|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
09-21-2013, 05:03 PM
|
| |
If itīs a threaded hood, then yes. If itīs a bayonet, then itīs a bit of a guess for no original hoods. Seems the DA55-500 bayonet is the same as the DA55
|
|
Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion
09-15-2013, 10:56 AM
|
| |
Maybe you're not looking in the right spot? It'll be right at the top of the page. Also, make sure you're using a picture straight out of the camera, unedited by any program. Sometimes the data gets lost when you put the pictures through any kind of image processing software. Here's what the results look like from my camera:
 |
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-27-2012, 12:50 PM
|
| |
A K-mount with an empty mirror box would also allow for such lenses - they could all be hidden mostly behind the lens and all look like the DA40 on the outside :)
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-03-2012, 10:02 PM
|
| |
I was implying that the folks saying 'mirrorless is the wave of the future, give up K-mount asap to get on the wave fully' are possibly being shortsighted. I admit the air-car example is extreme, but the point is valid.
Sometimes a trend can never really catch on like people assume it will, doomed from the start by fundamental problems, and sometimes it does catch on but much, much later than predicted because certain dependencies that everyone overlooked weren't in place yet, or certain established advantages to the status quo were discounted too heavily.
The last computer mainframe was supposed to be unplugged in 1996, according to Infoworld. :) And in 1992, Edward Yourdon wrote The Decline and Fall of the American Programmer. Yourdon predicted that within a few years, the computer programming profession in the U.S. would be decimated as most programming jobs would move overseas, where they could be done just as well by much cheaper labor. in 1996, realizing that it hadn't happened yet, he wrote Rise and Resurrection of the American Programmer, in which he reversed most of his earlier predictions and gave some 'reasons' why it didn't happen. About five years after that, people started predicting it would actually happen again, and companies began to source out programming tasks, jobs, entire projects overseas, from the US. Now ten years after that, those same companies have pulled a lot of that work back, realizing that some dependencies were not in place, quality and synergy suffered, escalating costs and diminishing the labor savings. They are still outsourcing quite a bit, and this 'total decimation' may still happen, just not as quickly as the CEOs thought 10 years ago, or as Yourdon thought 20 years ago.
Sometimes ideas seem so right, so plausible, that we just push the timeline in our minds. That might be happening now, with mirrorless.
I didn't mean that to be in any way harsh or disrespectful, Robin, sorry if it came across that way.
.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
12-18-2011, 03:11 AM
|
| |
What's the problem with using an adapter?
If they really going to use FF they might indeed just keep the K-mount, it will balance things out a bit better when there is a lens on it.
But if they use APS-C there is a bit more to gain, just look at the sony NEX bodies.
Not a fan of their styling though, i would want a real grip on the camera but it dos show how small they can be.
There are also other advantages concerning lens design that are flavourable if you move the lens closer to the sensor.
the Sony nex is to close though, just look at their corner sharpness... around 30mm would be ideal fos APS-C, that is roughly the same aspects as the k-mount for FF
I mean if they decide not to go for FF they might as well optimize the mount for what they do use, k-mount was designed for 135 film afterall.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
12-17-2011, 09:08 PM
|
| |
I think what those who say K-mount will be "dead" are referring to the fact that if Pentax released another professional camera mount, they *could* no longer produce future K-mount lenses. For example, if a mirrorless mount is introduced, sustaining (i.e. introducing new lenses for) K-mount, Q-mount, and -mount would be seen as a less-profitable business practice than just dropping K-mount. Hence, no more K-mount DSLRs (or new lenses for those hanging on to K-mount DSLRs). Olympus made a similar move with their 4/3rds mount line a couple years back. Doesn't mean Pentax would follow suit necessarily...
I don't think anyone is suggesting that Pentax would release a new mirrorless mount without a K-mount adapter. The adapter would likely allow full operation of K-mount lenses on the new mirrorless mount (similar to 4/3rds and micro-4/3rds IIRC). So in that sense, K-mount wouldn't be "dead", on the contrary it would be fully usable. However, K-mount lenses would likely be much bulkier (and perhaps more expensive) than their mirrorless-mount alternatives. Thus, K-mount lenses could lessen in popularity (and perhaps value).
There's a lot of "could"'s and "likely"'s in that explanation on purpose, and these aren't necessarily my views, I'm just trying to help out. :)
|
|
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help
03-22-2011, 10:18 AM
|
| |
Your explanation is completely accurate. I have only one quibble and a suggestion. In your first sentence, you say the crop factor "is only applied to the focal length of the lens". For those of us who understand the concept of "crop factor", let's all agree that we will refer to it applying to the ANGLE OF VIEW, not the focal length.
Maybe if we start a trend of referring to it this way, the idea of the crop factor will make more sense to newbies, who have been told that their 50mm lens "becomes" a 75mm lens, which we all know is not true.
If you think about it, the term "crop factor" is, in a rather obtuse way, self-explanatory. We don't refer to cropping a lens; we crop an image. That is exactly what the term refers to. If you take a 24 x 36mm image and crop a 24 x 16mm image out of the center, you have an APS-C sized image.
|
|
Forum: Pentax SLR Lens Discussion
02-02-2011, 03:28 PM
|
| |
Here are preliminary shots of the DAL35mm vs DAL18-55. Firstly, I have to say that I'm not a professional in any way. But I will call it as I see it in this very informal comparison.
I think I might have to start a new thread as I don't want to overload this topic with stuff that vaguely applies.
The shots were taken with a tripod and timer to avoid hand interference. Also auto focus was used and the tripod was not moved to avoid any differences in the picture.
Warning HUGE pictures. Straight from the camera at full resolution. It's about 3mb each so be warned.
ISO 100 F4.5 DAL35
http://dwo.net23.net/tmp/IMGP1579.JPG
ISO 100 F4.5 DAL18-55
http://dwo.net23.net/tmp/IMGP1588.JPG
From the two pictures the shutter speeds changed a little bit as it's a cloudy day here and the light is variable. However, if you don't take that into account, you can see that the DAL35 provides much more detail compared to the DA18-55. From the Timmy's cup and the Uniden phone. I want to say that the leather pouch on the left of the cup also has more detail also however it could just be lighting in that case so I will ignore that one. However, the colour rendition seems much better. Lastly the felt tip on the markers looks like it's more detailed not just a blur of grey.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
02-03-2011, 11:06 AM
|
| |
This is all part of Pentax's cunning plan to mitigate the inaccuracies of its autofocus system.
|
|
Forum: Lens Clubs
01-30-2011, 01:01 AM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-27-2011, 10:36 AM
|
| |
I suspect Pentax agrees with this. The whole point of mirrorless is to reduce size. Pentax likes making small lenses and small cameras. Going the m4/3rd route would enable Pentax to make an economically viable product without producing a complete system, while giving them a shot at creating the smallest interchangable lens camera. And if their camera offerings didn't sell well, they'd at least have the chance to make some money on their lens offerings. And they'd be entering a system which, while not currently complete, will be at some time in the future (which is not true, and probably never will be true, of Pentax's APS-C and MF systems).
I'm personally not a fan of m4/3rds. But Pentax will do what is best for Pentax, not what is best for me.
|
