|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
06-20-2012, 06:24 AM
|
| |
The FFD of the M mount is much to short to use M lenses with an SLR. I suppose Ricoh already has a GXR module with an APS-C Sensor and M mount.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
06-20-2012, 03:14 AM
|
| |
I don't think so either. Rangefinder cameras are interesting and nice for enthusiasts, not in the eyes of the masses. That's why the brands listed above won't ever produce RF cameras though they wouldn't have to launch a completely new system. People who want to shoot with a RF camera will buy a Leica (or maybe a Zeiss ZM for film lovers) sooner or later.
Yep. Forgot that :lol:
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
06-20-2012, 02:38 AM
|
| |
Throwing another rangefinder camera on the market wouldn't be that intelligent because of the limitations a RF brings to a system like eg. the fact you can't mount lenses bigger than a special size because you might see the lens in the RF. Especially longer tele lenses are hard to focus due to the fixed RF field of view.
Furthermore, Canon, Nikon and Olympus don't even produce RF cameras anymore since a looong time. Fujifilm just launched the X-Pro 1 to provide an digital RF system which is less expensive than Leica and found a market niche. Brands for which it might be useful to launch a RF camera are those who already have a camera system which has a short ffd. And these brands are Sony, Olympus, Samsung and Panasonic.
I guess you'd like to see a K-mount RF camera but I also assume you've seen the K-01. You wouldn't want a brick like this as an RF camera. Nevertheless, all Pentax limited lenses are actually very good for a RF system. They are very compact and would perfectly fit the viewfinder and it's "Leuchtrahmen" (sorry, I don't know the English term for these frames which display the fov of different focal lenghths).
Short and crisp: A Pentax RF camera would be as nice as unreasonable due to the need of an completely new system.
|
|
Forum: Photographic Technique
04-12-2012, 05:54 AM
|
| |
I guess the prism effect of the particles in the air splits light not only into visible light but also into uv- and ir-light. These wave-like rings in your third photo might be interferences or simple overlaying lighwaves, but I don't actually think that one can see light intereferences by eye or an usual camera. I suppose first-, second-, third- and-so-on-order light might be cues as well.
|
