|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
07-15-2015, 07:32 AM
|
| |
All right, they're not lying, they're just using an "arbitrarily"-chosen EI so that it will put them in a better light, making a direct comparison with the competition misleading. In other words, they're lying ;)
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
07-14-2015, 01:47 PM
|
| |
@Winder:
And my point was that a higher MP count might be required in order to avoid the "cheap" route (since going straight for the speed monsters is not an option). thus spending more money on those other areas.
12 and 16MP, that's just too few, even if we don't need more the Pentax must be seen as being "competitive". They need a sensor which will beat the K-3 in (almost) any situation. They need a sensor which will work well in crop mode. One that won't make people say "but I can get this 24MP FF camera cheaper".
Besides, we know it will have more than 24, don't we?
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
07-14-2015, 10:13 AM
|
| |
A higher MP count and excellent AF aren't exclusive. On the contrary, I'd say - going for the "mid-range" option should allow Pentax/Ricoh to include a more complex (thus expensive) AF module. But a D610 competitor might just reuse the K-3's AF.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
07-13-2015, 04:01 AM
|
| |
How many MP do we really need, how many do we want and how many are needed by Pentax/Ricoh are 3 separate things. IMO a low MP count might only answer the first question. The second comes down to:
- people might want a clear improvement over the K-3 (and not only at high ISO), since they're asked to pay double or more for the FF.
- the competition has it, Pentax/Ricoh should keep up.
The 3rd is related to the last point; Pentax/Ricoh will compete with either:
- low resolution cheap FF DSLR (i.e. compete on price, and they're not in a position to do that)
- mid-range, higher resolution FF DSLRs like the D810
- high end monsters sacrificing MP for sheer speed (but entering that market is very, very expensive)
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
07-13-2015, 03:07 AM
|
| |
"more than enough" for whom?
And your approach is incorrect: by "zooming in" on the higher resolution image, you were "enlarging" it more than a lower resolution image. The only thing you can prove this way is that doubling the MP can't give you double the detail - i.e. the law of diminishing returns. But you do get more detail.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
08-22-2013, 03:06 AM
|
| |
Very good points.
Regarding buffers, a 36MP camera would only require about double the RAM from a K5-II, in order to keep the same "buffer size". A 24MP low-ish end FF camera could get away with the same RAM quantity as the K5-II (and still getting 15+ RAW frames).
Anyway, RAM is cheap and Pentax can easily put in as much as required.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
06-01-2013, 01:55 AM
|
| |
I actually plan to slowly buy new, high quality lenses; that would be a positive. I don't care about cheap Sigma lenses ;)
But then, I'm not a "FF complainer" - I would just like the better viewfinder.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
05-31-2013, 11:18 AM
|
| |
Indeed it won't. If they'll make it (which I believe is likely, but not in the near future) they'll ask full price instead of making it a bargain.
That's fine for me. High quality doesn't cope well with being cheap...
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
05-23-2013, 12:27 PM
|
| |
"Vaporware is a product [...] that is announced to the general public but is never actually released nor officially cancelled" - Wiki
"Our" Pentax FF:
a. is not a product (but an abstract concept, or an internal project - depending who you're asking)
b. was not announced (Pentax barely admitted they are working on internal FF projects)
c. it didn't pass any due date (and it have to do it by a significant margin).
So, it fails on every defining characteristics.
The old MZ-D prototype, which was actually announced, was also officially cancelled; so it doesn't count as vaporware either.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
05-23-2013, 12:01 PM
|
| |
Except it can't possibly be vaporware.
|
