Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
William Robb wrote: Lets see, to get an angle of view that is more or less the same as the 15mm f/3.5 (the widest rectilinear that Pentax makes for 35mm), they would need to make a 10mm lens. I really have my doubts that this is feasable with the 45 or so mm flange to focal plane distance that the K mount has. Sigma have already made a full-frame 12-24mm zoom - a 10mm prime sounds tricky but not impossible in my decidedly unexpert opinion :-) S
Re[2]: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
From: Steve Jolly [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sigma have already made a full-frame 12-24mm zoom - a 10mm prime sounds tricky but not impossible in my decidedly unexpert opinion :-) Have you used it? Neither have I. Mostly, because I haven't seen a single review, saying that it's any good at 12mm. Jeez, take a 20/4, put a digicam's wide angle converter on it -- bang! - problem solved. Mishka
Re: Re[2]: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
- Original Message - From: Mike Ignatiev Subject: Re[2]: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena From: Steve Jolly [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sigma have already made a full-frame 12-24mm zoom - a 10mm prime sounds tricky but not impossible in my decidedly unexpert opinion :-) Have you used it? Neither have I. Mostly, because I haven't seen a single review, saying that it's any good at 12mm. Jeez, take a 20/4, put a digicam's wide angle converter on it -- bang! - problem solved. I think the whole idea is to get some sort of quality image as well. 10mm focal length is a surprisingly large jump from 12mm. William Robb
Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
- Original Message - From: Steve Jolly Subject: Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena It was in the 21st Feb issue of Amateur Photographer (UK), so I'm afraid there isn't a link to give you. They printed MTF graphs for five different focal lengths. At 12mm, the resolution (if you define it as the number of lppm that the lens can resolve with a contrast of 0.5) was 27 lppm wide-open, and 30 lppm closed down two stops. From the text of the review: Corner-of-frame sharpness at 12mm and full aperture (f4.5) is good on subject main features, with fine detail improving at three stops down to a very high standard. For some reason, people seem to think that a really wide angle lens should be (can be) as sharp as a normal or short telephoto macro lens. Thsi ain't the case, however, and the longer the lens flange to focal plane distance is, the harder it is to get a good design. If the Stigma is half assed good at 12mm, then they have done well. William Robb
Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
On 17 Mar 2004 at 18:54, John Forbes wrote: That's true. But manufacturers have to take a bet on what they think the market will want, and plan accordingly. No one in their right mind could possibly have wanted a digital camera with a less than full frame sensor which needed new lenses for wide angle work. I'm glad they didn't see fit to change the film format size each time they introduced a K mount film body. Of course sensor cost contributed to their decision to us an APS sized sensor but why try to make it a permanent fixture. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
On 17 Mar 2004 at 18:54, John Forbes wrote: That's true. But manufacturers have to take a bet on what they think the market will want, and plan accordingly. No one in their right mind could possibly have wanted a digital camera with a less than full frame sensor which needed new lenses for wide angle work. I'm glad they didn't see fit to change the film format size each time they introduced a K mount film body. Of course sensor cost contributed to their decision to us an APS sized sensor but why try to make it a permanent fixture. You could make exactly the same arguments against switching to 35mm instead of sticking with medium format. But that happened anyway. Nobody ever claimed that 35mm was in every way as good as 120 or 220. But it was plenty good enough for most purposes (and, in fact, superior for some aspects of photography), and a whole lot more convenient. There's no real reason that a digital camera has to share the frame size of any particular film-based camera. It's convenient to be able to use those K-mount lenses, but 24x36mm is not an immutable law of photography.
Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
You are very unhappy about the APS sensor size, and I sympathise with your feelings on the subject. However, I think you are letting your emotions blind you to the reality that Pentax is now committed to that size, and there is very little prospect of a change. If they really expected to be producing full frame sensor SLRs in a year or two's time they wouldn't start making APS sized lenses now. You are also trying to convince yourself that APS sensors are not capable of higher pixel density. That is not an argument you can sustain. Sony's new camera has an 8 Mpixel output, but uses a sensor that is vastly smaller than APS. They have managed to extract eight times as many pixels per sq mm from this sensor than from the *ist D's sensor. It is therefore not at all unlikely that we will be seeing 20 or 30 Mpixels from an APS sized sensor in just a few year's time, and this discussion will, in retrospect, sound like that of old timers saying the horseless carriage would never catch on. John On Thu, 18 Mar 2004 08:49:41 +1000, Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 17 Mar 2004 at 18:54, John Forbes wrote: That's true. But manufacturers have to take a bet on what they think the market will want, and plan accordingly. No one in their right mind could possibly have wanted a digital camera with a less than full frame sensor which needed new lenses for wide angle work. I'm glad they didn't see fit to change the film format size each time they introduced a K mount film body. Of course sensor cost contributed to their decision to us an APS sized sensor but why try to make it a permanent fixture. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
John Forbes wrote: I suspect that Pentax thinks the future is digital, And you, of course, believe film based units will continue to outsell digital???/ :-[ and will over the next few years abandon film ,and therefore the 35mm format. I doubt that Pentax will release any new 35mm lenses or cameras after they have dealt with what is already in the pipeline. In other words, they do not (I suspect) intend to support two formats in the future. John On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:29:55 -0500, J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: huh? By bringing out APS lenses, they ARE supporting two formats, 35mm and APS! JCO J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com -Original Message- From: John Forbes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 6:44 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena I don't believe Pentax has the resources to support two different dSLR formats, and the fact that they are bringing out lenses in the APS format means that is the format they have hitched themselves to. It is also too early to start talking about the limitations of the APS sensor. I am sure Pentax believe that more resloution can be squeezed out of it. Finally, a Pentax is an enthusiast's camera, not a pro's camera, though some pro's do use them, especially those who appreciate the small size and weight. I would guess that Pentax do not consider that there is sufficient demand within their market place to support 35mm sensors, and the necessarily higher cost and file sizes. Of course, what is so sad is that manufacturers did not produce a relatively low resolution 35mm sensor at the begining. By low res, I mean something capable of the same sort of pixel count as present APS sensors. This would surely have been easier, and therefore cheaper, to produce than the necessarily much higher density APS sensor, and would then have left the door open to much higher resolutions later. But as it is, don't hold your breath waiting for a 35mm sensor camera from Pentax. It won't happen, unless they make a huge shift in strategy, which will be very costly for them. John On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 15:36:35 -0500, Peter J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think that there is now at least some evidence that Pentax listens to this list and probably to others as well, Witness the 1.1 software upgrade, which made K/M lenses useful. If they do they will think twice about abandoning the aperture ring. Full frame sensors on dslrs? Well that depends on how inexpensive they become as components. Other manufactures are willing to step in to support a constituency which is something Leica is finding out. Christian Skofteland wrote: - Original Message - From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] How is the DA 14/2.8 a dead end? It doesn't provide full frame coverage, it has no aperture ring, it's good only for one digital camera, hopefully won't work properly on the next (if we are blessed). Careful, if you hold your breath too long you may turn blue and pass out... ;-) My prediction for the future of Pentax DSLRs: No 24x36 sensors and no aperture rings. As a matter of fact, if Pentax releases more 35mm SLRs they won't need aperture rings either. And I'd put money on no new lenses having aperture rings as well. (they may still produce and sell older lenses with the rings, but no new designs will have them). Pentax is SHOWING us the future. We can bury our heads in the sand and ignore it or we can open our eyes, accept it and move on. I'm holding my breath for another DSLR with the same basic features but higher pixel count and (maybe) some kind of in-the-body-IS. I'm not deluding myself into believing that Pentax will develop a line like Canon or even Nikon are and I'm certainly not thinking, hoping, wanting a DSLR (or film body) with complete backwards compatibility to M and K lenses. It would be futile. My US$1.00 Christian -- Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/
Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
John Forbes wrote: That's true. But manufacturers have to take a bet on what they think the market will want, and plan accordingly. Where is the mystery? From here it is a no brainer... :-P Otis Wright John On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 13:27:41 -0500, J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Its not up to pentax, it up to the market. if everybody else ends up with reasonable priced FF DSLRs in few years, pentax with have to swim or die. JCO J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com -Original Message- From: John Forbes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 1:06 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena I suspect that Pentax thinks the future is digital, and will over the next few years abandon film ,and therefore the 35mm format. I doubt that Pentax will release any new 35mm lenses or cameras after they have dealt with what is already in the pipeline. In other words, they do not (I suspect) intend to support two formats in the future. John On Wed, 17 Mar 2004 09:29:55 -0500, J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: huh? By bringing out APS lenses, they ARE supporting two formats, 35mm and APS! JCO -- -- J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com -- -- -Original Message- From: John Forbes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 6:44 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena I don't believe Pentax has the resources to support two different dSLR formats, and the fact that they are bringing out lenses in the APS format means that is the format they have hitched themselves to. It is also too early to start talking about the limitations of the APS sensor. I am sure Pentax believe that more resloution can be squeezed out of it. Finally, a Pentax is an enthusiast's camera, not a pro's camera, though some pro's do use them, especially those who appreciate the small size and weight. I would guess that Pentax do not consider that there is sufficient demand within their market place to support 35mm sensors, and the necessarily higher cost and file sizes. Of course, what is so sad is that manufacturers did not produce a relatively low resolution 35mm sensor at the begining. By low res, I mean something capable of the same sort of pixel count as present APS sensors. This would surely have been easier, and therefore cheaper, to produce than the necessarily much higher density APS sensor, and would then have left the door open to much higher resolutions later. But as it is, don't hold your breath waiting for a 35mm sensor camera from Pentax. It won't happen, unless they make a huge shift in strategy, which will be very costly for them. John On Tue, 16 Mar 2004 15:36:35 -0500, Peter J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think that there is now at least some evidence that Pentax listens to this list and probably to others as well, Witness the 1.1 software upgrade, which made K/M lenses useful. If they do they will think twice about abandoning the aperture ring. Full frame sensors on dslrs? Well that depends on how inexpensive they become as components. Other manufactures are willing to step in to support a constituency which is something Leica is finding out. Christian Skofteland wrote: - Original Message - From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] How is the DA 14/2.8 a dead end? It doesn't provide full frame coverage, it has no aperture ring, it's good only for one digital camera, hopefully won't work properly on the next (if we are blessed). Careful, if you hold your breath too long you may turn blue and pass out... ;-) My prediction for the future of Pentax DSLRs: No 24x36 sensors and no aperture rings. As a matter of fact, if Pentax releases more 35mm SLRs they won't need aperture rings either. And I'd put money on no new lenses having aperture rings as well. (they may still produce and sell older lenses with the rings, but no new designs will have them). Pentax is SHOWING us the future. We can bury our heads in the sand and ignore it or we can open our eyes, accept it and move on. I'm holding my breath for another DSLR with the same basic features but higher pixel count and (maybe) some kind of in-the-body-IS. I'm not deluding myself into believing that Pentax will develop a line like Canon or even Nikon are and I'm certainly not thinking, hoping, wanting a DSLR (or film body) with complete backwards compatibility to M and K lenses. It would be futile. My US$1.00 Christian -- Using M2, Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2
Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
- Original Message - From: John Forbes Subject: Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena You are very unhappy about the APS sensor size, and I sympathise with your feelings on the subject. The problem with the APS sensor isn't the dimension of it, but the back focus distance, which totally buggers up wide angle lens designs. William Robb
Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
which means that FF sensors have dropped enough in price that Pentax could swim. Herb - Original Message - From: J. C. O'Connell [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 1:27 PM Subject: RE: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena Its not up to pentax, it up to the market. if everybody else ends up with reasonable priced FF DSLRs in few years, pentax with have to swim or die. JCO
Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
- Original Message - From: John Forbes Subject: Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena Which is why they are designing new lenses. New designs aren't likely to be able to go far enough. Lets see, to get an angle of view that is more or less the same as the 15mm f/3.5 (the widest rectilinear that Pentax makes for 35mm), they would need to make a 10mm lens. I really have my doubts that this is feasable with the 45 or so mm flange to focal plane distance that the K mount has. Also, the new lens designs being shown are slow, huge zooms. The 16-45 is about the same size as the 28-70 f/2.8 and is a stop slower. William Robb
Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
The upcoming 14mm will be f2.8, so I've heard. Bill - Original Message - From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 10:16 PM Subject: Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena - Original Message - From: John Forbes Subject: Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena Which is why they are designing new lenses. New designs aren't likely to be able to go far enough. Lets see, to get an angle of view that is more or less the same as the 15mm f/3.5 (the widest rectilinear that Pentax makes for 35mm), they would need to make a 10mm lens. I really have my doubts that this is feasable with the 45 or so mm flange to focal plane distance that the K mount has. Also, the new lens designs being shown are slow, huge zooms. The 16-45 is about the same size as the 28-70 f/2.8 and is a stop slower. William Robb
Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I had pretty much made up my mind to wait for the new 24mm lens and skip the 16-45/4. And I'm still a likely purchaser of the 14. But just an hour or two ago I ran across a Sigma 17-35 EX 2.8-4 on ebay with a buy it now price of $229. That's half of what BH gets for it and about half of what I'd have to pay for the Pentax 16-45. Plus, I can shoot with it on my LX or MX. The lens appears to be getting good reviews and I figure it is probably good enough to meet my wide angle needs for the time being. (Mainly automobile interiors and of course the occasional landscap. But I still have my K 24/3.5). Hi Paul, A friend of mine uses the Canon version. He is quite happy wrt general performance, but the lens seems to be prone to heavy veiling flare under some lighting conditions (I'd add: that's what I would expect from a Sigma wide angle zoom...). According to the pictures I saw, the sharpness is very good (except maybe wide open @ 17mm) and so is the colour rendition. I think that for that price you cannot go wrong. Ciao, Gianfranco = To read is to travel without all the hassles of luggage. ---Emilio Salgari (1863-1911) __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
Thanks for the feedback Gianfranco. I too would expect it to be flare prone in some situations. It should be find for what I'll use it for. Eventually I hope to supplement it with the new 14mm Pentax prime or, better yet, the A 15/3.5. Paul On Mar 16, 2004, at 7:37 AM, Gianfranco Irlanda wrote: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I had pretty much made up my mind to wait for the new 24mm lens and skip the 16-45/4. And I'm still a likely purchaser of the 14. But just an hour or two ago I ran across a Sigma 17-35 EX 2.8-4 on ebay with a buy it now price of $229. That's half of what BH gets for it and about half of what I'd have to pay for the Pentax 16-45. Plus, I can shoot with it on my LX or MX. The lens appears to be getting good reviews and I figure it is probably good enough to meet my wide angle needs for the time being. (Mainly automobile interiors and of course the occasional landscap. But I still have my K 24/3.5). Hi Paul, A friend of mine uses the Canon version. He is quite happy wrt general performance, but the lens seems to be prone to heavy veiling flare under some lighting conditions (I'd add: that's what I would expect from a Sigma wide angle zoom...). According to the pictures I saw, the sharpness is very good (except maybe wide open @ 17mm) and so is the colour rendition. I think that for that price you cannot go wrong. Ciao, Gianfranco = To read is to travel without all the hassles of luggage. ---Emilio Salgari (1863-1911) __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail - More reliable, more storage, less spam http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
- Original Message - From: Paul Stenquist Subject: Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena or, better yet, the A 15/3.5. It is still available new, although it is a bit pricey. William Robb
Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
on 16.03.04 13:52, Paul Stenquist at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Eventually I hope to supplement it with the new 14mm Pentax prime or, better yet, the A 15/3.5. AFAIK (Dario's test images) A 15/3.5 is only so-so on *istD. Personally I would opt rather for DA 14/2.8. -- Best Regards Sylwek
Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
I seriously doubt we will see a $3000+ Pentax, especially one that goes after the 35 mm market. I think we'll see 24x36 sensors when the price drops below $2000. Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 03/16/04 09:37AM on 16.03.04 16:28, Rob Studdert at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It doesn't provide full frame coverage, it has no aperture ring, it's good only for one digital camera, hopefully won't work properly on the next (if we are blessed). I don't think Pentax would stop development of APS sized CCD cameras. There could be probably FF cameras, but they would be simple high-end DSLRs. It would rather be like that: 1. sub 1000$ baby-D with APS sized CCD 2. *istD (and/or its successor) ~1300$ 3. papa-D with 11 or more MPix CCD costing 3000$ or higher Now guess which size of CCD would be more popular??? I guess #1 and #2 would sell in quantities of 10 or more times than #3. That's reality. -- Best Regards Sylwek
Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
I think that there is now at least some evidence that Pentax listens to this list and probably to others as well, Witness the 1.1 software upgrade, which made K/M lenses useful. If they do they will think twice about abandoning the aperture ring. Full frame sensors on dslrs? Well that depends on how inexpensive they become as components. Other manufactures are willing to step in to support a constituency which is something Leica is finding out. Christian Skofteland wrote: - Original Message - From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] How is the DA 14/2.8 a dead end? It doesn't provide full frame coverage, it has no aperture ring, it's good only for one digital camera, hopefully won't work properly on the next (if we are blessed). Careful, if you hold your breath too long you may turn blue and pass out... ;-) My prediction for the future of Pentax DSLRs: No 24x36 sensors and no aperture rings. As a matter of fact, if Pentax releases more 35mm SLRs they won't need aperture rings either. And I'd put money on no new lenses having aperture rings as well. (they may still produce and sell older lenses with the rings, but no new designs will have them). Pentax is SHOWING us the future. We can bury our heads in the sand and ignore it or we can open our eyes, accept it and move on. I'm holding my breath for another DSLR with the same basic features but higher pixel count and (maybe) some kind of in-the-body-IS. I'm not deluding myself into believing that Pentax will develop a line like Canon or even Nikon are and I'm certainly not thinking, hoping, wanting a DSLR (or film body) with complete backwards compatibility to M and K lenses. It would be futile. My US$1.00 Christian
Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
On 16 Mar 2004 at 10:32, Christian Skofteland wrote: What is your time frame? How many years are you going to wait for Pentax to catch up? Look, I'm happy that they finally released a camera that was (mostly) the answer to what I was looking for. Is the *ist-D limited in functionality? Yes, as far as lens compatability (sensor size, aperture ring); no, in terms of the features I need (don't get me started on the crappy software, but it looks like they are getting it together. I honestly think the camera was rushed to market and the software was an afterthought...) I have an interim camera now, I can wait. I agree, 8MP is probably the highest it can go. I was reading reviews of the new Sony 8MP camera with a really small sensor. It's pretty much unusable at high ISO. The Sony sensor is tiny compared to the APS sensor so I'm not surprised however a real appreciation of high density limitation can be gained when looking at reviews of the E-1 system which is roughly the equivalent of a 7MP sensor in the APS format. The E-1 has 6.8um pixel size vs the *ist D 7.8um pixel dimensions. http://wwwjp.kodak.com/JP/plugins/acrobat/ja/corp/sensor/KAF-5101CE.pdf http://www.sony.net/Products/SC-HP/cx_news/vol28/pdf/icx413np.pdf Even if they do come out with a 24x36mm sensor and a fantastic Limited wide angle with no aperture ring? Hopefully Cosina will come the the rescue, their CEO has foresight. Shouldn't you be sleeping about now? ;-) I was :-) Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
*ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
I had pretty much made up my mind to wait for the new 24mm lens and skip the 16-45/4. And I'm still a likely purchaser of the 14. But just an hour or two ago I ran across a Sigma 17-35 EX 2.8-4 on ebay with a buy it now price of $229. That's half of what BH gets for it and about half of what I'd have to pay for the Pentax 16-45. Plus, I can shoot with it on my LX or MX. The lens appears to be getting good reviews and I figure it is probably good enough to meet my wide angle needs for the time being. (Mainly automobile interiors and of course the occasional landscap. But I still have my K 24/3.5).
Re: *ist-D and the wide angle lens dilmena
Doh, that should have read I had pretty much made up my mind to wait for the new 14mm lens. What a difference in angle of view a missed keystroke makes vbg On Mar 15, 2004, at 9:09 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote: I had pretty much made up my mind to wait for the new 24mm lens and skip the 16-45/4. And I'm still a likely purchaser of the 14. But just an hour or two ago I ran across a Sigma 17-35 EX 2.8-4 on ebay with a buy it now price of $229. That's half of what BH gets for it and about half of what I'd have to pay for the Pentax 16-45. Plus, I can shoot with it on my LX or MX. The lens appears to be getting good reviews and I figure it is probably good enough to meet my wide angle needs for the time being. (Mainly automobile interiors and of course the occasional landscap. But I still have my K 24/3.5).
