Hey Rob (and others that responded to my email (thanks), ----- Original Message ----- From: "Rob Brigham" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, October 17, 2002 12:27 PM Subject: RE: Pentax annonces digital SLR > Me for one! BTW, the price quoted on imaging resource is $1600US. > > I personally might buy the first model, and then just sit tight until > the ultimate model is released which fits my purposes better. I ideally > want a body exactly the same as the MZ-S, but with a 'swivellable' > screen on the back and a full frame sensor. The MZ-D I would possibly > have bought out of sheer madness and irresistable stupidity as it is way > bigger than I would ultimately like. I don't even use the BG-10. I > doubt if even the second Pentax DSLR will fit my bill, so I will > probably jum on with the initial 'cheapie' and wait till things settle, > probably in 3(or possibly 2)-5 years time.
Wow, you seem to have a lot of money! When you upgrade can you give the older one to me? :-) I cannot afford one DSLR (and personally don't need one) but I would be excited by it! I have some money I want to put towards either the FA 20-35mm or a manual focus fixed telephoto 300 ~ 500mm, but am afraid these along with what I have will not be compatible with a future DSLR. > > Will it keep going up? How high? A ISO6400 colour print with > > the grain of a Velvia or Provia 100 F? > > This is one area where digital is currently poor - high ISO noise is far > worse than film, such that most wont let you go past 800-1000, some wont > even go above 400. That is unfortunate, I quite often use 3200 b/w pushed to 6400. How does that affect the really slow films? Like the (old?) Kodachrome 25, 64, Fugi Velvia 50, etc? Or is the problem only in the higher end? So excuse my ignorance, but what exactly do you mean by 'noise'? I know in my Optio manual that they say I will have more noise if I set it at ISO 200. Does noise refer to (for lack of a better word) c**p in your photos or is it an audible sound? I cannot tell on my Optio the difference between 100 and 200 (the only choices). > > does the sensor size matter? APS, > > full-frame, etc? I've read some of the posts on this and you > > guys are just way over my head in this area, lots of > > scientific stuff. (ok, sorry, that was a bunch of questions in one) > > Quite simple really, a smaller sensor means that all of your lenses > become longer eg by a factor of 1.5. Thus your 24mm wide angle becomes > a 36mm which is no good for me. Therefore you have to buy super wide > angles like Sigma's 14mm to get a 20. I am glad I have a 17-35mm zoom! > That will give me a 24ish with the new APS size sensor. Of course this > is actually GOOD at the long end - a 300mm becomes a 450mm which is > excellent for motorsports or wildlife etc. This is why it is 'long > lens' photography ratehr than landscapes etc which has really adopted > digital as the norm. Thank You! Finally, I realize what the fuss is about. I thought, geez, what does size matter? (don't read anything into that :)), but I can see how important that is really is. I think then that I will do anything serious with my existing equipment until it becomes expensive or a hassle to shoot film. I'd hope by that time there would be a really nice DSLR for me to use. Regards, Brad Dobo
