Oleg_V
Leading Member
This road will lead us to cameraphones
-
Welcome to the new forums! Please read this first. For known issues we are working to resolve, click here.
Summary roadmap 2006 Pentax/Samsung
- Thread starter mvb123
- Start date
Gary Martin
Veteran Member
You mean they will combine a cell phone with a camera? What a great, original idea!
--
http://www.pixelstatic.com
KL Matt
Veteran Member
Hi,
I'm new here, so I won't waste time getting in on the general conjecture and speculating:
I say the new zoom is a DFA because the new bodies (at least the D replacement) will have less of a crop factor and won't all be compatible with the DA lenses. That would make sense from the standpoint of the focal length as well. A 60-250 with a 1.2 crop factor is just about exactly 50-210, a very popular range for Pentax users historically (look at all the 70-200 and 80-200/210 A and F zooms that are around).
I feel the sensor is the limiting quality factor with the equipment I have purchased so far (Ds and various manual and AF Pentax lenses) and would really enjoy a body that would in effect upgrade all my glass. I think it's safe to assume I'm not the only one. 9 megapixel would be ok but maybe not worth the money, 11 would be great.
Matt
I'm new here, so I won't waste time getting in on the general conjecture and speculating:
I say the new zoom is a DFA because the new bodies (at least the D replacement) will have less of a crop factor and won't all be compatible with the DA lenses. That would make sense from the standpoint of the focal length as well. A 60-250 with a 1.2 crop factor is just about exactly 50-210, a very popular range for Pentax users historically (look at all the 70-200 and 80-200/210 A and F zooms that are around).
I feel the sensor is the limiting quality factor with the equipment I have purchased so far (Ds and various manual and AF Pentax lenses) and would really enjoy a body that would in effect upgrade all my glass. I think it's safe to assume I'm not the only one. 9 megapixel would be ok but maybe not worth the money, 11 would be great.
Matt
reflux
Forum Enthusiast
MUCH help to those of us who photograph fast moving subjects under low light conditions.
daniel.
Aleksander Kozak
Leading Member
I believe that if these plans are going to be realized it would plenty of new gear. Plus AS with about 9M body what you want more if new lenses are great.
Joseph Tainter
Forum Pro
Hmmm. The F4 will make the lens lighter and less expensive. That makes sense for Pentax's current design approach. They just aren't bringing out fast glass these days.
But the zoom range is disappointing. The range will exceed 4x. Higher optical quality would be achieved by keeping the zoom range to 3x. I had been hoping for a 60-180 F4. When Pentax has brought out constant F4 zooms in the past, they have been serious lenses (e.g., FA 20-35, DA 16-45), and with high quality optical performance. Going to 4x in this lens makes me sceptical.
And why is it a D FA? For that matter, why does the D FA line even exist? A DA 60-250 F4 would be more compact and lighter, and fit their strategy of sticking with APS-C sized sensors. I will evaluate this lens partly on weight in deciding whether to buy. I can always stick with my SMC F 70-210 F4-5.6.
In the meantime, I am very interested in learning more about those forthcoming pancake lenses.
Joe
But the zoom range is disappointing. The range will exceed 4x. Higher optical quality would be achieved by keeping the zoom range to 3x. I had been hoping for a 60-180 F4. When Pentax has brought out constant F4 zooms in the past, they have been serious lenses (e.g., FA 20-35, DA 16-45), and with high quality optical performance. Going to 4x in this lens makes me sceptical.
And why is it a D FA? For that matter, why does the D FA line even exist? A DA 60-250 F4 would be more compact and lighter, and fit their strategy of sticking with APS-C sized sensors. I will evaluate this lens partly on weight in deciding whether to buy. I can always stick with my SMC F 70-210 F4-5.6.
In the meantime, I am very interested in learning more about those forthcoming pancake lenses.
Joe
Sarbu Alexandru-Cristian
Well-known member
You're kidding, right? There are still Pentax film camera users out there, you know...
Alex Sarbu
Aleksander Kozak
Leading Member
So maybe there is a chance for FF in the future...This crop is not so nice, DOF is different from 35mm which I do not like to much...
I am used to the angle of my 30mm, 50mm, 105mm 135mm and now there completely different lenses..
I am used to the angle of my 30mm, 50mm, 105mm 135mm and now there completely different lenses..Sarbu Alexandru-Cristian
Well-known member
I'm drooling for a real viewfinder.So maybe there is a chance for FF in the future...This crop is not
so nice, DOF is different from 35mm which I do not like to
much...
now there completely different lenses..
Well, medium format users won't call the LX viewfinder "real" but...
Still, I don't think we'll see a full (135) frame DSLR from Pentax soon.
Alex Sarbu
Joseph Tainter
Forum Pro
----------
Well, it's not as if Pentax was attending to the needs of those owners of film cameras. Or digital cameras for that matter. How many people have been pleading for renewed production of the FA* 300 F4.5?
No, I'm not kidding. I don't understand what Pentax is doing. Are they abandoning 24 x 36 mm or planning to bring something out with a sensor that size?
A zoom range of 60-250 makes sense for the current lineup of DSLRs, since the current "normal" zooms top out at 45 and 50 mm. It makes no sense for 35 mm in relation to other lenses, such as a 24-90, 28-70/80, 28-105. etc. Too much overlap for my tastes.
Joe
I think a 60-250 f4 is a good choice for a long zoom. It is a lens many can afford and I bet it will be very sharp.
Yes I would like that lens in F2.8 but it would be a monster to lug around.
When Pentax has there D2 with IS inside the camera, that will help, although it is no sub for a fast lens.
Will I buy this new offering ?, you bet your sweet bipie I will, as I'm getting more and more new Pentax lenses and getting rid of the old.
wll
Yes I would like that lens in F2.8 but it would be a monster to lug around.
When Pentax has there D2 with IS inside the camera, that will help, although it is no sub for a fast lens.
Will I buy this new offering ?, you bet your sweet bipie I will, as I'm getting more and more new Pentax lenses and getting rid of the old.
wll
Joele
Veteran Member
Actually a 60-250 makes a lot more sense with the 28-70 or 24-90 as there is some overlap.. with the DSLR zooms there is a gap, not good IMO...
Although a 3 lens combo (16-45/4, 28-105/3.2-4.5 and 60-250/4) would be good by me ;-)
------------
Joel - *ist DS/P30n/SFX
http://www.pbase.com/joele
richardday
Veteran Member
Those that aren't, don't know what they are missing! No zoom can match the FA*300/4.5 or the FA*200/2.8. I hope that one day Pentax will re-incarnate all their superb primes with the current D-FA design, which should reduce weight and hopefully costs as well. In their statement, when they released the lens roadmap last year, they said they had been especially surprised at the renewed demand for their primes. However, it makes sense for them to do the zooms first though.
I think that if the rumoured D replacement is a competent pro-am body to rival the D200 (I hope so), we shall see a bunch of new lenses for that. If the 5D format (FF) becomes a significant market sector, I expect that Pentax will offer a model in that format as well. The market place is still developing at a furious rate and nothing is that cast in stone as yet!
I think that they are just covering their assets (is that the right word ;-)), plus, I'm one who still uses some film, but very little these days.
Maybe they will do another co-op with Tokina and release a D-FA version of the new 80-400 ATX-D, that would make a whole lot of sense. I think that would be a very popular tele-zoom for enthustiasts.
I believe that Pentax will eventually have a very comprehensive range of both primes and zooms that will rival most of the competition, but with their own particular twist and exclusive features (SMC, QuickShift etc), as they did before. In the film days, it was said that camera bodies were the loss leaders to generate profitable lens sales and I believe this may well still prove be the case.
--
Richard Day - 'Carpe Diem!'
Gloucester UK
Roland Mabo
Forum Pro
That is fixed with great high ISO performance.
Take care*
Take care*
janneman02
Forum Pro
Alex Foot
Forum Enthusiast
I'm not entirely sure who's replying to who here, but going by the threaded view I have to assume that those re my subject title are replying (or not, in this case) to me.
I was trying to point out that expectations shouldn't be a perfect 1+1 in these partnerships, as they wouldn't be happening in the first place if each party was a technological (and/or commercial) whole.
What I WAS expecting...
IMHO...
was...
the complete opposite of a simple doubling of the effort: a little more dynamism, clarity and purpose to management. Panasonic played their entry well, the market will not accomodate Samsung imitating them, but that doesn't seem to be stopping Samsung: compacts and big-zoom point-and-shoots (and badly) then DSLRs. If they continue to imitate other development strategies, they will stay at least one generation behind ad infinitum.
The 20D was the seminal camera and still is the standard bearer in the DSLR market, defining the consumer preferences in its generation and dictating the key specs to the next generation: high ISO performance, solid FPS and AF. It is also the most profitable and highest profile camera, that most importantly locks people into the Canon system, with photographers of many skill levels and budgets using it for many many purposes.
Let's face it, locking into systems, multi-purpose and publicity seems to be what mass-marketing cameras is about.
Well, what's the biggest obstacle to competition in that sector, and weakness in Samsung and Pentax? Sensors. And Samsung and Pentax seem to be dancing around that completely (Samsung with it's entry-level obsession and Pentax with, well, not much but the vapourware 645D). The actual development might be tough, ie you need to headhunt hard, give them time and resources, but for management it really isn't a difficult problem to spot and work on.
Sensor research and development needs to be the top priority so that Samsung/Pentax can skip, say, the previous generation (unlike Konica-Minolta, who have the luxury of a partnership with Sony, an established APS-C manufacturer). The opportunity cost of the good money after bad by developing yet another entry level model (in BOTH BRANDS too) is a losing another full generation of sensor development, locks in a competitive lag wrt established players and maintains dependence on others for the key component.
Even an accountant can tell you how important the sensor is - it's the major cost component of the thing, and to not have it in-house and with IP makes you little more than an advanced rebadger.
Sure, Samsung has the money to do both, but let's delve one layer deeper. You can't have a schizophrenic strategy where the sensor boys go off and have a play when they know that management is not really relying on them and will happily just buy from Cypress or Sony and churn out various iterations on entry-levels. Unless the pressure is on and they feel involved, nothing interesting will happen.
If Samsung had launched from the moment the partnership was confirmed, pulled a team together by, say, November, and said right give me 14Mpx, APS-C, drop-dead dynamic range, 10 fps, noiseless 3200 ISO, with AS in mind, by March. It probably wouldn't've happened, but enough would've happened by that time to realise we need new lenses to catch up to the sensor. Start a team on that for, say a July deadline, then when the sensor arrives, probably in July, there's some real pressure for the optics guys to get it up for say September. Voila you have two established teams, with real R&D flowing. Then you have something worth entering with, and your system guaranteed.
But what we see here is more or less a continuation of the current Pentax strategy, in tandem with Samsung, with no real signs of real targeted R&D from either. 1 zoom. I mean come on.
Good accountants at Canon I reckon. I'm not an accountant, in fact I hate most of them, but the best ones always find insight, somewhere in the numbers.
--
I like the sound of my digital voice.
I was trying to point out that expectations shouldn't be a perfect 1+1 in these partnerships, as they wouldn't be happening in the first place if each party was a technological (and/or commercial) whole.
What I WAS expecting...
IMHO...
was...
the complete opposite of a simple doubling of the effort: a little more dynamism, clarity and purpose to management. Panasonic played their entry well, the market will not accomodate Samsung imitating them, but that doesn't seem to be stopping Samsung: compacts and big-zoom point-and-shoots (and badly) then DSLRs. If they continue to imitate other development strategies, they will stay at least one generation behind ad infinitum.
The 20D was the seminal camera and still is the standard bearer in the DSLR market, defining the consumer preferences in its generation and dictating the key specs to the next generation: high ISO performance, solid FPS and AF. It is also the most profitable and highest profile camera, that most importantly locks people into the Canon system, with photographers of many skill levels and budgets using it for many many purposes.
Let's face it, locking into systems, multi-purpose and publicity seems to be what mass-marketing cameras is about.
Well, what's the biggest obstacle to competition in that sector, and weakness in Samsung and Pentax? Sensors. And Samsung and Pentax seem to be dancing around that completely (Samsung with it's entry-level obsession and Pentax with, well, not much but the vapourware 645D). The actual development might be tough, ie you need to headhunt hard, give them time and resources, but for management it really isn't a difficult problem to spot and work on.
Sensor research and development needs to be the top priority so that Samsung/Pentax can skip, say, the previous generation (unlike Konica-Minolta, who have the luxury of a partnership with Sony, an established APS-C manufacturer). The opportunity cost of the good money after bad by developing yet another entry level model (in BOTH BRANDS too) is a losing another full generation of sensor development, locks in a competitive lag wrt established players and maintains dependence on others for the key component.
Even an accountant can tell you how important the sensor is - it's the major cost component of the thing, and to not have it in-house and with IP makes you little more than an advanced rebadger.
Sure, Samsung has the money to do both, but let's delve one layer deeper. You can't have a schizophrenic strategy where the sensor boys go off and have a play when they know that management is not really relying on them and will happily just buy from Cypress or Sony and churn out various iterations on entry-levels. Unless the pressure is on and they feel involved, nothing interesting will happen.
If Samsung had launched from the moment the partnership was confirmed, pulled a team together by, say, November, and said right give me 14Mpx, APS-C, drop-dead dynamic range, 10 fps, noiseless 3200 ISO, with AS in mind, by March. It probably wouldn't've happened, but enough would've happened by that time to realise we need new lenses to catch up to the sensor. Start a team on that for, say a July deadline, then when the sensor arrives, probably in July, there's some real pressure for the optics guys to get it up for say September. Voila you have two established teams, with real R&D flowing. Then you have something worth entering with, and your system guaranteed.
But what we see here is more or less a continuation of the current Pentax strategy, in tandem with Samsung, with no real signs of real targeted R&D from either. 1 zoom. I mean come on.
Good accountants at Canon I reckon. I'm not an accountant, in fact I hate most of them, but the best ones always find insight, somewhere in the numbers.
--
I like the sound of my digital voice.
Sarbu Alexandru-Cristian
Well-known member
Agreed. It makes sense to complete the "prosumer" line first, the f/4 telezoom is a must (I see how happy are the Canon users with their 70-200 f/4L) but after that...
I hope they're planning a nice high quality (but affordable, even if not very fast) primes.
Or maybe we'll see a DFA 24-70 f/4, who knows?
So, the glass is half-full?
They can do that, and they'll be crazy not to do it. And I think they could make an elegant move, to surpass their "disadvantages": the lack of USM and IS. I'm talking about Full-Time Manual focus in all of their DA&DFA lenses (a big plus), and in-body stabilisation (when? I can't say)
Alex Sarbu
reflux
Forum Enthusiast
WOW! Like, with magic?
I already use ISO 800 and 1600 in most cases, don't think Pentax suddenly will handle noise better than the competitiors.
Availability of fast glass IS important. I guess my and Pentax roadmaps differs here... Oh well, we still have Sigma.
I already use ISO 800 and 1600 in most cases, don't think Pentax suddenly will handle noise better than the competitiors.
Availability of fast glass IS important. I guess my and Pentax roadmaps differs here...
Oh well, we still have Sigma.richardday
Veteran Member
I wouldn't be surprised to see them update the DA-16-45 to something like 16-60/65 (i.e. a 4x zoom), they did this with the FA lenses, the FA 28-70 f4 was effectively replaced by the 28-105 and 24-90, a 16-60 would be the same in APS-C as the 24-90. The current DA 16-45 works well on FF above 21mm without serious vignetting, so it is already a pseudo D-FA, certainly you can achieve a similar FOV with a FF body with the same lens as with an APS-C body, in fact slightly wider, I use it on my MZ-S without any problems, if you crop the top and bottom you can push the FOV even wider and get a reasonable panoramic style shot.
I believe it has always been more than half full, I wouldn't have stayed with Pentax otherwise, they've always had some really superb glass, the bodies are more than adequate for most purposes and have great handling, sure we would all like a more up to date D, which I believe will come this year, probably later rather than sooner ;-)So, the glass is half-full?
I also reckon that the glass is filling up faster than emptying quite nicely
Quick shift already gives you full time manual focus if you switch off the AF and is great for fine tuning with AF on, I really like the QSF system. If they can implement in-body IS without sensor alignment inaccuracies, I'm okay with that too.
--
Richard Day - 'Carpe Diem!'
Gloucester UK
Roland Mabo
Forum Pro
I expect Pentax to announce a new telephoto fast prime (f/2.8) in addition to the upcoming new Limiteds sometime this spring (PMA or Tokyo Photo Expo), but I don't expect a fast telezoom before Photokina 2006.
Reason for this is that the heavy optics in a fast telezoom needs improvement to the autofocus system, this probably means in-lens autofocus motor, and it won't happen before the D replacement is ready to go on sale. Yes, I do expect the D replacement to feature an updated lens mount.
But the rumoured 60-210 f/4 will be a standard KAF lens.
Take care*
Reason for this is that the heavy optics in a fast telezoom needs improvement to the autofocus system, this probably means in-lens autofocus motor, and it won't happen before the D replacement is ready to go on sale. Yes, I do expect the D replacement to feature an updated lens mount.
But the rumoured 60-210 f/4 will be a standard KAF lens.
Take care*
Similar threads
Keyboard shortcuts
- f
- Forum