All Forum Comments
Comment by Shaky posted on K-7 now £799!! at 26/01/2010 - 13:30
No need for any links, Gartmore.
Tell me honestly that you mistook the K7 dslr for a professional video camera and I will instantly apologise for considering you a smartarse.
Vouchsafe me details of how I may go about shooting 35mm film at ISO 1600/3200 and I will recognise you are not taking the piss.
Tell me honestly that you mistook the K7 dslr for a professional video camera and I will instantly apologise for considering you a smartarse.
Vouchsafe me details of how I may go about shooting 35mm film at ISO 1600/3200 and I will recognise you are not taking the piss.
Comment by Shaky posted on K-7 now £799!! at 26/01/2010 - 12:16
gartmore wrote:
Autofocus on a video camera is a guaranteed 100% total waste of time. No professional video or motion picture film cameras have it for good reason. I thought the K7 was aimed at a pro market.
On the subject of high noise levels, in pictures, I see very few pictures posted here that are taken at the extreme end of the ISO range so what is the worry? Did any of you who are concerned about Pentax's alleged lack of performance in this respect ever shoot at 1600 or 3200 on film?
I think I see the problem here. The only film camera I ever owned was some cheap Kodak purchased with pocket money in the early 70s for an amount in the region of £8. Whether it was able to shoot at ISO 1600 or 3200 with some combination of film I neither know nor care.Autofocus on a video camera is a guaranteed 100% total waste of time. No professional video or motion picture film cameras have it for good reason. I thought the K7 was aimed at a pro market.
On the subject of high noise levels, in pictures, I see very few pictures posted here that are taken at the extreme end of the ISO range so what is the worry? Did any of you who are concerned about Pentax's alleged lack of performance in this respect ever shoot at 1600 or 3200 on film?
What I do know is that my requirement today for high ISO capability was recently eloquently set out by the oddly named poster, KZ. I simply want to take pictures of my kids in poorly lit but natural surroundings. That is to say without any kind of additional lighting.
However, it seems to me there is a large minority of individuals on this forum who sneeringly look down on this type of photography. Instead they see themselves as artists and technicians, elevated far above the unwashed masses who like to take pictures of their family. Why not simply use a variety of studio lighting equipment and accessories to enable proper photography at ISO 100 is the attendant view.
Based purely on a back of the envelope calculation it seems to me that the market for slrs has grown by a factor of maybe 7-10x from the late days of film to today’s market dominated by digital. This market growth has undoubtedly been driven by rank amateurs who demand functionality and ease of use. It has been a staggering democratisation of high end photography that is clearly abhorrent to many.
But for those who care about the future of Pentax as a brand as opposed to their own pretentions as artistes it should be welcomed that they finally appear to be adopting a mindset of mass-market appeal.
As for your comment regarding movie mode autofocus that is simply too asinine to address.
Comment by Shaky posted on K-7 now £799!! at 25/01/2010 - 20:55
hefty1 wrote:
Faulty electronic goods (especially pre-production ones) are hardly a new phenomenom.
Right, although of course here the situation is entirely reversed, in that the pre-production model offers superior performance in various respects related to autofocus.Faulty electronic goods (especially pre-production ones) are hardly a new phenomenom.
Look, I have no real emotional capital invested in this discussion and merely offered a possible theory that I find objectively plausible.
My objection - and this is largely directed at John - is that to characterise my explanation as a conspiracy theory is a cheap debating trick, where he attributes a position to me that I did not take in order to subsequently ridicule it (the strawman fallacy).
Comment by Shaky posted on K-7 now £799!! at 25/01/2010 - 12:08
Who said anything about conspiracy?
It is a reality that the Pentax/Samsung dslr strategic partnership has broken down.
It is also a reality that in an informal partnership (ie not a joint venture et al) each of the parties owns and controls various component technologies.
That is all.
It is a reality that the Pentax/Samsung dslr strategic partnership has broken down.
It is also a reality that in an informal partnership (ie not a joint venture et al) each of the parties owns and controls various component technologies.
That is all.
Comment by Shaky posted on K-7 now £799!! at 25/01/2010 - 10:49
I don't believe the explanation I put forward is anywhere near as farfetched as you imply, Hefty.
I would point to the episode where the apparently useable movie mode autofocus in pre-production models was subsequently canned. The only explanation proffered from a nameless executive was that the feature wasn't supposed to be available; undoubtedly a strong contender for the lamest corporate excuse of the decade, and in my view a strong indication of strange firmware goings on.
I would point to the episode where the apparently useable movie mode autofocus in pre-production models was subsequently canned. The only explanation proffered from a nameless executive was that the feature wasn't supposed to be available; undoubtedly a strong contender for the lamest corporate excuse of the decade, and in my view a strong indication of strange firmware goings on.
Comment by Shaky posted on K-7 now £799!! at 25/01/2010 - 10:37
Or maybe it was because large chunks of the pre-production firmware contained code that was proprietary to Samsung, which subsequently had to be pulled when the relationship broke down?
Certainly the Photo Rumors.com site carried stories of the imminent arrival of what with hindsight appeared to closely resemble a Samsung branded K7 until very late in the day, that then inexplicably failed to materialise.
Certainly the Photo Rumors.com site carried stories of the imminent arrival of what with hindsight appeared to closely resemble a Samsung branded K7 until very late in the day, that then inexplicably failed to materialise.
Comment by Shaky posted on K-7 now £799!! at 25/01/2010 - 07:11
womble wrote:
My question is: are the K-series lenses actually better than the M-series (despite being, on the whole, heavier and bigger) or is there a developing urban myth that they are which is driving up prices?
In my view the urban myth that is driving up prices is the pervasive sentiment that the price of Pentax lenses can never go down.My question is: are the K-series lenses actually better than the M-series (despite being, on the whole, heavier and bigger) or is there a developing urban myth that they are which is driving up prices?
Of course that was also the view on house prices not so long ago.
Comment by Shaky posted on "K" series lenses at 25/01/2010 - 07:05
More on Samsung:
Quote:
Samsung Denies M&A Deal With Pentax
By Kim Yoo-chul
Staff Reporter
Samsung Digital Imaging (SDI), Samsung Electronics' affiliate, has denied the possibility of buying Japan's Pentax Corp.
. . ."The need for the acquisition of Pentax has been reduced as Samsung has already internalized key camera-related technologies such as image sensors," the CEO said during a meeting with reporters in Seoul, Tuesday.
"We reviewed the M&A scenario a few years ago as Samsung was having difficulties in securing related technologies," the top executive said.
Upcoming hybrid digital cameras, possibly in the second half of this year, will be equipped with SDI's own lens and image sensors, he said.
"Another key point is that we will find new partners able to diversify possible channels for lenses."
Park said the company is targeting 15 percent of the global compact camera market by the end of this year, up from 12.5 percent in 2009.
"By 2012, Samsung Digital Imaging will have an 18 percent share in the segment."
Compact cameras account for 93 percent of the global camera market and the remaining 7 percent comprises of digital single lens reflex (DSLR) cameras.
. . .The executive said Samsung won't inject massive capital into the DSLR camera market due to low margins and the ongoing corporate shift toward the hybrid camera market.
"A very well-known Japanese company has been reeling from some 50-60 billion won in losses per year over the last few years in the DSLR market. We have no clear reason to strengthen DSLRs," according to the CEO.
"Consumer preferences are leaning toward hybrid cameras that offer a DSLR-equalized viewing experience. In line with the trend, Samsung will put more focus on hybrids," he said.
Source (& full story): Korea Times (via Photo Rumors)Samsung Denies M&A Deal With Pentax
By Kim Yoo-chul
Staff Reporter
Samsung Digital Imaging (SDI), Samsung Electronics' affiliate, has denied the possibility of buying Japan's Pentax Corp.
. . ."The need for the acquisition of Pentax has been reduced as Samsung has already internalized key camera-related technologies such as image sensors," the CEO said during a meeting with reporters in Seoul, Tuesday.
"We reviewed the M&A scenario a few years ago as Samsung was having difficulties in securing related technologies," the top executive said.
Upcoming hybrid digital cameras, possibly in the second half of this year, will be equipped with SDI's own lens and image sensors, he said.
"Another key point is that we will find new partners able to diversify possible channels for lenses."
Park said the company is targeting 15 percent of the global compact camera market by the end of this year, up from 12.5 percent in 2009.
"By 2012, Samsung Digital Imaging will have an 18 percent share in the segment."
Compact cameras account for 93 percent of the global camera market and the remaining 7 percent comprises of digital single lens reflex (DSLR) cameras.
. . .The executive said Samsung won't inject massive capital into the DSLR camera market due to low margins and the ongoing corporate shift toward the hybrid camera market.
"A very well-known Japanese company has been reeling from some 50-60 billion won in losses per year over the last few years in the DSLR market. We have no clear reason to strengthen DSLRs," according to the CEO.
"Consumer preferences are leaning toward hybrid cameras that offer a DSLR-equalized viewing experience. In line with the trend, Samsung will put more focus on hybrids," he said.
Comment by Shaky posted on Samsung GX. No . . .comeback. . ? at 21/01/2010 - 11:31
Quote:
Samsung GX. No real prospect of comeback
Friday 8th January 2010
Damien Demolder
Samsung GX-10 1st prize
With the launch of the new NX series of mirror-less cameras it seems there is very little chance now that Samsung will ever re-enter the DSLR market. Samsung UK's head of digital imaging, Robert King, would not commit to a definite answer on the subject during an interview with Amateur Photographer at CES in Las Vegas today. He repeated that the company was focusing its efforts on developing the NX system and that he could not state that the GX series would not be revisited in the future. It is clear though, as former vice president of Samsung Techwin Byung Woo Lee said when he first broke the news of the NX system to AP in 2008, that Samsung has moved into this new category as it realises that there is no chance of successfully competing against the developed DSLR ranges held by Nikon and Canon. Kim told us 'We will create a new category that we can dominate'. Interestingly SS Park, BJ Kim's replacement, told AP today that Samsung does not see the NX series as a competitor to the Micro Four Thirds products of Panasonic and Olympus, but that Samsung's models will broaden the mirror-less micro camera choice.
When asked how the NX range would develop Park said that the company obviously intends to produce more bodies in different forms and of different sensor resolutions, and that some models would appeal to professional users. With this in mind it is obvious that Samsung will have no need of GX DSLRs. Alongside the technology products that Samsung Electric has on show here the idea of an optical viewfinder seems rather old fashioned and inflexible.
Source: Amateur Photographer
Samsung GX. No real prospect of comeback
Friday 8th January 2010
Damien Demolder
Samsung GX-10 1st prize
With the launch of the new NX series of mirror-less cameras it seems there is very little chance now that Samsung will ever re-enter the DSLR market. Samsung UK's head of digital imaging, Robert King, would not commit to a definite answer on the subject during an interview with Amateur Photographer at CES in Las Vegas today. He repeated that the company was focusing its efforts on developing the NX system and that he could not state that the GX series would not be revisited in the future. It is clear though, as former vice president of Samsung Techwin Byung Woo Lee said when he first broke the news of the NX system to AP in 2008, that Samsung has moved into this new category as it realises that there is no chance of successfully competing against the developed DSLR ranges held by Nikon and Canon. Kim told us 'We will create a new category that we can dominate'. Interestingly SS Park, BJ Kim's replacement, told AP today that Samsung does not see the NX series as a competitor to the Micro Four Thirds products of Panasonic and Olympus, but that Samsung's models will broaden the mirror-less micro camera choice.
When asked how the NX range would develop Park said that the company obviously intends to produce more bodies in different forms and of different sensor resolutions, and that some models would appeal to professional users. With this in mind it is obvious that Samsung will have no need of GX DSLRs. Alongside the technology products that Samsung Electric has on show here the idea of an optical viewfinder seems rather old fashioned and inflexible.
Source: Amateur Photographer
Comment by Shaky posted on Samsung GX. No . . .comeback. . ? at 13/01/2010 - 11:04
(sigh @ Shaky - you only had to Google)
I've used Fuji 1600ASA Superia colour negative film. Once.
As for the Tri-X that is ISO 400; I am not going to get Boots to push it to ISO 1600 – assuming they still developed film - am I?
But of what relevance is the application of specialist development processing techniques for *black and white* film to the discussion about what is possible and desirable with a dslrs?
The reality is that in terms of current practice it is merely a load of meaningless techno-babble, injected by Gartmore to bolster a position otherwise totalling lacking in substance.