On Feb 23, 2010, at 12:08 AM, Tom C wrote: > Hear that Pentax? No need to go higher, do R&D, develop new products > that keep up with the competition. > > Oh, you already knew that? Excuse me. > But thanks for helping make that clear. However, further advances in APS will be welcome. Paul
> Tom C. > > On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 9:51 PM, John Francis <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Don't know about Paul, but I cvertainly would. If I were shooting >> Nikon I wouldn't feel the need for a D3x; for Canon I wouldn't see >> any point in paying through the nose for a 1Ds Mark whatever. >> >> I buy cameras that will do the job I need, not because they are the >> (current) top-of-the-line. And 14Mp is more pixels than I need; >> in fact the K10D (and, occasionally, the good old *ist-D) have more >> than enough pixels for nearly anything I want. Buying a camera just >> because somebody has stuck a "flagship" label on it is ridiculous. >> >> >> >> On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 09:29:16PM -0700, Tom C wrote: >>> Paul, >>> >>> Respectfully, if Pentax came out with a 21MP or 24MP digital body in >>> FF similar to a Canon EOS 5D MKII or Nikon D3x in basic >>> specifications, are you saying you would not find or suspect it to be >>> a superior product to their current 14.6MP flagship? And that given >>> the option to go with what would likely be viewed as their top of the >>> line in the size factor, that you would choose a lesser model? >>> >>> Tom C. >>> >>> >>> On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 8:02 PM, paul stenquist <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>>> I have not intention of going FF. With my DA* lenses, the K7 delivers all >>>> the quality I need. I've been selling some 24 x 30 prints, and the detail >>>> and sharpness are excellent. I hope Pentax continues to play a lead role >>>> in APS format. Their lens development strategy indicates that this exactly >>>> what is planned. >>>> Paul >>>> On Feb 22, 2010, at 8:37 PM, Tom C wrote: >>>> >>>>> I understand exactly what Boris is saying. ?If a 35mm sensor is 1.5x >>>>> that of an APS-C sensor, then given the same pixel density, one can >>>>> expect a significant increase in resolution using a FF 35mm sensor >>>>> over an APS-C sensor. Many people already have the 35mm lenses. >>>>> >>>>> I don't buy the digital lens superiority over those that were made for >>>>> 35mm film systems. ?Maybe there are some benefits here and there, at >>>>> certain f-stops but I've been getting great results with FF lenses on >>>>> digital bodies. Yes I know it's with the sweet spot of the lens, and >>>>> yes I know about chromatic aberration and vignetting with FF, and of >>>>> course the noise issue with increased pixel count overall. ?As far as >>>>> I'm concerned those all are excuses made when when one doesn't have a >>>>> full FF body to offer to go along with a complement of FF lenses. >>>>> >>>>> There's a good reason why other mfrs have a FF body in their lineup. >>>>> Specifically, Nikon, Canon and Sony do not have a sensor to offer that >>>>> is > 35mm FF format. ?So the 35mm FF format allows their user base to >>>>> realize an increase in resolution over APS-C that is significant and >>>>> detectable in tests, using their existing lenses and presumed >>>>> purchases of new FF lenses. Those mfrs have not been unsuccessful with >>>>> these products. >>>>> >>>>> I wager if Pentax came out with a FF 35mm format body, virtually every >>>>> single person claiming they were perfectly satisfied with APS-C and >>>>> could afford it, would jump to FF, in much the same manner that many >>>>> did not need anything greater than a 6MP DSLR before there was >>>>> anything better offered by Pentax. >>>>> >>>>> Tom C. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 6:05 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> Nothing wrong with a bigger sensor and more pixels. >>>>>> >>>>>> That said, I have no urge to change from what I'm using now. At all. >>>>>> It's working fine for my photography. >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Godfrey >>>>>> godfreydigiorgi.posterous.com >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> 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. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> 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. >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 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. >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> 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. >> >> -- >> 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. >> > > -- > 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. -- 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.
