|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
10-19-2018, 02:55 PM
|
| |
Stomped eh? Whatever.
You Tube
|
src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/kf1TT1unigM?controls=1" allowfullscreen>
|
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
10-17-2018, 01:17 PM
|
| |
But how many actually want to do video? That's the question. My answer based on that type of response based on my own experience would be "no one". My answer to the question to "do you want better video capability? Would be "no, and if you can make the camera cheaper by leaving it off, please do so." I'm not the only one who feels this way.
I personally don't think Pentax can compete in video after years of neglect. The question becomes, will the users they get by creating video be more than the value of the customers they lose, because the price is higher. Not to mention, that Pentax has said the biggest hold up for better video is the availability of a new sensor. Now that is a real reason relayed by company brass, not conjecture about what might be.
If you look at it honestly, adding cost for video is a financial risk for Pentax. We've had many here assert that adding video would increase Pentax sales. But, when you consider that any video Pentax could implement cheaply would not be cutting edge, (because no one makes cutting edge sensors available to them, not even Stony) or mature, based on their video efforts so far, it's unlikely they could inspire switchers from more mature video platforms just for video. Personally, I'd just buy something from Panasonic.
People don't seem to understand the pickle Pentax is in because their volume is so low, they have no clout in the sensor market. They get the crumbs.
Like myself, I suspect Pentax follows the philosophy, do a few things well rather than everything half assed.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
10-17-2018, 12:14 PM
|
| |
I used to teach video, so been there, done that, not interested. If i want to get back to video, I'll buy a camera designed to do video. Not everyone wants half baked video added onto a still camera as an after thought. Right tool for the job and all that.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
10-17-2018, 11:48 AM
|
| |
Ya, I tend to be like that, but when Tess takes the Q, there are times when I wonder why I go through all the trouble. We did a series of landscape comparisons a while ago Q-S1, K-5, K-3, K-1, For what we were shooting, and the way we were displaying it (4k monitor) the Q was just as good as anything. There are other things to shoot, and there are different ways to display images and I could easily devise a test showing the Q to be completely inadequate, but just walking around every day landscape etc. a Q does very well if for no particular purpose other than viewing on a computer monitor or 4k TV.
And actually, the times we've stretched the limits of what we need to print large, we've never actually had a large size print that was unpleasant to look at because of lack of resolution. People might argue they would have looked better with more resolution, but people will argue about almost anything subjective.
Which leads to the question "Should we govern our lives by the standards of the most demanding individuals?"
Or should we acknowledge those standards and go "pfffft ?"
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
10-17-2018, 10:41 AM
|
| |
I don't have the lens, but the comparison images have been self explanatory. I have many times run tests where I couldn't really recommend the front runner, because many other lenses did so unexpectedly well. Not in this case. In this case, living on a pension, I just can't justify spending that much on lens, no matter how much better it is. But, if I suddenly inherit a pile of money from a rich uncle I didn't know about, I'll pick one up. :D
---------- Post added 10-17-18 at 01:47 PM ----------
The site I saw that compared them refused to say which was better of the two, so maybe it's one step below an Otus, maybe it's not. I can't remember word for word but my recollection was more raw resolution from the Otis, but much smoother transitions and a more pleasing appearance from the Pentax.
And actually, I'm still not impressed with FF. As things stand right now, if i had to sell camera gear, the K-1 would be the first to go. It's "nice to have" not "have to have" and didn't cost a lot because I already had lenses for it, but there have been many times, I would have better images if I'd taken my K-3, based on higher resolution in the crop area, for an image that had to be cropped on the K-1.
So, I'm still saying, I don't need an FF camera. But it is nice to have.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
10-17-2018, 09:10 AM
|
| |
I think they have come to understand the limited value of attracting traffic to the stand and have responded accordingly. The mock ups of the 50 even here on the forum attracted a ton of negative posts. Others are much less generous in their commentary on other sites.
If you give the nay sayers a chance to take you down they will. Now that the 50 is out and it's a stellar lens, not one of the nay sayers has had the guts to come on here and say "I was wrong." There's no sense in trying to please some people, and personally, I wish Pentax would stop trying.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
10-17-2018, 08:57 AM
|
| |
Having released the DFA 50 1.4, the design philosophy is pretty clear. Do you really need a mockup to underused what the design parameters. are going o be. Pentax has decided there are more than enough average Pentax lenses out their. Their current focus is DA* and DFA* lenses. Modern lenses for modern sensors.
The DFA 85 1.4 will be to 85s what the DFA* 50 1.4 is to 50s.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
08-25-2018, 01:13 PM
|
| |
Changing the definition from real business, to successful business and then changing that to "a business that makes a lot of money" completely changes the topic.
Hilarious that my buddy who sold his studio and rents space, cut his staff from 6 to one and does the same work he used to do in rented studio space and doing in two months what used to take him all year and keeping most of the money he used to pay his staff with, after selling his studio for 1.5 million dollars to a condo developer, isn't by your definition successful.
I'll be laughing about this for a while. Maybe when he gets back from his latest 6 month vacation I'll tell him he isn't "successful." or "real" because some guy on some forum says so. I doubt he'll buy into that logic though.
Thanks for the laugh.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
08-25-2018, 05:19 AM
|
| |
Define "real business".
A friend from Toronto who did many catalogues, Sears, Eatpns , Canadian Tire went digital many years ago, He used a tethered set up with his image sent straight to the catalogue art directors so they could make any changes required before the models left the set, or the product had been moved from it's studio set. That was more than 15 years ago now. Was that "real business?"
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
08-20-2018, 06:39 AM
|
| |
It's tough job but someone has to do it. :D
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
08-19-2018, 06:19 PM
|
| |
Interesting, your thoughts on what all Pentaxians will do.
But seriously, in lens SR is better for stabilizing the image while you focus, and helping to lock focus.
I had a copy of the Sigma 120-400 with OS, I used the lens both with the in lens OS, and with it turned off to use IBIS. My decision was to send the lens back and continue to use Pentax glass with IBIS. No, I know thousands of hard core Nikonian and Canonites are going to jump in and extoll the virtues of in lens OS, but unlike most of them, I've actually worked with both. I know people with in lens OS are really loyal to their brands and will step in and vehemently defend their purchasing decision. Having had the the chance to work with both methods, on the same camera and lens, I like things as they are. In lens SR had it's advantages, but to me, they didn't in the big picture compensate for what you lose.
So, no, you're dead wrong. It isn't my love of the brand that made me choose IBIS. It was couple weeks of comparative use.
So are you going to change your statement, and retract this "love of the camera nonsense" and admit that a sane rational person could choose IBIS over in-lens-stabilization, or are you going to continue to label Pentax users as blinded by love or brand loyalty. Have you ever actually had the opportunity to use both. Where are all these unfounded assumptions coming from?
Would it be OK if we were to call you an in-lens-Stabilization lover blinded by your love of the technology? Would it be ok with you if we started applying the labels to you that you have applied to us?
If not, why?
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
08-18-2018, 02:20 PM
|
| |
You're right, we don't change a thing. Pentax makes their decisions, we buy into it or don't. The fact that they won't make any money from me, doesn't mean they won't make a pile of money selling to others. But I still think, Pentax should have offered the DA*60-250 conversion. I talked to the Pentax repair guys here, and even if I buy a baffle and ship it to them, they won't install it for me, even if I sign a waiver letting them off the hook for any ill effects.
That is really irritating. Pentax is not only not offering the upgrade, their service reps won't do it. I have serious issues with fine motor control and small screws. But they are forcing my hand here. (Sorry for the pun.)
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
08-18-2018, 12:54 PM
|
| |
Ya well we'll just have to disagree. The simple fact is, 36 MP has been around for 5 years. 45 and 51 MP cameras just haven't worked out to be what people thought they would be. Every effort to make APS_c higher than 24 MP and FF higher than 36 MP has lead to articulating and fire issues. Pentax may believe we are going to need higher resolution capable lenses in the future and is encouraging us to buy them now, I'll hedge my bets and buy them when I actually need them.
As for your opinion of the 60-250, there are optical engineers who have a different opinion. I choose theirs.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
08-18-2018, 08:00 AM
|
| |
And the more judicious of us will decide if we want those lenses and sensors, when we see what the provide for our images.
I looked at the images of the DFA 50 1.4 and decided the 55 1.4 was good enough for me. I'll take the DA*55 and keep the extra $1100 CAD and be a happy camper. And its quite possible the DFA 70-200 will have the same effect on others. They'll look at the difference in IQ and say the 60-250 is still good enough for me. For a lot of my images, the DA 55-300 does a fine job.
There may be new hi res sensors coming and Pentax may be betting on that. But whether or not i will buy one of those high res sensors is another question. And I certainly won't be upgrading to any of the new hi-spec high cost lenses until I know that I will.
If i shoot another 10 years with my K-1 and K-3 will I really be suffering?
The K-3 resolution mapped to full frame gives you 51 MP. If the DA*60-250 can handle that pixel density then it can handle 51 MP on a K-1. Just how far into the future is Pentax looking? Are they asking us to pay a premium now for lenses that won't be needed until 10 or 15 years from now?
Not to mention that 28 MP APS_c and 51 MP FF just haven't done all that well in the consumer market to date. There are a lot of assumptions going on here that fall too close to "high margins, not market share" . More margin is good for Pentax, but is it good for you?
These kinds of things need to be examined a lot more closely. What Pentax officially believes is heavily influenced by their marketing department.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
08-18-2018, 06:33 AM
|
| |
It feels like you and me have been singing that song for years now.
I don't know what part of the "the patent for the DA*60-250 says it's a full frame lens" it is that people don't get. The fact that Pentax claims it's not is irrelevant, and known only to them. The patent is filed and can't be changed. The tech specs of the lens are full frame. End of discussion.
And a 20-35 ƒ4 would be awesome.
Altogether now, everyone join in the chorus.
"if the DA*60-250 isn't a full frame lens, Pentax doesn't make any full rame lenses."
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
08-17-2018, 09:00 AM
|
| |
Cropping a DA*60-250 image to 4x3 gets rid of the vignetting and you still have a roughly 6500x4900 image. That's still a 31 MP image. Cropped to 16:9 you still get 30 MP. Only if you're stuck on 3x2 image size and uncropped, does the 60-250 present problems. I haven't modified mine.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
08-17-2018, 08:40 AM
|
| |
When you compare the DA*55 to the FDA 50, there is improvement even though both are DA*s. I can't imaging that wouldn't be true of the FAs. The good thing is, unlike some other companies with no legacy glass if the FA meets your needs you can buy one on eBay. You aren't locked into a company's current offerings.
Pentax is focussing on premium quality product that goes beyond the older FA* and DA* values. High margin, not volume. They were ready for this, this type of glass has been neglected. There are lots of older lenses out there for those of us who are adverse to such products. And when the new ones come out, people will upgrade and there will be more of them available at better prices.
Onward and upward I say.
Why do I like the DFA *50 1.4? Because it enabled me to get a DA*55 1.4 for 35% off. SO I'm a big fan. Maybe not of the lens itself, but because of it's effect on the market.
When the new DFA*85 1.4 comes out, I may look to see who is selling FA 85s for good prices. It's not less than it was optically because something better has been released.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
08-17-2018, 07:22 AM
|
| |
With a few aspherical elements for CA control it would still be relevant. They did the best they could with spherical glass. But, I'm not selling mine anytime soon. Part of that is because it's Tess's. :D
But part of the charm of the 70-210 is it's size. Screw drive is part of that. I doubt pentax will make another 70-200 type lens the size of the F 70-210. It would be awesome if they could pull it off though.
My images have been ruined by CA or purple fringing often enough with it, I hesitate to use it now. I'm sure used with ehflm camera it came on an SF1 it would still work great.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
08-17-2018, 06:02 AM
|
| |
Thats why I suggested it as possibility, if we are going to speculate , I don't see any reason to leave anything out. It's not listed on the road map as a DFA*. So we know it's not top shelf. Since the DA*60-250 is a star lens there may be a conclusion to be drawn there.
Or it could also be that the new mid to upper range consumer is better than the old DA*s. Anything's possible. The place of the new 50 has been discussed. Pros and people with money to spend. It's not a lens for everyone. It costs more than many APS-c shooters have paid for their whole multi-lens system. Looking at the 70-200 ƒ4s from other companies, they tend to be more "lenses for everyone."
I'm seeing this as more like the F 70-210 which existed side by side with the FA*80-200, only it will be the modern equivalent of that lens. People who want a DA* will be buying the 2.8.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
08-17-2018, 05:34 AM
|
| |
The DA*60-260 is still in the catalogue. Many have modified their 60-250s, others are happy using it without modification. There is already a lens in the 70-200 slot that the new lens will be competing with. APSpc shooters would have to accept less range. Many FF shooters will continue to use their 60-250s. There is a really diminished market for this lens. Especially if it come in at higher cost than the 60-250. It's not clear if this lens is a 70-210 type lens, a 16-85 type lens, or a DA* type lens. MY guess is consumer glass, not as good optically as the 60-250, but more affordable and faster AF.
But I know absolutely nothing. And I wouldn't bet on anything at this point. I'll make up my mind what it is, the day they release the product info. Then we'll know something.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
08-16-2018, 06:53 PM
|
| |
Sorry, I hate it when I cause people to spit out perfectly good seltzer. Such a waste.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
08-16-2018, 04:44 PM
|
| |
Tess, is that you? :D
The problem is, those of us who have been on the forum for a while have heard it all before, proposed by a rotating bunch of speculators who always sound credible, and who always flame out about the time reality proves them to be wrong. So which position is intolerable is open to debate.
If every one of them were to turn up and start posting at the same time, you'd know what intolerable really is. :D
Why does "suffering succotash" come to mind? :D
Do you drip spittle when you say "insufferable?" :D
Hey, I'm happy to be ignored, do you need instructions on how to do it? :D
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
08-16-2018, 02:03 PM
|
| |
You just reiterate the point, none of us knows a freaking thing. If there is one really annoying about this type of speculation, it's that no-one knows what they don't know. Huge gaps in knowledge are filled in with assumptions. Yet people proudly trot out opinions, which could be best characterized as 95% speculation 5% ancient history. And people pronounce these opinions as if they have knowledge the rest of us don't.
What is Masakazu working on right now? Oh, you don't know? Then maybe you should quit pretending like you know something. I guarantee you he's working on a project, maybe more than one, maybe three or four. No one has any idea how it works over there in the Pentax labs. And yet we have all these know it alls pretending like they do. It's a colossal waste of ones and zeros.
Good thing the ones and zeros are cheap. Or maybe it would be better if they weren't. Would anyone actually pay to spread this drivel?
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
08-16-2018, 12:17 PM
|
| |
That would be a shame. Why would I give up 60mm of focal length for a lens that probably wouldn't be any better? The DA*60-260 is FF, heavy and heavily corrected. What they should do is redesign the 60-250 case to be full frame compatible and ad a modern DC motor, the design of the glass doesn't need to be changed at all.
Given the number of lenses we don't have, the DFA 70-200 ƒ4 ia waste of time and effort.
|
|
Forum: Pentax News and Rumors
06-28-2018, 06:47 AM
|
| |
This whole series is about changing Pentax production to meet higher standards. Eventually it will be affecting even kit lenses.
What people may not like will be the price. The DFA 28-105 is in every sense a kit lens, but it isn't being sold at a kit lens price. It's possible the days of the low cost consumer alternative are over, at least for Pentax.
Given the CEO's directive to pursue high value, high margin markets instead of market share, that would make sense.
I love my old FA 35-80 kit lens, in a retro-charm kind of way. It's nothing like my DFA 28-105.
|
