Remember that while MF lenses deliver lower lpmm in most cases, they're delivering that slightly lower resolution to a much larger sensor/negative, for more effective resolution.
-Adam Jack Davis wrote: > Haven't been reading that much of the "..More news" thread, but noted a > reference to 645D lenses as "giving the best" and I gather that was in > reference to image. There was a time when MF lenses lacked the > resolving power of 35mm. A desired 'creamy' wedding look was offered as > the reason. > Suppose that remains a consideration in the manufacture of MF lenses? > > Jack > > > --- DagT <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >>The Nikon-people are saying the same, but that does not make it >>right. >> >>Remember that the requirements made by the FF sensor makes lot of the >>Canon lenses useless (at least in vignetting, edge sharpness..), so >>you have to add new lenses to the cost. >> >>If I had to change many of my lenses anyway I'd rather have a cropped >>645D. You get the best from the lenses and you get an even larger >>sensor. >> >>DagT >> >> >>>Fra: "P. J. Alling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> >>>I'm broke right now, but even I don't see that as a huge price. >> >>What >> >>>would you have expected to pay for a FF 35mm DSLR even three years >> >>ago. >> >>>I think the Kodak DCS cameras were about $6000. Which was about >> >>half >> >>>the price of the equivalent Canon? While imaging chips are >> >>probably not >> >>>going to halve in price in the next three years, they may fall by >>>another 1/3 with a savings in the support hardware, (the rest of >> >>the >> >>>camera that is), of maybe 50% being not unreasonable. We, (yes the >> >>>royal we), could postulate that a FF DSLR would be selling for less >> >>that >> >>>$2000.00. Maybe around say $1600.00. How many on this list paid >> >>that >> >>>much for their *ist-D. Pentax will have to build one, just to >> >>compete. >> >>>If they can't they're doomed anyway, and I think they know it. >>> >>>Paul Stenquist wrote: >>> >>> >>>>Only the Canon pro cameras are full frame. None sell for less than >> >>>>$3000. >>>>On Aug 8, 2006, at 1:57 AM, P. J. Alling wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>After Pentax killed the MZ-D/MR-52 in IIRC 2003 there were people >> >>on >> >>>>>this list who predicted that Pentax would never introduce a >> >>Digital SLR >> >>>>>that they would be film forever. The *ist-D was announced, what >> >>within >> >>>>>a year, in peoples hands in less than 1 1/2 years. Canon has >> >>managed >> >>>>>to >>>>>bring the cost of a FF DSLR into the realm of mere mortals. If >> >>Pentax >> >>>>>can get a FF sensor and build a camera for a price that they feel >> >>is >> >>>>>competitive they will build it. Personally I think that Canon's >>>>>propaganda machine is good enough that FF 35mm format will remain >> >>the >> >>>>>holy grail of DSLR development, (not that they don't have a >> >>point). >> >>>>>Pentax will either have one within the next 3-4 years, (1.3 crop >> >>is >> >>>>>close enough for government work), be a name on a Samsung >> >>product, or >> >>>>>be >>>>>out of the Camera business. This is especially so if the 645D >> >>has >> >>>>>limited sales success. If I'm right, (and I hope I am, not about >> >>the >> >>>>>645D but about the FF sensor), I'll send you a bottle of Tabasco. >>>>> >>>>>Paul Stenquist wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>The *ist was a stopgap film camera. No one considered it a top >> >>of the >> >>>>>>line offering. I will eat this message if Pentax releases a 1.3 >> >>or >> >>>>>>full-frame camera. It ain't gonna happen. >>>>>>Paul >>>>>>On Aug 7, 2006, at 9:57 PM, P. J. Alling wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>>It was sold as the new top of the line, and in most respects >> >>had, at >> >>>>>>>least for Pentax top of the line specifications. The MZ-S was >> >>the >> >>>>>>>Flagship but was soon discontinued anyway. The *ist >> >>effectively >> >>>>>>>replaced the MZ-S the MZ3/ZX5n MZ-6/ZX-L etc. Don't forget the >> >>green >> >>>>>>>button Kludge on the *ist-D didn't come along until there was a >>>>>>>wave of >>>>>>>protest from Pentax's user base in Japan, (and here, but >> >>Japanese >> >>>>>>>users >>>>>>>are what Pentax probably really cared about). I have no doubt >> >>that >> >>>>>>>Pentax will change sensors as soon as it makes economic sense >> >>to do >> >>>>>>>so. >>>>>>>If a 1.3 crop or full frame 35mm sensor is released next week >> >>with a >> >>>>>>>price/quality ratio that makes economic sense. Don't doubt >> >>that >> >>>>>>>those >>>>>>>DA lenses will be suddenly obsolete. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Paul Stenquist wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>The film *ist was a limited offering aimed at newbie amateurs. >> >>It >> >>>>>>>>was built for use with consumer zooms. It wasn't likely that >> >>many >> >>>>>>>>would want to use it with pre-A lenses. >>>>>>>>Paul >>>>>>>>On Aug 7, 2006, at 6:45 PM, P. J. Alling wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>They've never screwed with their customers like that before. >>>>>>>>>Well not >>>>>>>>>until the introduction of the *ist Film and Digital >> >>introduction >> >>>>>>>>>that >>>>>>>>>is. Try to meter with a pre-A lens on the film *ist and let >> >>me >> >>>>>>>>>know how >>>>>>>>>that works for ya. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Aaron Reynolds wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>On Aug 5, 2006, at 7:35 AM, Mark Roberts wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>And encourage us to buy new lenses? Gosh, no! >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>I just can't see it. They've never screwed with the >> >>customer like >> >>>>>>>>>>that >>>>>>>>>>before. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Plus, their pro commitment is still to medium format. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>-Aaron >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>-- >>>>>>>>>When you're worried or in doubt, >>>>>>>>> Run in circles, (scream and shout). >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>-- >>>>>>>>>PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>>>>>>>[email protected] >>>>>>>>>http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >> > === message truncated === > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
