akluiber

akluiber

Lives in United States United States
Joined on Jan 27, 2004

Comments

Total: 9, showing: 1 – 9
In reply to:

kemal erdogan: I believe the name change marks that a full frame K-1 is on the corner

...said every FF wishing Pentaxian for every release since the K10.

Direct link | Posted on Oct 12, 2013 at 06:11 UTC
In reply to:

Sergey Borachev: K-5 had the best IQ for APS-C cameras. The closest was D7000. These 2 cameras were head and shoulders above others.

After 2 years, you would expect a big improvement, but what we see is in the K-5 II is next to nothing in the context of IQ improvement, when you realised that more and more cameras have essentially the same IQ. NEX-7 (which also has 24MP), and X-Pro1, X-E1 have arguably better IQ. NEX-5N, NEX-5R, and most likely the NEX-6, and some entry level DSLRS all have equivalent IQ. Then there are the E-M5, E-PL5, E-PM2 and GH3, and many more that have an IQ that is very close, but much more compact in size, not to mention significantly better features, e.g. AF.

What's the point?

Build quality, sealing, excellent controls, and, as you mention, excellent IQ for what will likely drop to a ~$1000 USD body.

The point is value, and Pentax has always had that in spades.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 13, 2012 at 17:54 UTC
In reply to:

waxwaine: Where are those people claiming for a old 50s digital SLR like OMD5? Saving for the US1400? Better get a K-30 + Q/ limiteds.

"If you adjust the working distance to get the same framing then you have deeper DOF."

Exactly. If you're going to crop in on the APS-C anyway, sure, then it's a moot point.

But if you have intentions to isolate a subject at a specific composition within the frame, you've gotta back away and go wider in m4/3s to get a similar result. So, functionally, it's still not the same.

Direct link | Posted on May 22, 2012 at 21:06 UTC
In reply to:

waxwaine: Where are those people claiming for a old 50s digital SLR like OMD5? Saving for the US1400? Better get a K-30 + Q/ limiteds.

Sensor size is part of the DOF equation. Smaller sensors have less control on the shallow end. Putting a Pentax lens on a m4/3 camera will not produce the same DOF as a camera with an APS-C sensor.

http://www.cambridgeincolour.com/tutorials/digital-camera-sensor-size.htm

Direct link | Posted on May 22, 2012 at 16:26 UTC
In reply to:

Peadingle: Rather disappointed as a long-time Pentax fan looking to buy a DSLR. Why? Because the K-30 doesn't have an articulating viewing screen that my current two digital cameras have, and a feature that I am not now prepared to be without.

I'm no camera engineer, but one of Pentax's big schticks is weather and environment sealing. It may be that they feel an articulating LCD compromises that feature too much.

Direct link | Posted on May 22, 2012 at 07:46 UTC
On Ricoh reshuffle sees Pentax take control of cameras article (163 comments in total)
In reply to:

Henry M. Hertz: first thing they should do.. fire the designers and get new ones.

Clearly you've never held a K7/K5. IMO, they're the most well built and logically laid out dSLRS yet made.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 9, 2012 at 18:16 UTC
On Pentax reveals K lens roadmap for 2012 and 2013 article (101 comments in total)
In reply to:

kryten61: Hey didn't Pentax release a 645D about 2 years ago?
How many lenses have they gotten to market since its release?
Maybe they should make this a priority?
Also What advantage does a Mirrorless system really have when it still has the retrofocal elements that allow a mirror to be there, But they just leave the mirror out? Surely the MAJOR reason for a Smaller mirrorles camera system is that its smaller? I like Pentax, but really? an adaptor would have been a more elegant solution to backward compatibility? No?

The K01 is the size it is because it retains compatibility with Pentax's full K mount lenses.

Want a smaller aps-c MILC from Pentax? Then be prepared to invest in an entirely new line of lenses, or buy an adapter which would negate all your size savings anyway.

Direct link | Posted on Feb 4, 2012 at 06:44 UTC
In reply to:

bigdaddave: Why do people want face detection in a RAW converter?

Are they incapable of recognising a face themselves?

graybalanced nailed it.

Even if you don't care for the "fun" aspect of it. It's a great way to quickly populate hundreds or thousands of photos with relevant tag information.

Direct link | Posted on Jan 10, 2012 at 18:29 UTC
On Adobe faces criticism for change of upgrade policy article (398 comments in total)
In reply to:

Jogger: If he doesnt like, just go somewhere else. Easy peasy. Crying about it will do nothing.

Giving exposure to wide consumer sentiment about the stupidity of a business decision can certainly have effect. See Netflix.

Direct link | Posted on Nov 22, 2011 at 22:36 UTC
Total: 9, showing: 1 – 9