Pentax K-3
Posted 06/07/2012 - 10:18
Link
APSC lenses might vignette - the square would need to be about halfway between the longest and shortest side of the current sensor to fit within the APSC lens image circle (although the image circle of many DA does actually seem to be larger than the sensor actually requires - in fact some actually cover full frame or near-as-dammit.
Why not just use a 135 format sensor and allow people to crop? Most people would prefer to use the full image circle of lenses such as the FA series. I guess a 'bespoke' square sensor which would be less cost effective than a standard full-frame sensor which are produced in bulk for Nikon/Sony.
Why not just use a 135 format sensor and allow people to crop? Most people would prefer to use the full image circle of lenses such as the FA series. I guess a 'bespoke' square sensor which would be less cost effective than a standard full-frame sensor which are produced in bulk for Nikon/Sony.
Posted 06/07/2012 - 14:49
Link
Pentaxophile wrote:
My feeling is they should make a camera almost specifically for the small FAltds. But it is interesting how the lens roadmap got updated earlier this year. Of course, they wouldn't let it be known whether these new lenses were FF until they had announced the camera. I imagine they would want to play their FF cards very close to their chest so as not to affect their crop camera and lens sales. I think Nikon played it the same way.
I wonder how much more mileage can be wrung out of the FA Limiteds. Eventually, you'd think Pentax might want to redo them, redesigned for modern production methods, the kinds of glass in use today, motorized, weather-proofed, in some cases optimized for video, etc. You can't go on selling the past forever, not least when Nikon and Canon are steadily building up a stock of newly designed FF prime lenses with all this in mind.
My feeling is they should make a camera almost specifically for the small FAltds. But it is interesting how the lens roadmap got updated earlier this year. Of course, they wouldn't let it be known whether these new lenses were FF until they had announced the camera. I imagine they would want to play their FF cards very close to their chest so as not to affect their crop camera and lens sales. I think Nikon played it the same way.
Posted 06/07/2012 - 15:06
Link
There's absolutely nothing wrong with the performance of the FA Limited series. The 77mm, for example is a whisker better than the 70mm Limited.
They may be getting to the limit of resolution for the current crop of sensors, but as they outresolve the zooms anyway, is there a point in redesign for the sake of it?
They may be getting to the limit of resolution for the current crop of sensors, but as they outresolve the zooms anyway, is there a point in redesign for the sake of it?
Best regards, John
Posted 06/07/2012 - 16:58
Link
Quote:
The 77mm, for example is a whisker better than the 70mm Limited
It is "faster" but is it really "better"?The 77mm, for example is a whisker better than the 70mm Limited
http://www.photozone.de/pentax/128-pentax-smc-fa-77mm-f18-limited-review--test-r...
http://www.photozone.de/pentax/127-pentax-smc-da-70mm-f24-limited-review--test-r...
Posted 06/07/2012 - 17:07
Link
Quote:
It is "faster" but is it really "better"?
Yes, by a whisker, and using the samples I tested for EPZ.It is "faster" but is it really "better"?
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/smc-pentax-fa-77mm-f-1-8-limited-lens-16892
http://www.ephotozine.com/article/smc-pentax-da-70mm-f-2-4-limited-lens-review-1...
Having said that, I would choose the 70mm as I prefer the focal length and the QuickShift facility. Others will prefere the 77mm for its wider aperture. Either is fine and represents a very high qual;ity of lens manufacture.
Best regards, John
Posted 06/07/2012 - 20:07
Link
They are classic lenses, well known to non-Pentax photographers, and held in high regard, which has to count for something.
They were designed in the past, but that doesn't mean they're going to perform worse in the present, or on digital. As far as 'wringing out mileage' goes, IMO Pentax are actually under-capitalising on the reputation and quality of these lenses.
Pentax still has a long way to go to beat Canikon on the range of lenses they have available, nd of course they need to keep making progress, but neither Canon or Nikon has anything quite like the FA ltds in terms of quality in a compact package. They just so obviously make sense as the bedrock of an 'alternative approach to FF' from Pentax.
They were designed in the past, but that doesn't mean they're going to perform worse in the present, or on digital. As far as 'wringing out mileage' goes, IMO Pentax are actually under-capitalising on the reputation and quality of these lenses.
Pentax still has a long way to go to beat Canikon on the range of lenses they have available, nd of course they need to keep making progress, but neither Canon or Nikon has anything quite like the FA ltds in terms of quality in a compact package. They just so obviously make sense as the bedrock of an 'alternative approach to FF' from Pentax.
Posted 06/07/2012 - 20:18
Link
Pentaxophile wrote:
They are classic lenses, well known to non-Pentax photographers, and held in high regard, which has to count for something.
They were designed in the past, but that doesn't mean they're going to perform worse in the present, or on digital. As far as 'wringing out mileage' goes, IMO Pentax are actually under-capitalising on the reputation and quality of these lenses.
Pentax still has a long way to go to beat Canikon on the range of lenses they have available, nd of course they need to keep making progress, but neither Canon or Nikon has anything quite like the FA ltds in terms of quality in a compact package. They just so obviously make sense as the bedrock of an 'alternative approach to FF' from Pentax.
I'm not trying to suggest these aren't fine lenses, only that for a marque you are only as good are your last camera, or lens. If you don't make an effort to keep up with the others (which would include matching design to current production techniques), then you are simply sitting on the quayside watching the ship sail way. No lens motors and no WR in so many of Pentax's higher end lenses strikes me as baffling, before we get to video requirements. But that's up to Pentax, of course. Fortunately we can change if we have to; they will always be Pentax.
They are classic lenses, well known to non-Pentax photographers, and held in high regard, which has to count for something.
They were designed in the past, but that doesn't mean they're going to perform worse in the present, or on digital. As far as 'wringing out mileage' goes, IMO Pentax are actually under-capitalising on the reputation and quality of these lenses.
Pentax still has a long way to go to beat Canikon on the range of lenses they have available, nd of course they need to keep making progress, but neither Canon or Nikon has anything quite like the FA ltds in terms of quality in a compact package. They just so obviously make sense as the bedrock of an 'alternative approach to FF' from Pentax.
Posted 06/07/2012 - 20:23
Link
I would welcome a compact FF camera from Pentax, as opposed to the big bruising brutes that are the 5D and D700/D800. It could be a great USP for Pentax IF it could be done. (electronic motherboard, battery and indeed the sensor itself do take a lot more space than a mere roll of film)
Plus, as Nikon have proved, the electronics deal with DX lenses accordingly - unlike Canon who fool the user to buy EF-S lenses and then have to buy again when they upgrade to FF...naughty Canon!
anyway, Pentax are committed to SD cards, so that will reduce space needed as opposed to CF on the rivals.
So, a FF body no bigger than the K10D/K20D I would be very happy with. If they could get it down to K7/K5 size, even better!
Maybe they could even do some processing to counter the vignetting on certain DA lenses too (anything longer than 28mm)
Will it happen? Well knowing Pentax, possibly. I just look forward to the outcome, as I will certainly be on the list for a FF Pentax digital.
Plus, as Nikon have proved, the electronics deal with DX lenses accordingly - unlike Canon who fool the user to buy EF-S lenses and then have to buy again when they upgrade to FF...naughty Canon!
anyway, Pentax are committed to SD cards, so that will reduce space needed as opposed to CF on the rivals.
So, a FF body no bigger than the K10D/K20D I would be very happy with. If they could get it down to K7/K5 size, even better!
Maybe they could even do some processing to counter the vignetting on certain DA lenses too (anything longer than 28mm)
Will it happen? Well knowing Pentax, possibly. I just look forward to the outcome, as I will certainly be on the list for a FF Pentax digital.
Some Cameras
Posted 06/07/2012 - 20:40
Link
I don't particularly want a square photo all the time, it's just it would save turning the camera around for Landscape and Portraits. If people want full frame then it could be based on that and the sensor would be a little bigger than the short side of an APS-C even if it was the short side of a full frame.
AM I ALONE?.
CHEERS Vic.
AM I ALONE?.
CHEERS Vic.
Born again biker with lots of Pentax bits. Every day I wake up is a good day. I'm so old I don't even buy green bananas.
Posted 06/07/2012 - 21:41
Link
Pentaxophile wrote:
OTOH it's also in their interests to let people *think* there's an FF on the cards, if thats what some people want.
Whatever's coming, if the k30 is anything to go by, it'll be good!
Talking of which - when is anyone actually going to get one for real?
OTOH it's also in their interests to let people *think* there's an FF on the cards, if thats what some people want.
Whatever's coming, if the k30 is anything to go by, it'll be good!
Posted 07/07/2012 - 21:36
Link
So the K-3 would be a crop sensor camera using the same sensor as the Nikon 3200 and the Sony A77
Posted 07/07/2012 - 22:52
Link
mecrox wrote:
[quote:3496ace15f="Pentaxophile"]I'm not trying to suggest these aren't fine lenses, only that for a marque you are only as good are your last camera, or lens. If you don't make an effort to keep up with the others (which would include matching design to current production techniques), then you are simply sitting on the quayside watching the ship sail way. No lens motors and no WR in so many of Pentax's higher end lenses strikes me as baffling, before we get to video requirements. But that's up to Pentax, of course. Fortunately we can change if we have to; they will always be Pentax.
As far as I know, Pentax top-end DA* lenses do have sealing and focus motors. Yes we need more of them, and I am sure if Pentax did release a FF DSLR they would release some more, which is good news for everyone![quote:3496ace15f="Pentaxophile"]I'm not trying to suggest these aren't fine lenses, only that for a marque you are only as good are your last camera, or lens. If you don't make an effort to keep up with the others (which would include matching design to current production techniques), then you are simply sitting on the quayside watching the ship sail way. No lens motors and no WR in so many of Pentax's higher end lenses strikes me as baffling, before we get to video requirements. But that's up to Pentax, of course. Fortunately we can change if we have to; they will always be Pentax.
I don't know what you mean by 'optimised for video' though - that term sounds like marketing-speak to me. Strikes me that a lot of the really old lenses, and M42 lenses, are much in demand for video. You want a fast lens, and one with a smooth manual focus action.
Posted 07/07/2012 - 23:22
Link
vic cross wrote:
I don't particularly want a square photo all the time, it's just it would save turning the camera around for Landscape and Portraits. If people want full frame then it could be based on that and the sensor would be a little bigger than the short side of an APS-C even if it was the short side of a full frame.
AM I ALONE?.
CHEERS Vic.
NJope you're not alone.I don't particularly want a square photo all the time, it's just it would save turning the camera around for Landscape and Portraits. If people want full frame then it could be based on that and the sensor would be a little bigger than the short side of an APS-C even if it was the short side of a full frame.
AM I ALONE?.
CHEERS Vic.
I don't see a problem now. If anyone wants a square format photograph just crop it square.
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
4248 posts
16 years
Blyth,
Northumberland
The square format has been asked for many times since the 1960s onwards, and we did have it in the form of Rollei and Zeiss 126 format SLRs. It made them look very boxy though and didn't catch on. Don't forget you would end up with a square the size of the shortest side of the APS-C format, not the longest.
Looking at it the other way round, if you want a square you can crop your images square. I often do and it fills an ePHOTOzine space very nicely at 1000x1000 pixels.
Might be "boxy". Wouldn't need a grip to assist for portrait shooting though. So maybe the size of a K5 with a grip.
PPG
Flickr