walgarch

Lives in Australia Australia
Joined on Oct 9, 2013

Comments

Total: 27, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »

Why did they have to call it "classic"? It just reminds me of the disaster that New Coke was :P

Link | Posted on Oct 19, 2017 at 01:22 UTC as 69th comment | 1 reply
On article The Nikon D850 could be the only DSLR you’ll ever need (1100 comments in total)

"The Nikon D850 could be the only DSLR you’ll ever need"

... until the next one comes out :P

Link | Posted on Sep 27, 2017 at 03:22 UTC as 101st comment
On article Report: Ricoh announcing cost cuts in face of crisis (326 comments in total)
In reply to:

Class A: It would behove DPRreview well to provide a more differentiated and balanced picture. Otherwise, mostly negative news could contribute to the decline of a classic camera brand (Pentax), not because Ricoh wouldn't be able to manage, but because customers have been driven away from Ricoh due to scary news.

The implied prophecy of Ricoh being in major trouble (they are not, they just made less profit then before) may actually materialise, just because it has been made and purported by popular websites.

I completely agree, but this is also Ricoh/Pentax marketing at it's worst. They need to get ahead of this, but instead they let Nikkei and photography news sites imaginations run wild. Hype up your products, announce new initiatives, send out those press releases, announce to the world the company is doing something with Pentax! Just don't sit on your hands!

When there is a void of feedback from a company, people will naturally fill in the gap with their biases.

Link | Posted on Jul 21, 2017 at 02:58 UTC
On article Report: Ricoh announcing cost cuts in face of crisis (326 comments in total)

Sad news really, but I assume that's why companies diversify. If Ricoh's office equipment division isn't as profitable as it once was, perhaps they'll start investing more in their camera divisions?

I don't think this report is all doom and gloom

Link | Posted on Jun 20, 2017 at 08:01 UTC as 41st comment | 4 replies
In reply to:

walgarch: Seriously guys, how long have people been saying Pentax is doomed? We're at 'the boy who cried wolf' levels now. The camera market has been a mess for years now, and Pentax has stuck around. I'm really not sure what kind of proof you guys need anymore lol

This is getting out of hand, but whatever, I'll bite...

Just a couple of questions:
What other camera maker's cameras use the k-mount? If a camera brand has exclusive access to a mount is it essentially theirs?

Also, using tech companies as a reference is misleading and frankly setting up another strawman. You're also basically arguing that selling a company means it's dying (Pentax to Hoya then to Ricoh), but that's a bad inference because companies get sold all the time and by that reasoning WhatsApp should also be dying

Though you're right about Pentax being a brand name, even though I never said it wasn't...

You still haven't given any solid reasons why Pentax is dying though? Profit and marketshare are topics that Pentax is struggling with; could be a good place to start?

Link | Posted on Apr 18, 2017 at 01:53 UTC
In reply to:

walgarch: Seriously guys, how long have people been saying Pentax is doomed? We're at 'the boy who cried wolf' levels now. The camera market has been a mess for years now, and Pentax has stuck around. I'm really not sure what kind of proof you guys need anymore lol

@DPPMetro I don't think he does. The arguement that Pentax is a brand is true, but it's also a strawman arguement. Whether Pentax is a brand or not is not a question here.

My original point is that Pentax has stuck around, even with all the naysayers. ET2 counters with Pentax is a brand and HASN'T stuck around. I counter that argument with Pentax is the k-mount (which at it's essence it is, it's been the k-mount since 1975 and hasn't been shared with any other camera maker). ET2 counters with Pentax is a brand.

ET2's main assertion is that Pentax hasn't stuck around. I'm asserting it has since the 1970's because someone is still making k-mount cameras and lenses as recently as the KP and K1. So which is truer? That Pentax hasn't "stuck around", or that there was a camera released this year (the KP) and a FF camera and lenses released last year?

Link | Posted on Apr 17, 2017 at 02:19 UTC
In reply to:

walgarch: Seriously guys, how long have people been saying Pentax is doomed? We're at 'the boy who cried wolf' levels now. The camera market has been a mess for years now, and Pentax has stuck around. I'm really not sure what kind of proof you guys need anymore lol

@ET2 And yet we have the just-released KP, the K1 from last year, new FF lenses and new lenses on the roadmap. Pentax is the K-Mount, no matter who it's sold to. It's not dead till it's dead, and all this pessimism is just ridiculous. Ricoh is giving the k-mount a damn good go!

Link | Posted on Apr 14, 2017 at 09:53 UTC

Seriously guys, how long have people been saying Pentax is doomed? We're at 'the boy who cried wolf' levels now. The camera market has been a mess for years now, and Pentax has stuck around. I'm really not sure what kind of proof you guys need anymore lol

Link | Posted on Apr 13, 2017 at 00:51 UTC as 45th comment | 15 replies
In reply to:

Peter Bendheim: "In January 2016, the F.A.A. issued a warning that lithium-ion batteries in a cargo hold carried the “risk of a catastrophic hull loss” on an airplane."

Source New York Times, September 11, 2016

This was pretty much my exact same thought. So what are people to do instead? Check in your electronics and carry on the lithium-ion batteries?... Do they even realise it's the batteries that are the actual dangerous things in most electronics

Can't get your travel ban, so gotta find some other avenue to get your "win"

Link | Posted on Mar 21, 2017 at 22:29 UTC

I'd love to see this in a Pentax K mount. I wouldn't mind upgrading my existing Tamron 70-200 to one with a silent motor and weather resistance

Link | Posted on Feb 7, 2017 at 04:11 UTC as 33rd comment | 9 replies
In reply to:

Suave: Should we expect the Firefly version to have life expectancy of 2 years?

Only if you encounter a Fox

Link | Posted on Sep 7, 2016 at 10:53 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2674 comments in total)
In reply to:

Smaug01: A really well-balanced review, as usual. Nice job, guys.

@Rishi

Also Rishi, I kind of take offence that you would think I'm trying to make you guys look bad. Have a look back at my comments and you'll see I'm a pretty positive guy. Not everyone here is trying to make you look bad, and most pentaxians realise that every camera has it's short comings.

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 07:30 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2674 comments in total)
In reply to:

Smaug01: A really well-balanced review, as usual. Nice job, guys.

@Rishi

"single point continuous autofocus seemed to be the most effective way to utilize the AF system found on the K-1, but even that failed about half of the time during our AF bike test"

I'd never knowingly deceive anyone, but you're quite right. I misspoke, the 50% success rate was from AF-C not AF-S.

I still stand by my original assertion though. A 50% success rate is extremely low, even with AF-C, and goes against my experience with the camera

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 06:53 UTC
On article Special K? Pentax K-1 Review (2674 comments in total)
In reply to:

Smaug01: A really well-balanced review, as usual. Nice job, guys.

I'd have to agree! The mood of the review is pretty positive. Sad that the guys had trouble when reviewing the AF. 50% keep rate on AF-S is horrible! I've never had that happen on my K1

Link | Posted on Jul 6, 2016 at 03:45 UTC
On article D500 owner formally accuses Nikon of false advertising (473 comments in total)
In reply to:

Cultured Vulture: Good, I can sue Sony for their claim that the A6300 has the "Worlds Fastest Autofocus" Only problem is it's only in an extremely narrow set of circumstances. I can claim damages because I bought one to shoot dog agility events and it's not the fastest at all.

Still seems misleading on the website

Link | Posted on Jun 18, 2016 at 11:24 UTC
In reply to:

whakapu: Ya gotta love Pentax. They're the anti-Canon. Where Canon's first thought is "how can we hobble this camera so it won't take sales from the next model up in our range" Pentax just seem to think "what else can we cram in this puppy". Why would you buy a K3II now? Pop-up flash, flippy screen, smaller form, hybrid AF, more advanced SR, more compact, possibly better noise reduction, and lower price against top screen, faster shooting and maybe better build. Pentax don't seem to care which we buy.

I think Pentax's modus operandi is to make a great camera and if it's better value than one of it's higher end cameras, then it updates that high end camera to make it worthwhile too.

I wouldn't be surprised if there was a K3II replacement in the works. Fingers crossed we get to see it before/at Photokina :D

Link | Posted on Jun 9, 2016 at 00:34 UTC
On article Pentax K-1 Pixel Shift Resolution: Updated Field Test (212 comments in total)
In reply to:

m43ismoretroublethanitsworth: As far as the bundled SilkyPix software; I used it over the course of 4 years on 4 computers and it is slow, in addition to being cumbersome. The fact that Lightroom doesn't handle Pixel shift properly, is more evidence that the technology just is not beneficial.

"The fact that Lightroom doesn't handle Pixel shift properly, is more evidence that the technology just is not beneficial."

Maybe not for the photography you care about, but I think you'd find some product and architectural photographers who would disagree

Link | Posted on Jun 8, 2016 at 03:31 UTC
On article Waterfails: We test Pentax K-1's Pixel Shift (225 comments in total)

This test has legitimacy, but unfortunately the methodology is flawed.

There are going to be landscape photographers who are interested in this feature and it will influence their possible purchase.

Too bad ACR was used to do RAW conversion. It's obvious that it can't apply motion correction correctly. This flaw has been pointed out on various occasions in various posts and even in TheCameraStoreTV's review of the K-1 ( https://youtu.be/87yGmD71nyA?t=13m6s ) I would've hoped that DPR would be more thorough in this regard instead of giving the impression that pixel shift artefacts are more pronounced and ugly than they really are. And to also point out that applying motion correction via Pentax's silkypix program provides better motion correction than through the in camera JPEG conversion.

The cynic in me thinks the damage is already done and that people will assume pixel shift is not worth it; the optimist in me hope that Adobe will actually support Pentax features more thoroughly

Link | Posted on Jun 1, 2016 at 01:29 UTC as 68th comment | 2 replies
On article Hands-on with the Pentax K-3 II (535 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike FL: So, K-3.2 uses same sensor as old K3. Well let's see how dated K3 sensor vs Fiji's old/lowest-end Fuji X-A1:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=lowlight&attr13_0=pentax_k3&attr13_1=fujifilm_xa1&attr13_2=fujifilm_xt1&attr13_3=fujifilm_xe2&attr15_0=jpeg&attr15_1=jpeg&attr15_2=jpeg&attr15_3=jpeg&attr16_0=12800&attr16_1=12800&attr16_2=12800&attr16_3=12800&normalization=print&widget=75&x=0.07533055257188802&y=0.512815730723348

Not good.

"What you are trying to say is that Pentax does not know how to make a decent JPEG engine. Fair enough!"

I'm making two points:

1. The Pentax JPEG conversion algorithm isn't that great
2. Your argument is critically flawed because you want to compare sensor performance but instead compare JPEG conversion

Nice try at going off on a tangent

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2015 at 07:08 UTC
On article Hands-on with the Pentax K-3 II (535 comments in total)
In reply to:

Mike FL: So, K-3.2 uses same sensor as old K3. Well let's see how dated K3 sensor vs Fiji's old/lowest-end Fuji X-A1:

http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/image-comparison/fullscreen?attr18=lowlight&attr13_0=pentax_k3&attr13_1=fujifilm_xa1&attr13_2=fujifilm_xt1&attr13_3=fujifilm_xe2&attr15_0=jpeg&attr15_1=jpeg&attr15_2=jpeg&attr15_3=jpeg&attr16_0=12800&attr16_1=12800&attr16_2=12800&attr16_3=12800&normalization=print&widget=75&x=0.07533055257188802&y=0.512815730723348

Not good.

Oh wow, a JPEG comparison. Something that has wholly to do with software conversion instead of sensor performance.

Link | Posted on Apr 23, 2015 at 06:16 UTC
Total: 27, showing: 1 – 20
« First‹ Previous12Next ›Last »