New pentax models

For all those pentax gear freaks, Outdoor Photography Mag has a news article about a new DSLR with 10 Mpixel and a Digital 645 format, 18Mpixel.

I wonder what size the CCD for the DSLR will be?

Steve

What, these models? http://www.pentax.co.jp/english/news/2006/200615.html#gaiyo

Check this thread from February 2006 https://www.pentaxuser.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2289&highlight=645d

To answer you question, there is a 99.9999% probability that the *ist-D replacement (I'm guessing it'll be called *ist-D2) will retain the APS-C sized sensor. What will be interesting is its 'noise' ellimination performance at medium/low light levels and medium/high ISO settings.

The 645D will probably be far too expensive for most of us on this forum, but wait 'til they start appearing on Ebay in 10-15 years time. It's imminent arrival has definitely influenced the price of used 645 lenses.

I'm curious as to whether we think a "medium format" DSLR will be useful to the amateur? Oe would a full frame 35mm-sized DSLR be more to the point?

The review of the Mamiya ZD in the new AP, which runs to eight pages, concludes that although it can produce stunning A3+ prints there are some serious issues. Firstly, the low pass filter is a whopping £1500 optional extra, without which one gets moire pattern effects in fine detail (such as a model's hair). Secondly, the CCD has a much higher noise level than a full frame Canon 35mm sized chip. Even at 400 ISO noise is a problem, and for a chip that size that is not acceptable as far as I can see.

So, like the Kodak DC14N and the Leica digital back, these very expensive potentially very exciting products are not always up to scratch.

I believe the Canon uses a CMOS sensor, which I think is substantially different to a CCD. This might account for the difference in 'noise' performance between the two systems.

Given the noise issues with the Sony 6.1 meg CCD used in our Pentax digitals, some serious changes in design will have had to have been used in a 10 Meg chip and a greater than 60% increase in pixel density. 10 - 6.1 = 3.9, so the increase in density = 63.93% when expressed as a percentage of the original 6.1.

I am assuming of course that the new camera will have an APS-C sized sensor. If not, I and several others here have perhaps wasted a lot of money on DA lenses.

As for the digital 645, I seem to remember reading somewhere that its sensor is a full-sized 6 x 4.5 - if I can find where I read it I'll post a link. But then, it could have been in that dream I had where Tesco were giving away 645D's with a box of cornflakes. Just my luck . . . they'd sold out of cornflakes

Yes indeed, Canon do use CMOS sensors in the DSLRs.

Considering that the pixels are physically much larger in the mamiya ZD chip, it's not very good that noise is such an issue. If anything, the noise levels should be considerably lower.

Hopefully, the Pentax 645D will benefit from Pentax's now considerable experience with digital and it will be a much better camera. I'm sure the sensor is nowhere near 645 in size, but it will be significantly bigger than a 35mm frame.

The *istD2 (for want of a better description!) will I'm sure have an APS-C sized sensor. I can't see Pentax putting so much sffort into the DA lenses only to make them defunct; it's not their style.

The *ist D2 (not it's real name, thankfully) will have an APS-C sized sensor.

It is ridiculous to even contemplate Pentax bringing out any K-mount DSLR with a sensor size that is not APS-C, or fairly close to it.

The fact that substantially greater pixel densities are now possible than were imaginable a few years ago means that the prospect of a 35mm-sized chip has now disappeared completely. It just isn't going to happen.

G

Agreed, George.

pay carefull attention to samsung, the future is predictable.....
I see faster imaging processors, HUGE flash-ram buffers and in camera, fully programable "photoshop" like actions....
imagine a camera that'll make suggestions on how to fix the images in it's memory, show you a "soft proof" and wait for you to ok it, before it uses it's downtime to process the raw files for you.

This is what was concerning me in particular! Is it worth spending money on DA lenses to find that they may only have a short shelf life. I'm also concerned that if Pentax become absorbed by the Samsung organisation that we will loose the loyalty to the consumer which we have enjoyed over the years.

steve

I wouldn't worry too much, there is every likelihood that the pentax ethos will continue as before, and as no-one else really offers anything more substantive anyway there's no-where to go for us!

I would just enjoy what we have and worry about the future when it's worth worrying about....

There is not a glimmer of a chance that Pentax will produce a 35mm sized DSLR. Their view is that if people want a larger sensor, they should move up to the 645D.

The new DA lenses do in fact cover an image circle a bit larger (in some cases a lot larger) than the APS-C sensor, so a SLIGHTLY larger sensor is a possibility. But, the size of any larger sensor will be constrained by the smallest DA lens image circle.

People who hold out hope of a 35mm-sized sensor are letting their judgement be clouded by wishful thinking.

G

Quite agree with George.

And to be honest, what is there to be gained anyway? The new 12-24mm lens is just great, and the 10-17mm fisheye covers wider still - so why go full frame?
The only full frames out there are from Canon (1Ds-MkII and 5D), and they are CMOS, not CCD.

New skills need to be learned for digital, and having a full frame doesn't obviate any of those skills. I'd like to progress a bit further - APS-C isn't holding me back, my current collection of Pentax glass isn't. If anything I'd like to see improved it's less shadow noise, and more dynamic range. But that's being picky, because I've produced images that completely outperform anything I'd ever managed to do with full frame film.

More res would be nice... so the new *ist-D will be on my shopping list
Matt

APS-C is here to stay, certainly for a few years at least. Improvements will be made to address the current issues and the result, I'm sure, will be an outstanding product for most of us.

I'm hoping that we *ist-D owners will get some of the firmware advances that are going into the *ist-D2 passed on to us in the form of a firmware upgrade, just as DS owners did when the DS2 was released. I think Pentax owes us that at least for all the feedback and wish lists we've given to them

Excuse my ignorance and possible blindness but, what are the differences between the D, DS, K100D, K110D and the Samsung X whatever

I've done a side-by-side at DPReview but the differences in my opinion are minor for MY NEEDS. Am I missing the forrest for the trees?

Thanks

No, the differences are very minor.

*istDS and K100D have pentaprism finder, the latter having shake reduction.

*istDL and K110D have pentamirror finder, the latter having shake reduction.

The Samsung models seem to be the same as the *istDS and *istDL.

I like the gorgeous pentaprism finder clarity and so that decides the choice for me. Otherwise, basically any of them would do and the current price of the *istDL2 is very difficult to resist.