All Forum Comments
Comment by wadna posted on Pentax D FA 645 25mm f/4 at 04/02/2011 - 04:53
"and limits you to jpeg"
Not so. DR expansion works in RAW as well & it certainly helps mitigate the K7 DR weakness.
Not so. DR expansion works in RAW as well & it certainly helps mitigate the K7 DR weakness.
Comment by wadna posted on How do you find your K7 at 03/02/2011 - 22:03
"Of course it's of interest. This looks like the first improved wide angle for the 645D that was promised from the start."
The lack of activity on this thread proves my point I think. Members of this forum are not interested in a FF Pentax or the 645D as they have made abundantly clear in previous threads.
I hope this is part of a newfound activity & success by Pentax. Kr, K5, 645D & new lenses. I think they need something below the Kr (cheaper,smaller entry level dSLR or APS-C EVIL (probably with 28mm register distance) & a FF dSLR to give people who lust after the 645D but can't afford/justify it (most of us) an option that provides significantly better IQ than APS-C. Let's face it, a sensor 2.3 time bigger than APS-C is big step up & can be done in a body not much larger than the K5. It would make the Nikon & Canon FF cameras look the monsters they are.
The lack of activity on this thread proves my point I think. Members of this forum are not interested in a FF Pentax or the 645D as they have made abundantly clear in previous threads.
I hope this is part of a newfound activity & success by Pentax. Kr, K5, 645D & new lenses. I think they need something below the Kr (cheaper,smaller entry level dSLR or APS-C EVIL (probably with 28mm register distance) & a FF dSLR to give people who lust after the 645D but can't afford/justify it (most of us) an option that provides significantly better IQ than APS-C. Let's face it, a sensor 2.3 time bigger than APS-C is big step up & can be done in a body not much larger than the K5. It would make the Nikon & Canon FF cameras look the monsters they are.
Comment by wadna posted on Pentax D FA 645 25mm f/4 at 03/02/2011 - 21:59
johnriley wrote:
APS-C to 645D is what I'm after and I suspect that it will be a big enough jump.
It will be a huge jump - about 3.9 times APS-C. Of course the next step is a true 6*4.5 giving you 7.4 times APS-C. Enough?Quote:
By the way John, the jump from APS-C to Full Frame is approaching that of 35mm to 6*4.5 - not insignificant.
To be honest I never found the jump from 35mm to 645 to be enough. I should have bought a 67 to get the leap in quality I wanted.By the way John, the jump from APS-C to Full Frame is approaching that of 35mm to 6*4.5 - not insignificant.
APS-C to 645D is what I'm after and I suspect that it will be a big enough jump.
Of course the Pentax 6*7 was more a studio or landscape camera courtesy of that huge mirror.
Comment by wadna posted on Pentax D FA 645 25mm f/4 at 02/02/2011 - 00:47
johnriley wrote:
Going back to the 645 design, I have used these in the past and they are not that heavy or bulky compared to even a FF nikon or Canon DSLR.
The design is by its nature more "boxy" but it works very well and it is definitely suitable for use "in the field" as well as the studio.
I would love to "play" with one but at 1.2kgs it's no light weight.Going back to the 645 design, I have used these in the past and they are not that heavy or bulky compared to even a FF nikon or Canon DSLR.
The design is by its nature more "boxy" but it works very well and it is definitely suitable for use "in the field" as well as the studio.
Traveling in India I became extremely frustrated with the slow wake up, focus & shoot of my *istD & started to think of a D700 as I was very impressed with the one a friend of mine had but decided at nearly 1kg it was more weight than I wanted to carry. I bought a K-7 instead. Mixed reaction; much faster than the *istD & lovely to handle but I'm not so enamoured with the sensor.
I would be interested in a FF Pentax but first of all I've got to get some decent "mileage" out of the K-7. After all I changed from a brace of Spotmatics to the *istD & then the K-7. I would still have the *istD if I hadn't become so frustrated with it, it produced some wonderful images for me despite it's shortcomings.
By the way John, the jump from APS-C to Full Frame is approaching that of 35mm to 6*4.5 - not insignificant.
Comment by wadna posted on Pentax D FA 645 25mm f/4 at 01/02/2011 - 10:09
"I think the only sensible way for Pentax to offer FF would be if they made a digital LX. Same basic size and weight, WR sealed, and aimed at people who don't like the fairly massive bulk of the current FF offerings. Otherwise they'd be turning up late to an already saturated market."
A FF Pentax need not be that much bigger than the K-5/7. Pentax has a history of making cameras smaller & lighter than Nikon & Canon.
A FF Pentax need not be that much bigger than the K-5/7. Pentax has a history of making cameras smaller & lighter than Nikon & Canon.
Comment by wadna posted on Pentax D FA 645 25mm f/4 at 01/02/2011 - 05:39
"The only problem is affording it."
Dead right John. Lusting is one thing, being able to afford it is another. Size & weight of the 645D is also an issue but I would still be interested in a full frame Pentax.
Pentax is going to stir up the MF world. It would be logical for them to produce an FF camera to complete the marketing line up.
Dead right John. Lusting is one thing, being able to afford it is another. Size & weight of the 645D is also an issue but I would still be interested in a full frame Pentax.
Pentax is going to stir up the MF world. It would be logical for them to produce an FF camera to complete the marketing line up.
Comment by wadna posted on Pentax D FA 645 25mm f/4 at 01/02/2011 - 03:41
Yes.
Comment by wadna posted on Is this abstract? at 31/01/2011 - 08:49
Apparently it's year away. Not that it seems to be of interest to those on this forum who don't want a Full Frame Pentax let alone a MF one.
Comment by wadna posted on Pentax D FA 645 25mm f/4 at 31/01/2011 - 08:48
"If you're after sharp across the frame then 1.4 shooting is not for you. it's missing the point."
Really! What do you get an f1.4 lens for? Blurred images - blur from corner to corner means it was blurred in the centre too. Not soft, BLURRED.
As I said my consumer grade Sigma 17-70 zoom wide open ate the supposedly Pro grade 30mm f1.4 prime lens for brekky.
Reports I have read on this lens indicate it's quality varies dramatically. One had to return the original test lens as it was so bad...........
I bought a FA31 Limited instead. Soft wide open but produces beautiful images.
Really! What do you get an f1.4 lens for? Blurred images - blur from corner to corner means it was blurred in the centre too. Not soft, BLURRED.
As I said my consumer grade Sigma 17-70 zoom wide open ate the supposedly Pro grade 30mm f1.4 prime lens for brekky.
Reports I have read on this lens indicate it's quality varies dramatically. One had to return the original test lens as it was so bad...........
I bought a FA31 Limited instead. Soft wide open but produces beautiful images.
Comment by wadna posted on The Sigma 30mm f1.4: I'm with Smeggypants! at 30/01/2011 - 05:19
I'm loving the FA 31 Limited on my K-7 - it makes a great "standard" lens.
"I went out and bought a D700 and for the last twenty one months have never looked back or regretted it. Along with the FF came a huge bright viewfinder, silly fast AF, very low noise hi ISO and some rather nice fast glass that actually gives you the correct field of view that I came to expect after using 35mm cameras."
I bought the K-7 instead but was tempted by the D700. The D700 weight/bulk deterred me as did the prospect of going out & buying a heap of new glass. There's no doubt though that the D700 is an excellent camera.
A FF Pentax would be nice.