|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-25-2019, 07:47 AM
|
| |
Make up your mind, were you joking or were flame baiting? (You said "lure"...).
Anyway, I don't care what it is; just stop.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-25-2019, 06:08 AM
|
| |
No, they don't - and if they did, you wouldn't know anyway.
Which means you're lying.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-24-2019, 02:13 PM
|
| |
What is a similar result?
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-24-2019, 10:55 AM
|
| |
Sorry, Mike, I should've quoted photoptimist. Although when I say "preaching" I rather have in mind the many past discussions on the subject...
I've seen the damage it does. People asking, "what happens when I put my APS-C lens on FF? what anything other than the 300mm it is, would it become?" - just yesterday. That's "equivalence". You see people not understanding how simple the concept of cropping is. That's "equivalence".
One might argue that's misunderstood "equivalence" so it's these people's fault; this is just an excuse - when you put the simple, elegant, universal theory into the "equivalence" blender, it's nobody else's fault but yours.
Right... "equivalence" is a special application of the existing theory in a silly attempt to tell you how you could "replicate" an image on a different format. There's a long list of (often ignored) limitations and conditions in which it might actually sorta work... except it doesn't.
If you're applying the existing theory outside the constraints of "equivalence", you're not using it. It's not Joseph James who invented mathematics.
---------- Post added 24-01-19 at 08:12 PM ----------
It's IMHO extremely rare to want to precisely replicate both field of view and depth of field, when switching formats. You will not shoot the exact same images anyway.
In practice, you don't need - nor can you easily achieve - such precision. A "rule of thumb", easily remembered, will get you there. A drawing on a napkin will make you understand.
And a glimpse through the viewfinder will make you see.
The assumption that you buy another format to get the "same" image is also deeply flawed - you're buying another format because you want something different.
So maybe you want to print larger - and the entire "equivalence" theory breaks down into a billion shards. Wait, I'm not supposed to believe one would actually want to benefit from the incredible detail the K-1's 36MP can offer.
What if you crop? What if the formats have different aspect ratios? Any practical aspect is ignored by "equivalence"; what you want doesn't matter for it.
The fault of "equivalence" is what it means: a failed attempt to get you the "same" image even when you don't want to.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-24-2019, 10:19 AM
|
| |
Sigh... by dismissing this "equivalence" religion, we don't go back to some dark cave before mathematics was invented. We have the entire apparatus of mathematics and basic physics/optics we learned in school; we're just applying it properly.
Computing the angle of view for different formats is not "equivalence". Computing DoF is not "equivalence". Magnification ratios, perspective, we can do anything useful without falling into "equivalence".
The only thing "equivalence" ever did was to confuse people. Stop preaching. Please.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-24-2019, 08:37 AM
|
| |
Yes, they're called "equivalence advocates". Trouble is, they can't stop preaching.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-23-2019, 10:44 AM
|
| |
Actually, why don't we stop discussing "equivalency"?
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-19-2019, 05:02 AM
|
| |
We are forgetting something. 10, maybe 20 years from now, a significant part of the R/Z user base which never had any DSLR would have difficulties to accept their cameras are suboptimal because of backwards compatibility reasons.
They'd be more or less in the same situation as Sony FE.
A new camera mount is introduced for the future, not for the immediate 2-3 years. This isn't a senseless move made only to get sales.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-17-2019, 07:42 AM
|
| |
Mike, but what do we do when someone's comments are consistently and insistently against this community's spirit?
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-17-2019, 03:58 AM
|
| |
Thank you, Mountain Vision and Mike.
Good point about the SD readers.
Maybe we could sum it up as:
- the SD is way more consumer friendly, for the reasons stated.
- XQD is better suited when a higher transfer speed is needed - as in pro action shooting, or high quality 4K video. Neither are Pentax' domains.
Note that "higher" doesn't mean "higher than Pentax"! Pentax is far from maxing out UHS-I... while the UHS-II capable D850 can reach 150-200MB/sec with the faster cards.
Rondec, absolutely! Using a faster SD mode is the obvious solution.
Even supporting UHS-I SDR-104 speeds would be a big step forward, effectively doubling the write speed (the D850 can reach 80MB/sec+ with UHS-I cards). I'd be happy if they do at least this.
Then there's UHS-II.
Link to the D850 measurements:
https://alikgriffin.com/best-memory-cards-nikon-d850/ |
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-17-2019, 02:12 AM
|
| |
SD cards are fine. They're small, relatively inexpensive, ubiquitous, the existing ones have capacities more than large enough (512GB on the market, and a 1TB card was just announced) and speeds several steps up from what Pentax can currently handle.
XDQ cards are fine, too. A very nice, more "pro" format, a bit faster than SDs - what's not to like?
Except it's not all rosy:
- right now I can only buy Sony XQD cards (in the U.S. I see that Delkin is also available). I have nothing against Sony, but I wouldn't like betting on a single supplier. Oh, and only 120GB and 240GB versions are available around here - 2 x 120GB would cost me as much as the GR III will.
- they are more expensive, a notch above the most expensive SD card
- no way you can just enter a random electronics store and buy an XQD, if you find out your storage capacity is lacking during a trip
- they're larger, which means it's more difficult to fit without increasing the camera size (especially 2 of them). Do we want larger cameras?
- they're only a good fit for higher end cameras. Which means, a set of SDs for some cameras, a set of XQD for the high-end.
Note that the D850 has 1 XQD slot and 1 SD slot... so if you shoot on 2 cards at once, you need 2 sets of cards for a single camera.
One shouldn't make a circus because Pentax choose a fine option instead of another.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-15-2019, 04:56 PM
|
| |
The evidence is that the K-1 sold relatively well (for a Pentax). It would've benefited from a stronger follow-up, but as a camera it was successful.
And I'm still not done buying FF stuff.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-15-2019, 04:38 PM
|
| |
Of course you don't buy the random nonsense against the K-1 #972 ;)
People who needed the FF jumped ship. Others continued to wait. Others didn't even want FF at first.
But the fact is, the K-1 did well for a Pentax. Quite a few of us bought it, and new lenses - at price levels very difficult to reach with APS-C.
Note that Ron is militating for the disappearance of Pentax (diverting essential money away from Pentax means precisely that), which is a weird thing to do here on Pentaxforums.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-15-2019, 03:01 PM
|
| |
What I find amazing is that he's bringing up that nonsense again, after seeing how the FF was a success.
Maybe that's the thing - everything that could bring even a moderate success is a "bad" idea and should be put on hold. Instead, Pentax/Ricoh should enter one wild goose chase after another.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-15-2019, 02:28 PM
|
| |
Just a few posts before, someone had to remind us how "the dslr is over". He's obviously not worth listening to, but he is noisy.
---------- Post added 15-01-19 at 11:29 PM ----------
If they had "enough resources", they would've completed the K-mount DSLR line by now.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-15-2019, 02:10 PM
|
| |
What a silly thing to say.
We cannot escape the MILC propaganda even here, on Pentaxforums. This isn't about us being sensitive, it's about those MILC fanboys being utterly and insistently annoying.
(The use of word "fanboys" is intentional, and it should be taken as excluding the MILC users which aren't.)
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-15-2019, 12:11 PM
|
| |
Don't tell me. By 2021, all DSLR users which are actually being held hostages in the DSLR world against their own volition would finally beak free and buy their precious MILCs :rolleyes:
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-11-2019, 03:44 PM
|
| |
Wide angles evolved a lot since 1977.
The D FA* 50mm was delayed not because of any issue with its optics - those were truly excellent - but of an implementation issue (the barrel was found not to properly support the glass' weight).
People looking for shortcuts are often "finding" them in the least difficult areas. Designing an ultra wide isn't difficult for a skilled optical engineer; there's software to assist with that, and he has the experience. But making it into a product? Having to met strict requirements, including image quality in its various aspects, price, weight/size, cost, autofocus speed, easy manufacturing, calibration?
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-11-2019, 02:17 PM
|
| |
I'm pretty sure designing a lens involves much more than stating a focal length, and even an element count.
As a software developer, I've seen thousands of times people wishing that a certain problem was simple. It never became that way, no matter how hard they were wishing.
The DA 21mm is not an UWA on FF because it doesn't cover that format.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-11-2019, 10:17 AM
|
| |
Fuji people might want to pay a premium, while Pentax people might not even want to pay a fair price. That's how hype works.
---------- Post added 11-01-19 at 07:22 PM ----------
Yes, interesting how the Canon's is most acclaimed, while Pentax... "why have they done that and not something different?".
It's always "why not something different?" with Pentax. It excuses people from putting money where their mouth is; after all, why would you buy something, when you wanted something else?
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-11-2019, 08:41 AM
|
| |
Cut the mount ring (KAF2 contacts, no aperture ring support) and the aperture mechanism (different number of blades) from the list.
Perhaps some screws will fit, but that would be all.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-11-2019, 06:06 AM
|
| |
And have you done any study about it, or just made up some arguments to reach a predefined conclusion? ;)
"At first, we wanted to provide full-frame single-focus lenses with angles of view that were different from those provided by existing models, and even initiated a project in this direction. These included an 85mm F1.4 lens, which was listed on our lens roadmap. After conducting research on the types of lenses our users desired, however, the most sought-after model was a 50mm lens — a standard single-focus lens familiar to all users since the days of film photography. There were several other options, but since this was what users most wanted, there was no reason to ignore the demand. So priority was placed on the development of the HD PENTAX-D FA★50mmF1.4 SDM AW."
http://www.ricoh-imaging.co.jp/english/products/star_lens/special/sp_dfa50-14/interview/
L.E. The point is: our wishes, and even intuition won't necessarily match reality.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-11-2019, 04:59 AM
|
| |
The roadmap contains a D FA* 85mm f/1.4 and an ultra wide.
As for the D FA* 50mm... does "most sought after" ring a bell?
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-11-2019, 04:24 AM
|
| |
The DA* 11-16mm appears as planned for the 2019, according to the (soon to be updated) June 2018 roadmap.
---------- Post added 11-01-19 at 01:29 PM ----------
Speculating beyond available information is a bit pointless, especially now - so close to CP+.
It makes little sense to update the DA*s before the other lenses from the roadmap. Or it makes a lot of sense to update some of the DA*s, if for example they're preparing a new APS-C flagship and don't want it paired with the DA* 16-50 and 50-135.
It makes little sense to launch a 50mm as the first D FA* prime. It makes a lot of sense to launch a 50mm as the first D FA* prime, as that was the most sought after lens.
Yep, unfortunately there's no clear cut answer, no obvious "best line" to follow.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
01-10-2019, 01:53 PM
|
| |
If we want them to do a lot, we have to be prepared to pay realistic prices - rather than imagining they'd be much cheaper than one could reasonably expect.
|
