Potential capability of articulated screens

Alex Sarbu wrote:

.

Ricoh Imaging did:

- several Theta models (because there's no way you'd have a screen on such a camera)

Not so Alex.

https://360rumors.com/kandao-qoocam-8k-360-camera-beyond-max/

I am waiting for the Z2 with screen and higher resolution

No, actually I am not. I am quite satisfied with my Z1.

Barry - we cannot make Pentax add an articulated screen to K new. It is already ready for production any time now. No changes possible. So, it is not constructive to discuss this right now.

Pontoneer wrote:

I wish this forum had a like button !

Top right hand corner of a post.

MrB1 wrote:

johnami wrote:

I have said this before but I'll say it again. If a simple SLR digital model could be produced, without all the bells and whistles, I would be a customer.........with Art screen or not.

I sometimes feel making DSLR so complex just pushes new potential customers away.

It seems to me that this is a misconception which is probably an unintended and ignored consequence of marketing. A DSLR can be as simple or as complex as the user desires.

For simplicity, beginners could start with everything on Auto, and concentrate on the very basics of viewpoint and composition, then gradually get to know other camera features as they progress. Again for simplicity, the more advanced photographers can use all the manual settings if they wish, rather like using a Pentax MX film SLR.

In both cases, I think it is better to have the other features (i.e. those that add to the apparent complexity) available in the camera. They might be never used by some, but does that matter when others might sometimes come across a photographic opportunity where they prove useful?

For me, the articulated screen is a good example. As I get old and less mobile, it provides me with the ability to get shots at heights and angles for which, when younger, I could have got down on the ground and used the viewfinder. I could get down for them now, but it is unlikely that I would ever be able to get up again.

Including a feature will always give some users more photographic opportunities to enjoy their photography - isn't that at the core of the Pentax principles? Those who don't want a particular feature are under no obligation ever to use it, so it shouldn't matter to them if it is in the next camera they intend to buy.

Philip

Understand your sentiments.

However the best way to really learn about photography is not to aided by automatic tools. Pure manual, speed and aperture. 😊

Even if people are under no obligation to use all the wonders of a modern box, they are still paying for them and carrying them around.

johnami wrote:

MrB1 wrote:

johnami wrote:

I have said this before but I'll say it again. If a simple SLR digital model could be produced, without all the bells and whistles, I would be a customer.........with Art screen or not.

I sometimes feel making DSLR so complex just pushes new potential customers away.

It seems to me that this is a misconception which is probably an unintended and ignored consequence of marketing. A DSLR can be as simple or as complex as the user desires.

For simplicity, beginners could start with everything on Auto, and concentrate on the very basics of viewpoint and composition, then gradually get to know other camera features as they progress. Again for simplicity, the more advanced photographers can use all the manual settings if they wish, rather like using a Pentax MX film SLR.

In both cases, I think it is better to have the other features (i.e. those that add to the apparent complexity) available in the camera. They might be never used by some, but does that matter when others might sometimes come across a photographic opportunity where they prove useful?

For me, the articulated screen is a good example. As I get old and less mobile, it provides me with the ability to get shots at heights and angles for which, when younger, I could have got down on the ground and used the viewfinder. I could get down for them now, but it is unlikely that I would ever be able to get up again.

Including a feature will always give some users more photographic opportunities to enjoy their photography - isn't that at the core of the Pentax principles? Those who don't want a particular feature are under no obligation ever to use it, so it shouldn't matter to them if it is in the next camera they intend to buy.

Philip

Understand your sentiments.

However the best way to really learn about photography is not to aided by automatic tools. Pure manual, speed and aperture. 😊

Do mostly agree. But - not fully. It all depends on how you approach photography. Maybe the technical aspects of the camera is totally uninteresting for the photographer.

Even if people are under no obligation to use all the wonders of a modern box, they are still paying for them and carrying them around.

Most of the wonders do not weight so much.

johnami wrote:

.... Understand your sentiments.

However the best way to really learn about photography is not to aided by automatic tools. Pure manual, speed and aperture. 😊

I'm old-school.
I could apply the "Sunny f/16 Scheme" and get well-exposed slides.
I could set-up my early Pentax SLRs by feel behind my back conforming to that scheme.

But I see no merit in being able to do that nowadays!
I think there are far more important things to learn about.

Even if people are under no obligation to use all the wonders of a modern box, they are still paying for them and carrying them around.

I suspect that having all those options in a camera ultimately makes the camera cheaper!
It enables it to be sold to a much wider customer-base and avoids the need for the camera-maker to develop and release multiple versions for different markets.

MrB1 wrote:

With the camera settings on Auto, the beginner can concentrate on and practise these fundamentally important skills, and the camera will usually produce an acceptable (though perhaps not optimal) image. Everyone here must have seen how important this is:- there are many images on the Web, captured by experienced keen photographers who know all about shutter speed, aperture, ISO and focus so the images are technically good, but they are spoiled by poor choice of viewpoint and/or composition.

Concur. If you want to teach someone to cook, you don't start them with whole grain and a grinder, but prepared ingredients. Those who want to progress will, and in different directions and orders.

bob5050

After spending considerable time reading through the different forums here on DPreview I have come to the conclusion that technology is only good when your preferred brand acquires it.

Roland Karlsson wrote:

Barry - we cannot make Pentax add an articulated screen to K new. It is already ready for production any time now. No changes possible. So, it is not constructive to discuss this right now.

Do we have any evidence that Pentax reads these forums?  "Constructive" isn't really relevant if they don't.  And even if they do, we speak for our own personal reasons and feedback would just be a bonus.

I have a camera with an articulated screen and I haven't even begun to explore all the possibilities yet.

Rahto wrote:

After spending considerable time reading through the different forums here on DPreview I have come to the conclusion that technology is only good when your preferred brand acquires it.

My preferred brand was Pentax , which didn't acquire the technology I wanted!

So at great expense I'm having to change brands to follow the technology I want.

That was exactly my point and why I have been shooting both Canon and Pentax for over 15 years.

grcolts wrote:

The articulated screen is so very handy for shooting stars, meteors, comets, etc. Being able to tilt the screen so as to see it at night is something I find very useful.

In addition to the above you can use an unextended tripod closer to the ground making it massively more rigid and less susceptible to wind.

I've even done the above to fully shelter behind stone walls in very windy mountains and achieved total calm for star photography.

I can't believe some still mention the selfie word when articulated screens are debated, especially on a photography site like this where 1/2 the members are pensioners 

Mark Ransom wrote:

Do we have any evidence that Pentax reads these forums?

Well, Asahi man does--but I don't think he's ever represented himself as actually within the Pentax design/development group.

I have a camera with an articulated screen and I haven't even begun to explore all the possibilities yet.

I've had/used a couple--enough to know they're really handy now and then, but not something I'd be terribly upset about if the k-new doesn't have one. I'd like to see what else the camera has.

bob5050

K-new’s design and engineering is finished. No doubt they are working to perfect the production line for a fully new camera. Parts fabrication and assembly lines have their own sets of problems.  If they tucked in a fully new articulation mechanism behind that flush rear screen, great; it would be one of the most elegant engineering feats in all modern DSLR manufacturing. But that’s all we can say about it.

In any case, thank the deities it’s not a flip-out articulation, because those are generally made of composite material because of the additional flex required on and above tilt mechanisms, which can be metal.  I believe this is the point where Pentax draws the line when they want to produce their most robust “flagship” bodies.  It would have been a mistake to slap a composite materials flip out screen on K-new, and Pentax did not make it.

As for elegant engineering and design, I don’t doubt that Pentax is capable of producing anything they decide to produce.  Appreciation of their ability to do so is absolutely abysmal.  The K-1 provided an entirely unique articulating screen that gave some side to side articulation in addition to the tilt, without resorting to composite materials to do so.  DPR dissed the design for the sake of a clever snark, when the fact is that it was highly elegant and functional, inarguably proving highly robust in the long run, with the bonus of night lights on the back.  The one remaining thing that intrigues me about an entirely new tilt mechanism on K-new is the K-1’s light switch on the four-way controller . . .

drummercam wrote:

K-new’s design and engineering is finished.

I tend to think that as well. We've long hit design freeze. The more relevant question is how far one side or the other are we from start of main production.

It wouldn't surprise me to find out that there are early production copies accumulating in a warehouse somewhere while production ramps up.

bob5050

bob5050 wrote:

Barry Pearson wrote:

I responded about landscapes, but I forgot to include these examples of my use of the K-1-series articulated screen in Live View that I recently posted:

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/64279412

I often use Live View using the K-1-series articulated screen.

And you do it well. But given that you already decided to take these shots in the future with Canon gear, that still means you're not a data point against my statement that "the notion that K-7/5/3 legacy customers will leave in significant droves over the screen issue seems way overblown."

The best you could say is that the lack might be one factor out of several that would weigh against your buying a K-new. But, if I've understood you correctly, it's by far not the most significant one.

bob5050

I couldn't have achieved last night's back garden astrophotography star tracing videos without the fully articulated screen at a crazy angle on a short tripod. The angle also allowed me to see the LCD screen (through the back door window) progressing with 300 exposures and the red night vision LCD on to save power. Dew eventually ruined the last 1/3 exposures though on the big bulbous unheated Samyang 14mm f2.8 front element.

LiveView is essential for astrophotography as is the 16x magnification so I can get the focus exactly correct on a single star. Autofocus does not work for wide field astrophotography.

Try doing the above without LiveView and a fixed screen... Even the K1 or KP screens couldn't be positioned to what I needed last night.

The above is why I bought a K-70 and not a KP, I need a fully articulated screen.

The above is why K-new would be as useful as a glass hammer for me.

I also tried the Live Sync remote software last night with my new and first ever smart phone running Android 9 and it didn't crash so I'll be testing it out more and hopefully it will be good enough to use.... The remote LiveView screen is the best articulated screen available on a phone or tablet not attached to the camera.

Pentax could do the same trick as Canon did with the R5 and the R6. It could make two different K-new’ s with the same chassis. One with an articulated screen. Because people like to fantisize my question is: What will be the specs of the two models, or for what target clients could you make two different models ?

I really like those pictures Barry!

Nicely done!