All Forum Comments
Comment by Horst posted on DPR Best DSLR of the year vote at 05/01/2014 - 22:30
Blythman wrote.
So the subject will be the same size. Its just that you get the tail of the bird in to the frame too
Regards, Horst
Quote:
But AF should be more precise on the APS-C as the subject will be larger in the viewfinder.
The viewfinder for FF is larger by the same amount as the FF area is larger.But AF should be more precise on the APS-C as the subject will be larger in the viewfinder.
So the subject will be the same size. Its just that you get the tail of the bird in to the frame too
Regards, Horst
Comment by Horst posted on DPR Best DSLR of the year vote at 05/01/2014 - 22:15
Pentaxian wrote:
Regards, Horst
Quote:
However, with FF frame cameras, you loose on the long end.
Why?However, with FF frame cameras, you loose on the long end.
Regards, Horst
Comment by Horst posted on DPR Best DSLR of the year vote at 05/01/2014 - 13:16
Algernon wrote:
If the pixel count is increased ny the same amount as the area from APS-C to FF you would have exactly the same picture if you cropped it to APS-C
size.
Its amazing how people don't seem to understand this.
However, with APS-C you loose on the wide angle lenses.
You have to buy more expensive and bulkier wide angles to get the
same picture coverage as on FF.
Regards, Horst
Quote:
I'm also very impressed with axelluther's shots taken on
APS-C. His latest zoo shots on the PentaxDSLR eu forum
equal anything I've seen from FF plus he would have
needed 1.5x longer lenses on the FF.
You would not have needed a 1.5x longer focal length on FFI'm also very impressed with axelluther's shots taken on
APS-C. His latest zoo shots on the PentaxDSLR eu forum
equal anything I've seen from FF plus he would have
needed 1.5x longer lenses on the FF.
If the pixel count is increased ny the same amount as the area from APS-C to FF you would have exactly the same picture if you cropped it to APS-C
size.
Its amazing how people don't seem to understand this.
However, with APS-C you loose on the wide angle lenses.
You have to buy more expensive and bulkier wide angles to get the
same picture coverage as on FF.
Regards, Horst
Comment by Horst posted on DPR Best DSLR of the year vote at 05/01/2014 - 12:21
Smeggy wrote:
100% agree with this. The only reason we have smaller sensors in SLR's is because at the start FF couldn't be done. Now it can.
DO it!!!!.
I hope if ever Pentax releases a FF, they aren't to stupid and price them self out of the market.
Regards, Horst
Quote:
Because of the above, my argument is that the future of the DSLR in the hobbyist market is Full Frame.
Because of the above, my argument is that the future of the DSLR in the hobbyist market is Full Frame.
100% agree with this. The only reason we have smaller sensors in SLR's is because at the start FF couldn't be done. Now it can.
DO it!!!!.
I hope if ever Pentax releases a FF, they aren't to stupid and price them self out of the market.
Regards, Horst
Comment by Horst posted on DPR Best DSLR of the year vote at 05/01/2014 - 08:58
Ralph Hardwick wrote:
Regards, Horst
Quote:
Personally I quite like being the only one around without a Canon or Nikon. I don't really care if they produce a FF or try to take on the pro market so long as they stay in business and continue to support the cameras that I have (unlike Olympus and my previous 4/3 DSLR).
If you like being the only one around with a Pentax, then the future for Pentax is really bleak.Personally I quite like being the only one around without a Canon or Nikon. I don't really care if they produce a FF or try to take on the pro market so long as they stay in business and continue to support the cameras that I have (unlike Olympus and my previous 4/3 DSLR).
Regards, Horst
Comment by Horst posted on DPR Best DSLR of the year vote at 04/01/2014 - 21:51
One of the problem with Pentax is the younger generation of Amateur and professional photographers.
Its a different story for old codgers like myself to carry on about Spotmatics and LX's and MX's and how good Pentax is.
We remember and reminisce and have our dreams about the good old days.
However the younger generations is not really aware of Pentax except maybe for some Optio models.
They grew up with Nikon's and Canon's. They see it at weddings. The wedding photographers turn up with a Nikon. A relatively large Camera with a great big lens and a big Nikon emblemel, or of course with some 2/4 Square.
The wedding party and all the guest see the great big Nikon or Canon
emblem and dream about having one of them. If they see a Hasselblad or similar, they are lost and forget about it.
The problem is: They don't see a Pentax.
I really believe if the photographer came along with a Pentax,an unknown brand to the younger ones; and most guests and wedding parties consist mainly of young people; they would be suspicious and worry, what they get for their money.
I believe, The big downturn for companies like Pentax and Minolta etc
started with the Vietnam War, when the war correspondence got rid of the Leica equipment and it was then all Nikon's. They where rugged and relatively large cameras and lenses.
It was big advertised in the captions of the pictures they send back, Also the images of the photographers showed them with the Nikon's hanging around the neck.
Then just about all the press photographers switched to Nikon. Cannon was a nonentity at this time. Nikon's where considered tough and indestructible . Rightly or wrongly. They where painted black and after some use, the black wore off on the edges of the cameras and lenses. This was a sign of a professional user and all the Amateurs who mostly bought the next lower priced Nikon's wanted the same look.
Pentax was nowhere to be seen. Plenty of amateurs used still Pentax, but they slowly aged or died out ( The users the is). In the meantime Canon
made a big entrance and suddenly there where 2 major players.
Pentax tried with the M and A-series of cameras, small, of a fantastic quality, still good sales figures but already on the way out.
They never really got ahead, especially with the horrible non professionals things like the P3's and similar horrible plastic cameras.
Everything seem to be done to make them as cheap looking and priced as possible.
Now with the latest Digital cameras, Pentax high is back with solid, high quality cameras, but are trying to avoid at all cost a FF model.
The excuse, that the camera ends up to large and that they are noisier, because of the smaller pixel size is not an argument.
Why should a digital FF camera be larger when all Film cameras before with their large mirrors could be made quite small.
he sensor pixel size is the same size as with the existing 16or 24mp. The amplifiers can be made lower noise . This happens all the time.
So If Pentax doesn't pull the finger out with more advertising and a FF model, then it won't go any further. There is no point being in a niche marked. This is OK for small operations, but not for large companies.
I personally don't believe that Pentax could be a big player in the professional marked anymore.
I love my Pentax equipment dearly, but if Pentax would go out of existence,I would be sad, but that's about it.
I am to old to worry whats happen in the next 30 years.
There would be plenty of secondhand Pentax equipment on Ebay to last me for the rest of my life.
Regards, Horst
Its a different story for old codgers like myself to carry on about Spotmatics and LX's and MX's and how good Pentax is.
We remember and reminisce and have our dreams about the good old days.
However the younger generations is not really aware of Pentax except maybe for some Optio models.
They grew up with Nikon's and Canon's. They see it at weddings. The wedding photographers turn up with a Nikon. A relatively large Camera with a great big lens and a big Nikon emblemel, or of course with some 2/4 Square.
The wedding party and all the guest see the great big Nikon or Canon
emblem and dream about having one of them. If they see a Hasselblad or similar, they are lost and forget about it.
The problem is: They don't see a Pentax.
I really believe if the photographer came along with a Pentax,an unknown brand to the younger ones; and most guests and wedding parties consist mainly of young people; they would be suspicious and worry, what they get for their money.
I believe, The big downturn for companies like Pentax and Minolta etc
started with the Vietnam War, when the war correspondence got rid of the Leica equipment and it was then all Nikon's. They where rugged and relatively large cameras and lenses.
It was big advertised in the captions of the pictures they send back, Also the images of the photographers showed them with the Nikon's hanging around the neck.
Then just about all the press photographers switched to Nikon. Cannon was a nonentity at this time. Nikon's where considered tough and indestructible . Rightly or wrongly. They where painted black and after some use, the black wore off on the edges of the cameras and lenses. This was a sign of a professional user and all the Amateurs who mostly bought the next lower priced Nikon's wanted the same look.
Pentax was nowhere to be seen. Plenty of amateurs used still Pentax, but they slowly aged or died out ( The users the is). In the meantime Canon
made a big entrance and suddenly there where 2 major players.
Pentax tried with the M and A-series of cameras, small, of a fantastic quality, still good sales figures but already on the way out.
They never really got ahead, especially with the horrible non professionals things like the P3's and similar horrible plastic cameras.
Everything seem to be done to make them as cheap looking and priced as possible.
Now with the latest Digital cameras, Pentax high is back with solid, high quality cameras, but are trying to avoid at all cost a FF model.
The excuse, that the camera ends up to large and that they are noisier, because of the smaller pixel size is not an argument.
Why should a digital FF camera be larger when all Film cameras before with their large mirrors could be made quite small.
he sensor pixel size is the same size as with the existing 16or 24mp. The amplifiers can be made lower noise . This happens all the time.
So If Pentax doesn't pull the finger out with more advertising and a FF model, then it won't go any further. There is no point being in a niche marked. This is OK for small operations, but not for large companies.
I personally don't believe that Pentax could be a big player in the professional marked anymore.
I love my Pentax equipment dearly, but if Pentax would go out of existence,I would be sad, but that's about it.
I am to old to worry whats happen in the next 30 years.
There would be plenty of secondhand Pentax equipment on Ebay to last me for the rest of my life.
Regards, Horst
Comment by Horst posted on DPR Best DSLR of the year vote at 04/01/2014 - 13:52
CMW wrote:
How did McDonald's grow that large. Not by word to mouth , that's for sure. have a look at any commercial TV station. That,s how it works.
It did not work for me, I hate the stuff, but I am probably Robinson Crusoe.
Regards, Horst
Quote:
Nothing is going to change the fundamentals. Pentax cameras have a v small market share, and are in the uncomfortable position of being way outside the top three. Spending a disproportionate sum on marketing and PR will be money unwisely spent. It is a long haul ahead for the brand, and the financial logic in the longer term is for further consolidation of the companies producing cameras.
Well, How would you let people now and incite them to buy Pentax if not by advertising.Nothing is going to change the fundamentals. Pentax cameras have a v small market share, and are in the uncomfortable position of being way outside the top three. Spending a disproportionate sum on marketing and PR will be money unwisely spent. It is a long haul ahead for the brand, and the financial logic in the longer term is for further consolidation of the companies producing cameras.
How did McDonald's grow that large. Not by word to mouth , that's for sure. have a look at any commercial TV station. That,s how it works.
It did not work for me, I hate the stuff, but I am probably Robinson Crusoe.
Regards, Horst
Comment by Horst posted on DPR Best DSLR of the year vote at 03/01/2014 - 13:03
Yes it has a big circulation. It is a Murdoch broadsheet.
More ads like this in more papers and it may work
Regards, Horst
More ads like this in more papers and it may work
Regards, Horst
Comment by Horst posted on DPR Best DSLR of the year vote at 03/01/2014 - 12:39
MattyH wrote:
this is like running against windmills. Where the windmills are the advertiser and the millions of user of Nikons and Canons
Ilovesaabs wrote:
Regards, Horst
Quote:
Question? Would you be more willing to spend thousands of pounds on word of mouth from someone who has used the item in question or a nice glossy photo in Hello magazine?
The hello magazine is read by millions of people. How are you going to have an effective word to moth campaign wit a relatively few Pentax users. Question? Would you be more willing to spend thousands of pounds on word of mouth from someone who has used the item in question or a nice glossy photo in Hello magazine?
this is like running against windmills. Where the windmills are the advertiser and the millions of user of Nikons and Canons
Ilovesaabs wrote:
Quote:
Easy one - put the Pentax in a small space with a Nikon and a Canon and chuck a bucket of water over them I went whale watching with my Canon owning other half in choppy seas, the rocking boat made me ill, the water killed the 50D, my K20D was fine
Who are going to tell this? The converted? put this in to an advert in the magazines, on TV etc then it becomes meaningful.Easy one - put the Pentax in a small space with a Nikon and a Canon and chuck a bucket of water over them I went whale watching with my Canon owning other half in choppy seas, the rocking boat made me ill, the water killed the 50D, my K20D was fine
Regards, Horst
Comment by Horst posted on DPR Best DSLR of the year vote at 03/01/2014 - 12:15
Beside, some lenses resolving power might not be high enough to take advantage of higher resolution sensors, so cropping might not work.
is not greater per given area.
So the same lens gives you the same resolution. However if you want a more tele effect (back to APS_C ) you just crop it to APS-C size and you'll be
able to use the centre portion of the lens.
However, this is the last time i will comment on FF versus a APS-C.
This is like fighting against Windmills.
Also I am going on holidays for a week and will hopefully be able to do lots of photographing.
No Phone, no internet , just the missus and I.
Regards, Horst