|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
02-11-2020, 01:10 PM
|
| |
This is exactly the outcome:
Products?RICOH IMAGING CANADA
It is NOT about the roadmap but the fact they obviously miss the "auto" updates. Nicely presented with a "new" K1 II and K50 and K3 II in the current lineup on the link above.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
02-11-2020, 12:19 PM
|
| |
I am not a business advisor and I would never think I know enough about business to advice any big scale business. In fact I pay others to do this job in my own business and give them full power to decide such things. I do however invest in local businesses a lot and I am not keen to loose money because of people not working with modern tools or doing mistakes because of not following easy concepts.
You know why some people earn a hell lot of money as consultments? Because most mistakes are extremly easy to avoid and a lot of businesses get much more efficient with only a few minor tweaks.
In this case use any project managment tool that it is out there, have a preset for "new product available" and you cannot miss updating the roadmap or at least archive it. It is ok to have a web page that with a date to discripe a current state and let it get out of date. But when it is just generally there and stating "current state" without a date put to it, it is just bad marketing.
---------- Post added 02-11-20 at 12:22 PM ----------
Got it now, thanks for clarification. :)
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
02-11-2020, 12:06 PM
|
| |
Just for clarification as I did not fully understand the post:
Do you wish for the development of new lenses, a DFA* 24-70 / 2.8 II and a DFA70-200 in addition to the current lineup?
---------- Post added 02-11-20 at 12:16 PM ----------
I am not a business advisor and I would never think I know enough about business to advice any big scale business. In fact I pay others to do this job in my own business and give them full power to decide such things. I do however invest in local businesses a lot and I am not keen to loose money because of people not working with modern tools or doing mistakes because of not following easy concepts.
You know why some people earn a hell lot of money as consultments? Because most mistakes are extremly easy to avoid and a lot of businesses get much more efficient with only a few minor tweaks.
In this case use any project managment tool that it is out there, have a preset for "new product available" and you cannot miss updating the roadmap or at least archive it. It is ok to have a web page that with a date to discripe a current state and let it get out of date. But when it is just generally there and stating "current state" without a date put to it, it is just bad marketing.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
02-11-2020, 07:40 AM
|
| |
When it comes down to a big (or even small business) imho there is no "too serious".
When I invest in a local startup and see such mistakes I talk to them and advice them on how to get this perfected or at least where they might find information to find a working solution for themselves (I do realize that our solution is not the right for everyone and as long as the result is there in the end I do not care at all how it is achieved). When I see a lot of such mistakes happen and no improvement, I stop my financal support to cut my risk of financal losses. If this is the right thing to do or not, others do the same, also on big scales.
If a brand has been sold twice within a couple of years and is in a declining market with small share there is simply no space for stupid mistakes and if I were a big shareholder this might influence my decission if I invest or not. Again: It is not about a roadmap being updated in time or not. It is about a company/brand that needs to work in a efficiant way leaving as little room for human error as possible. This means they need to have a workflow pipeline and in this case it is faulty or non existent, the later being worse.
---------- Post added 02-11-20 at 07:46 AM ----------
In what way does this make any sense as a response to what I wrote?
The original statement to which I replied was that they may not update the roadmap because they need to make consientious backchecking with the actual development. Between the roadmap versions a lot of stuff changed (change from 70-200 to 70-210 as a recent example). If this would have all been points carefully evaluated the evaluation would have been corrected many times which means a way to nonlinear development. This is something that would mean a loss of ressources on projects without outcome and would be bad for business. I do not think this is the case, hopefully not. This however means that there is no "waiting for development and carefully checking if the new roadmap information will be exactly true".
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
02-11-2020, 07:07 AM
|
| |
You should not hope for that. That would mean they burn a hell lot of resources without outcome, thinking about how much the roadmap changed over time.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
02-11-2020, 04:30 AM
|
| |
It is not about the roadmap. It is about organisating workflows. If there is a possibility to "forget" something like a road map update, there is a huge problem going on and it is a mess. Quite simple. If they do not forget but choose to not put the 5 mins of work into the update, there is another huge problem going on.
Let's just hope that development and sales are completly sepperated departmens with different workflows and for now it looks like they do better work, thankfully.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
02-09-2020, 06:03 AM
|
| |
It is a mess, when a document not being archived shows a completly wrong state.
If the mess is because they work unpeofessionally in this matter or because they are unstaffed does not matter, it stays a mess.
They put a lot of work into the presentation of the 70-210, there is no other excuse to a not updated lens map than bad workflows, which in the end is missing professionalism.
The fact they update every time they use it themselves (at cp) makes it look even worse.
It is sad, because very easy to avoid and they may get a lot of heat because of this very unimportant detail compared to the actual development.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-22-2020, 01:35 PM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-20-2020, 04:10 PM
|
| |
If I had to guess I would put it at somewhere between 1600€ and 1800€.
Disclaimer: Absolutly nothing to quote me on. I got no information what so ever other than the idea of relative priceing to the dfa* 50 and other brands.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-20-2020, 12:11 PM
|
| |
I change lenses a lot too, unless I am on the beach. I try to not change on sandy areas.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-20-2020, 09:05 AM
|
| |
I own it myself and it is a great lens, BUT it can beat all the other lenses because it is huge and there was absolutly everything put into the sharpness, nothing into reducing weight or anything like that.
I had the chance to test a Simga 50 1.4 Art on a D850 for a couple of hours and got to say, it is a great lens too and actually not far behind but with significantly lower pricing. If Nikon would decide to build such a lens, they propably could get up to this level too. At least they were able to build a lot of sharp lenses in the past and got comparably big dev sources. Calculating those lenses with multiple variations has become very easy these days compared to the past, just because of pure processing power.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-18-2020, 03:52 PM
|
| |
The price named in the thread is lower than I expected too.
Lets hope all of this will be true.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-18-2020, 07:30 AM
|
| |
You are write about that. Sorry for mixing those up, there however is no indication in physics which one is the right one as both are derived from the same word meaning the same.
Still, you are right of course.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-18-2020, 05:30 AM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-18-2020, 05:09 AM
|
| |
I did, not about dispersion though. Sorry that my english is not up to your level.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-18-2020, 04:27 AM
|
| |
I agree that it helps image quality, no argueing about that.
---------- Post added 01-18-20 at 04:33 AM ----------
Not about the coatings used in specific, as this diacussion should be over, but a general thought on that:
By utilizing resonances around specific frequencys of light you can kind of easily build a material having glass like behaviour but anormal dispersion. This means the index of refrection increases with decreasing frequency, working agai st ca caused by normal dispersion.
The second option is to try to eliminate the ca colours for very specific angles. This way you can get rid of ca in focus plane by removing the specific frequency light very slightly out of focus. This way however you remove specific frequencys and change colors slightly.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-17-2020, 03:46 PM
|
| |
I never said there is nothing they do. I was just curious what they actually precisly promise to do and did not read up the claims before.
I can agree that certain things may be better with specific coatings, esp if you got specific wavelenght ca issues which in some cases also influences micro contrast.
On this level I can totally agree.
@MickeyBugs: It is rather easy, just use a single layer of hairspray and measure the correspnding wavelenghts in an angle giving those results. It even works with water. The amount reflected is highly depended on angle and polarisation, even ignoring a lot of other parameters. Those graphs are obviously not at 0rad, as this would mean 100% transmission rate in traditional optics and at least 0% reflection rate in quantum optics (which not necessarily means 100% transmission). So which angle did they measure?
@Kunzite: I originally asked how coating is supposed to work and got answers that obviously lacked by scientific background.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-17-2020, 11:43 AM
|
| |
Those graphs are absolut useless selling stuff.
There are so many undefined boundary conditions that I could produce the same results with hairspray layers.
This is exactly what I mean, there is a lot of claims about those coatings and I am not convinced by many of them. They just not make sence from a scientific standpoint, if you consider the amount of technology they can use for producing the lenses.
I used to work with meta materials, we could even make objects invisble for specific wavelenghts (not all frequencys of the visible spectrum of course). What they claim would be a brakethrough in optics far beoyned that.
---------- Post added 01-17-20 at 11:47 AM ----------
The claims are way to unspecific to do any science on them. There is nothing specific at all about the claims. All I said is that the way many seem to think they work, what they dont state themselves, is definitly wrong.
I took part in the development of modern algorithms to simulate such stuff.
Also this is a bold claim to make. I hope I could use this on my products, it is true until prooven differently.
---------- Post added 01-17-20 at 11:48 AM ----------
Btw, do you understand what a "nano coating" does? Exactly the one thing I stated how this could be helping to improve image quality.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-17-2020, 04:19 AM
|
| |
Polishing a glass does not make it a mirror. A mirror is using total reflection which occours from optical dense to optically lens dense surface interaction. In this case a coating would not help to prevent at all (at least if it not also prevents transmission). There of course is a also a mirorrtype that is enabled by polishing, like a cupper plate. This however is due to its electrical behaviour glass does not have.
Polisihng a glass will prevent reflections inside a lens at the angle of the light is steeper this way, which results in lower reflection rate.
The way destructive interference on coatings can be used does not work with camera lenses. This is too dependend on wavelengths.
It can be used (and does in a scientific context) to outcome some specific wavelenght issues. If you for example got purple frining the wavelength indeed is specific enough to get some dempening by interference on it, but you cannot use a thin film diffraction to shut down all kinds of wavelenghts.
---------- Post added 01-17-20 at 04:22 AM ----------
Yeah yeah, the flat earth thingy. I don't know about you, but I did my phd in quantum optics and this is the very reason I am very critical on the claims made by manufactureres on what they achieved by coatings. I took the last few hours to read a bit on what they claim to do and most of this wont wort on broad spectrums of wavelengths.
If you use a multi coating structure you can correct aspherical errors yes, but this would mean the coating has to be very specific to every lense which sounds very expensive.
Scattering on the other hand is easily helped by perfecting the surface.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-17-2020, 02:58 AM
|
| |
And this is exactly where a coating cannot do anything more than perfecting the surface of the lense. Reducing reflections (assuming you cannot have a graduant index of refrection inside the coating, which is not possible to be implemented easily) only means changing the angles in which the light hits the lens on a microscopical scale.
---------- Post added 01-17-20 at 03:00 AM ----------
There is only so much you can achieve with the coating there. If the coating is too different in optical behaviour compared to the glass underneath you just get another boundary layer between coating and glass where these effects are produced again.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-16-2020, 04:23 PM
|
| |
So the just try to correct non perferct surfaces on the single lenses with, I assume, in best case identical optical behaviour as the glass hat. I can see that this is a very valid thing.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-16-2020, 07:48 AM
|
| |
I read about those coatings over and over, but to me it sounds like pixy dust.
What do you expect those coatings actually do? Looking at it from a physisists standpoint, I can only see real value if it changes polarisation, absorbs scattered light or if you are able to put on different thicknesses over the single lenses radius to work the same way an aspherical element does.
What does the coating actually do?
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-16-2020, 03:58 AM
|
| |
Is there any difference in optical quality between the DFA* 50 and the Tokina one?
I ask because I had the chance to compare the Tokina against the Sigma ART on a D850 and the Sigma did extremly well.
However, I am very pleased with my DFA* anyway and cannot compare to Tokina now.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-09-2020, 04:02 AM
|
| |
Exactly.
The other side of the trueth however is, that the amount of available products is rather low, so at a given time there might be availability but no demand, and another given time the opposite. The smaller the total amount is, the worse you can apply simple statistics of supply and demand. At least looking at the German market (no 35 1.4 art available for 3 weeks now) this effect is already important. So expensive lenses do not necessarily mean, there is a high demand.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-09-2020, 01:41 AM
|
| |
I was looking at the used market for the 35 1.4 art myself.
At least in german ebay they are significantly higher prized (200€ more) than those with canon and nikon mounts and harder to get too.
|
