Anastigmat

Lives in United States San Jose, CA, United States
Joined on Mar 27, 2004

Comments

Total: 338, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »

It is welcome competition not only to medium format cameras but also to the FF 35mm format. It would have been even better if Fujifilm found a way to reduce the bulk of the rear LCD, which seems to be the main reason for the depth of this camera. Hopefully more manufacturers, perhaps including Nikon and Canon, will bring out medium format mirrorless cameras of their own. Pentax will probably bring one out, because the 645 is simply too bulky in its current body with the mirror. Old lenses can be made to fit the new bodies by using a short extension tube.

Link | Posted on Sep 20, 2016 at 16:19 UTC as 96th comment | 1 reply

The new instant film will take off as well as a lead zeppelin.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 22:58 UTC as 12th comment | 2 replies

A mirrorless camera that seems to be about as deep as a SLR. Looks like they did not take full advantage of the design and reduce the lens flange to sensor distance. Nevertheless, the lack of mirror flap should contribute to sharper images, especially at slow shutter speeds.

Link | Posted on Sep 19, 2016 at 22:51 UTC as 119th comment | 1 reply
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (2078 comments in total)
In reply to:

photoshack: Being that I'd used Canon (largest investment, lots of lenses), Sony A7S II, Fuji X100S I have always gone back to FF Canon bodies. I don't care about GPS but could see why travel guys would need it, I don't care about Wireless (I had it, found it clunky and too slow to actually use and chewed battery.) Occasionally I use a Camranger on the Canon for wireless previews, long exposure but really that is more of a toy.

So while people are slamming Canon for its sticking with DSLR form-factor using that old mirror and being "big", I really don't see the problem...the others cannot compare when you are looking for the results. Granted I have looked at Nikons with some envy, but to me they are the real competitor not mirrorless consumer cameras.

So this IV seems like a good upgrade for those who need those features, and the extra MP and ISO range is very good.

Sony simply does not have the ability to make a mirror that flaps up and down fast enough for 10 fps or more. Canon and Nikon are the only camera makers who have the ability since they have been making pro cameras for over half a century. Sony's move to pellicle mirrors was less than a resounding success, and mirrorless is their next alternative. So, what does Sony fans claim? That the mirror is old fashioned and clunky.

If you can make a mirror fast enough for 10fps or more, then it ain't clunky. The format that benefits the most from mirrorless is medium format. The mirrors on those cameras are too large and they cause vibrations. Since few people shoot sports with a 1 fps medium format camera, and since removing the mirror reduces weight and the size of the camera, mirrorless medium format makes a lot more sense than mirrorless FF. Mirrorless APS-C also makes more sense than mirrorless FF.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 16:18 UTC
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (2078 comments in total)
In reply to:

woerd: This sure will be a very good drsl body. Unfortunately the camera concept with mirror is becoming old fashion and chunky. I owned a number of full frame drsl bodies from Canon but i changed to Sony (A7RII) and i never wanna go back.
My opinion: unless you are an action shooter you better choose the Sony for it's new technologies and image quality.

Problem with cameras like the A7RII is that there are very few lenses made for it. Using lens adapters defeats the advantage of compactness the camera and lenses specifically designed for it have. New lenses are also more expensive. Besides, long lenses designed for this camera aren't any shorter and they are in fact longer because the shorter lens flange to film plane distance of the camera means the missing extension has to be added to the lens. So if you carry several telephotos, they will all have extra length built into them. I guess it isn't a problem for most people who buy into mirrorless because they are unlikely to use long lenses, which are used mostly for wildlife and sports.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 16:09 UTC
On article Striding Forth: Canon EOS 5D Mark IV Review (2078 comments in total)

This camera is nice and capable, but manufacturers have to introduce cheaper FF bodies, ideally for less than $1,000 or the sales slump of DSLR cameras will continue. Most people already own an APS-C model or two, and those who don't can get one real cheap on the used market. The only real upgrade is FF, but the price is still too high for the budgets of most photographers.

Link | Posted on Aug 25, 2016 at 16:02 UTC as 366th comment | 1 reply
In reply to:

cdembrey: Android phone already outsell iPhones—why would Apple do anything to cut iPhone sales?? Short answer is that they wouldn't.

Apple fought the FBI in the past. Why would they now sell-out to them now?? @Brian Hedrick said: " They may have patented it for the sole purpose of PREVENTING it from being implemented." Sounds about right to me.

Lots of paranoia among the Apple HATERS.

Apple is trying to stop the bootlegging of music. They are planning to stay in the music streaming business. Heard that they are buying Jay Z's music streaming service Tidal. Tidal does not have a lot of customers but it has music found nowhere else. Apple is hoping to get into the business of exclusive content, content that other music streaming services won't have. If people can record and sell bootlegged music videos with the iPhone then they will lose exclusivity.

Link | Posted on Jul 5, 2016 at 06:17 UTC
In reply to:

Greg OH: I'll bet the cop who shot Walter Scott wishes he had this.
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/walter-scott-shooting/walter-scott-shooting-grand-jury-returns-murder-indictment-against-cop-n371626

Yup. They will send out signals to disable iPhones in the future when they are out on a job.

Link | Posted on Jul 5, 2016 at 06:11 UTC

That is one way to reduce iPhone sales.

Link | Posted on Jul 5, 2016 at 06:09 UTC as 12th comment
In reply to:

Anastigmat: I am glad somebody did the obvious and come out with a mirrorless medium format camera. The medium format requires a big mirror, and it reduces sharpness because of vibration caused by the mirror flopping up and down. It also makes the camera much heavier and deeper. Wide angle lenses are also less sharp because they need to be reverse telephotos. The main advantage of a mirror is that there is no delay which is very important when shooting sports. But since no one shoots sports with a 1 frame per second medium format camera, that is not an issue. Mirrorless medium format is definitely the future. Mirrorless 35mm won't be the future because of the need for 10 fps shooting.

One more way that mirrorless makes sense for medium format is that the pentaprism also weighs a lot. Getting rid of it lightens the camera even more.

Link | Posted on Jun 30, 2016 at 01:44 UTC
In reply to:

MustyMarie: Mirror-less may be the future, but small in hand I hope is NOT!! Some of us, not trump (small you know what too- yes brain!!), have big hands, those mirrorless Sony are just too small for my hands and not fun to use, plus the menus are not so great, ie - NOT ergonomic for many of us.

These H mirrorless look larger, maybe better for us with larger hands, be interesting to see how they are in real world use.

Mirrorless will shrink the depth dimension. It will not shrink the height or width of the cameras.

Link | Posted on Jun 30, 2016 at 01:43 UTC
In reply to:

Zvonimir Tosic: For those waiting for 'pancake' lenses for this Hassy; it won't happen. Ever. Unless you want it to be f22 pinhole-cap lens?

While marketing can fool you into .. "look kids, we have shrunk the flange distance: quickly go buy our camera now!" .. mood, they cannot distort the laws of optics same as they can twist our minds into the mirrorless fad.

Front element of any decent lens still nees to sit at a certain distance from the sensor, and there is no way around it. (Unless you want *&^_@ image quality).

Slim down the camera, but the lens must grow bigger then. Really good pancakes are a trait of the SLRs, not of the larger format mirrorless cameras. With mirrorless fad, you will get a slimmer camera body, but almost always some 'beer can' or 'tomato tin' of a lens.

PS. Check the Fuji 27mm/2.8 and Pentax DA40/2.8; Pentax lens is half the height of Fuji, and still there are no optical cheats in it; only but 100% tele-centricity.

We will likely see more compact wide angle lenses, because they can be made the same way that wide angles are made for rangefinder cameras like the Leica M series. They can stick their rear end into the camera body if necessary. We will likely see fisheye lenses for medium format cameras.

Link | Posted on Jun 30, 2016 at 01:42 UTC

I am glad somebody did the obvious and come out with a mirrorless medium format camera. The medium format requires a big mirror, and it reduces sharpness because of vibration caused by the mirror flopping up and down. It also makes the camera much heavier and deeper. Wide angle lenses are also less sharp because they need to be reverse telephotos. The main advantage of a mirror is that there is no delay which is very important when shooting sports. But since no one shoots sports with a 1 frame per second medium format camera, that is not an issue. Mirrorless medium format is definitely the future. Mirrorless 35mm won't be the future because of the need for 10 fps shooting.

Link | Posted on Jun 30, 2016 at 01:38 UTC as 6th comment | 1 reply

Ricoh should put its own brand name on some of the Pentax cameras. It was a pretty well liked brand when it was making Pentax K mount cameras in the past.

Link | Posted on Jun 13, 2016 at 18:23 UTC as 12th comment | 4 replies
On article UPDATED: CP+ 2016: shooting the Pentax K-1 in Yokohama (378 comments in total)

Long time Canon and Nikon users would almost certainly not switch to this camera. Pentax users who had recently converted to other brands to get their first full frame may contemplate coming back. First time buyers without a large lens collection may be attracted by the low price and wealth of features. Entry level full frames made by competitors just aren't as well built, moisture proof or feature rich.

Even if you are not planning to buy it yourself, you should be thankful that there is more competition. Nikon has a history of copying Pentax innovations and incorporating them into their own cameras (e.g. the LX's interchangeable prism system with hotshoe on the prism housing was copied by the Nikon F4). Prices on FF will likely drop. It is been artificially high for way too long due to lack of competition. If they keep dropping, we are going to see APS-C DSLR cameras disappear from the market and the only cameras that still use that sensor size will be mirrorless cameras.

Link | Posted on Mar 7, 2016 at 16:28 UTC as 13th comment | 1 reply
On article CP+ 2016: Pentax K-1 past and present (152 comments in total)
In reply to:

T3: That rear LCD articulation looks fantastic. Very innovative. I love it when companies are willing to try something new, and to break from the stodgy, conservative status quo.

Low angle shots can be done without lying on one's belly when using the LCD.

Link | Posted on Feb 27, 2016 at 20:54 UTC

Encouraging news. Sigma is inching towards full frame with the APS-H sensor. I think its SA lens mount can accomodate a FF sensor Let's hope it will introduce a FF DSLR in the future.

Link | Posted on Feb 26, 2016 at 00:28 UTC as 12th comment
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2660 comments in total)
In reply to:

Edgar_in_Indy: Can somebody please remind me why Canon and Nikon refuse to unshackle their sensors, and finally allow them to move?

Speaking of being "uninformed" (LOL), it is well known that inbody IS cannot be combined with in lens IS. Therefore Canon and Nikon would just incur more development and manufacturing cost if they add IS to their bodies, while at the same time lose the ability to charge more for their IS lenses. Tamron has recently added IS to its 90mm f/2.8 macro lens, in order to woo Nikon and Canon camera owners. Nikon and Canon users are not going to switch to Pentax or Sony because of in camera IS In fact, even when Nikon lacked a full frame, many Nikon users swear that they will stick with Nikon forever instead of buying a FF Canon. That means Nikon and Canon has nothing to lose and profits to gain if they refuse to add in camera IS.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2016 at 16:52 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2660 comments in total)
In reply to:

Edgar_in_Indy: Can somebody please remind me why Canon and Nikon refuse to unshackle their sensors, and finally allow them to move?

It is a marketing decision. They charge a lot to add stabilization to the lens If they add image stabilization to the body, then they won't be able to sell those image stabilized lenses.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2016 at 15:34 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2660 comments in total)
In reply to:

Tobi Wan Kenobi: Q1: What do Nikon D2-D5, D800/810, D750, D700, D600/610, D500, Df, D200/300, D7000-7200 DSLRs have in common? They ALL have aperture feelers to ensure full functionality in aperture priority and manual exposure mode with all classic AI(s) manual focus lenses (except for some exotic fisheye lenses that protrude into the mirror box).
Q2: What do ALL Pentax DSLRs, K-1 included, have in common? Answer: no aperture feeler. With lenses before KA-mount (classic K-mount SMC lenses before 1983 as well as, for instance, all Ricoh/"Rikenon" lenses), we're restricted to stop-down metering.
When I realized that, I became ... deeply disappointed, to say the least. Of course, if I was a Pentaxian, I would have known earlier. But isn't that a real shame? What a missed opportunity for the K-1. Does anyone else, apart from me, hope that the K-1 MkII will have that feature?

I have been griping about that for over a decade. Pentax's first DSLR was unfortunately based on a low end film camera body missing the aperture coupling ring in the body. Every Pentax camera ever made since then has lacked this ring, but Pentax has remedied this through software. You push a green button on the camera when using one of the old lenses and the camera stops down the lens and takes a meter reading. Yes it is less convenient to use. In fact it is a pain in the butt to use the camera this way. I wish Pentax would bring back the aperture coupling ring, but no dice. Not even the first full frame it has ever made.

Link | Posted on Feb 23, 2016 at 07:04 UTC
Total: 338, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12345Next ›Last »