I only use that example because I just read it this evening. Not because it was my original source.
P. J. Alling wrote: > Did you actually read the current Modern Photograpy review. I'll > paraphrase they found that it had impressive built in anti noise > software. You're mistaking firmware with physics. > > Adam Maas wrote: > >> I have been paying attention and you obviously haven't. You're talking >> about the older 10+MP bodies (K10D, D2X, D200, D80, D40X, A100) with >> last-generation CCD or CMOS sensors. The new 10/12MP CMOS sensors >> introduced in the last month or so ( in the D300, 40D, and A700) have >> massively improved high ISO performance achieved at the sensor, not by >> processing (The Sony A700, which is the one I've had a chance to look at >> seriously, produces results at ISO 6400 that is about as good as a K10D >> at 1600). >> >> This is the same sensor tech that gives the D3 2+ stops of noise >> advantage over the 5D at the same pixel density. >> >> -Adam >> >> >> P. J. Alling wrote: >> >> >>> I'm sorry, haven't you been paying attention. Every review I've read >>> that doesn't gloss over high ISO performance mentions the loss of detail >>> at high ISO in the 10+ mp bodies. Pentax simply doesn't offer 3200 ISO >>> on the K10D, makes you wonder why. Well maybe you don't and I don't but >>> for different reasons. I know why and you think it isn't so. All the >>> other manufactures are using advanced software algorithms to reduce >>> noise and maintain detail. The limits already being reached, you can use >>> software to mask it, you can pretend it isn't here, but that just >>> doesn't change the facts. >>> >>> Adam Maas wrote: >>> >>> >>>> P. J. Alling wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> What you need, and what Pentax needs to do, are two different things. >>>>> Try this on for size "If I could get that kind of performance without >>>>> SR, I wouldn't need SR." You probably won't acknowledge that that >>>>> statement makes as much sense as your argument. Yet that's converse of >>>>> your argument, and just as valid. They both make equal sense from a >>>>> personal stand point. >>>>> >>>>> There is one immutable fact. Image quality will degrade as sensor >>>>> densities increase beyond a certain point. That's simple physics. Pentax >>>>> has pretty much reached that point. Nikon had as well. This degradation >>>>> can b/e //ameliorated /with software, but at a price. In the case of >>>>> Pentax, noise that was massaged to make it look more film like. Nikon >>>>> was more aggressive and sacrificed detail. Nikon knew they were at the >>>>> limit so they stepped around it with a larger sensor, (something that >>>>> they were always planning to do). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Pentax certainly hasn't reached that point. The new crop bodies from >>>> Nikon, Sony and Canon indicate that the limit was far higher than >>>> previously thought (the 40D matches the 5D's high ISO performance, the >>>> D300 appears to have even better high ISO performance, the A700 is in >>>> the same ballpark). Sure, FF is always going to have an advantage, but >>>> current-gen cropped bodies are already exceeding what was current for FF >>>> performance in August. What was unachievable 6 months ago for >>>> crop-sensor high ISO performance is about to become the norm. FF isn't a >>>> holy grail and I don't see Pentax doing it until they can do a $999 FF >>>> body, which isn't anytime soon. Pentax isn't competing with the 5D market. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> I know what you think you need, but what does Pentax need? Well they >>>>> need two things market share and profits. Pentax probably cannot be the >>>>> number one manufacture any time soon, (don't say never, Canon wasn't >>>>> always number one, but I'll be realistic). Being number two is also >>>>> unlikely, (as I said realistic), but being number three is doable. >>>>> That's what they have to aim for and to do that they pretty much have to >>>>> fight Olympus and Sony. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> True. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> The current Olympus system is based on the 4:3 system. Why hasn't >>>>> Olympus brought out their new Pro body? Because the image sensor is >>>>> giving them fits, that's why. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Actually, they solved that with the E-510/E-410 bodies, which match the >>>> midrange crop bodies in high-ISO performance. And that's before they >>>> look at adding the improvements Sony, Nikon and Canon have found which >>>> look to improve high ISO noise by 2 or more stops. They'll never match >>>> FF, and will ahve a hard time matching APS-C, but they certainly are at >>>> the point where high ISO noise is adequately controlled. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> High ISO quality is lacking due to noise >>>>> at increased pixel density. Everyone else involved with the 4:3 system >>>>> is in the same boat, these cameras will be high end consumer grade from >>>>> here on, nothing more, (no matter how expensive Leica's versions are), >>>>> no matter what Olympus markets their new high end body as, partly >>>>> because the FF Nikon has raised the bar, and partly because of their >>>>> inherent limitations. Olympus has decided to compete with small camera >>>>> size with "reasonable" picture quality at low to medium ISO first, and >>>>> gimmicks like "Live View" second. (Of course Canon can match that >>>>> gimmick any time they feel like it, I know some will say it's not a >>>>> gimmick, but it is, really, just think about it). >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Nobody other than Nikon, Canon and Sony have the resources necessary to >>>> compete in the pro FF market. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> . >>>>> Sony has been slow up to now because they are feeling things out, they >>>>> are probably still integrating the K/M engineers and project managers >>>>> into Sony's culture. Sony sales managers insist on the cameras being >>>>> profitable, and they are milking the old K/M system as much as possible. >>>>> However they know to maintain and increase their market share they will >>>>> have to match the big boys, and that means a FF body, (as far as I know >>>>> they don't even make any reduced frame lenses), so look for a FF body >>>>> soon. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Dunno about that, Sony as a company has not been particularly >>>> competetive in consumer electronics of late. They're relying too much on >>>> branding and not enough on providing superior product for good prices. >>>> Their last bastion of dominance was gaming systems and they've been >>>> pushed into distant third their by MS and Nintendo. The pricing on the >>>> A700 shows that Sony still doesn't get it, Canon's higher-performance >>>> 40D has a $100USD lower MSRP. And this in a market where Canon is the >>>> Big Dog. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> That means that Pentax will have to get a FF body to keep from becoming >>>>> locked in a contest for 4th place with Olympus and the 4:3 system.. Hoya >>>>> will probably not like the odds at that point. They too are interested >>>>> in the camera line being profitable. If it isn't, and shows no signs of >>>>> becoming so, that's all there will be. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Profitable and large market share are not inherently linked. See Apple >>>> Computer or BMW for details. Pentax is filling a market niche that Sony, >>>> Nikon and Canon are all ignoring to some extent. Small, fast, and good >>>> glass is being ignored by all the other makers. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> The market Pentax plays in is mutable. Four years ago the *ist-D sold >>>>> for $1600.00 The least expensive FF was the Kodak DCS 14n available for >>>>> about $4000.00. Today the Kodak is gone and you can buy a Canon 5D for >>>>> $3000, and the K10D is considered by many, (not just Pentaxians), to be >>>>> semi pro competition for mid range Nikons and Canons, thought it sells >>>>> for the price of an expensive consumer DSLR. Oh yes and 6 to 8mp >>>>> consumer grade DSLRs can be had for 1/2 what a consumer SLR cost just a >>>>> couple of years ago, and what an expensive P&S sells for now. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Things seem to be settling out. The price brackets have essentially been >>>> stable for the last 2 years, certainly since the DL was introduced. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> Notice that I didn't mention megapixels much, well lets talk about them >>>>> briefly. 6mp sensors in DSLRs are now more or less dead, (like the >>>>> dinosaurs of my youth, you could kill one but it would take some time >>>>> for that knowledge to get to it's brain through it's gigantic body, >>>>> today's dinosaurs are different, much smarter and more active but I >>>>> digress). Sure 6mp cameras are just as capable as they were before, but >>>>> from a marketing standpoint they are history. So are 8mp cameras. Pentax >>>>> will probably start upgrading everything in January, they have to, to >>>>> remain competitive, (the K100D super was a stopgap with easy to >>>>> implement upgrades). The megapixel wars, silly as they may seem, are on, >>>>> and image quality will require bigger sensors, not just more megapixels >>>>> and Pentax will have to compete there or become an also ran, then to >>>>> take the Dinosaur analogy in whole different direction, extinct. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> 6MP is dead outside the bargain market. There will be a 10MP K100 >>>> variant, I'm sure. And Pentax has made room for a model above the K10D >>>> in the sub-$1000 market. I don't see Pentax aggressively trying to move >>>> upmarket, at least not until they have a better handle on the >>>> low/midrange market. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> > > > -- Remember, it’s pillage then burn. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
