viewfinder magnification (was Re: K100D SR)
On 2006-06-27 15:43, John Francis wrote: Thanks for the clarification. I now understand better what magnification means. I did not expect that what you see in the viewfinder of a DSLR is that much smaller than the image of a full frame. Note that I'm comparing an MX (an early, minimal-automation camera) with the *ist-D. The later Pentax bodies, with more information to be shown in the viewfinder, dedicate less of the total area to the image - they have to leave room for electronic readouts for aperture, shutter speed, focus point selection, focus confirmation, over/under exposure, etc. The MX had minimal additional information; the shutter speed was superimposed on the image area, and the aperture was visible through a small window that let you see the aperture ring on the lens. The only extra information was the five coloured LEDs for exposure (an electronic form of the old match needle metering). By the time you get to the auto focus bodies, though, the magnification has been cut back to somewhere between 0.7x and 0.8x. For bodies such as the MZ-6 (aka the ZX-L) or MZ-7 (ZX-7) the total image area, at 90% coverage and 0.7x magnification, is only a little larger than the *ist-D (95% coverage and 95% magnification of a rectangle only 67% of full frame). That's an interesting info. Yes, the MX seems to be very special, where MX-6/7 are special on the other edge of the scale. The *istDL / K100D is within a different range than the *istD / *istDS. From http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/viewfinder.html I learn that a magnification of 1.00 would be perfect when you have your standard lense (50 mm full frame) and crosscheck with the open other eye. I guess this technique is hardly used with current cameras? The page named above lists the magnification for different cameras. I found those results after I checked Boris' (always excellent) overview, since it lacked a viewfinder magnification for the LX (side note below). Robert Monaghan's numbers differ slightly from the spec numbers: Both PZ-1 and ZX-5 are speced at 0.8, while Robert names 0.86 and 0.78. Here's the full Pentax list from Boris: model VF vis mount MZ-6 / ZX-L 0.7 92% KAF MZ-7 / ZX-7 0.7 92% KAF MZ-30 / ZX-30 0.7 92% crippled KAF *ist0.7 90% crippled KAF MZ-S0.7592% KAF2 MZ-D0.7592% KAF2 MZ-10 / ZX-10 0.7792% KAF2 MZ-50 / ZX-50 0.7792% crippled KAF MZ-60 / ZX-60 0.7790% crippled KAF MZ-M / ZX-M 0.7792% KA2 Z-10 / PZ-100.7792% KAF2 Z-50p 0.7792% KAF2 Z-70 / PZ-700.7792% KAF2 MZ-30.8 92% KAF2 MZ-5n / ZX-5n 0.8 92% KAF2 MZ-5 / ZX-5 0.8 92% KAF2 Z-1p / PZ-1p0.8 92% KAF2 Z-1 / PZ-1 0.8 92% KAF2 Z-5p0.8 92% KAF2 Z-5 0.8 92% KAF2 Z-20 / PZ-200.8 92% KAF2 SFXn/SF1n 0.8192% KAF SFX/SF1 0.8192% KAF superA 0.8292% KA programA0.8292% KA A3/A30000.8292% KA P5/P50 0.8292% KA P3n/P30n0.8292% KA P3/P30 0.8292% KA SF7/SF100.8292% KAF MV1 0.8592% K MV 0.8592% K *ist DL 0.8595% crippled KAF2 KM(motor) 0.8793% K KM 0.8793% K MG 0.8792% K K2 DMD 0.8895% K K2 0.8895% K KX(motor) 0.8893% K KX 0.8893% K K1000SE 0.88? % K K1000 0.88? % K LX(early) 0.9 98% K LX(late)0.9 98% K ME F0.9592% KF ME Super0.9592% K ME 0.9592% K *ist D 0.9595% crippled KAF2 *ist DS20.9595% crippled KAF2 *ist DS 0.9595% crippled KAF2 MX 0.9795% K Comments on LX: there are eight exchangable viewfinders, but I did not see specs for them. Some sources name 0.9, others 0.86. Visible area is speced at 98%. Other sources confirm 98% vertically, but 95% horizontally. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: viewfinder magnification (was Re: K100D SR)
On Wed, Jun 28, 2006 at 12:18:17PM +0200, Martin Trautmann wrote: From http://medfmt.8k.com/mf/viewfinder.html I learn that a magnification of 1.00 would be perfect when you have your standard lense (50 mm full frame) and crosscheck with the open other eye. I guess this technique is hardly used with current cameras? I don't see anything special about a magnification of 1.0 for that. I quite often keep both eyes open so that I can check for things happening out of frame. If anything, I use that technique more with long focal lengths than with a 50mm lens, so I'm looking at a very magnified view through the camera. The human eye brain is amazingly good at reconciling the two different fields of view. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
Unfortunately they do now. William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: John Francis Subject: Re: K100D SR I want the car to shift for me, but only when I tell it to shift. I guess you might say I prefer a hyper-manual transmission :-) Do they put Tiptronics into Porsches? William Robb -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
The Volkswagen beetle with semi-automatic gear box. Had an electronic clutch mechanism, (if you put enough force on the stick shift the clutch disengaged,. you could do it on the highway intentionally by hitting it with your knee), and a two speed (forward) one reverse gear box. The standard VW gearbox was nearly indestructible, (they would survive long after the rest of the car wore out or rusted away), the semi-auto was not... William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: John Francis Subject: Re: K100D SR Do they put Tiptronics into Porsches? As a matter of fact that's the only place you find one - Ah. I thought I had seen a Volkswagon with a Tiptronic once. it was many (30 or so) years ago. William Robb -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
Adam Maas wrote: William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: John Francis Subject: Re: K100D SR Do they put Tiptronics into Porsches? As a matter of fact that's the only place you find one - Ah. I thought I had seen a Volkswagon with a Tiptronic once. it was many (30 or so) years ago. William Robb Possible, Volkswagen and Porsche are very closely associated. And there's a surprising degree of parts interchangability between the original Beetle and air-cooled 911's. -Adam Considerably more between the Beetle and the Speedster, (356) -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
I bought an NSU RO 80 from the factory in 1970. The gear lever had a switch that opened the clutch. Gears could be changed very fast. It was also quite a fast car. On the autobahns I was able to do about 120 mph without much trouble. The top speed was supposed to be 117 mph but some of them could do much more. I was a lot younger. The engine gave out after about 30 000 miles and was changed under warranty. The next one gave out after another 20 000 and was again changed under warranty. It went on like this for a while before I changed it for a BMW. The Wankel engine is a brilliant design. The seals are difficult to make and don't last long. The car was years ahead of its time -- not just the engine, the whole concept. But after a while I lost interest in cars. As long as they run and don't fall apart I'm happy now. Don P. J. Alling wrote: The Volkswagen beetle with semi-automatic gear box. Had an electronic clutch mechanism, (if you put enough force on the stick shift the clutch disengaged,. you could do it on the highway intentionally by hitting it with your knee), and a two speed (forward) one reverse gear box. The standard VW gearbox was nearly indestructible, (they would survive long after the rest of the car wore out or rusted away), the semi-auto was not... William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: John Francis Subject: Re: K100D SR Do they put Tiptronics into Porsches? As a matter of fact that's the only place you find one - Ah. I thought I had seen a Volkswagon with a Tiptronic once. it was many (30 or so) years ago. William Robb -- Dr E D F Williams www.kolumbus.fi/mimosa/ http://personal.inet.fi/cool/don.williams/ 41660 TOIVAKKA – Finland - +358400706616 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/06/27 Tue AM 02:02:24 GMT To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: K100D SR - Original Message - From: John Francis Subject: Re: K100D SR I want the car to shift for me, but only when I tell it to shift. I guess you might say I prefer a hyper-manual transmission :-) Do they put Tiptronics into Porsches? And Mercedes. The technology is sold to whoever, these days. - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Jun 27, 2006, at 2:50 AM, William Robb wrote: Some people want the machine to do all the work for them. That's the whole point of building a machine to start with. I still like to shift my own gears. You're replying to a guy who rides a bicycle uphill by choice :) - Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On 2006-06-26 19:29, John Francis wrote: Put an MX and a *ist-D up, side by side, one to each eye (you'll have to do that with the cameras in portrait position), each with a 50mm lens fitted, and objects seen through the two viewfinders *will* appear to be the same size (and will appear just a little smaller than you would see with the naked eye). It's just that the MX will crop to one rectangualr portion of the total field of view, while the *ist-D will crop to a somewhat smaller one. Most viewfinders, in fact, try to present their image at an apparent distance of around 1m from the eye. So if you imagine a wall about 1m in front of you the MX viewfinder (with a 50mm lens) is just about like looking through a rectangular 30 x 20 window in that wall, while the *ist-D viewfinder (with the same 50mm lens) is like looking through a 20 x 13.3 window. But in each case the objects, as seen through those windows, are the same apparent size. Thanks for the clarification. I now understand better what magnification means. I did not expect that what you see in the viewfinder of a DSLR is that much smaller than the image of a full frame. Some people do consider this as an advantage. Personally, I thought the wider, the better, as long as you will see the full image. Former SLRs where a good setup for me. 'tunneling' into a DSLR was an effect that I expected more from the mirror viewfinders (Olympus 4/3rds), while I now feel it's directly linked to the sensor size. But I expected 1:1.5 magnifcation of the viewfinder before (comparing SLR:DSLR). - Martin -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, William Robb wrote: Do they put Tiptronics into Porsches? TipTronic was patented by Porsche. They also put TipTronic into Volkswagen and Audi (I think those are the only lisncees of TipTronic proper), though the shift times are a little slower than in the Porsches by factory default. You can change the trans ECU to allow for Porsche-like shifting times, though. gfen, tiptronic VW owner. -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Tue, Jun 27, 2006 at 12:13:14PM +0200, Martin Trautmann wrote: On 2006-06-26 19:29, John Francis wrote: Put an MX and a *ist-D up, side by side, one to each eye (you'll have to do that with the cameras in portrait position), each with a 50mm lens fitted, and objects seen through the two viewfinders *will* appear to be the same size (and will appear just a little smaller than you would see with the naked eye). It's just that the MX will crop to one rectangualr portion of the total field of view, while the *ist-D will crop to a somewhat smaller one. Most viewfinders, in fact, try to present their image at an apparent distance of around 1m from the eye. So if you imagine a wall about 1m in front of you the MX viewfinder (with a 50mm lens) is just about like looking through a rectangular 30 x 20 window in that wall, while the *ist-D viewfinder (with the same 50mm lens) is like looking through a 20 x 13.3 window. But in each case the objects, as seen through those windows, are the same apparent size. Thanks for the clarification. I now understand better what magnification means. I did not expect that what you see in the viewfinder of a DSLR is that much smaller than the image of a full frame. Note that I'm comparing an MX (an early, minimal-automation camera) with the *ist-D. The later Pentax bodies, with more information to be shown in the viewfinder, dedicate less of the total area to the image - they have to leave room for electronic readouts for aperture, shutter speed, focus point selection, focus confirmation, over/under exposure, etc. The MX had minimal additional information; the shutter speed was superimposed on the image area, and the aperture was visible through a small window that let you see the aperture ring on the lens. The only extra information was the five coloured LEDs for exposure (an electronic form of the old match needle metering). By the time you get to the auto focus bodies, though, the magnification has been cut back to somewhere between 0.7x and 0.8x. For bodies such as the MZ-6 (aka the ZX-L) or MZ-7 (ZX-7) the total image area, at 90% coverage and 0.7x magnification, is only a little larger than the *ist-D (95% coverage and 95% magnification of a rectangle only 67% of full frame). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Jun 26, 2006, at 1:17 PM, John Francis wrote: But, in any case, we seem to be getting some way from cameras :-) This list had something to do with cameras? G -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
I think you're getting yourself very confused. Viewfinder magnification has absolutely nothing to do with sensor size. There's no such thing as a life sized viewfinder, because you're still just looking at an image projected on a small (24mm x 16mm or 36 x 24mm) screen. 100% magnification just means that the angle that the image in the viewfinder subtends at the eye is the same angle that the real object subtends at the eye; if you look through the camera viewfinder, then suddenly remove the camera so that you're looking at the real object, you'll see no aparent change in size. Put an MX and a *ist-D up, side by side, one to each eye (you'll have to do that with the cameras in portrait position), each with a 50mm lens fitted, and objects seen through the two viewfinders *will* appear to be the same size (and will appear just a little smaller than you would see with the naked eye). It's just that the MX will crop to one rectangualr portion of the total field of view, while the *ist-D will crop to a somewhat smaller one. Most viewfinders, in fact, try to present their image at an apparent distance of around 1m from the eye. So if you imagine a wall about 1m in front of you the MX viewfinder (with a 50mm lens) is just about like looking through a rectangular 30 x 20 window in that wall, while the *ist-D viewfinder (with the same 50mm lens) is like looking through a 20 x 13.3 window. But in each case the objects, as seen through those windows, are the same apparent size. On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 04:22:49PM -0400, graywolf wrote: People keep saying silly things like that. Optical magnification is not he same thing as viewfinder magnification. 100% viewfinder magnification means the image in the viewfinder appears life sized. To get that a sub-frame camera needs far higher optical magnification than a full-frame camera. To match an MX's 95% viewfinder magnification your ist-D needs 1.5x more optical magnification, it does not have it. If my Oly had the same optical magnification as an MX the image would be 1/5 the size. You could hardly call that 95% viewfinder magnification. -- graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- John Francis wrote: Depends on the camera. The magnification of the *ist-D viewfinder is the same as that of my MX, and it appears equally bright (just cropped to a smaller image area, of course). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Jun 26, 2006, at 4:29 PM, John Francis wrote: .. Put an MX and a *ist-D up, side by side, one to each eye (you'll have to do that with the cameras in portrait position), each with a 50mm lens fitted, and objects seen through the two viewfinders *will* appear to be the same size (and will appear just a little smaller than you would see with the naked eye). It's just that the MX will crop to one rectangualr portion of the total field of view, while the *ist-D will crop to a somewhat smaller one. Yup. Did just that with a pair of 50mm f/1.7 lenses fitted, MX and DS bodies. Exactly the same viewfinder magnification and brightness in the same area, just less area in the DSLR so the total illumination of the finder was lower. The smaller focusing screen in the DS has better eye relief: I was able to see the whole screen without moving my eye around. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
- Original Message - From: John Francis Subject: Re: K100D SR I want the car to shift for me, but only when I tell it to shift. I guess you might say I prefer a hyper-manual transmission :-) Do they put Tiptronics into Porsches? William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 08:02:24PM -0600, William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: John Francis Subject: Re: K100D SR I want the car to shift for me, but only when I tell it to shift. I guess you might say I prefer a hyper-manual transmission :-) Do they put Tiptronics into Porsches? As a matter of fact that's the only place you find one - Tiptronic is a Porsche registered trademark. Other manufacturers have to call it something else - on a BMW, for example, it's referred to as a Sequential Manual Gearbox (or SMG). Several other manufacturers offer automatic gearboxes with an option to manually shift the ratios - I've come across them on Opel/Vauxhalls, Pontiacs, and even my wife's MINI. But these aren't the same as a true Tiptronic/SMG; they still have the fluid flywheel of the automatic transmission, not a real clutch. I believe even the Honda Fit offers this on automatic models, complete with paddle shifters on the steering wheel. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
Do they put Tiptronics into Porsches? Yes, they have for years. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: K100D SR - Original Message - From: John Francis Subject: Re: K100D SR I want the car to shift for me, but only when I tell it to shift. I guess you might say I prefer a hyper-manual transmission :-) Do they put Tiptronics into Porsches? William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
It's Autostick on Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep. But again, no real clutch.But manual shifting of automatics is old hat. I can manually shift my '55 Chevy BelAir through the Powerglide's two speeds. It will hold first gear until I bump the lever. In the early days all automatics would hold the lower gears if you kept the lever in low or (where applicable) 2. A 57 Ford will do a nice manual shift. You start in low, and it will stay in first until you go to drive. When you move the lever to drive, the trans shifts to second. Moving the lever back to low will cause it to stay in second until you move it back to drive a second time. This will shift the box to third gear. Manual shifting of automatics is nothing new. Only the marketing is new. By the way, '51 Chryslers used a manual clutch with an automatic transmission -- not completely unlike that Tiptronic. In the late sixties I built a little dragster with a nitro burning, normally aspirated Pontiac engine. The trans was a Chrysler Torqueflite with a manual clutch on the front. In those days, we called them Clutchflites. The clutch was used only to get off the starting line. The trans was then shifted manually, but there was no torque converter. Similar to the Tiptronic in most regards. Paul On Jun 26, 2006, at 11:33 PM, John Francis wrote: On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 08:02:24PM -0600, William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: John Francis Subject: Re: K100D SR I want the car to shift for me, but only when I tell it to shift. I guess you might say I prefer a hyper-manual transmission :-) Do they put Tiptronics into Porsches? As a matter of fact that's the only place you find one - Tiptronic is a Porsche registered trademark. Other manufacturers have to call it something else - on a BMW, for example, it's referred to as a Sequential Manual Gearbox (or SMG). Several other manufacturers offer automatic gearboxes with an option to manually shift the ratios - I've come across them on Opel/Vauxhalls, Pontiacs, and even my wife's MINI. But these aren't the same as a true Tiptronic/SMG; they still have the fluid flywheel of the automatic transmission, not a real clutch. I believe even the Honda Fit offers this on automatic models, complete with paddle shifters on the steering wheel. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
John Francis wrote: On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 08:02:24PM -0600, William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: John Francis Subject: Re: K100D SR I want the car to shift for me, but only when I tell it to shift. I guess you might say I prefer a hyper-manual transmission :-) Do they put Tiptronics into Porsches? As a matter of fact that's the only place you find one - Tiptronic is a Porsche registered trademark. Other manufacturers have to call it something else - on a BMW, for example, it's referred to as a Sequential Manual Gearbox (or SMG). Several other manufacturers offer automatic gearboxes with an option to manually shift the ratios - I've come across them on Opel/Vauxhalls, Pontiacs, and even my wife's MINI. But these aren't the same as a true Tiptronic/SMG; they still have the fluid flywheel of the automatic transmission, not a real clutch. I believe even the Honda Fit offers this on automatic models, complete with paddle shifters on the steering wheel. Chrysler introduced the manual shifting Automatics on the Eagle Vision TSi back in 1994, I forget what they called it. They're great on the upshift, but produce very slow downshifts, unlike the true clutchless manuals. IIRC DaimlerChrysler now sells cars with both types of clutch-free shifting. Of course, if you know what you're doing, no clutch is needed for any gear other than first or reverse on a traditional manual transmission. But that does take a lot of skill do to without overstressing the gearbox. -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
- Original Message - From: John Francis Subject: Re: K100D SR Do they put Tiptronics into Porsches? As a matter of fact that's the only place you find one - Ah. I thought I had seen a Volkswagon with a Tiptronic once. it was many (30 or so) years ago. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: John Francis Subject: Re: K100D SR Do they put Tiptronics into Porsches? As a matter of fact that's the only place you find one - Ah. I thought I had seen a Volkswagon with a Tiptronic once. it was many (30 or so) years ago. William Robb Possible, Volkswagen and Porsche are very closely associated. And there's a surprising degree of parts interchangability between the original Beetle and air-cooled 911's. -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On 2006-06-23 15:21, John Francis wrote: All the Pentax DSLRs ar so-called APS-C sensors - around 24mm x 16mm. This means the field of view you get with any lens is the same as the field of view you get on a 35mm camera with a lens 1.5x the focal length. ... while the view finder is 1/1.5 darker!? (67%) Martin -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
Your maths is wrong. .33 darker. And as the viewfinders happen to be very good, I personally don't notice the difference. It's only like going from a 1.4 to a 1.7 lens. John On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 12:12:53 +0100, Martin Trautmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2006-06-23 15:21, John Francis wrote: All the Pentax DSLRs ar so-called APS-C sensors - around 24mm x 16mm. This means the field of view you get with any lens is the same as the field of view you get on a 35mm camera with a lens 1.5x the focal length. ... while the view finder is 1/1.5 darker!? (67%) Martin -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
Aaron Reynolds wrote: On Jun 25, 2006, at 1:48 PM, Adam Maas wrote: I actually prefer the aperture ring+thumbwheel interface of the early Nikon AF bodies (I think you can shoot a PZ-series camera this way as well). Doing everything with one hand never came naturally to me, whether a two-wheel or wheel+button interface, but the thumbwheel was always quicker than a shutter dial. See, I thought I preferred the aperture ring until I actually tried not using it because it wasn't available to me any more. -Aaron I came to my conclusion on preferences after trying essentially every interface when I got back into photography. I actually started with a body that had the thumbwheel+button interface (like the DS), which I certainly can live with. Right now I own bodies with that interface, as well as the classic ring+dial and the ring+thumbwheel. I tend to use the old bodies the most for other reasons though. -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
- Original Message - From: David Mann Subject: Re: K100D SR Some people want the machine to do all the work for them. That's the whole point of building a machine to start with. I still like to shift my own gears. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
Thanks, that's what I would have wanted to say (only 67 % left). Since there are not that many f1.4 lenses left, it's more like 2.8 to 3.5 (or 3.43) ;-) On 2006-06-26 13:14, John Forbes wrote: Your maths is wrong. .33 darker. And as the viewfinders happen to be very good, I personally don't notice the difference. It's only like going from a 1.4 to a 1.7 lens. On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 12:12:53 +0100, Martin Trautmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2006-06-23 15:21, John Francis wrote: All the Pentax DSLRs ar so-called APS-C sensors - around 24mm x 16mm. This means the field of view you get with any lens is the same as the field of view you get on a 35mm camera with a lens 1.5x the focal length. ... while the view finder is 1/1.5 darker!? (67%) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On 26/6/06, William Robb, discombobulated, unleashed: I still like to shift my own gears. Mark! That's a classic. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 01:12:53PM +0200, Martin Trautmann wrote: On 2006-06-23 15:21, John Francis wrote: All the Pentax DSLRs ar so-called APS-C sensors - around 24mm x 16mm. This means the field of view you get with any lens is the same as the field of view you get on a 35mm camera with a lens 1.5x the focal length. ... while the view finder is 1/1.5 darker!? (67%) Depends on the camera. The magnification of the *ist-D viewfinder is the same as that of my MX, and it appears equally bright (just cropped to a smaller image area, of course). On my MZ-S, with a lower viewfinder magnification (there has to be somewhere to stick the extra in-viewfinder information) the image is brighter. But I never heard anybody say they preferred the MZ-S viewfinder to that of the MX. The entry model DSLRs from some other vendors have a significantly lower magnfication, as well as the cropped image area, leading to an effect which has been likened to looking down a tunnel. There has to be a trade-off between brightness and overall image size, and I have no problems with the *ist-D, even using a lens with a maximum aperture of f/4. Of course it's not as bright as using a f/1.4 lens, but my old eyes can adapt to the loss of around a stop of light far better than they can perceive detail in a smaller image. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
You're both wrong. It's either no darker (just cropped to a smaller area) - so just as bright in illumination per equal area (or equal solid angle submitted at the eye), or it's 1/(1.5)^2 as much total illumination, which is a little over one stop difference (it's like going from f/1.4 to f/2.1). On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 01:14:10PM +0100, John Forbes wrote: Your maths is wrong. .33 darker. And as the viewfinders happen to be very good, I personally don't notice the difference. It's only like going from a 1.4 to a 1.7 lens. John On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 12:12:53 +0100, Martin Trautmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2006-06-23 15:21, John Francis wrote: All the Pentax DSLRs ar so-called APS-C sensors - around 24mm x 16mm. This means the field of view you get with any lens is the same as the field of view you get on a 35mm camera with a lens 1.5x the focal length. ... while the view finder is 1/1.5 darker!? (67%) Martin -- Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/m2/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
I agree with John Francis. Godfrey On Jun 26, 2006, at 9:40 AM, John Francis wrote: You're both wrong. It's either no darker (just cropped to a smaller area) - so just as bright in illumination per equal area (or equal solid angle submitted at the eye), or it's 1/(1.5)^2 as much total illumination, which is a little over one stop difference (it's like going from f/1.4 to f/2.1). On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 01:14:10PM +0100, John Forbes wrote: Your maths is wrong. .33 darker. And as the viewfinders happen to be very good, I personally don't notice the difference. It's only like going from a 1.4 to a 1.7 lens. John On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 12:12:53 +0100, Martin Trautmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 2006-06-23 15:21, John Francis wrote: All the Pentax DSLRs ar so-called APS-C sensors - around 24mm x 16mm. This means the field of view you get with any lens is the same as the field of view you get on a 35mm camera with a lens 1.5x the focal length. ... while the view finder is 1/1.5 darker!? (67%) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On 2006-06-26 12:40, John Francis wrote: You're both wrong. It's either no darker (just cropped to a smaller area) - so you assume that there's no additional magnification within the viewfinder? Personally, I assumed first that the viewfinder image is the same as before. I checked - and I'm wrong. Analog kameras where at abount 0.7 .. 0.8 magnification, covering around 92 % (MX/ZX series). *ist was 0.7 of 90 %. Digital cameras where 0.95 of 95% (*istD or *istDS) and 0.85 of 95% (*istDL and probably K100D). I guess this is somewhere in between: the viewfinder is not half area (as the sensor is, cropped from 24x36 to roughly 18x24). But it's not magnified to full format viewfinder either. so just as bright in illumination per equal area (or equal solid angle submitted at the eye), or it's 1/(1.5)^2 as much total illumination, which is a little over one stop difference (it's like going from f/1.4 to f/2.1). Hm - I guess you are right. Half sensor area translates directly to half light, which is exactly one aperture step. So what's the total? (1/2 * 0.95) / (1 * 0.7) = 0.67. The K100D has 67% brightness of a ZK-L? Please correct me when I'm wrong... -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Mon, 26 Jun 2006, John Francis wrote: is brighter. But I never heard anybody say they preferred the MZ-S viewfinder to that of the MX. I prefer the MZ-S viewfinder to that of the MX (and of the ME Super). I find these viewfinders to be too big, making it extremely difficult to keep track of what is in and what is out of frame. For tripod use they rock, of course. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
I still like to shift my own gears. Me too. The only auto trans car I have is mainly driven by my wife. The other two vehicles are 5 6 speed manuals. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: K100D SR - Original Message - From: David Mann Subject: Re: K100D SR Some people want the machine to do all the work for them. That's the whole point of building a machine to start with. I still like to shift my own gears. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Jun 26, 2006, at 11:00 AM, Kenneth Waller wrote: I still like to shift my own gears. Me too. The only auto trans car I have is mainly driven by my wife. The other two vehicles are 5 6 speed manuals. Still have my Alfa Spider for manual shifting. It gets driven regularly. ;-) The Land Rover Freelander has one of those incredibly neat transmissions with full auto, limited range auto, manual and special ascent/descent mode traction control settings on an all wheel drive system. It is incredibly good to drive for what is essentially a light truck, I enjoy the heck out of it. Have your cake and eat it however you want, as dinner time permits. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
I want the car to shift for me, but only when I tell it to shift. I guess you might say I prefer a hyper-manual transmission :-) On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 02:00:34PM -0400, Kenneth Waller wrote: I still like to shift my own gears. Me too. The only auto trans car I have is mainly driven by my wife. The other two vehicles are 5 6 speed manuals. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: K100D SR - Original Message - From: David Mann Subject: Re: K100D SR Some people want the machine to do all the work for them. That's the whole point of building a machine to start with. I still like to shift my own gears. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
They do those now. TipTronic and such. -Adam John Francis wrote: I want the car to shift for me, but only when I tell it to shift. I guess you might say I prefer a hyper-manual transmission :-) On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 02:00:34PM -0400, Kenneth Waller wrote: I still like to shift my own gears. Me too. The only auto trans car I have is mainly driven by my wife. The other two vehicles are 5 6 speed manuals. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: K100D SR - Original Message - From: David Mann Subject: Re: K100D SR Some people want the machine to do all the work for them. That's the whole point of building a machine to start with. I still like to shift my own gears. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
I guess you might say I prefer a hyper-manual transmission :-) More stuff to go wrong. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: K100D SR I want the car to shift for me, but only when I tell it to shift. I guess you might say I prefer a hyper-manual transmission :-) On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 02:00:34PM -0400, Kenneth Waller wrote: I still like to shift my own gears. Me too. The only auto trans car I have is mainly driven by my wife. The other two vehicles are 5 6 speed manuals. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: K100D SR - Original Message - From: David Mann Subject: Re: K100D SR Some people want the machine to do all the work for them. That's the whole point of building a machine to start with. I still like to shift my own gears. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
Yes. I know that. I drive one. On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 03:53:39PM -0400, Adam Maas wrote: They do those now. TipTronic and such. -Adam John Francis wrote: I want the car to shift for me, but only when I tell it to shift. I guess you might say I prefer a hyper-manual transmission :-) On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 02:00:34PM -0400, Kenneth Waller wrote: I still like to shift my own gears. Me too. The only auto trans car I have is mainly driven by my wife. The other two vehicles are 5 6 speed manuals. Kenneth Waller - Original Message - From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: K100D SR - Original Message - From: David Mann Subject: Re: K100D SR Some people want the machine to do all the work for them. That's the whole point of building a machine to start with. I still like to shift my own gears. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 07:53:02PM +0200, Martin Trautmann wrote: On 2006-06-26 12:40, John Francis wrote: You're both wrong. It's either no darker (just cropped to a smaller area) - so you assume that there's no additional magnification within the viewfinder? Personally, I assumed first that the viewfinder image is the same as before. I checked - and I'm wrong. Analog kameras where at abount 0.7 .. 0.8 magnification, covering around 92 % (MX/ZX series). *ist was 0.7 of 90 %. Digital cameras where 0.95 of 95% (*istD or *istDS) and 0.85 of 95% (*istDL and probably K100D). I guess this is somewhere in between: the viewfinder is not half area (as the sensor is, cropped from 24x36 to roughly 18x24). But it's not magnified to full format viewfinder either. so just as bright in illumination per equal area (or equal solid angle submitted at the eye), or it's 1/(1.5)^2 as much total illumination, which is a little over one stop difference (it's like going from f/1.4 to f/2.1). Hm - I guess you are right. Half sensor area translates directly to half light, which is exactly one aperture step. So what's the total? (1/2 * 0.95) / (1 * 0.7) = 0.67. The K100D has 67% brightness of a ZK-L? Please correct me when I'm wrong... Totally bogus. You either don't need the magnification at all, if you are measuring the total amount of light energy the viewfinder, or you need the square of the magnification as a measure of area. In any case, you're making it far too complicated. Ignore the coverage - what you really care about is how bright a unit area of the viewfinder looks. The K100D has, we will assume, 0.85x viewfinder magnification. A ZX-L has 0.7x. That means the image in the K100D viewfinder appears (0.7/0.85)^2 (which, by a coincidence, is pretty close to 67%) as bright as in the viewfinder of the ZX-L - a difference of just about half a stop. If you also take into account the difference in total image size (the DL shows .95^2 of a 24 x 16 sensor, while the ZX-L shows .90^2 of 36 x 24) you get another factor of two in favour of the ZX-L. But showing twice as much illuminated area in the viewfinder doesn't make a given part of the image any brighter - it would only be important if you were using the viewfinder as a light source to illuminate something else. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 03:54:57PM -0400, Kenneth Waller wrote: I guess you might say I prefer a hyper-manual transmission :-) More stuff to go wrong. Kenneth Waller True. But, on the other hand, computer-controlled shifting puts far less of a strain on the individual components because it can always match engine speed to the transmission speed. BMW claim increased reliability as one of the benefits of their SMG, and I believe Porsche say the same about their Tiptronic boxes. But, in any case, we seem to be getting some way from cameras :-) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
People keep saying silly things like that. Optical magnification is not he same thing as viewfinder magnification. 100% viewfinder magnification means the image in the viewfinder appears life sized. To get that a sub-frame camera needs far higher optical magnification than a full-frame camera. To match an MX's 95% viewfinder magnification your ist-D needs 1.5x more optical magnification, it does not have it. If my Oly had the same optical magnification as an MX the image would be 1/5 the size. You could hardly call that 95% viewfinder magnification. -- graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com http://webpages.charter.net/graywolf Idiot Proof == Expert Proof --- John Francis wrote: Depends on the camera. The magnification of the *ist-D viewfinder is the same as that of my MX, and it appears equally bright (just cropped to a smaller image area, of course). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On 25/6/06, Aaron Reynolds, discombobulated, unleashed: *ist D - the pro body Mark! -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
I have also heard the rumor that they will introduce Leica-branded version of the Panasonic DMC-L1 SLR with 4/3 system lens mount. The 14-50mm/F2.8-3.5 Leica D Vario Elmarit is equipped with an aperture ring. It may be the only four thirds DSLR specific lens so equipped but it has one. gfen, should be happy. Hell if Panasonic can do it why not Pentax? http://www.dpreview.com/news/0602/06022609panasonicdmcl1.asp Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: On Jun 24, 2006, at 11:27 AM, gfen wrote: My interest just waned that much more. I'm evidently going to continue being a bitter hold out .. You're going to be bitter a long time, I'm afraid. Sigh, I guess it was a sign of the times when the FAJ without the aperature rings came out. I presume the DA lenses are specifically designed to not cover full frame and are also FAJ mount? All DA lenses are similar to the FA-J in not having aperture rings. Control of the lens is up to the body. Maybe its time I buy that Leica after all and ascend to snobbery the proper way. :) ... With a close relationship to the manager at your bank? ;-) Gah, next thing someone'll tell me they've gone all funny, too... Leica is due to introduce a digital version of the M able to take its M-bayonet lenses later this year. I have also heard the rumor that they will introduce Leica-branded version of the Panasonic DMC-L1 SLR with 4/3 system lens mount. Life moves on. You either stick with what you have because you like it, or you move with the way things go. I do a little of both. I bought the Pentax DS, enjoyed a bevy of older lenses, but then upgraded one at a time to the latest series and sold off the older ones. You get the most out of a modern body with the latest lenses. Godfrey -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Jun 25, 2006, at 12:18 PM, P. J. Alling wrote: The 14-50mm/F2.8-3.5 Leica D Vario Elmarit is equipped with an aperture ring. It may be the only four thirds DSLR specific lens so equipped but it has one. gfen, should be happy. Hell if Panasonic can do it why not Pentax? Is this a standard aperture ring that will work on the mechanical cameras, or a simulated electronic aperture ring? Does this Leica/Panasonic support full metering etc with old lenses without electronic contacts? -Aaron -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
Aaron Reynolds wrote: On Jun 25, 2006, at 12:18 PM, P. J. Alling wrote: The 14-50mm/F2.8-3.5 Leica D Vario Elmarit is equipped with an aperture ring. It may be the only four thirds DSLR specific lens so equipped but it has one. gfen, should be happy. Hell if Panasonic can do it why not Pentax? Is this a standard aperture ring that will work on the mechanical cameras, or a simulated electronic aperture ring? Does this Leica/Panasonic support full metering etc with old lenses without electronic contacts? -Aaron Electronic aperture ring, 4/3rd's mount has no mechanical connections. But there are no mechanical cameras that you could mount the lens on anyways. All 4/3rds bodies do stop down metering with adapter-mounted lenses, there are no non-electronic lenses for the mount. -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Jun 25, 2006, at 1:00 PM, Adam Maas wrote: Electronic aperture ring, 4/3rd's mount has no mechanical connections. But there are no mechanical cameras that you could mount the lens on anyways. All 4/3rds bodies do stop down metering with adapter-mounted lenses, there are no non-electronic lenses for the mount. I don't exactly see the advantage, then, over Pentax's implementation. -Aaron -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
Aaron Reynolds wrote: On Jun 25, 2006, at 1:00 PM, Adam Maas wrote: Electronic aperture ring, 4/3rd's mount has no mechanical connections. But there are no mechanical cameras that you could mount the lens on anyways. All 4/3rds bodies do stop down metering with adapter-mounted lenses, there are no non-electronic lenses for the mount. I don't exactly see the advantage, then, over Pentax's implementation. -Aaron Some prefer that interface. I find using one hand for aperture and the other to change shutter comes naturally, while using one hand to do both is more awkward. I actually prefer the aperture ring+thumbwheel interface of the early Nikon AF bodies (I think you can shoot a PZ-series camera this way as well). Doing everything with one hand never came naturally to me, whether a two-wheel or wheel+button interface, but the thumbwheel was always quicker than a shutter dial. The DMC-L1 actually uses the same interface as the MZ-5n, with a shutter speed dial and aperture ring, both with A settings that determine mode. The L1 however allows setting shutterspeed in 1/3 stops (it has settings for 2/60 seconds, 1 through 1/800 and 1000/4000, the first and last require using the control wheel to pick the actual shutter speed, bit wierd, but looks like it will work well). -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: K100D SR
Electronic aperture ring, 4/3rd's mount has no mechanical connections. But there are no mechanical cameras that you could mount the lens on anyways. All 4/3rds bodies do stop down metering with adapter-mounted lenses, there are no non-electronic lenses for the mount. I don't exactly see the advantage, then, over Pentax's implementation. -Aaron There is no advantage for what you're after. However, with the new Panasonic camera and Leitz lens, you can continue to use a shutter speed dial and aperture in their accustomed places rather than having to learn a new set of movements for a new camera. Old dogs, new tricks and all that. One of the things I have noticed in learning to use the E-500 is that the aperture and shutter speed are controlled from a single dial, so their operation is modal. In man-machine interface design it's usually considered preferable to have separate controls for separate functions to avoid modes, rather than overloading controls. Under some circumstances I like to be able to vary both at the same time, which is not possible with the setup as it is. To use the dial in its non-default mode you have to press an interlock, which is not very conveniently placed for me. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Jun 25, 2006, at 9:18 AM, P. J. Alling wrote: I have also heard the rumor that they will introduce Leica-branded version of the Panasonic DMC-L1 SLR with 4/3 system lens mount. The 14-50mm/F2.8-3.5 Leica D Vario Elmarit is equipped with an aperture ring. It may be the only four thirds DSLR specific lens so equipped but it has one. gfen, should be happy. Hell if Panasonic can do it why not Pentax? http://www.dpreview.com/news/0602/06022609panasonicdmcl1.asp The aperture ring in that lens will only work in conjunction with the Panasonic L1 body, not with the Olympus bodies that share the 4/3 mount which control the aperture via on-body controls. The aperture is controlled by the body, the ring is simply an alternative actuator for the in-body aperture control wheel. As such, it adds probably a nice chunk of dollars or so to the price of the lens as well as some bulk. I agree that aperture control on the lens like this presents a familiar user interface. Do you want to spend lots of additional money for every lens to have it just because you don't want to accommodate the more modern and (usually cited to be) more convenient thumbwheel to control the aperture? Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
How could it possibly work on a mechanical camera, it's a 4/3 lens, I know of no 4/3 mechanical cameras. They don't support any old lenses because there are none. If however you read the review you will see that the Panasonic uses the old method for selecting program mode set the lens to a, (on the aperture ring), and the shutter speed dial, (yes it has an old fashioned shutter speed dial, very old fashioned), to automatic and you get program exposure. This might make using other 4/3 lenses from other manufactures problematic but I expect there's a workaround. Several immediately spring to mind. However there is nothing keeping Pentax from implementing an electronic f stop ring. It is possible in fact to allow the use of F and FA lenses that way now, as these lenses report the exact selected aperture digitally to the camera body. Aaron Reynolds wrote: On Jun 25, 2006, at 12:18 PM, P. J. Alling wrote: The 14-50mm/F2.8-3.5 Leica D Vario Elmarit is equipped with an aperture ring. It may be the only four thirds DSLR specific lens so equipped but it has one. gfen, should be happy. Hell if Panasonic can do it why not Pentax? Is this a standard aperture ring that will work on the mechanical cameras, or a simulated electronic aperture ring? Does this Leica/Panasonic support full metering etc with old lenses without electronic contacts? -Aaron -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
The L1 selects mode and aperture via the command dial with non-aperture ring lenses. -Adam P. J. Alling wrote: How could it possibly work on a mechanical camera, it's a 4/3 lens, I know of no 4/3 mechanical cameras. They don't support any old lenses because there are none. If however you read the review you will see that the Panasonic uses the old method for selecting program mode set the lens to a, (on the aperture ring), and the shutter speed dial, (yes it has an old fashioned shutter speed dial, very old fashioned), to automatic and you get program exposure. This might make using other 4/3 lenses from other manufactures problematic but I expect there's a workaround. Several immediately spring to mind. However there is nothing keeping Pentax from implementing an electronic f stop ring. It is possible in fact to allow the use of F and FA lenses that way now, as these lenses report the exact selected aperture digitally to the camera body. Aaron Reynolds wrote: On Jun 25, 2006, at 12:18 PM, P. J. Alling wrote: The 14-50mm/F2.8-3.5 Leica D Vario Elmarit is equipped with an aperture ring. It may be the only four thirds DSLR specific lens so equipped but it has one. gfen, should be happy. Hell if Panasonic can do it why not Pentax? Is this a standard aperture ring that will work on the mechanical cameras, or a simulated electronic aperture ring? Does this Leica/Panasonic support full metering etc with old lenses without electronic contacts? -Aaron -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Jun 25, 2006, at 1:48 PM, Adam Maas wrote: I actually prefer the aperture ring+thumbwheel interface of the early Nikon AF bodies (I think you can shoot a PZ-series camera this way as well). Doing everything with one hand never came naturally to me, whether a two-wheel or wheel+button interface, but the thumbwheel was always quicker than a shutter dial. See, I thought I preferred the aperture ring until I actually tried not using it because it wasn't available to me any more. -Aaron -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Jun 25, 2006, at 5:11 AM, William Robb wrote: Some people want the machine to do all the work for them. That's the whole point of building a machine to start with. - Dave -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Fri, 23 Jun 2006, John Francis wrote: automatically during exposure. And while metering has to be done stopped down, rather than at full aperture, a single push of a button will stop the lens down, take a meter reading, select an appropriate shutter speed, and open the aperture again. This all happens faster than it just took you to read about it. Alas, its just one more thing I'm stuck having to do, and it annoys me. Looks like I'm not quite ready to retire the MX or ZX5n yet. :) What's the difference between the K100D and the K10D, and where are they pricing these things at? -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Jun 24, 2006, at 8:18 AM, gfen wrote: What's the difference between the K100D and the K10D, and where are they pricing these things at? From Shel's BH post -- $619.00 for the K100D with SR, $519.00 for the K110D w/out SR The K100D has shake reduction, the K110D does not. Otherwise, they are the same. -Aaron -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Sat, 24 Jun 2006, P. J. Alling wrote: We'll have to see about the K10D but the K100D seems to have the same mount as the D/DS/DL/2... Pentax has released this many digital cameras? Yow, I have been gone a long time...Although, I see most of the same names on the list as the last two times I've popped back to read it. What became of the film line? Dead? The Brotherhood? DIsbanded? The Little Brotherhood, also dead I assume.. or did they actually put out some sort of MF/645 based digital thingy as rumoured last time I was 'round here? -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Jun 24, 2006, at 8:26 AM, gfen wrote: The Brotherhood? DIsbanded? We've simply raised our rates. -Aaron -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
I'm sure they will all share the same mount. Paul On Jun 24, 2006, at 12:41 AM, P. J. Alling wrote: We'll have to see about the K10D but the K100D seems to have the same mount as the D/DS/DL/2... gfen wrote: What sort of mount does it use? Are M and A series lenses going to work properly? -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
There is still the Brotherhood, but I think there is a new head of the order - Abbot Norm. Regards, Bob S. On 6/24/06, gfen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 24 Jun 2006, P. J. Alling wrote: We'll have to see about the K10D but the K100D seems to have the same mount as the D/DS/DL/2... Pentax has released this many digital cameras? Yow, I have been gone a long time...Although, I see most of the same names on the list as the last two times I've popped back to read it. What became of the film line? Dead? The Brotherhood? DIsbanded? The Little Brotherhood, also dead I assume.. or did they actually put out some sort of MF/645 based digital thingy as rumoured last time I was 'round here? -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
- Original Message - From: gfen [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Little Brotherhood, also dead I assume.. or did they actually put out some sort of MF/645 based digital thingy as rumoured last time I was 'round here? Sisterhood, if you please. :-) We sit on our hands, and save up for Christmas. Sister Jostein -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Sat, 24 Jun 2006, Jostein wrote: Sisterhood, if you please. :-) Wait for it...No, I do not approve this namechange. :) I'll be sticking with Little Brother, thank you very much. ;) -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
The K10D is expected to be 10mp the K100D is still 6mp. That's the major difference. (The K10D may have a bigger buffer, and I'm really hoping for an aperture simulator, or 1.3 crop instead of APS-C but neither is likely). gfen wrote: On Fri, 23 Jun 2006, John Francis wrote: automatically during exposure. And while metering has to be done stopped down, rather than at full aperture, a single push of a button will stop the lens down, take a meter reading, select an appropriate shutter speed, and open the aperture again. This all happens faster than it just took you to read about it. Alas, its just one more thing I'm stuck having to do, and it annoys me. Looks like I'm not quite ready to retire the MX or ZX5n yet. :) What's the difference between the K100D and the K10D, and where are they pricing these things at? -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
645d is expected real soon now... gfen wrote: On Sat, 24 Jun 2006, P. J. Alling wrote: We'll have to see about the K10D but the K100D seems to have the same mount as the D/DS/DL/2... Pentax has released this many digital cameras? Yow, I have been gone a long time...Although, I see most of the same names on the list as the last two times I've popped back to read it. What became of the film line? Dead? The Brotherhood? DIsbanded? The Little Brotherhood, also dead I assume.. or did they actually put out some sort of MF/645 based digital thingy as rumoured last time I was 'round here? -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
Hello gfen, Not sure why you are saying alas. You haven't tried it. I have used an MX for many, many years and it is among my favorite bodies of all time. The process that John described is faster to use than an MX. So if you are happy with your MX, you should not be significantly bothered by the Pentax DSLR. -- Bruce Saturday, June 24, 2006, 5:18:38 AM, you wrote: g On Fri, 23 Jun 2006, John Francis wrote: automatically during exposure. And while metering has to be done stopped down, rather than at full aperture, a single push of a button will stop the lens down, take a meter reading, select an appropriate shutter speed, and open the aperture again. This all happens faster than it just took you to read about it. g Alas, its just one more thing I'm stuck having to do, and it annoys me. g Looks like I'm not quite ready to retire the MX or ZX5n yet. :) g What's the difference between the K100D and the K10D, and where are they g pricing these things at? g -- g http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. g http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
- Original Message - From: Bruce Dayton Subject: Re: K100D SR Hello gfen, Not sure why you are saying alas. You haven't tried it. I have used an MX for many, many years and it is among my favorite bodies of all time. The process that John described is faster to use than an MX. So if you are happy with your MX, you should not be significantly bothered by the Pentax DSLR. Some people want the machine to do all the work for them. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Sat, 24 Jun 2006, Bruce Dayton wrote: Not sure why you are saying alas. You haven't tried it. I have used I'm lazy, that's why. Incredibly lazy. And forgetful. Incredibly forgetful. Its something I don't desire to have to do, I ratehr apprechaite that the camera is smart enough that I don't have to stop down to meter. Now, its easier having to press the DoF button to meter rather than stopping down, but I still choose to avoid it as much as possible. Its another headache I don't need to worry about. I've already got a camera that requires me jump through hoops, setting, doublechecking, and resetting a series of dials, widgets, and bits. I kinda considered the move from the ZX5n (which I use more than the MX, I should really sell that) to a digital body to be streamlining things, I don't want to have to remember to do that every time I might happent o use one of the two or so lenses that don't have an A setting. Two? Crap, maybe only one.. but its the point of it. Bugs me. Incredibly lazy, forgetful, and a total whiner. That's me. All the electric bells and whistles don't mean squat if I have to remember to fidget them into working right. A 645d sounds delightful, though, coz I know all of my 645 lenses have Automatic settings, except I know I can't afford one o' them. :) -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Sat, 24 Jun 2006, William Robb wrote: Some people want the machine to do all the work for them. Damn skippy. Robocamera better do it all, otherwise its not much of a convienence. Look, maybe I'm just rehashing 4 year old arguments that no one right cares abotu anymore, I can acknowledge thate veryone else has probably moved on and accepted this feature, but I'm not. I retain the right to live in the past, and as such I prefer to think that their new fangled digital camera is gonna do what I want it to do when I want it to do it, not require me to remember to flip this switch here when I need to this feature here, but only once in awhile when I'm using some particular lenses. I'm not a complete bastard about it, though. Fine, so in order for SR to work, you need to tell it the focal length. Makes sense to me. It can't do any automatic features with a M42 lens attached to it through an adapter. This I can accept. But I don't want to accept that its not smart enough to replicate a feature thats been on every one of the camera bodies since the mid '70s, including the MZ-S from which I think all the rest of this descends. Fine, eventually I'll have to crack one way or another, I suppose, and just give in. But I can assure you that I can hold on for as long as I need to and will be happy to buy one on the used market in a year or two rather than a brand new one for want of something as simple as not having to press the DoF preview to meter. -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 08:18:38AM -0400, gfen wrote: On Fri, 23 Jun 2006, John Francis wrote: automatically during exposure. And while metering has to be done stopped down, rather than at full aperture, a single push of a button will stop the lens down, take a meter reading, select an appropriate shutter speed, and open the aperture again. This all happens faster than it just took you to read about it. Alas, its just one more thing I'm stuck having to do, and it annoys me. Looks like I'm not quite ready to retire the MX or ZX5n yet. :) If you object to having to push a button, why on earth would you consider using the MX, where you have to rotate a knob to set the shutter speed (much harder to do with the camera to your eye!). :-) [That's a joke - I still have two MXs, and understand their appeal] What's the difference between the K100D and the K10D, and where are they pricing these things at? Nobody knows what the price of the K10D will be. (Or, to be precise, those who do know aren't allowed to tell anyone). The known differences between it and the K100D are 10MP vs 6MP, the two-thumb-wheel interface (as found on the PZ bodies and the *ist-D), and better weather sealing. And, probably, the ability to take an external battery/portrait grip. I'd also expect it to have everything the *ist-D has (0.95+ viewfinder magnification, wireless flash control, PC socket, etc., etc.) - this camera is targeted at the advanced amateur, and as an upgrade body. We are also led to believe it will have a much faster frame rate (and bigger buffer) than any of the current Pentax DSLRs, and improved auto focus. Beyond that, rumour and speculation are rife, especially as there are two new lenses (a 28-50/f2.8 and a 50-135/f2.8) scheduled for release shortly after the K10D body; do Pentax plan to stay with in-body auto-focus motors, or will we see USM or other in-lens motors? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 01:37:21PM -0400, gfen wrote: But I don't want to accept that its not smart enough to replicate a feature thats been on every one of the camera bodies since the mid '70s, including the MZ-S from which I think all the rest of this descends. You're not alone in this - there are still a few die-hards here who say they'll refuse to buy the K10D if it doesn't re-introduce the aperture sensing mechanism (omitted from all the digital bodies). Personally I think they're flogging a dead horse - most of the new lenses don't even have aperture rings, so it's unlikely that Pentax will bother with adding something they've already decided to drop. You're mistaken in your belief that the digital bodies are is some way descendants of the MZ-S. The proposed MZ-D (with a full frame sensor) never made it to market. If it had, then we may well have seen aperture rings on the lenses, and aperture being set that way as it is on the MZ bodies. But, instead, we got cameras with the control interface of the PZ bodies, where the lens is left set to the A setting, and everything is controlled by the finger/thumb control wheels on the body. My *ist-D is, operationally, almost identical to my PZ-1p. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Sat, 24 Jun 2006, John Francis wrote: as it is on the MZ bodies. But, instead, we got cameras with the control interface of the PZ bodies, where the lens is left set to the A setting, and everything is controlled by the finger/thumb control wheels on the body. My *ist-D is, operationally, almost identical to my PZ-1p. Woah, evidently I misread what was originally said.. I didn't grasp this at all. So... I have to set the aperature from the camera body? I don't have the privlege of doing it the right way, with the ring on the lens itself? My interest just waned that much more. I'm evidently going to continue being a bitter hold out, and to think, I was close to wafflign when I saw the prices at BH (I didn't realize they had gone so low, down to $420 for some variation, the DL*ist I suppose). Sigh, I guess it was a sign of the times when the FAJ without the aperature rings came out. I presume the DA lenses are specifically designed to not cover full frame and are also FAJ mount? Maybe its time I buy that Leica after all and ascend to snobbery the proper way. :) Gah, next thing someone'll tell me they've gone all funny, too... -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
Quoting Bob Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED]: There is still the Brotherhood, but I think there is a new head of the order - Abbot Norm. Regards, Bob S. Norm's our new leader. I'm selling the 6x7 then. Liz, don't answer the phone vbg Dave Equine Photography in York Region -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
Except that on the PZ-1p the aperture ring was fully supported too. John Francis wrote: On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 01:37:21PM -0400, gfen wrote: But I don't want to accept that its not smart enough to replicate a feature thats been on every one of the camera bodies since the mid '70s, including the MZ-S from which I think all the rest of this descends. You're not alone in this - there are still a few die-hards here who say they'll refuse to buy the K10D if it doesn't re-introduce the aperture sensing mechanism (omitted from all the digital bodies). Personally I think they're flogging a dead horse - most of the new lenses don't even have aperture rings, so it's unlikely that Pentax will bother with adding something they've already decided to drop. You're mistaken in your belief that the digital bodies are is some way descendants of the MZ-S. The proposed MZ-D (with a full frame sensor) never made it to market. If it had, then we may well have seen aperture rings on the lenses, and aperture being set that way as it is on the MZ bodies. But, instead, we got cameras with the control interface of the PZ bodies, where the lens is left set to the A setting, and everything is controlled by the finger/thumb control wheels on the body. My *ist-D is, operationally, almost identical to my PZ-1p. -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 02:27:31PM -0400, gfen wrote: So... I have to set the aperature from the camera body? I don't have the privlege of doing it the right way, with the ring on the lens itself? Not if you want to use the automatic exposure features of the body. If you want to set the aperture the right way (guess you've never used a really long telephoto lens on a monopod - you don't have a hand anywhere near the aperture ring) then you're just going to have to set the shutter speed the right way yourself. And what's wrong with pushing a button to meter? It was good enough for the Spotmatic; this new-fangled full-time, full-aperture metering is for wimps who don't know how to do it the right way. Not that real photographers need a meter, anyway. Get some new lenses (that's anything made in the last 25+ years) and you'll be able to use all the features of the body, including spot metering (not available with older lenses). Or switch to a DSLR manufacturer with a better backwards compatibility story than Pentax. Oh, wait - there aren't any. Still, switch anyway - that will show them! Sigh, I guess it was a sign of the times when the FAJ without the aperature rings came out. I presume the DA lenses are specifically designed to not cover full frame and are also FAJ mount? Yep. You're right, too, that you're just rehashing old arguments that have been played out here, in excruciating detail, too many times. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Sat, 24 Jun 2006, John Francis wrote: Get some new lenses (that's anything made in the last 25+ years) Sometimes they really don't make 'em like they used to, y'know...A moot argument for me, but not for everyone here. Pentax. Oh, wait - there aren't any. Still, switch anyway - that will show them! Or I can continue functioning along like I always have, but drop the broad support I've always given Pentax in the past for producing excellent optics and cameras and the right price. If there's no DSLR that provides me the proper usage of the aperature ring, well then so be it. I didn't need a DSLR anyways. I'm not sure why there's a chip on your shoulder because some people have a preference for doing things they way they always have, and because some people don't like to give up features and methods that have worked across teh board so we can fidget with wee little buttons and menus. You're right, too, that you're just rehashing old arguments that have been played out here, in excruciating detail, too many times. Ain't the Internet grand? -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
Gfen, My viewpoint if you care: - Don't bash until you try it. This refers to the thumbwheels (with the current price-crash of the film bodies you can buy a PZ body at the price of chewing gum) and the kludge for the aperture (I played with Jaume's DL last week and I was not terribly inconvenienced, though I am as lazy and error-prone as you claimed earlier). - I am not terribly happy about it myself, but I would bet we will never see another camera with the aperture lever. A straightforward corollary of this is that the current arrangement is the best we can get. I doubt Nikon betters the Pentax scheme, though I may be wrong. - I am tempted by the SR feature. - I am extremely happy with film (despite just having lost three films on the post). - I am sticking with the MZ-S (though I should sell one of the two), but this has nothing to do with the aperture lever. Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
- Original Message - From: gfen [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Sat, 24 Jun 2006, Jostein wrote: Sisterhood, if you please. :-) Wait for it...No, I do not approve this namechange. :) I'll be sticking with Little Brother, thank you very much. ;) Well that's what you get for leaving us for so long. Welcome back anyway! :-) Seriously, the 645D is officially in the pipelines, as described by this news release from Pentax Japan just before PMA 2006: http://www.pentax.co.jp/english/news/2006/200615.html Also, if you look at the lens development roadmap, you'll see that they are reviving the 645-format 55mm lens, a focal lenght that was never produced in AF version for the N and NII. http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/en/lens/roadmap.pdf With an expected crop factor of 1.3 for the digital sensor, 55mm will become a normal lens. Photokina might look very interesting for Pentax users this year. :-) Jostein -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 03:15:33PM -0400, gfen wrote: On Sat, 24 Jun 2006, John Francis wrote: Get some new lenses (that's anything made in the last 25+ years) Sometimes they really don't make 'em like they used to, y'know...A moot argument for me, but not for everyone here. There are only a few of the pre-A K-mount lenses that measure up to their later counterparts in an objective (sic) test. And when you also take into account the different crop factor of the DSLRs, you'll often find that those lenses aren't as much use to you anymore - they're the wrong focal length. Pentax. Oh, wait - there aren't any. Still, switch anyway - that will show them! Or I can continue functioning along like I always have, but drop the broad support I've always given Pentax in the past for producing excellent optics and cameras and the right price. They still do produce excellent cameras and optics at the right price. If there's no DSLR that provides me the proper usage of the aperature ring, well then so be it. I didn't need a DSLR anyways. Then don't get one - stick with film, or a rangefinder, and you'll be happy. I'm not sure why there's a chip on your shoulder because some people have a preference for doing things they way they always have, and because some people don't like to give up features and methods that have worked across teh board so we can fidget with wee little buttons and menus. I have absolutely no problem with that. Although, as others have pointed out, you really shouldn't condemn things until you try them; some of the loudest complainers on this list in the past have found that once they put their prejudices aside things really weren't as bad as they had been fearing. In my initial answers I tried to be even-handed in the way I described what was, and was not, possible with the current Pentax DSLR bodies. It's only your continued arrogance in suggesting that what _you_ want to do is the only right or proper way to do things that irks me. You're right, too, that you're just rehashing old arguments that have been played out here, in excruciating detail, too many times. Ain't the Internet grand? Not really. But I'm bored ... -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Jun 24, 2006, at 11:27 AM, gfen wrote: My interest just waned that much more. I'm evidently going to continue being a bitter hold out .. You're going to be bitter a long time, I'm afraid. Sigh, I guess it was a sign of the times when the FAJ without the aperature rings came out. I presume the DA lenses are specifically designed to not cover full frame and are also FAJ mount? All DA lenses are similar to the FA-J in not having aperture rings. Control of the lens is up to the body. Maybe its time I buy that Leica after all and ascend to snobbery the proper way. :) ... With a close relationship to the manager at your bank? ;-) Gah, next thing someone'll tell me they've gone all funny, too... Leica is due to introduce a digital version of the M able to take its M-bayonet lenses later this year. I have also heard the rumor that they will introduce Leica-branded version of the Panasonic DMC-L1 SLR with 4/3 system lens mount. Life moves on. You either stick with what you have because you like it, or you move with the way things go. I do a little of both. I bought the Pentax DS, enjoyed a bevy of older lenses, but then upgraded one at a time to the latest series and sold off the older ones. You get the most out of a modern body with the latest lenses. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
gfen wrote: On Sat, 24 Jun 2006, John Francis wrote: Get some new lenses (that's anything made in the last 25+ years) Sometimes they really don't make 'em like they used to, y'know...A moot argument for me, but not for everyone here. Pentax. Oh, wait - there aren't any. Still, switch anyway - that will show them! Or I can continue functioning along like I always have, but drop the broad support I've always given Pentax in the past for producing excellent optics and cameras and the right price. If there's no DSLR that provides me the proper usage of the aperature ring, well then so be it. I didn't need a DSLR anyways. There are a few, the upcoming Panasonic DMC-L1 will allow for aperture rings (But only on Panasonic/Leica lenses, the Oly and Sigma lenses in that mount all lack them) and even has a shutter speed dial. The higher end Nikons will allow for them only with Manual Focus lenses (AF lenses require setting aperture from the body, as do the rare AI-P MF lenses, Program and Shutter priority require AF/AI-P lenses). The Pentax units (Which are all currently descended from the *ist film SLR, which uses the PZ-style interface) will allow you to use the aperture ring, but only with stop-down metering. -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
While you're within reason to expect a robocamera to work robomiracles, it seems somewhat perverse to insist that it perform these miracles while working with three-decade-old lenses. No matter what you believe, your MZ body is also crippled with these lenses, just not as obviously. As to wee buttons and menus -- what are you talking about? Oh, right, more complaints about the significantly smarter and easier to use implementation of common functions from someone who hasn't used the camera. I realize that you feel no one else in the universe is qualified to design a camera interface, but perhaps you should look at the camera before declaring that it's no good? When I first used an ME Super, I thought its controls were a disastrous miscalculation. After two weeks, I couldn't to back to a top-mounted dial for shutter speed. Everyone did it forever, but you know what? The top-mounted dial is a terrible control mechanism for a camera! The DS2 is remarkably well thought out for shooting. I realized today that I never need to look at the top of the camera for anything aside from exposure mode. If the top LCD was broken it would probablyvtake me weeks to notice. It's superfluous, but it's there to placate those accustomed to looking at the top of their cameras. -Aaron -Original Message- From: gfen [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm not sure why there's a chip on your shoulder because some people have a preference for doing things they way they always have, and because some people don't like to give up features and methods that have worked across teh board so we can fidget with wee little buttons and menus. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
Well said, Aaron. On Jun 24, 2006, at 11:40 PM, Aaron Reynolds wrote: While you're within reason to expect a robocamera to work robomiracles, it seems somewhat perverse to insist that it perform these miracles while working with three-decade-old lenses. No matter what you believe, your MZ body is also crippled with these lenses, just not as obviously. As to wee buttons and menus -- what are you talking about? Oh, right, more complaints about the significantly smarter and easier to use implementation of common functions from someone who hasn't used the camera. I realize that you feel no one else in the universe is qualified to design a camera interface, but perhaps you should look at the camera before declaring that it's no good? When I first used an ME Super, I thought its controls were a disastrous miscalculation. After two weeks, I couldn't to back to a top-mounted dial for shutter speed. Everyone did it forever, but you know what? The top-mounted dial is a terrible control mechanism for a camera! The DS2 is remarkably well thought out for shooting. I realized today that I never need to look at the top of the camera for anything aside from exposure mode. If the top LCD was broken it would probablyvtake me weeks to notice. It's superfluous, but it's there to placate those accustomed to looking at the top of their cameras. -Aaron -Original Message- From: gfen [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm not sure why there's a chip on your shoulder because some people have a preference for doing things they way they always have, and because some people don't like to give up features and methods that have worked across teh board so we can fidget with wee little buttons and menus. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Jun 24, 2006, at 8:26 AM, gfen wrote: Pentax has released this many digital cameras? The SLRs that we've seen: *ist D - the pro body, now eclipsed in some ways by the consumer bodies that followed *istDS - same sensor and viewfinder, different control layout, smaller, no battery grip, faster write speed and larger buffer *istDL - same as the DS but with a pentamirror instead of a pentaprism, fewer AF points, poorer flash handling, smaller buffer *istDS2 - same as the DS but with a bigger rear LCD *istDL2 - same as the DL but with a bigger rear LCD So really there are only three bodies -- the two 2 versions are just really minor updates. All of these except the DL2 are currently out of production. What's coming: K100D - midway between the DS2 and the DL2, with the pentamirror and a smaller buffer but with the addition of body-side anti-shake K110D - the K100D without anti-shake Those two will be out in the next few weeks. K10D - anti-shake, 10MP sensor, not much else is really known for certain. At least, not that people can talk about. -Aaron -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
The difference between the DL and DL2 is the AF unt (3 point vs 5 point), the LCD is the same 2.5 unit introduced on the DL, and common with the DS2. -Adam Aaron Reynolds wrote: On Jun 24, 2006, at 8:26 AM, gfen wrote: Pentax has released this many digital cameras? The SLRs that we've seen: *ist D - the pro body, now eclipsed in some ways by the consumer bodies that followed *istDS - same sensor and viewfinder, different control layout, smaller, no battery grip, faster write speed and larger buffer *istDL - same as the DS but with a pentamirror instead of a pentaprism, fewer AF points, poorer flash handling, smaller buffer *istDS2 - same as the DS but with a bigger rear LCD *istDL2 - same as the DL but with a bigger rear LCD So really there are only three bodies -- the two 2 versions are just really minor updates. All of these except the DL2 are currently out of production. What's coming: K100D - midway between the DS2 and the DL2, with the pentamirror and a smaller buffer but with the addition of body-side anti-shake K110D - the K100D without anti-shake Those two will be out in the next few weeks. K10D - anti-shake, 10MP sensor, not much else is really known for certain. At least, not that people can talk about. -Aaron -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Jun 25, 2006, at 12:50 AM, Adam Maas wrote: The difference between the DL and DL2 is the AF unt (3 point vs 5 point), the LCD is the same 2.5 unit introduced on the DL, and common with the DS2. See, I knew I'd screw some of it up. -Aaron -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
Aaron Reynolds wrote: On Jun 25, 2006, at 12:50 AM, Adam Maas wrote: The difference between the DL and DL2 is the AF unt (3 point vs 5 point), the LCD is the same 2.5 unit introduced on the DL, and common with the DS2. See, I knew I'd screw some of it up. -Aaron Don't worry about it ;-) It's hard to keep track of with all the minor differences. -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
What sort of mount does it use? Are M and A series lenses going to work properly? -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
It will because the camera allows you to manually select the focal length of the lens you put on it. 2006/6/23, gfen [EMAIL PROTECTED]: What sort of mount does it use? Are M and A series lenses going to work properly? -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- -- Thibault Massart aka Thibouille -- *ist-D,Z1,SFXn,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ;) ... -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Fri, 23 Jun 2006, Thibouille wrote: It will because the camera allows you to manually select the focal length of the lens you put on it. Can someone fill me in? Its been more than a few years since I've paid attention to anything that didn't require a tripod. :) I don't even know anything about the ist D. So, it needs to know the focal length? But, it'll stop down for me automatically, I don't have to manually stop down to do everything? I assume its not a full frame sensor, either, is it? -- http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye. http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Fri, Jun 23, 2006 at 02:11:59PM -0400, gfen wrote: On Fri, 23 Jun 2006, Thibouille wrote: It will because the camera allows you to manually select the focal length of the lens you put on it. Can someone fill me in? Its been more than a few years since I've paid attention to anything that didn't require a tripod. :) I don't even know anything about the ist D. So, it needs to know the focal length? But, it'll stop down for me automatically, I don't have to manually stop down to do everything? I assume its not a full frame sensor, either, is it? All the Pentax DSLRs ar so-called APS-C sensors - around 24mm x 16mm. This means the field of view you get with any lens is the same as the field of view you get on a 35mm camera with a lens 1.5x the focal length. The Shake Reduction circuitry on the K100D (and the forthcoming K10D) needs to know the focal length of the lens. With any of the auto-focus lenses (F or FA - basically anything introduced since 1987) the camera reads this information directly from the lens - you don't have to do anything. With older lenses you have to manually enter the focal length if you want to use shake reduction. All the Pentax DSLRs work best with lenses with an A setting on the aperture ring (if the lens even has an aperture ring). They lack the aperture sensing lever (this is what you'll often see being referred to perjoratively as the crippled K-mount), so with older lenses you pretty much have to work in metered manual mode. Even there, though, you can focus and compose at full aperture - the camera will stop down automatically during exposure. And while metering has to be done stopped down, rather than at full aperture, a single push of a button will stop the lens down, take a meter reading, select an appropriate shutter speed, and open the aperture again. This all happens faster than it just took you to read about it. But this is only necessary with really old lenses - (1975 - 1983). With the A lenses introduced in 1983 you get the full choice of manual, aperture priority, shutter priority or program exposures. And with the F, FA or DA lenses you also get auto-focus. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
We'll have to see about the K10D but the K100D seems to have the same mount as the D/DS/DL/2... gfen wrote: What sort of mount does it use? Are M and A series lenses going to work properly? -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout). -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
At least it will be, much, lighter than the D200 or D2H using the VR Nikon lens. Its pretty heavy, but the vr/sr systems really help. Looking forward for hands on inspection. Thnaks Ken Dave Quoting Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Great news. I'm looking forward to the 10 megapixel model. The older I get, the more I need IS :-). Paul K wrote: Hi all, I just encountered a very brief review of the effectiveness of the K100D (Beta) SR. Reviewer is a well known camera writer who always has a privilege for sneak previews. Cheers, Ken -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net Equine Photography in York Region -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
I missed the source of the review, please repeat the name of the source of the KD 100 SR review. DG At 03:43 PM 6/18/2006, you wrote: Thanks, Ken. Great report and good news about the SR. I too wish that Pentax was not so conservative. Pentax have been developing this system over so many years, way before Minolta announced the CCD shift method, and even during the film camera era. Ken, do you mean than even when Pentax produced only film cameras, they were nonetheless working on shake reduction for an eventual digital sensor? Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
Takeshita K wrote: I just encountered a very brief review of the effectiveness of the K100D (Beta) SR. That sounds great, but the thing I wonder about is how SR interacts with panning. That is, does it help, does it hurt, do you have to turn SR off when panning, ... -- Thanks, DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Jun 19, 2006, at 10:16 AM, Doug Franklin wrote: That sounds great, but the thing I wonder about is how SR interacts with panning. That is, does it help, does it hurt, do you have to turn SR off when panning, ... In general, the other cameras/lenses I've owned that have image stabilization have special modes for panning which implement stabilization in the vertical direction while unlocking it in the horizontal direction. Whether the Pentax solution includes this kind of stuff or recognizes and does the right thing regarding large scale movement in one direction while maintaining stabilization service in the other is as yet unknown. At the worst, you simply turn it off for panning work. Godfrey -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
K100D SR
Hi all, I just encountered a very brief review of the effectiveness of the K100D (Beta) SR. Reviewer is a well known camera writer who always has a privilege for sneak previews. He is reviewing a K100D + DA 21mm F3.2 AL Limited, but no review of the lens, only on the SR. He talks about the difference between the RS used for A10 (using micro-stepping motors) and the magnetic floating used for K100D which most PDMLers know by now. According to him (who interviewed Pentax engineers), Pentax have been developing this system over so many years, way before Minolta announced the CCD shift method, and even during the film camera era. His point is that the effectiveness of Pentax's SR is more than 2 stops which Pentax so far disclosed. But he found that this was an overly conservative estimate. He experimented it using various lenses and was convinced that it really has more than 3 stops effectiveness. He went on to say, as most of us here know again, that he has to wonder why Pentax have always been very timid (his word) in showing this sort of specs. He said he was so frustrated that Pentax do'nt usually brag about their accomplishments. Well, sounds like the Pentax's SR is indeed very effective. Just FYI. Cheers, Ken -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
Great news. I'm looking forward to the 10 megapixel model. The older I get, the more I need IS :-). Paul K wrote: Hi all, I just encountered a very brief review of the effectiveness of the K100D (Beta) SR. Reviewer is a well known camera writer who always has a privilege for sneak previews. He is reviewing a K100D + DA 21mm F3.2 AL Limited, but no review of the lens, only on the SR. He talks about the difference between the RS used for A10 (using micro-stepping motors) and the magnetic floating used for K100D which most PDMLers know by now. According to him (who interviewed Pentax engineers), Pentax have been developing this system over so many years, way before Minolta announced the CCD shift method, and even during the film camera era. His point is that the effectiveness of Pentax's SR is more than 2 stops which Pentax so far disclosed. But he found that this was an overly conservative estimate. He experimented it using various lenses and was convinced that it really has more than 3 stops effectiveness. He went on to say, as most of us here know again, that he has to wonder why Pentax have always been very timid (his word) in showing this sort of specs. He said he was so frustrated that Pentax do'nt usually brag about their accomplishments. Well, sounds like the Pentax's SR is indeed very effective. Just FYI. Cheers, Ken -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
K100D SR
Thanks, Ken. Great report and good news about the SR. I too wish that Pentax was not so conservative. Pentax have been developing this system over so many years, way before Minolta announced the CCD shift method, and even during the film camera era. Ken, do you mean than even when Pentax produced only film cameras, they were nonetheless working on shake reduction for an eventual digital sensor? Joe -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
On Jun 18, 2006, at 4:43 PM, Joseph Tainter wrote: Ken, do you mean than even when Pentax produced only film cameras, they were nonetheless working on shake reduction for an eventual digital sensor? Hi Joe, That's what this reviewer is saying. Pal was saying that Pentax had a basic patent for the IS and it is very conceivable that they had developed all sorts of designs for the SR over the years. I am sure that they were always trying to market some form of SR but film plane cannot be shifted so the CCD shift method must be a new concept. Whether they have been developing this particular method even during the film era, I do not know, but that's certainly what the reviewer says ;-). And it is very conceivable as Pentax, over the years, have developed many things but only few made into the market. Timid marketing? Maybe. But they appear to have transformed themselves into more of a risk taker since switching to digital. Cheers, ken -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: K100D SR
Thanks for the inside info, Ken. Three+ stops of shake reduction is good news indeed! Things are looking up for Pentax... Regards, Jim -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
