|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
08-26-2019, 07:40 PM
|
| |
You say they smothered it. They say that they delayed it because of 'production bandwidth,' right? If they 'smothered' it, one should probably ask why? I mean, that smacks of malfeasance. Without knowing their internal workings, I don't know why their explanation shouldn't be believable.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
08-26-2019, 06:10 PM
|
| |
Why would you assume that they think this? Perhaps it's just that they have limited time and staff, like most organizations, and focus on the brands that have the higher market share and/or are getting the most clicks. Pentax has something like 2% of the ILC market, right? But to presume that they're biased against the brand (to the tune of throwing the results or being maliciously careless) for this reason, seems to be more than a little rich. What business would prioritize 2% of their market?
---------- Post added 08-26-19 at 06:12 PM ----------
Thanks for clarifying. I honestly didn't look too much at the sensor specifics, but clearly they aren't similar enough for a good comparison. I appreciate you pointing out the details. I did attempt to find the MTF charts for the Pentax WR, but came up short. The only site I found was Swedish, and if I'm reading it correctly, it was considerably softer than the Sony. I stand corrected.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
08-26-2019, 05:56 PM
|
| |
They disclose all of that. Not sure how this is perceived as unfair. If you want to see how a Nikon lens compares to Pentax, for example, try to find an equivalent aps-c camera test where available.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
08-24-2019, 03:43 PM
|
| |
I was curious how the FE90 to the FA100 compared in the DXO testing. I had the 100 on my K3ii, and loved it. Beautiful rendering, really sharp, and very solidly built. The only gripe I had was the AF which hunted pretty frequently, though this was likely due to environmental factors. Anyway, the problem with making this comparison has been that DXO hasn’t tested anything with the K1, so FF to FF isn’t possible on their site. But using a somewhat equivalent sensor (it may be the same—I don’t know the details) in the older a5000 to compare to the K3 (the former tested a 79 overall vs an 80 for the latter) it can be possible to have a closer comparison of the lenses. Yes, I know it’s not exact, but I’m just trying to get in the ballpark. Doing so brings the respective Macro lenses much closer together in score, with the Pentax scoring 22 to the Sony’s 23. Close enough to be negligible IMO, and reinforces the opinions of many here (including me) about the FA100 on an aps-c sensor.
|
