All Forum Comments
Comment by Anvh posted on "Why Pentax and not Nikon?" at 06/06/2010 - 16:54
K10D wrote:
Base line are good Stefan.
Having a poll on this is not going to change anything.
I was not hoping to change anything, just wanting to see if they would buy into a 135 system if Pentax would offer a similar camera as Nikon or Canon.Base line are good Stefan.
Having a poll on this is not going to change anything.
By the looks of it many think they are fine where they are and are considering it if they would be cheaper.
womble wrote:
Don't forget bigger heavier lenses.flossie wrote:
...all you really have to do is change the actual sensor - no more work than putting a different CPU in a PC...
Plus a bigger mirror, a bigger focusing screen, a bigger lightbox, a bigger shutter.......all you really have to do is change the actual sensor - no more work than putting a different CPU in a PC...
I mean the DA*50-135 is quite small when comparing to other 70-200 f/2.8 lenses
Comment by Anvh posted on Buy a 135 format? at 06/06/2010 - 15:17
K10D wrote:
Stefan let's look at just 135 FF and MF.
If all the people who wanted a FF have jumped ship then why not those who wanted MF as the Mamiya DM22 is cheaper than the 645D and has a slightly larger sensor.
That's indeed an option and possibility but the camera is not the biggest expense that are the lenses.Stefan let's look at just 135 FF and MF.
If all the people who wanted a FF have jumped ship then why not those who wanted MF as the Mamiya DM22 is cheaper than the 645D and has a slightly larger sensor.
You also said many Pentax 645 were sold second-hand so they all have a user and they have Pentax lenses so they're potential buyers.
Quote:
With respect to APS lenses only, why are people buying second hand 135 lenses then? There are a lot of Pentax users with 135 glass that cant see the full benefit on an APS body.
Because second-hand lenses are cheaper and there aren't many second hand DA lenses on the market.With respect to APS lenses only, why are people buying second hand 135 lenses then? There are a lot of Pentax users with 135 glass that cant see the full benefit on an APS body.
Also many focal lengths only are ever made for 135 format.
And how many Pentax 135 format lenses are there against the couple of DA lenses.
Quote:
It's not a thought process to see what people think, it's a matter of fact. No amount of discussion will change that.
Pentax DSLR users have efectively been forced into buying APS glass and into buying third party glass where Pentax have not offered an alternative.
Yes and so, that does not change the fact that many users have lenses that won't work on 135 format.It's not a thought process to see what people think, it's a matter of fact. No amount of discussion will change that.
Pentax DSLR users have efectively been forced into buying APS glass and into buying third party glass where Pentax have not offered an alternative.
Quote:
The big picture is (IMO)
Pentax have small issues to resolve with the APS C sensor (KX better than K7), the new rumoured DSLR may resolve these issues. Yet, in the mean time, they have gaps in their lens range and continued to go with the 645D project. MF is not a bread and butter format. People who buy them seldom upgrade or change them unlike the SLR/DSLR users.
That's not true, the k-X sensor is different but it suffers from a lot of artefacts the K7 sensor is cleaner at lower ISO levels, there is no one better.The big picture is (IMO)
Pentax have small issues to resolve with the APS C sensor (KX better than K7), the new rumoured DSLR may resolve these issues. Yet, in the mean time, they have gaps in their lens range and continued to go with the 645D project. MF is not a bread and butter format. People who buy them seldom upgrade or change them unlike the SLR/DSLR users.
There is no gap in the lens range of Pentax they are missing some on the tele end I think
I agree that the 645 is a smaller market but so is the 135.
But Like I said the 645D was already so good as developed so the additional last costs weren't that much and they seem to launch the system with just two lenses and 5 or 6 older lenses back into production. A 135 format camera would asked for full development cost.
Quote:
I would be the first to congratulate Pentax if they make a profit based on DMF sales. Have you ever thought of why Canon and Nikon never went MF?
It may just have been that they never saw it as good business then or now. Pentax did make it work with film. No contest.
You already said it so they have the name Nikon or Canon never did anything with MF I believe.I would be the first to congratulate Pentax if they make a profit based on DMF sales. Have you ever thought of why Canon and Nikon never went MF?
It may just have been that they never saw it as good business then or now. Pentax did make it work with film. No contest.
Quote:
Pentax seem to be a company with great technical ability that make cameras for photographers, yet have lost a focal point. There is a common wish out here for low noise, wide ISO range, better firmware (screw or SDM option)and FF so that all Pentax glass works over the image circle, but to date Pentax don't listen or don't care?
If I read the comments here I believe many are happy with APS sensor camera and aren't longing for 135 camera.Pentax seem to be a company with great technical ability that make cameras for photographers, yet have lost a focal point. There is a common wish out here for low noise, wide ISO range, better firmware (screw or SDM option)and FF so that all Pentax glass works over the image circle, but to date Pentax don't listen or don't care?
The advantages of 135 is small in terms of image quality and they need to have better noise levels because you need to close the lens a bit more to get the DOF you need then with APS cameras so the sensor need to be more sensitive.
Comment by Anvh posted on Full-frame Pentax? I hope not! at 06/06/2010 - 15:11
K10D, you need to have a base line, I could easily said entry level 135 format and you would come to the same conclusion for the price range.
I don't know what you are getting at with the lens comment, yes I've one lens that fits on 135 format sensor so what about my other lenses?
There is now a quite a big Pentax user group that never had a pentax film camera so it's logical to think they don't have so many film lenses and if they bought new they would buy new DA lenses.
ps. this not a topic to discus 135 format vs APS-C more the viability if pentax would have a decent market if they would follow Nikon and Canon example of 135 format.
I don't know what you are getting at with the lens comment, yes I've one lens that fits on 135 format sensor so what about my other lenses?
There is now a quite a big Pentax user group that never had a pentax film camera so it's logical to think they don't have so many film lenses and if they bought new they would buy new DA lenses.
flossie wrote:
First two options are prejorative, as they make assumptions about size and cost.
Since there actually is no Pentax 135 format you need to do something so you look at what the rest is doing. If you've another suggestion I'm more then happy to hear it. First two options are prejorative, as they make assumptions about size and cost.
ps. this not a topic to discus 135 format vs APS-C more the viability if pentax would have a decent market if they would follow Nikon and Canon example of 135 format.
Comment by Anvh posted on Buy a 135 format? at 06/06/2010 - 14:47
Simple poll to see how many members here would really consider buying a digital 135 format Pentax camera and in what price class and for what reason not.
I hope that I cover most options with this.
I hope that I cover most options with this.
Comment by Anvh posted on Buy a 135 format? at 06/06/2010 - 13:42
edumad wrote:
FF is good for Pentax because a 24mm would be 24mm, 20mm would be 20mm, etc.
Instead of buying an expensive 18mm, a 28mm would do the job.
Instead of expensive new AF, older, a bit less expensive lenses could be used.
That being said, for me, I'd be happier with a K-X ISO behaviour on K-7 spec'd body but with the K10D's ergonomics and frame.
24mm is always 24mm FF is good for Pentax because a 24mm would be 24mm, 20mm would be 20mm, etc.
Instead of buying an expensive 18mm, a 28mm would do the job.
Instead of expensive new AF, older, a bit less expensive lenses could be used.
That being said, for me, I'd be happier with a K-X ISO behaviour on K-7 spec'd body but with the K10D's ergonomics and frame.
On APS-C (which also fullframe in Pentax case) longer lenses are cheaper. Both types have their merits non is better then another I think.
I agree with you K10D but want to go on a bit about this line.
K10D wrote:
There would probably be less people buying a 645D than a FF (135) Pentax if it were available.
I don't think so.There would probably be less people buying a 645D than a FF (135) Pentax if it were available.
The main market is the advance entry level and the K-X is super effective there.
All the people who wanted 135 format al ready jumped ship or are using APS-C sensors now and probably have lenses that only fit on that.
Yes I agree there is more potential with a quick look but I think many don't want to invest more in their camera to buy 135 format.
Lets just do a poll here to see what members here think.
Comment by Anvh posted on Full-frame Pentax? I hope not! at 06/06/2010 - 13:31
When you search you will also find some having troubles with ATP cards so lets face it no product is without a fault or dodgy card once in a while.
They are indeed durable link
But lets face it, how likely would it be for the card to get wet.
They are indeed durable link
But lets face it, how likely would it be for the card to get wet.
Comment by Anvh posted on Which memory card? at 06/06/2010 - 12:49
You need to have Adobe Camera Raw 3.6 or up so that means CS2 and up.
Photoshop 7 does support DNG so you can use this converter Windows - Mac
Other option would be update photoshop or get another RAW processor like Silkypix, Phaseone or Lightroom, for example.
I don't think you can find any plugins that work.
Photoshop 7 does support DNG so you can use this converter Windows - Mac
Other option would be update photoshop or get another RAW processor like Silkypix, Phaseone or Lightroom, for example.
I don't think you can find any plugins that work.
Comment by Anvh posted on raw converter at 06/06/2010 - 12:38
flossie wrote:
That graph is from wackypedia Stefan... so is unsurprisingly misleading - its completely missing the UV spike, I shall see if I can dig one out have got a load of stuff from the NPL somewhere....
Yep that's right but all the others are so good as the same on the net, I already looked for it That graph is from wackypedia Stefan... so is unsurprisingly misleading - its completely missing the UV spike, I shall see if I can dig one out have got a load of stuff from the NPL somewhere....
Lets hope you've something.
As for the UV spike does it really matter, after all the current DSLR cut that light anyway.
At what wave length is the UV spike, i've some drawings down to 200 nm but they don't have a spike.
Not that it's different or anything but it shows it against other light sources.
Comment by Anvh posted on LED ring lights, use of? at 06/06/2010 - 12:19
You can do it in photoshop with the warp tool (or puppet warp in CS5) but that's fully manual and quite time consuming.
Don't know about the other editors.
Don't know about the other editors.
Comment by Anvh posted on Distortion Correction (Keystoning?) at 06/06/2010 - 12:11
How on earth do you open a banana from the "other" end (the one without the stalk)? You'd need a knife to get into it as opposed to just using the stalk as a handle to break the skin!