Pål, you missed just two elements in your analysis of the ideal (?) P-645:
1. In addition to the 35mm film insert, there should be a 35mm digital
insert. Later they can expand to a 645 digital insert as technology advances
and prices reduce.
2. Please, interchangable finders! Like the LX, with a similar range of
alternate finders.
Stan
on 3/25/01 2:22 PM, Pål Jensen at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Actually, they should make this camera into a multi-format camera. That means
> 6X4,5 + 35mm; the latter via 35mm film insert. You should also be able to
> mount the K-mount lenses onto this camera when using 35mm film insert. The
> adapter needed must include lens elements so that its possible to focus on the
> film plane. This element should be movable to counteract for vibration; an IS
> converter. There should be space for this due to the larger diameter of the
> 645 mount.
> This kind of hybrid camera no bigger than an EOS-1V or an F5 would be great.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Pål Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Sunday, March 25, 2001 5:14 PM
> Subject: Introducing the Pentax 645S
>
>
>> Relax, it's just wishful thinking. Its just another contribution to my wish
>> list.
>>
>> I want a Pentax 645 camera broadly along the lines of the MZ-S.
>>
>> It should be more compact than the 645n. At a first look its hard to imagine
>> how this could be done. However, The distance from the lens mount to the film
>> plane is only about 60% of the total lenght of the body. Hence, theres
>> potential for shortening the overall lenght of the body by at least 30%.
>> This can be done by letting the film go into the camera instead of into the
>> back like now. The distance between the bottom of the mirror box to the
>> bottom plate of the camera is almost large enough to fit a film roll;
>> likewise on the top of the camera; only a slight increase in height should be
>> neccesery. Some redesign of the finder system is probably needed but much can
>> be achieved with eg. mirrors.
>>
>> The camera body is also wider that it has to be. This is because the shutter
>> mechanism is placed at sides of the mirror box. By removing the shutter
>> mechanism from these areas and rather use some space here for thin circuitry
>> boards, I would estimate that the width can be reduced by about 5%. Instead
>> the camera can use a shutter where only the shutter plane extends into the
>> camera house proper; the shutter mechanism will then be located to the grip
>> section. On the 645n this area is open space.
>>
>> If Pentax could manage to reduce power consumption down to MZ-S level, then
>> it could use the same type of batteries as the MZ-S, thereby saving the space
>> six AA batteries occupies in the 645n. An add-on AA batery pack could then be
>> offered like for the MZ-S.
>>
>> It should also adopt the MZ-S feature set and use magnesium outer panels. Add
>> some ultra compact medium format lenses to this outfit and you would have a
>> winner....and Pentax, don't forget mirror-lock (or prefire).
>>
>> I can esily visualize this camera. It will be significantly smaller than the
>> EOS1 and F5 and still be full featured. Is it possible? I think so. The
>> electronics shouldn't take more space than on the MZ-S. The shutter
>> mecahanism can be located in the grip section.
>>
>> Pål
>>
>>
>
>
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
