All Forum Comments
Comment by K10D posted on What makes an image? at 01/03/2011 - 23:57
cabstar wrote:
Remember the the 645 is the lowest priced camera in that format
It has to be as it's the only DMF using that format, but its not the cheapest DMF with a lens included. That title still goes to a Mamiya DM22 at $1200 less. Remember the the 645 is the lowest priced camera in that format
Yes it has lower pixel count for a larger sensor, it's still cheaper.
Best regards
Comment by K10D posted on Pentax 645D and Canon 1ds Mark III comparison at 01/03/2011 - 23:44
So we say that Pentax have had an input to some of the sensor design and along with their software have produced excellent IQ. The D7000 and K5 seem very close in IQ and low noise to assume that they are common manufacture to two different standards though?
Do you have any links to Pentax input to the sensor manufacturing specs?
If true, then that's an extra strand in the DNA.
Best regards
Do you have any links to Pentax input to the sensor manufacturing specs?
If true, then that's an extra strand in the DNA.
Best regards
Comment by K10D posted on What makes an image? at 01/03/2011 - 13:20
Mannesty wrote:
Sell the K10D, the other two have far superior low light/high ISO capabilities. A K7 would provide very little improvement as a K10D replacement except for its similarity to the K5.
Looking at your sig., I'd also sell the DA 18-55, DA 17-70, and the Sigma 70-300mm. I'd replace the low FL lenses with a DA*16-50, and maybe even replace the DAL50-300mm with a DA*60-250.
On balance, I'd start replacing your lenses before the bodies.
So dump everything except a KX and start again?Sell the K10D, the other two have far superior low light/high ISO capabilities. A K7 would provide very little improvement as a K10D replacement except for its similarity to the K5.
Looking at your sig., I'd also sell the DA 18-55, DA 17-70, and the Sigma 70-300mm. I'd replace the low FL lenses with a DA*16-50, and maybe even replace the DAL50-300mm with a DA*60-250.
On balance, I'd start replacing your lenses before the bodies.
Cheaper to delete your profile.
Best regards
Comment by K10D posted on K5 / KX / K10 which 2 would you keep and why? at 01/03/2011 - 12:33
Tyr wrote:
Pentax have their bodies and lenses. So in agreement with you about third party components, does that mean that with a K7 and Sigma lens, the only Pentax finger in the pie is the camera firmware/software? Is that the Pentax image quality?
Best regards
Not sure where you got your Nikon sensor information but Pentax have input into Sony's sensor design as well. In fact Pentax do better with the same Sony sensors than Nikon does. It has been the same each time they have used the same sensor.[/quote]Not sure whether you mean Nikon don't or do? linkK10D wrote:
Similarly, the first Ford Sierra Diesel had a Peugeot engine and gearbox, and the first Vauxhall Vectra with a 3-litre diesel used a BMW engine - and it still drove like a Vauxhall.
Did Pentax ALWAYS make their own shutter units back in the days of 35mm rollfilm?
Geoff
Yet Sony and Canon have their sensor, their camera and their lenses, Nikon have their bodies and lenses and their "design" sensors.DoctorJeff wrote:
[quote:3496ace15f="K10D"]
In all cases above we have a third party sensor. ... ...
... ...Always worth stopping to give thought to what you actually mean when you say “I shoot with a Pentax”.
Follow that argument and you must also agree that Boeing never built an aircraft - since they always used someone else's engines. [quote:3496ace15f="K10D"]
In all cases above we have a third party sensor. ... ...
... ...Always worth stopping to give thought to what you actually mean when you say “I shoot with a Pentax”.
Similarly, the first Ford Sierra Diesel had a Peugeot engine and gearbox, and the first Vauxhall Vectra with a 3-litre diesel used a BMW engine - and it still drove like a Vauxhall.
Did Pentax ALWAYS make their own shutter units back in the days of 35mm rollfilm?
Geoff
Pentax have their bodies and lenses. So in agreement with you about third party components, does that mean that with a K7 and Sigma lens, the only Pentax finger in the pie is the camera firmware/software? Is that the Pentax image quality?
Best regards
link
We discussed the above before.
The only common sensor that I know of between Pentax and Nikon is the K5 and D7000. I don't think Nikon used Samsung sensors? Which other Pentax/Nikon cameras have shared a Sony sensor?
I am not comparing the K5 and D7000, I have a D7000 and am well happy with it just as I am with my Pentax's.
So for a common sensor and non Pentax lens, do you agree that the only Pentax input to IQ is the in camera software? Your statement above leads me to think you do?
Best regards
Comment by K10D posted on What makes an image? at 01/03/2011 - 12:12
DoctorJeff wrote:
Similarly, the first Ford Sierra Diesel had a Peugeot engine and gearbox, and the first Vauxhall Vectra with a 3-litre diesel used a BMW engine - and it still drove like a Vauxhall.
Did Pentax ALWAYS make their own shutter units back in the days of 35mm rollfilm?
Geoff
Yet Sony and Canon have their sensor, their camera and their lenses, Nikon have their bodies and lenses and their "design" sensors.K10D wrote:
In all cases above we have a third party sensor. ... ...
... ...Always worth stopping to give thought to what you actually mean when you say “I shoot with a Pentax”.
Follow that argument and you must also agree that Boeing never built an aircraft - since they always used someone else's engines. In all cases above we have a third party sensor. ... ...
... ...Always worth stopping to give thought to what you actually mean when you say “I shoot with a Pentax”.
Similarly, the first Ford Sierra Diesel had a Peugeot engine and gearbox, and the first Vauxhall Vectra with a 3-litre diesel used a BMW engine - and it still drove like a Vauxhall.
Did Pentax ALWAYS make their own shutter units back in the days of 35mm rollfilm?
Geoff
Pentax have their bodies and lenses. So in agreement with you about third party components, does that mean that with a K7 and Sigma lens, the only Pentax finger in the pie is the camera firmware/software? Is that the Pentax image quality?
Best regards
Comment by K10D posted on What makes an image? at 01/03/2011 - 11:03
Oh dear, are they short of material to put in magazines or on-line?
Intended markets and users are worlds apart.
Best regards.
Intended markets and users are worlds apart.
Best regards.
Comment by K10D posted on Pentax 645D and Canon 1ds Mark III comparison at 01/03/2011 - 09:56
davex wrote:
Davex.
Absolutely.Quote:
In real terms we have lost a choice
Surely the lost choice by which i think you mean film type is now replaced by choice of system. Pentax i think is known for richer more vibrant colours than Cannon,which I believe is also different to the way Nikon images look. You pays your money and takes your choice.In real terms we have lost a choice
Davex.
I doubt few people buy a camera for colour quality though, they buy through adverts, word of mouth etc. or to do a specific task.
Best regards
Comment by K10D posted on What makes an image? at 01/03/2011 - 09:51
MarkTaylor wrote:
The camera contributes the AF system (unless you use manual focus) and metering system. In the case of Pentax it also contributions Shake Reduction. All three can make a direct contribution to the quality of your image, to a greater or lesser extent depending on the circumstances.
Additionally there are many other camera properties which might play a vital part in enabling you to capture the image you want in particular situations: Continuous shooting speed, Weatherproof body, Live view mode (when you need to be 6'2" but are only 5'6" as I discovered for one particular shot a few days ago), Electronic Level Function (yes, this can make a difference, particularly when lens distortions make it difficult to line up a shot accurately in the viewfinder), Composition Adjustment, Ergonomics as has already been mentioned. I'm sure there are a bunch more I haven't thought of off the top of my head.
Then there are the JPEG-only as-you-shoot image processing functions which are too numerous to mention. They needn't be useless to a RAW shooter, either - personally I shoot in RAW+ and use the various JPEG features as I see fit. That way if the camera produces a JPEG that's close enough to what I want (with maybe some minor tweaking), I save time by not having to touch the RAW file and I reap the benefits of these features.
Of course if you don't use these features you don't get the benefit of them, but to me that's a pointless argument. The features are there for a reason and can make a difference if you allow them to.
Features. I have never and will never use the video function on my K7 or D7000. In camera SR, sometimes use it but remember its a Minolta inception that is also used by Sony.The camera contributes the AF system (unless you use manual focus) and metering system. In the case of Pentax it also contributions Shake Reduction. All three can make a direct contribution to the quality of your image, to a greater or lesser extent depending on the circumstances.
Additionally there are many other camera properties which might play a vital part in enabling you to capture the image you want in particular situations: Continuous shooting speed, Weatherproof body, Live view mode (when you need to be 6'2" but are only 5'6" as I discovered for one particular shot a few days ago), Electronic Level Function (yes, this can make a difference, particularly when lens distortions make it difficult to line up a shot accurately in the viewfinder), Composition Adjustment, Ergonomics as has already been mentioned. I'm sure there are a bunch more I haven't thought of off the top of my head.
Then there are the JPEG-only as-you-shoot image processing functions which are too numerous to mention. They needn't be useless to a RAW shooter, either - personally I shoot in RAW+ and use the various JPEG features as I see fit. That way if the camera produces a JPEG that's close enough to what I want (with maybe some minor tweaking), I save time by not having to touch the RAW file and I reap the benefits of these features.
Of course if you don't use these features you don't get the benefit of them, but to me that's a pointless argument. The features are there for a reason and can make a difference if you allow them to.
By IQ, I am looking at light to sensor components. After which you have processing either in camera (JPEG) or out (RAW to JPEG). Not looking at RAW vs Jpeg as each to their own, either way, the OP does show that if RAW and converted in other software that its not PENTAX processed is it? Hefty makes a similar point above.
It's all perception. For the non PC savy, RAW is a non starter. Its the same as home developing and printing used to be. Done by a few compared to thousands putting a film through a lab. That said, very few home developers had tha skills of burning and dodging.
Previously, IQ was down to lens and film type, all we have done is "fix" the film type by way of a digital sensor. In real terms we have lost a choice.
Best regards
Comment by K10D posted on What makes an image? at 01/03/2011 - 09:27
Smeggypants wrote:
Vile stuff.
I'm a coffee imbiber extraordinaire
WTF is Errol
Errol (corrected the spelling here)is one of Bricktops henchmen from the film Snatch. Bricktop would correct or dismiss a statement and ask him to put the kettle on.....K10D wrote:
Best regards
Tea!!!Smeggypants wrote:
notwithstanding remotes, I have to press a Pentax button in order to take the shot.
"Behave yourself Errol, put the kettle on and make a cup of tea"notwithstanding remotes, I have to press a Pentax button in order to take the shot.
Best regards
Vile stuff.
I'm a coffee imbiber extraordinaire
WTF is Errol
Whats it got to do with the OP. Nothing Tommy, it's tip top.
Best regards
Comment by K10D posted on What makes an image? at 01/03/2011 - 09:13
If you consider tethered shooting, then it's lens, sensor and cable to?
Best regards