Zvonimir Tosic: Nice to know Fuji did not dare to compare Total_size-vs-Performance quotient of their cameras with Pentax K-3 armed with, say, 6 DA Limiteds.
But instead with 7DII which has .. ~8 years old sensor tech and no lenses that can compare with Fuji's or Pentax APS-C optimised primes.
One rule of Japanese business is never mention your direct competitors. Never, especially in the same sentence as your brand name sake. So no wonder they love people stuck with very expensive DSLRs and large lenses, who want to trade to smaller body and equally large lenses. :)
Nice to know Fuji did not dare to compare Total_size-vs-Performance quotient of their cameras with Pentax K-3 armed with, say, 6 DA Limiteds.
Hah, nothing new. Machine grease and olive oil have similar effects and can be found inside your car, your bike, and inside your sandwich. It can also work as a cool photo filter, so it saves on software.
So basically, going back to film, and include negatives / positives when submitting a photograph. Ah, good ol film; we had much less visual rubbish and forgery in film age — despite efforts to tweak and doctor negatives, it was so much harder and for these types of competitions, not worth the effort.
zorgon: It's an interesting camera no doubt, but this is a startup company looking for investors so don't hold your breath. I do hope this digital rangefinder technology will find it's way onto the market however.
You mean, something like Lytro, who came with yet another very good concept after it was taken seriously by the market?
photogeek: They're a year from shipping and the only thing they have is a render? Good luck with that.
Actually in video on their website, there is a camera in hands.
Cheng Bao: A new comer to a dying market in already-dead niche
I would not say it is dying. It is refining itself. It is only a matter of time when the future kids, grown up on iPhones, throw iToys in the bin when they realise there is something better and allows lots of learning too, yet they were oblivious to it. Smartphones have killed quality content: great photography and great music, for the sake of convenience. The great quality content and the opportunity to exercise brain will strike back.
Make is simple, yes, but not simpler than that. Where is ISO control? At least film Leica camera had a simple ISO wheel on the back. If sensitivity control is not simple and intuitive as shutter speed selection, all this brushed aluminium is a waste.
Zvonimir Tosic: 1st looks like a watercolour painting. Very nice.
1st looks like a watercolour painting. Very nice.
Zvonimir Tosic: Interestingly, Pentax representative said that they have already experimented with sensor shift technology to achieve same goal as this, now advertised by Olympus (and Hassy in the past). But, Pentax admits, the result is a large size dataset, plenty of megapickles, but the quality of the picture does not improve.So instead of delivering that — which obviously is not difficult — they would rather focus how to make native resolution even better.
Which is interesting, as it better sheds light on what Olympus really wants to achieve: a perception that their small cameras (which are indeed limited by sensor size and performance worse that others), are also competitors when it comes to large image sizes.
Do not judge my statement above as “mine” because it is the transcript. Pentax engineer said the amount of data increases significantly, but there is nothing significant to be gained from it. In their opinion, other methods of improving resolution performance without increasing number of pixels are more intelligible. Consider this: Pentax speaks from the perspective of 24 MPs, most likely 36MPs in the FF, then the 51 MPs in MF too, and even the resolution performance of the native 24 MPs surpasses anything Olympus can offer natively. They are in a different boat altogether than Olympus, who must — using inferior sensor size and performance — prove it is still somewhat competent system. Olympus has abandoned everything and focuses on m4/3. Pentax, on the other hand, did not abandon anything and justifies each tech to its own. Why would they bother increasing the resolution performance of the K-3 when the FF will bring that, and more, while using the same mount?
Interestingly, Pentax representative said that they have already experimented with sensor shift technology to achieve same goal as this, now advertised by Olympus (and Hassy in the past). But, Pentax admits, the result is a large size dataset, plenty of megapickles, but the quality of the picture does not improve.So instead of delivering that — which obviously is not difficult — they would rather focus how to make native resolution even better.
Design and functionality go hand in had; one defines the other. So if FF design sports obviously huge pentaprism, no doubt it makes perfect sense from the functional point of view: that VF will have something unique. That is where the secret of this camera is hidden (from the first look of it). I do not complain about design at all; I think it is brilliant and unique (that is equally important for immediate recognition factor) and like all Pentax DSLRs, it will surely make lots of sense.
EcoPix: As an old P67 user from way back, my heart fluttered when I saw that photo. Bring it on, Pentax. You can be great again.
As for features I want, are my eyes playing tricks or is that rear screen not 3:2? I would love Super 35 or something akin to the old 6x7 format proportions but bigger than 4/3rds. It would need to fit inside existing image circles.
Not sure whether old Pentax and Takumar lenses would be successful on such a hi-res beast. Maybe 645 lenses would work, and some of their old pro ED teles.
One thing left hanging by Canikon is the obvious - an electronic viewfinder as well as OVF, be it overlay, flip-out eyepiece or slip-on.
I already have enough cameras for several photographers, but if Pentax did something really bold and affordable...
Yes, the 645Z is in 4:3 format, so perhaps they have just reused the back screen feature from 645Z for the FF. This is only a mockup, after all, in which not all things may be accurate. But I presume they surely wanted to show us the HUGE PENTAPRISM, because everyone is talking of it.
Zvonimir Tosic: Let's bet that the button below the PC socket is rather "Engage the EVF Overlay, Baby!" button ... :-)
To that on a DSLR, properly, the mirror must be adjustably translucent, so at the same time OVF receives the projected image and the sensor fills up the rest and imposes on top of it. It requires serious engineering and innovation. Such breakthrough will never come from big, lazy two.
Let's bet that the button below the PC socket is rather "Engage the EVF Overlay, Baby!" button ... :-)
Robbie Corrigan: Ahh just so you know the 31mm Limited is not exactly a small lens. Compared to the other Limited's it is massive. So based on this, this prototype is a couple of mm wider, perhaps a cm taller than the K-3, grip seems deeper so its really like a taller, tougher K20D. Its VF could well be the star of the show, 100% field of view, 0.8 or greater magnification. First lens I will mount is my 43mm Limited and enjoy a 'real' normal FOV and go street shooting. When it gets dark, I'll find an available light only gig and dig out my A50 f/1.2 and immerse myself in my own photography heaven, a system I know, a big VF, a fast manual lens and lighting I have to adapt to.
Sounds like heaven.
The pentaprism in this FF is prominent. Perhaps finally a DSLR to free us from a feeble VFs of its peers, and deliver something like:
100% view, 95% magnification, plus EVF overlay. Like-Nothing-Else-Out-There.
The secret of this camera is hidden there, in that hump. And I bet many users will start screaming in excitement when they look though the view finder. Pentax engineers said in an interview, that the compact size of the FF is not the only thing Pentax is interested in. And that they want something *else* too.
Canon sees no profit in it so they won't waste their name on it. And there is no profit in it at all, or perhaps very little for one player. Others are suffocating.The whole mirrorless game is a fad and a race to the bottom. Also a horrible age for optics, because we are being fed with heavily compromised optics for systems (garbage in quality and nightmare of a design) that cannot even produce a decent image without heavy software cooking behind it. If the optics is done right for the mirrorless, it would be bigger than for the SLR!So I am not certain why some people are raving for something that moves entire values and hallmarks of photographic and optical ideals and design in the dumpster?
Zvonimir Tosic: Like who cares really?
I have read it, and concluded it is much ado about nothing.