|
Forum: Pentax Mirrorless Cameras
07-31-2018, 12:15 AM
|
| |
I'm talking about the Q sensor being too small for interchangeable lens camera, IMO. (same for the Nikon 1.) Yes, smaller sensors give larger depth of field, but that may be a blessing for some but a curse for others. i.e. One of the benefits of DSLRs and other large sensor cameras is small DOF which gives you that separation and a much more 3D look. Smaller sensors don't give you (as much of) that, and IMO, give a much more toy result.
Even smaller sensors dominate phones, ultrazooms, etc, but with smaller sensors come smaller lenses which have issues with diffractive limit.
In the end, the consumer speaks. In my view, the commercial decisions made by Pentax with both mirrorless lines was wrong. Personally, I'd like to see Pentax release a full frame mirrorless to compete directly with the Sony A7 series. There are a mountain lenses that would work very nicely via a suitable AF adapter.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Mirrorless Cameras
07-30-2018, 05:21 PM
|
| |
I live in Japan (I'm an Aussie), and there are generally a lot of mirrorless cameras. Generally, you see mainly Canon & Nikon DSLRs, or Sony (most common), Olympus & Panasonic, and Fuji which are relatively more popular in Japan. I rarely see any other mirrorless (Pentax K or Q, Nikon 1, Canon M, Ricoh GX, Leica M), and I don't see many Pentax or Sony DSLRs.
In my spare time, I fix cameras and lenses, so I see a lot of gear and try out a lot of cameras. (In my university days, I worked part time fixing electronic gear, + cameras, lightmeters and projectors)
I shoot mostly mirrorless these days, strangely because of versatility and retro!!! Or to put that another way, I like to shoot manual focus lenses, the best way to do that is to use mirrorless. It also means I can shoot with just about any lens (Pentax, Minolta, Nikon, Canon FD, Konica, Zeiss, and so on). I find it takes me back to my photography 30 years ago, and I find it really satisfying.
There two reasons why, IMO, Pentax has missed the boat on mirrorless, wasting design resources and money:
1. Q system is like a toy. The sensor is too small, as are the cameras to be taken seriously. It misread what consumers wanted. I see a lot of broken lenses, because the system is not robust
2. K system. I didn't like the styling, but the biggest problem was the size. It used standard Pentax K mount lenses, which made the overall system big, with no tangible reason to buy them over Pentax DSLRs. What should have happened was similar to the Canon EOS M: Produce a small mirrorless body and a basic set of lenses (say, two good quality zooms and a pancake), plus bundle an adapter that adapts the camera to Pentax K-mount lenses(including the aperture lever). And build in "on sensor" phase detection points to make the AF seamless. I think I would have bought that. One model with EVF one without.
Strangely, the Sony mirrorless(APS-C) are generally really good, but their basic kit lenses are quite poor. Canon did the opposite: the initial cameras were just ok, but the kit lenses were really quite good. Pentax could have grabbed a good share of the mirrorless market with smarter decisions that didn't waste development on two dead end product lines.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Mirrorless Cameras
08-17-2018, 07:46 AM
|
| |
Yes, the NEX series E-mount cameras, starting with the NEX-3 & the NEX-5 had no EVF. They then introduced the NEX-7 which did, and it was a much better camera from the handling point of view, but there were some weaknesses in the design of the sensor that had problems with some lenses towards the edges.
They then introduced the NEX-6 which also had an EVF.
After this, they changed the product line, introducing the A3500 & A5000 (no EVF), and the A6000 (with EVF). These were the start of the current APS-C mirrorless series (A5100, A6300, A6500)
Notice that after the initial A3500, A5000 & A5100, they didn't continue the product line without EVF, but continued ONLY the series A6000, A6300, A6500 with EVF.
So I think you are probably correct, that Sony saw the importance of an EVF for their mirrorless APS-C line.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
02-08-2011, 03:23 PM
|
| |
Exactly!!!!
To say that micro 4/3 & 4/3 are "small" sensors is showing ignorance at best or deliberately misleading at worst.
And in fact, if you take the Panasonic GH2, the difference is even less:
m43 = 273 mm^2 (Pany GH2)
APSC = 355 mm^2, or 30% more than m43 (Nikon D7000)
FF = 864 mm^2 or 143% more than APSC
m43 = 273 mm^2 (Pany GH2)
APSC = 332 mm^2, or 22% more than m43 (Canon 600D)
FF = 864 mm^2 or 160% more than APSC
(and to compare to the orignal G1)
m43 = 224 mm^2 (Pany G1)
APSC = 355 mm^2, or 58% more than m43 (Nikon D7000)
FF = 864 mm^2 or 143% more than APSC
m43 = 224 mm^2 (Pany G1)
APSC = 332 mm^2, or 48% more than m43 (Canon 600D)
FF = 864 mm^2 or 160% more than APSC
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
11-10-2010, 05:37 PM
|
| |
They could also make a PK adapter that is partially retractable. A Pentax pancake lens could retract into the adapter:
Not as tiny as above, but still just as small as any other(Panasonic/Olympus/Sony) mirrorless camera with their standard pancake attached!!
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
10-07-2010, 12:47 AM
|
| |
But we are not talking about DSLR, we are talking about micro 4/3 optimised for CDAF, as it's sole auto focusing method. The PDAF lenses (e.g. Olympus 14-42mm) work perfectly fine on a Panasonic GF1. It's just slower to focus than the Panasonic CDAF 14-45mm. But the focus DOES work well, and is accurate. Have you actually used one of these cameras?
The "smart" electronics would emulate a CDAF lens.
i.e. To the micro 4/3 camera, it sees a CDAF lens. The extra electronics would NOT make AF slower.
No, that's not right. Have you actually watched a micro 4/3 lens focus?
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
05-11-2010, 05:04 AM
|
| |
Both this Sony E-mount and the micro 4/3 have the room to retract a portion of the len into body.
I suspect that they will all do this at some stage. The Panasonic camera should be able to retract about 10mm of the rear element.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
04-18-2010, 04:57 AM
|
| |
From the Olympus site:
"Four Thirds is a reference to the size of the image sensor. The image sensor for Four Thirds cameras is what is commonly referred to as a 4/3 type or 4/3 type sensor. These describe the type of sensor not the actual size of the light sensitive area, which is normally much smaller
The sensor measures approximately 22.3mm diagonally, not four-thirds of an inch, which would be about 33.87mm. "
The Image circle is 33.87mm.
The image circle diameter is a bit bigger than the diagonal of the sensor.
As for the aspect ratio..... while it is true that it's nominally 4:3, the standard allows for different aspect ratios within the same image circle. For example, the Panasonic GH1 uses an oversized sensor with the aspect ratio capability of native 4:3, 16:9 and 3:2 image formats, without cropping the image as would be done by just using a standard 4:3 sensor like in the G1.
|
