Reading mode: Light Dark

Rangefinder Pentax?

Go to last post
--
kokopuffs
 
No mirror slap, interchangeable lens, adapter for most mounts, pretty small.

Thank you
Russell

--

'It is impossible to reason a person out of positions they have not been reasoned into'

--Walter Cunningham
 
Wallace Ross said:
If that is the case I was unaware of it. But is it possible that the
poster meant that the lens was a M42 mount rather than a Leica M
mount. I'm not convinced that Pentax has ever made anything for a
rangefinder (unless you count 35mm AF PS).
But I have been wrong previously on two occasions :)
Click to expand...
Make that three! Pentax indeed made the 43/1.9 in Leica Thread Mount, for rangefinder cameras. It's rather scarce and sells for $800 or more.

The R-D1, by the way, is a great camera, 6mp sensor and all. It is, in fact, my favorite digicam--I use it as often as my K20D.

Here's the 43 Special...

 
EVIL cameras with live view are already being made, which have no mirror and therefore yes can be as quiet as a rangefinder.
Charlie Self said:
Photography for me is a business, as well as a pleasure, though it's
not truly social even as a pleasure. At the same time, calling
rangefinders "quaint" is not useful. When an SLR of any kind can open
and close its shutter as silently as even a low end rangefinder, THEN
might be the time to call the rangefinder quaint. But, as you point
out, to do that, the mirror must go, at which point, the camera is no
longer a reflex model.
Click to expand...
 
johnnyhuman said:
johnnyhuman said:
Photography for me is a business, as well as a pleasure, though it's
not truly social even as a pleasure. At the same time, calling
rangefinders "quaint" is not useful. When an SLR of any kind can open
and close its shutter as silently as even a low end rangefinder, THEN
might be the time to call the rangefinder quaint. But, as you point
out, to do that, the mirror must go, at which point, the camera is no
longer a reflex model.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Lens interchangeability?

--
Charlie Self
http://www.charlieselfonline.com

 
junyo said:
Charlie Self said:
When an SLR of any kind can open
and close its shutter as silently as even a low end rangefinder, THEN
might be the time to call the rangefinder quaint.
Click to expand...
The Canon EOS RT. I believe that rangefinders can safely be called
quaint now.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canon_EOS_RT
Click to expand...
Sure. It had quite a great sensor back in '92 when they packed it in. I think it was called film.

The RT is quanit: it has been out of production for 17 years, and was a film camera. Evidently, the meaning of digital has escaped a couple of you.

--
Charlie Self
http://www.charlieselfonline.com

 
inverseroom said:
Make that three! Pentax indeed made the 43/1.9 in Leica Thread
Mount, for rangefinder cameras. It's rather scarce and sells for
$800 or more.

The R-D1, by the way, is a great camera, 6mp sensor and all. It is,
in fact, my favorite digicam--I use it as often as my K20D.

Here's the 43 Special...
Click to expand...
Thanks for the info, just like most people I really enjoy being wrong. That picture looks alot like the one at rangefinder forums:)
 
Charlie Self said:
I'm all over the place this morning, first posting this in the Pentax
Forum accidentally.
Personally, I'd go for the body, the 28mm f/1.4 and, later something
shorter and something longer, with a good macro tossed in for kicks.

Regardless of the prices on the Epson and the Leica, I don't believe
they're doing anything like this, even at many times the price.

--
Charlie Self
Click to expand...
What would you do with a macro lens on a rangefinder camera?

Bob
 
Yes, lens interchangeability.

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/panasonicdmcg1/
Charlie Self said:
johnnyhuman said:
Charlie Self said:
Photography for me is a business, as well as a pleasure, though it's
not truly social even as a pleasure. At the same time, calling
rangefinders "quaint" is not useful. When an SLR of any kind can open
and close its shutter as silently as even a low end rangefinder, THEN
might be the time to call the rangefinder quaint. But, as you point
out, to do that, the mirror must go, at which point, the camera is no
longer a reflex model.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Lens interchangeability?
Click to expand...
 
I'm sure that the G1 is a fine camera, perhaps it is even a better concept but it still isn't a rangefinder.

One thing I like about some of my small cameras is how thin they are. The Olympus XA just fits in a pocket. And that's not a coat pocket. We are really lucky to have so many choices of camera types today. My K10D fits most of my needs, it's what any DSLR isn't good for that I want something else. I own a Sony DSC-V3 and a Pentax W30 which both increase my photography versatility but the missing link for me is a small camera (much smaller than a K2000 or a G1)that beats 35mm film quality with a fast lens.
 
JoeDaBassPlayer said:
What is quaint would be a lack of AF. Without it, it is a niche item.
Pentax comes close enough with the K2000 IMHO. It is as small as a
rangefinder, has the fast, reliable AF consumers want and they did
make it considerably more quiet than my old SLR's. It also has the
small, high quality lenses to go with it.

Close enough and a lot less expensive. :-)
Click to expand...
They could take the k2000 a little further:
Drop the mirror box - use live view
Drop the price a little
Leave the mount unchanged
Shrink the body a bit

And they could come up with a new superwide angle lens that would work only on this R3000 (let's say), and would protrude in the mirror box space. Nice and small wide angle that combined with a R3000 would be a killer for street shooting, hiking/backpacking. And you could use all the other kmount lenses on it aswell. It's really doable and would cost even less to manufacture than a k2000, Pentax sucks for not doing it.
 
First, for a real rangefinder, forget the current lens lineup. The Pentax K mount has no focus coupling, so you can't use a rangefinder mechanism to focus them; it has to be some form of through-the-lens system or another.

So if Pentax would make a rangefinder, they'd have to start a whole new series of rangefinder lenses separate from the current lineup; or they could make it M mount compatible and let you use Leica, Voigtländer and Zeiss lenses on it.

Problem is, starting a whole new lens mount and creating lenses for it is a huge undertaking and a large risk for a company, and not something that'd make a whole lot of sense for Hoya to do. On the other hand, if you go with the M mount, you're relinquishing lens sales to Leica and the other manufacturers, and as lens sales are rather higher-margin than the body, you're throwing away a lot of the potential revenue from a new body.

Yes, I'd love a reasonably priced digital rangefinder too. But I don't see any sense in Pentax being the company to come out with one. If there's anything Pentax is in a position to accomplish, it would be in a price-competitive digital MF camera for hobbyists.

--
Pics: http://www.flickr.com/photos/jannem/
Blog: http://janneinosaka.blogspot.com
 
Robert Gotschall said:
Charlie Self said:
I'm all over the place this morning, first posting this in the Pentax
Forum accidentally.
Personally, I'd go for the body, the 28mm f/1.4 and, later something
shorter and something longer, with a good macro tossed in for kicks.

Regardless of the prices on the Epson and the Leica, I don't believe
they're doing anything like this, even at many times the price.

--
Charlie Self
Click to expand...
What would you do with a macro lens on a rangefinder camera?
Click to expand...
Macro doesn't have to be used for macro only. A good 100mm macro...1.5 crop on an RF? A good 80mm? You name it.

--
Charlie Self
http://www.charlieselfonline.com

 
--

I really do not think it would be cheaper. Once you get rid of the stupid mirror, you need an intelligent live view system. Then you are changing a bunch of other things, too, including the lenses.
 
Well said, my posts on this are really just thinking out loud. I agree that it isn't necessarily a good idea to build a new niche system. I must say though that when I saw the Olympus micro 4/3 prototype it did get me thinking. They hinted at external viewfinders as well.

I am amazed how much difference small changes in dimensions makes. The Olympus Infinity Jr. is only about half an inch shorter than the Infinty II but it looks miniture in comparison.
 
They can make EVIL cameras much smaller than the G1. In fact Panasonic said that when they were designing it they deliberately made it larger than it had to be so it would look "more like an SLR." But if you look at the micro 4/3 prototype that Olympus showed at Photokina last year, you can get an idea of what is possible:

http://www.dpreview.com/news/0809/08092208olympus_micro_four_thirds.asp

I guess I'm not sure what a digital rangefinder camera could offer that a camera using EVIL technology couldn't.
Wallace Ross said:
I'm sure that the G1 is a fine camera, perhaps it is even a better
concept but it still isn't a rangefinder.

One thing I like about some of my small cameras is how thin they are.
The Olympus XA just fits in a pocket. And that's not a coat pocket.
We are really lucky to have so many choices of camera types today.
My K10D fits most of my needs, it's what any DSLR isn't good for that
I want something else. I own a Sony DSC-V3 and a Pentax W30 which
both increase my photography versatility but the missing link for me
is a small camera (much smaller than a K2000 or a G1)that beats 35mm
film quality with a fast lens.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top