Thanks for the quick replies. Apologies for the double, addidentally posted on film SLR instead of digi to begin with.

I was using a 2 sec timer so will have to check if those shot without the timer are still affected.
I have checked Pentax’s firmware page and there has been no releases since those for the K10d.
I really hope the firmware is fixed soon as I am spending longer spotting out images now then when I was scanning my film!

However... After some browsing I found that Pentax are on the case
http://pentaxlife.com/pentax-k20d-hot-pixels-problem-confirmed

Hi all,
I purchased a K20d about 2 weeks ago now and have enjoyed using it for a variety of location photography. I have now come to process lots of images and noticed that every single one regardless of the lens, settings, iso and pc software all have little white specs over the shots.

Of course I assumed this to be dust, but from my experience dust on the sensor comes out as blurred dots (out of focus dust) however these almost look like tiny white dead pixels as they are very sharp.
Here is a little sample of where they become most annoying - when the background is black. (Sorry I cant show more of the shot as its for work)




This was shot on 100iso using flash, tripod, SR on.

I have tried it on all my better lenses (ltds and *s) with similar results.
Of course I have tried the dust shaking mechanism about 5 times and before each shot and still no change. The camera is brand new so the only thing I can think of is a firmware fault or that I need to change some custom settings.

Any suggestions greatly appreciated.[/list]

I still don’t believe the cost of the sensor has much to do with someone making a door for a 67 which is compatible with digital backs.

I am not suggesting Pentax make another digital medium format in addition to the 645d coming out later this year, I would just like the older 67 bodies to be compatible with digital backs so pro's have the option rather than just sell up and buy an old Hasselblad kit.

To me it seems like a relatively minor component to the extent I am seriously considering buying a spare back to cannibalize into a frame to fit a digital back... worst case and likely scenario I destroy a £30 6x7 door!

A new digital back from leaf or Phase one will set you back in the region of £15000 to £25000 which is very expensive which is why hiring is very popular.

Cost would be the main concern if you had to produce a sensor only for the 67, however sensors are being constantly made and upgraded, the 3 main manufacturers being Phase One, Leaf and Imacon which currently only make sensors for Hasselblads and 5x4 cameras.

I am hoping it will be eventually possible to take one of these digital backs and mount it onto the back Pentax 6x7 system as it is currently possible to with Hasselblads which are up to 30 years old.

After studying the setup on the Hasselblad I can not see any reason why a 6x7 door with a hole in it to accommodate the digital back would not work just as well as on a Blad where you change the film back to a digital one.

Surely to mass produce a replacement hinge door on a 67 that fits a digital back would not cost the earth..... and I am sure there are enough 67 users to warrant its manufacture.

I have been doing some commercial work where the client has specified they needed it all to be shot digital.
As I generally shoot on a Pentax 6x7 and 5x4 it meant hiring a whole kit in order to do so. I hired the phase one back with the V system, allowing it to go onto the back of the older 500 series blads which I borrowed off a friend.

Throughout the whole day of cursing at the blad (for simply not being a Pentax) I don’t see why a back can not be altered for a digital back to fit a 67 in the same way that one has been altered to work with Polaroid.

Literally all it would need is a spare door with a frame the size of the sensor cut into it.
Even the sensor is fired off by the flash sync socket on the camera so there doesn’t need to be any further communication between back and camera.

Obviously it is crucial for focusing that the sensor is at the right distance from curtain etc, but principally I don’t see why everyone has concluded it is a no-go situation and that every 67 owner should sell their kit.

If anyone has any further ideas on the subject I would love to hear them.

Thanks

From what I have discovered sharpness, or lack of it, is evident on all forms of digital even when scanning hi-res film.

I have been working along side a fine artist who hires expensive equipment and the simple solution to getting the sharpest 'unprocessed' images is to use the best sensors.
I have been using a leaf 33 back over the last week and even that needs sharpening however it needs far less than a DSLr because the chip is so big and ultimately very good.

The winning solution the artist has discovered is to still use 10x8 positive and drum scan if needs be, this method requires the minimal amount of sharpening and therefore reduces the loss of tones in the final image.

I have a Ds (yet to afford a leaf back, even the K10d) and the sharpness is very poor especially when compared to any Canon DSLr for the simple reason that Canon's sensors are far better.
I have a range of Fa* and limited Pentax lenses and the results are still poor when matched with a Canon with a cheap kit zoom lens because their sensors are just that much better.
Hopefully when Pentax match Canon's sensors, Pentax's superior optics will ultimately give them the edge with quality.
I was hoping the K10d was this camera but I am not convinced from the reviews ive read and images I have seen, then again I have yet to play around with a raw file...

I understand what you are saying but I totally disagree with any form of correct viewing distance.

To me that implies two things:

1) That you restrict the audience from viewing a photograph how they would like to.
I don’t know about any of you but I always study a photograph for the first time from the 'optimum' viewing distance then always move in to capture detail and less significant objects I might not have noticed further away.
A prime example of where you need to do this is with Gregory Crewdson's and Jeff Wall's photographs where the entire picture is typically made up of lots of small details.

2) That the technical quality of the photograph is so dire that you don’t want people to stand too close to see this for themselves.

From what you are saying a bill board will look fantastic as long as you are 100ft away, however I say 'it is awful quality that is hidden by the fact your eyes can not see the tennis ball sized pixels from 100ft away!'

As far as film format goes, going by printing area and using 35mm as a standard typically the rule of thumb because of inverse square law is:

35mm = 1
120 645 = 2x
120 6x7 = 4x
5x4 = 16x
10x8 = 64x

Going back to the original point posted of why do we need 5x4, the reason is simple...... for big prints!

At the size you are showing us your landscape pics you really cannot differentiate between film formats, especially when they have been scanned. At that size scanning a 35mm and 5x4 they both would look exactly the same.
When larger formats really come into their own is when they are printed to large sizes. Strictly speaking a 5x4 neg is 8x larger than your 645 so you can print 8x larger whilst keeping the same definition. In-fact because 5x4 film is also thicker and has a higher silver density so you also get twice the definition resulting in crisper images.

By all means if your prints rarely exceed A4 then larger formats are not are really not an issue and even the humble 35mm is perfect for the job!

It seems silly to me that Pentax could not simply add a flash sync connection to save us playing around with wirless syncs and hotshoe adapters.

Secondly I cant even use either of these as I use an old but powerful studio kit and unless it is plugged directly into the cameras sync socket it frys the camera, therefore I am stuck firing the camera on bulb then setting the flash off everytime!

Can any of you lucky K10d owners answer a couple of Qs about the camea.

1) Does it have a designated flash sync socket or is it via hot-shoe adapter like the *ist Ds/DL etc?

2) Can you thether it to a pc/laptop to instantly view images?

3) Does it only take CF cards now and SD is no longer an option?

Thanks in advance!