-7 -- but maybe next time):



Basically, they could do it by putting a mirror at a 45 degree angle in the camera -- this would bounce the light up. Then, using a pentaprism would reflect the image out of the eyepiece (some may call it a "view finder").

This way, the photographer can always see the same image that the sensor sees. Live view. Through the eye piece.

I think it'd be a great feature.
Forum: Video Recording and Processing 05-19-2009, 06:51 PM  
Quality of K-7 video
Posted By jay
Replies: 997
Views: 164,616
This is true for everything except motion picture film cameras, which have a true optical viewfinder -- the "standard" framerate for film is 24 fps -- they usually use a shutter of 1/48, minimum. They operate exactly like a traditional D-SLR does in continuous shooting -- just very very very fast. Haha, it would be awesome if Pentax could design a shutter like that -- you'd get to use your optical viewfinder during video recording. Neato.

Anyway, yes, all other cameras that record motion video use an electronic shutter.




They record the same image to both fields, so although they play back at 50i/60i, it looks like like 25p.

I'm just glad 3-2 pull down/up appears to be a thing of the past for good now :-)



Depends on what class you're operating in. And that's what's tricky about these D-SLRs. Where do they fit in?

Obviously, there are video cameras out there which can shoot in 1080p. But they're not consumer cameras, and they're not prosumer cameras, either. They're pro cameras -- with price tags in the $100,000 order of magnitude.

The Canon 5D Mk II shoots video with a larger frame size than a $500,000 Arri 35mm film camera -- and if it only output uncompressed video from the HDMI port, it'd look better than one, too.

If Pentax can pull off uncompressed 1080p/720p output from the HDMI port, that'd be huge. That would definitely be the kicker.

Remember, HDMI can very easily be translated to HD-SDI (which is the standard for professional video distribution, with 4:2:2 YCbCr sampling).

That's what I'm hoping for.
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 05-19-2009, 12:51 AM  
Official BASH the K7 thread
Posted By jay
Replies: 177
Views: 25,749
Pentax redesigned the camera so all the buttons can be operated one-handed. You're seriously going to complain about a bracketing button? Many photographers have never touched their bracketing button. (I had to check to see if my K10D actually has one...)

I sort of thought bracketing went away with our film spools when we went to digital? I spot-meter and inspect the histogram and rarely have exposure problems. And it's so easy to change shutter speed or aperture with the e-dials, I just assumed people who did bracket would just do that.

And the batteries? Were you mad that the K10D used batteries that weren't compatible with the K100D? You *do* realize the K-7 is *not* a replacement for the K20D, right? That'd be like expecting a Canon 1D battery to fit in a 40D -- a camera in a different class. The K-7 has higher-density batteries that are slightly larger -- it seems justifiable in changing the design to accommodate that.

Ridiculous.
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 05-18-2009, 02:39 PM  
is this pic of K30D?
Posted By jay
Replies: 4,086
Views: 1,338,568
I think most companies shy away from addressing specific rumored features/specifications for a camera that Pentax hasn't even acknowledged exists (other than saying that there WILL be a new camera)



I think it's funny that people run the rumor mill by scooping up patents and piecing them together into full cameras. I know it's been said (though obviously not enough), but everyone needs to remember that companies file patents all the time -- for things that may never be implemented.

And then everyone on here gets disappointed when the new K-whatever doesn't have a built-in coffee maker, X-ray vision, and shoots out flowers and rainbows from the pop-up flash -- even though Pentax patented all of these technologies!
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 05-18-2009, 12:03 PM  
K7 unveiled in kannes!!!
Posted By jay
Replies: 22
Views: 6,291
Firstly,



Why do you always sign your posts like that? That takes so much effort. Speaking of effort, some of our friends on the boards need to put more of it toward thinking:



it's "its" not "it's" -- and excuse me for the bleeding out of my eye socket -- I just had an aneurysm caused by this sheer stupidity.



.....

I... I don't know what to say.
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 05-16-2009, 07:21 PM  
Is there a DA* 30mm/1.0 in the works?
Posted By jay
Replies: 156
Views: 34,186
Why change something if it's not broken? Sticking six metal contacts a lens in different patterns to identify the max aperture of a lens seems like a perfectly decent idea -- especially since it maintains forward and backward compatibility with existing lenses. And it's a lot more rugged than a serial digital interface.

And, it's not keeping them from designing this mystical lens. Recall -- as I said earlier -- there are two UNUSED patterns. So if they introduced a 30/1.0 lens, they'd be able to implement it in the K-7; and I'm guessing older cameras could be updated with new firmware to support it.

And they wouldn't have to change the electro-mechanical spec.

And, everyone knows I'm a fan of APS-C + fast glass vs. full-frame + traditional glass.

So, here's hoping for some new designs!
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 05-16-2009, 09:37 AM  
Is there a DA* 30mm/1.0 in the works?
Posted By jay
Replies: 156
Views: 34,186
Yeah, but that's full-frame. An APS-C-specific lens would have a proportionally smaller exit pupil.



True, there's a serial communication protocol on the 7th pin of the lens -- but I believe it only transmits the lens size, subject distance and focal length of the lens, and not the maximum/minimum aperture. Then again, I've never really sat down and deciphered it -- I'm only going off what I've read before.
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 05-16-2009, 12:00 AM  
Is there a DA* 30mm/1.0 in the works?
Posted By jay
Replies: 156
Views: 34,186
a 30mm f/1.0 lens (or any f/1.0 lens, for that matter) is impossible. The K-mount doesn't support anything faster than f/1.2.

Recall the K-A mount uses 5 metal contacts that are either shorted or open to tell the camera what the maximum open aperture is, and the minimum aperture.

The two "fastest" patterns are 10001 for a f/1.2 - f/16 lens, and 11111 for an f/1.2 - f/22 lens.

So, Pentax would have to, at the minimum, add an extra pin to the mount somewhere. This seems rather unlikely.

EDIT: Actually, I realized 11001 and 11000 both cause the camera to report f--, so they're unused. If they did introduce a 30mm f/1.0 lens, they would be able to use one of the unused combinations -- but the lens wouldn't be backward-compatible with existing camera bodies.
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 05-14-2009, 01:06 AM  
Are These New Photos of K-7 Real ?
Posted By jay
Replies: 226
Views: 40,115
??

...how would adding a touch screen improve the ergonomics of the device? I mean, I've only done light study on material sciences, but it seems to me that the LAST thing I'd want is more shit in front of the LCD.

Touchscreens are just gimmicky in this situation (though in some applications, they work marvelously)



Am I the only person who realizes the goal of their product ergonomics design was to be able to operating all of the cameras shooting system one-handed? It allows you to keep your eye in the viewfinder as you tweak and adjust settings with your right hand, while holding your glass with your left hand. I obviouisly haven't shot with it yet -- but it seems clever.





Haha, I noticed that, too. I'm reading all these requests for things like an auto-bracket button. I don't think I've ever used auto-bracketing on my camera before. Reading the complaints makes me want to figure out how different photographers work.

While working at a newspaper, I was taught to keep everything on manual -- the old "you control the camera, not the other way around" mentality. Before, I had always shot in aperture priority, and I had no problem with setting exposure compensation and stuff.

But now, honestly, from how I shoot, I'd say the AF point selector is worthless -- I never have any reason to move my point away from the middle, with half-way shutter button AF being the first thing I disable on a new camera.

As for the metering mode switch? I don't think I've ever taken my camera off spot metering ever.

Point the camera at the center of the area of the subject I want to be exposed correctly and focused on -- hit the AF button, hit the green button, recompose, take the picture.

It's all about how we learned how to take pictures. it's cool how differently everyone uses their cameras :-)
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 05-12-2009, 11:43 PM  
Pentax should build faster glass
Posted By jay
Replies: 37
Views: 5,654
Reading all the rants from all the people yelling about full-frame as a way to to get better photographs (because of the shallower DOF) encouraged me to start this thread.

What if Pentax came out with new, ultra-fast DA* lenses? Would you stop complaining, then?


What about a conversion from full-frame to APS-C like this:

85mm f/1.4 --> 55mm f/1.2
300mm f/2.8 --> 200mm f/2.0
80-200 f/2.8 --> 50-135mm f/2.0


You'd get your shallow DOF, but you'd also get an extra stop, for available light.

Or, if you honestly think that a full-frame camera looks noticably better than an APS-C all the time, then think of that extra stop as a means to turn down your ISO (to regain image quality).

And if you're like me, and want your pictures to actually be sharp and have a discernible subject (I know, I'm so old-fashioned), then you could simply stop your lens down a stop. You'd have the same available light as a full-frame camera, but you'd have a sharper photo.

Thoughts?
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 05-12-2009, 11:35 PM  
What's with the FF Postings - Why ?
Posted By jay
Replies: 249
Views: 27,282
BUT ISTEVE, MY PHOTOS WUD LOOK BETTER IN SHALLOW DEPTH OF FIELD WONT THEY CUZ THATS WHAT THE PROS USE RIGHT SO IT MUST BE THE SECRET TO THAT "PRO SHOT"

Ha. I couldn't agree with you on this issue more.

And, as I've said before -- those FF advocates looking for shallower depth of field? Why not start threads asking for faster glass? A 200mm f/2.2 or 2.5 lens for APS-C would be about the same size as a 200mm f/2.8 full-frame lens. Perhaps Pentax should come out with some super-fast lenses.

They'd look and feel about the same as full-frame counterparts -- and probably be in the same price range as well. But, one extra advantage they'd have is their faster apertures would be great for available-light photography.

I know several journalists who would jump ship and come over to Pentax if they'd design f/2.0 versions of their zooms, and f/1.2 - f/1.4 versions of their standard primes.

Those guys need as much light as they can get.
Forum: Video Recording and Processing 05-12-2009, 11:21 PM  
Quality of K-7 video
Posted By jay
Replies: 997
Views: 164,616
MJPEG is a terrible, inefficient, old codec.

The PCI video capture cards from the 90s used that codec to compress video. As an atheist, I don't do a lot of praying -- but I PRAY TO GOD they don't use MJPEG on the K-7.

I don't understand your apparent beef with interframe compression -- it maintains much higher image quality image for the bandwidth it occupies. And any modern computer is more than capable of editing the video smoothly. Besides, you could always uncompress it in your edit suite if you're concerned about rendering time while you're working on the timeline.

I think people are worried about this compression scheme too much. MPEG4 would be the ideal candidate for video on this device. It's very efficient and makes use of cutting-edge algorithms so moderate-bitrate (in the same area that class-4 SDHC cards can record in) MPEG4 video would be killer. It's a widely-used standard that most professional NLE's can work with easily.

Regarding the form factor "issue" -- this is a non-issue. Any professional is going to have this thing mounted to a fluid-filled head on a tripod/dolly/jib/crane at all times. Honestly -- if the image quality is there, the form factor doesn't matter at all. You could easily build it up with a rail system, matte box, giant EVF, optical viewfinder extender, follow-focus control, etc.

Regarding the comment about consumers being disapointed with 24p video -- the main film look is super shallow DOF. When I'm shooting on a Sony 2/3" professional HD camera, with long, fast (f/1.2ish) glass, in a well-lit scene, the footage looks straight out of a movie. Even though it's 30p.

But, 24p does help. As well as the gamma curve. Haha, that used to be the big deal -- that's how you'd get the "film look" -- with gamma correction. Then everyone realized, "no, that's not right. we have to spend $500,000 on lenses and lighting gear and a 35mm film camera to get that film look"

I think a large-sensor D-SLR that's compact and can output uncompressed video from the HDMI port, plus record in a good-quality lossy-compressed standard would be the nail in the coffin for 1/3" prosumer video cameras.

The big giants of the video field have been really lazy and not very innovative -- and now it's time for them to pay.
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 05-06-2009, 07:00 PM  
is this pic of K30D?
Posted By jay
Replies: 4,086
Views: 1,338,568
....what are you talking about?

Last I heard, Pentax designed it so when this thread reaches 2000 posts, the camera converts into full-frame so Gooshin will finally shut up.

:)
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 05-06-2009, 06:25 PM  
What's with the FF Postings - Why ?
Posted By jay
Replies: 249
Views: 27,282
Coming out with different-colors of K-m's that are just K200D varieties isn't really remarkable. Especially considering the cameras mostly replace existing models. Same with lenses. They'll phase out the 50/1.4 eventually -- in favor of the 55/1.4. Who knows if they're still producing it.

Even if they come out with a new body every year, that offers no proof that they have the manufacturing force to actually create production runs of more than three or so cameras at a time.

And, more importantly, the lenses. Each lens has to have its own assembly process -- that's why it's so costly to introduce a new lens (as opposed to REPLACING an existing lens)

It would be one thing if Pentax REPLACED all their DA* lenses with full-frame versions -- their current production facilities could handle the production of the new lenses.

Even though -- remember -- they'd have to re-tool the entire plant, which would be incredibly costly. Not to mention all the R&D that would have to go into developing these new optics.

So they're obviously not going to do that (remember -- who is their target? who are they going after? people who want rugged, small, light D-SLRs they can take anywhere with them.)

Right now, Pentax has the K20D, the K200D, and the K-m.

Let's see what Canon has in store:

1Ds Mk III, 1D Mk III, 5D, 50D, 40D, Rebel T1i, Rebel XSi, Rebel XTi, Rebel XS.

That's what they have IN PRODUCTION right now. I count 63 lenses in their arsenal.

obviously, they have the resources to dedicate at least one body (actually two) to full-frame. All of their L-series glass is full-frame, because they've chosen to transition it over with their film system.

My point is -- it's not necessarily wrong to want a full-frame camera. But if that's what you think you need, you're in the wrong camp. Pentax just doesn't have the resources to produce that -- and you haven't offered any shred of evidence suggesting otherwise.

Not to mention, again:

THEY DON'T HAVE THE LENSES.

Maybe if I type it in capital letters it'll stand out and someone will comment on it.

DA* lenses -- even the telephoto ones -- exhibit unacceptable vignetting. They don't produce FA lenses anymore, and they obviously don't have the resources to bring them back into production.

They already have a DA line, a DA-limited line, a DA* line and a few old FA lenses still around. They're reinvigorating their medium format system -- which should have calmed you down, but apparently hasn't.

So, my question -- how do you expect Pentax to release a full-frame body, plus an entire line of full-frame lenses, in addition to their APS-C system (which they're already sruggling to meet deadlines) AND their medium-format system?

That's THREE systems. Canon and Nikon have two. And these companies are both at least 20 times larger than Pentax and have tremendous market share.

Answer me that, and then we'll talk.



Yes.
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 05-06-2009, 01:01 PM  
What's with the FF Postings - Why ?
Posted By jay
Replies: 249
Views: 27,282
Firstly, you don't need to refer to me as an idiot. I don't believe the number of posts I've made on this forum has any correlation with my understanding of photography.

My point remains simple: Full-frame makes sense for Nikon and Canon. They have a large line of lenses in production, and can easily support producing two dozen lenses.

Pentax cannot.

Showing me pictures of all your old taks and 3rd party MF lenses doesn't provide a single reason why Pentax should manufacture a FF camera.

Yes -- FA and FA* lenses look great -- but most of them are out of production. Didn't you get that memo? That means Pentax doesn't make a cent for ANY FA* lens sold.

How would you go about marketing that?

It would be like if Canon went to APS-C with their EOS system -- and then years later came out with a full-frame camera that took advantage of full-frame FD lenses.

Sure, lots of people have old full-frame lenses around (and the first line of limiteds are all full-frame, I'm aware)

But, Pentax CANNOT release a full-frame camera unless they are currently producing a line of full-frame lenses! How could ANYONE disagree with that statement?

That's why this argument seems so ridiculous -- it would be SUICIDE for Pentax to produce a full-frame body.

Whenever I picture a fictitious product, I try to figure out how realistic it is by picturing what the product manual would read like.

"The exciting new Pentax K3D features a full-frame* sensor, for the ultimate in image quality...

*full-frame sensor only supports legacy FA lenses."

...Even if the engineers came out with a design, the marketing department would say "oh hell no"

And then you bring up ridiculous statements like, "some of the DA* lenses cover full-frames at narrower apertures and longer focal lengths"

....I was giddy like a little child when I read that. You initially wanted full-frame so you could get less depth of field (because obviously, that's the ultimate mark of a good photograph...?)

...so, you'll get your full-frame camera, slap on a DA* 16-50, and say, "oh, it works great at f/8.0 and above -- and you can't zoom out further than 24mm"

....so, you want a full-frame camera so you can get razor-thin depth of field. But you'll have to shoot at f/8.0 or higher on almost EVERY lens in production?

And, again, how would Pentax explain that in the manual?

"The following DA* lenses may be used in full-frame mode:
300/4 at all apertures (vignetting may occur)
16-50/2.8 at 24.5mm or greater, at f/8.0
50-135/2.8 at f/4.0 or higher
12-24/4 at 19mm or greater, at f/10"

I'm completely making up the numbers -- but that's essentially what it would be like, right?

That is one hell of a hack, if you ask me! Professional photographers wouldn't spend a dime on a camera that requires so much explanation to do anything.

If the situation was different, and they had a full line of full-frame SDM lenses, then obviously, a FF camera would make perfect sense.

Hell, I'd buy one.

But that's not the case. That's why the argument is ridiculous.

You need to look at the situation from a business/marketing point of view -- and not just from the perspective of a photographer who needs even thinner depth-of-field.

By that argument, why shouldn't Pentax make a 90mm f/1.0 lens?

It's POSSIBLE. Companies have made them before. BUT, they're outrageously expensive -- they would sell very few of them, and the R&D costs would be prohibitively expensive.

Now, I *have* advocated for f/2.0 or f/2.2 zooms from Pentax for people who want depth-of-field characteristics similar to film. Falconeye and I have mentioned that as a wonderful solution to the "problem" of too much DoF that you're heavily burdened by.

But, even then, Pentax would have to determine if there's a market for it.

Canon and Nikon have 400/2.8s -- why doesn't Pentax? No market.

It's really that simple.

And stop with the personal attacks. Thanks for your understanding.
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 05-05-2009, 06:53 PM  
What's with the FF Postings - Why ?
Posted By jay
Replies: 249
Views: 27,282
Buy faster glass and STFU.

FF fanboys on these forums don't seem to get it. I see things like, "well, I want FF so my lenses perform at their real focal lengths"

What does that even mean?

Pull out an 80mm f/2.0 lens for you mystical FF Pentax and I could just as easily say, "oh, that's not the REAL focal length. You need to shoot with my Mamiya 645 with my 80/1.9."

The focal length is the intrinsic characteristic of a lens. it doesn't matter what sort of insignificant size you crop the image circle to -- FF, APS-C, super-16... who cares.

There's nothing inherently wrong with full-frame (nor MF or LF, for that matter). If all of your lenses are full-frame, and you're comfortable with the weight of those lenses, their image quality, and focal lengths -- great.

But none of the FF advocates have addressed any concerns about lens availability. They spend all their time arguing that they need less depth, or they need better IQ (We'll see how good the 5D mk II looks against a fine-tuned K-7 when it comes out...), but no one has explained to me which lenses they plan on using with this mystical FF camera.

Pentax doesn't have any glass in production that meets these requirements. You can't go out and buy a mystical "16-35 f/2.8 SDM" like you can with Canon or Nikon to use as your ultra wide -- Pentax just doesn't make it; they never have. They don't make a 70-200/2.8, a 300/2.8, or a 400/2.8. Yes, they used to make AF versions of the teles, their AF is slow, and they're extremely hard to come by these days. And they're outrageously expensive.

Not to mention, a Pentax FF body would cost more than $2,000 USD. And again, the widest usable pro zoom you'd have available is a 24-70 f/2.8 -- with screw-drive AF. You wouldn't have SDM on *any* of your lenses. Nor would you have the water sealing.

...These were great lenses, but they're old dinosaurs. I was playing with my dad's 50-135 -- and I'm planning on ordering a 60-250 -- and it was awesome. When I look into the viewfinder, it reminds me of my old Canon 1-series film camera with a 70-200. Except, with my K10D, it was much much lighter and compact.

And I'm comparing that to my imagination of a Pentax FF camera with a big old clunky FA* 80-200, with that loud AF drive. The weight. The size of the whole package. Icky!

It just seems absolutely ridiculous that there's a single person out there who would really shell out all that dough for a few less centimeters (yes... centimeters) of depth.

And! If you do have the dough, why not advocate for the speedy release of the Pentax 645D? I see that as Pentax's answer to the full-frame question. You all should be running your mouth in a "645D Requests" thread, and hopefully Pentax will integrate some of your ideas into their product. Start with this one:

-Design K-mount adapter allowing the use of full-frame and crop-frame lenses, in addition to the 645 lenses, on the camera in crop mode

"But that costs too much money." I can hear it now. Consumer cameras are out of the question. APS-C isn't good enough, MF is too good. So Pentax -- wiith all their market reach and huge stockpiles of capital laying around -- should introduce a FOURTH camera line. And, I'm assuming you all expect another line of lenses?

I can hear the responses now. "Yeah, but sometimes that's what you need to make the perfect image."

Sure. But, if you're so critical of your photography, I'm sure you spend days in post production examining every pixel to make sure it's perfect. If you need even less depth, just rotoscope it in photoshop.

Or buy faster glass.

Or buy a nice Nikon.
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 05-05-2009, 04:44 PM  
is this pic of K30D?
Posted By jay
Replies: 4,086
Views: 1,338,568
That's really sad.

Let's talk more about video. If Pentax could pull off live uncompressed 1080p output from the HDMI port, it'd be a huge hit.

The form factor by itself sucks for video -- but honestly, when you build it up, it's no different than a broadcast-quality camera. You get a good-quality custom-made sled, and it is functionally identical to a $150,000 Sony broadcast camera.

MPEG4 is by far the best compression codec for video these days (especially at medium bitrates), so that choice is obvious.

Now all we need is four-channel balanced audio, and it'd be perfect :-)
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 05-04-2009, 03:34 PM  
What's with the FF Postings - Why ?
Posted By jay
Replies: 249
Views: 27,282
I don't mean to sound like a Pentax heretic, but I try to find the best product that suits my needs -- I don't care what label is plastered on it.

I have a Tamron 17-50mm f/2.8 lens instead of the Pentax 16-50. Why? I think it's a better lens. And if Tokina ever slaps a PK mount on the 11-16mm f/2.8, I'll be the first in line to pick it up. And if a Pentax DA* version comes out? Even better.

And I'm not particularly embarrassed by my Mamiya 645 film system that occasionally travels with me. I even fashioned an adapter allowing me to mount my Mamiya glass to my K10D.
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 05-04-2009, 12:30 PM  
What's with the FF Postings - Why ?
Posted By jay
Replies: 249
Views: 27,282
Fail! Haha.
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 05-04-2009, 12:25 PM  
is this pic of K30D?
Posted By jay
Replies: 4,086
Views: 1,338,568
Too bad they didn't release it 07/07/07 -- we would have had it years ago!
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 05-04-2009, 12:12 PM  
What's with the FF Postings - Why ?
Posted By jay
Replies: 249
Views: 27,282
Nikon puts weights into the base of their APS-C lenses so they balance better and so the FF lenses don't feel much heavier (that way, people don't shy away from them for the weight).

Anyway, you'd invest in a new, heavier camera, with new, heavier lenses (that have less telephoto reach) -- all this, just for slightly shallower depth-of-field?

If cousinsane really needs APS-C to have the same characteristics as a 35mm f/2.0 wide-open, go buy a Sigma 24/1.8; it'll be very similar. Slightly more expensive, but the costs would be recouped when you spend less on a body, and buy a 200 f/2.8 instead of a 300 f/2.8 FF.
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 05-04-2009, 12:02 PM  
What's with the FF Postings - Why ?
Posted By jay
Replies: 249
Views: 27,282
Wonderful. And, to them, I would say, "Why bother with 35mm FF? Get 56 MP Leaf digital back, and invest in a MF system." Now THAT'S image quality right there.

But you're right. There's a point of diminishing returns. And I think APS-C is a perfect balance.
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 05-04-2009, 11:57 AM  
What's with the FF Postings - Why ?
Posted By jay
Replies: 249
Views: 27,282
Yeah, it's a great move by Nikon -- they did plenty of market research and testing, and figured out that there's a niche for this. And they're a wonderful manufacturer.

The trick is -- is there a niche in the Pentax community for this? Obviously, Hoya doesn't think so. They're going with the 645.

Again, you're looking at the format -- Nikon had dozens of full-frame lenses they kept around. Pentax ditched their whole full-frame line (save the limiteds) and moved to APS-C.

At some point, you have to realize not every camera company should have the same product portfolio.

Maybe you haven't taken note of what we say to people who come to the forums and complain about Pentax not having full-frame: "If you want full frame, go buy a Nikon"

If it *is* really important to you, you'd have better luck selling off your Pentax gear and moving to Nikon than sitting around complaining -- if it's that important, than maybe Pentax isn't the right camera for you?

I think a lot of people landed into Pentax with the K10D -- it was inexpensive and full of features. And now they've gotten into photography, and are convinced they need full-frame. Unfortunately, Pentax is focused on outdoors photography -- small, light, weather-resistant bodies and lenses. They're probably NOT interested in building a camera body whose selling feature -- full frame -- requires you to buy lenses Pentax no longer manufactures.

It's all about the market.
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 05-04-2009, 11:25 AM  
What's with the FF Postings - Why ?
Posted By jay
Replies: 249
Views: 27,282
Yes. An oft-forgotten point to mention.




Yes. Again, this was mentioned in the K-7 megathread by Falconeye.

I mentioned the fast f/2.0 Oly zooms they designed for 4/3rds to give the same DOF characteristics of full-frame (well, of APS-C).

That was my biggest complaint for pentax designating the 55/1.4 as the "digital replacement" for the 85/1.4, or the 50-135/2.8 as the replacement for 80-200/2.8.

It's easier to make large-aperture lenses for smaller systems -- but that damn FF frame mirror is f**cking up everyone's shit. especially for wide-angles.

That's why, again, the NX system is interesting. Even a new APS-C system that featured a scaled down mirror box would help significantly.

But for telephoto designs, it doesn't matter much. I would assume the DA* lenses are f/2.8 as opposed to f/2.0 is to keep them cheaper and lighter. A 50-135 f/2.0 would look identical on a K20D as a 70-200 2.8 looks on a Canon FF. And, actually, it'd probably weight/cost the same, too. Assuming they really made use of that smaller image circle size -- which some suggest hasn't been done -- some of the DA* lenses unnecessarily cover full-frame.

And, as pointed out -- the argument works backwards, too. Maybe I want to shoot a 300mm lens at f/2.8 and get more than an inch of depth of field?

a 50-135 f/2.0 would cost/weigh the same as a 70-200 2.8 on full-frame -- BUT, at the equivalent DOF, it'd be faster! Cool!




....Yeah, I noticed that, too. I have an 80mm f/1.9 for my Mamiya 645, and I thought that lens was the fastest MF lens in production.



love it! too true!



Yup, that's the drawback with APS-C. Your tele lenses reach nice and far, but wide-angle lenses aren't very wide, and have too much depth.

BUT! As mentioned, this could be easily corrected with a redesigned mirror box that is shrunk, or no mirror box at all (a la NX). If you could move the lens closer to the sensor, even by a few mm, all the sudden, a 24 / 1.4 would be much easier to design. It'd be about the size of the 35/2, weigh about the same, and would be inexpensive to manufacture.

If the EVF in the NX is as good as we'd hope, we could see a lot of pros carrying one around -- and Samsung could start designing outrageous wide-angle lenses (10mm f/1.4 would be about the size of the Pentax 14/2.8!)

So, we'll have to see :-)
Search took 0.00 seconds | Showing results 1 to 25 of 65

 
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:04 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