RE: Pentax 645D IR
> the ice-loving peoples of the world are one of Pentax's largest > markets, Frank. I'm surprised you don't know that. Just last year alone > sales reached nearly double figures, and there's rumoured to be a > special edition coming out that smells of herring. > > B We have a few days of -20 to -30 Celsius almost every winter here. Pentax are the only cameras that feel at home in my igloo at those temperatures. I would pass on a herring-scented edition, though. Somebody might accidentally eat it. kris -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: Pentax 645D IR
> From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of > knarftheria...@gmail.com > > Wow. > > I think that would be a really stupid marketing move by Pentax. > Especially the part about instructions bring in Inuit. From Northeast > Greenland for god sake! > > Pentax marketing department FAIL - again! > > What were they thinking? > the ice-loving peoples of the world are one of Pentax's largest markets, Frank. I'm surprised you don't know that. Just last year alone sales reached nearly double figures, and there's rumoured to be a special edition coming out that smells of herring. B > Cheers, > frank > > > --- Original Message --- > > From: "AlunFoto - Jostein Øksne" > Sent: December 14, 2012 12/14/12 > To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" > Subject: RE: Pentax 645D IR > > J.C.O. is entirely right. Once superseded by another model, the 645D > will stop taking pictures on any ISO other than 140, force JPG format, > and introduce a lag of 30 seconds before writing exposures to card. > During that lag, you will see a message on the chimp screen explaining > what you have to do to re-enable the camera's functionality. For > unknown reasons, this message will only appear in the language used by > the Inuits of North-East Greenland, who refuse to translate because > they find the text offensive. > > The next model will be a lot better. Among its most important > achievents will be abandoning the hopelessly inaccurate way of relaying > aperture information between camera and optics using a simple lever. > According to Pentax officials, that's on par with steam engines for > obsolence, and they are deeply ashamed about it still being there, > despite their best efforts to move forward. > > Just FYI, you know, like, :-) > > Cheers, > Jostein -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: Pentax 645D IR
Wow. I think that would be a really stupid marketing move by Pentax. Especially the part about instructions bring in Inuit. From Northeast Greenland for god sake! Pentax marketing department FAIL - again! What were they thinking? Cheers, frank --- Original Message --- From: "AlunFoto - Jostein Øksne" Sent: December 14, 2012 12/14/12 To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List" Subject: RE: Pentax 645D IR J.C.O. is entirely right. Once superseded by another model, the 645D will stop taking pictures on any ISO other than 140, force JPG format, and introduce a lag of 30 seconds before writing exposures to card. During that lag, you will see a message on the chimp screen explaining what you have to do to re-enable the camera's functionality. For unknown reasons, this message will only appear in the language used by the Inuits of North-East Greenland, who refuse to translate because they find the text offensive. The next model will be a lot better. Among its most important achievents will be abandoning the hopelessly inaccurate way of relaying aperture information between camera and optics using a simple lever. According to Pentax officials, that's on par with steam engines for obsolence, and they are deeply ashamed about it still being there, despite their best efforts to move forward. Just FYI, you know, like, :-) Cheers, Jostein "J.C. O'Connell" wrote: >And presto, you have a $10K obsolete piece o crap original 645D. > >- >J.C.O'Connell >hifis...@gate.net >- > >-Original Message- >From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of P. J. Alling >Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 12:53 PM >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >Subject: Re: Pentax 645D IR > >Unfortunatly this doesn't address the main problem, The Nikon D800 >pretty much equals the image quality of low end medium format DSLRs in >a >35mm body format. Pentax Ricoh needs to announce a higher resolution >improved image quality upgrade to the 645d real soon now. > >On 12/13/2012 2:26 AM, Dario Bonazza wrote: >> Looks like it is: >> http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/pentax-645d-ir-announced.html >> -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
On Dec 15, 2012, at 4:39 PM, P. J. Alling wrote: > On 12/15/2012 4:34 PM, Stan Halpin wrote: >> On Dec 15, 2012, at 3:27 PM, Larry Colen wrote: >> >>> On Dec 15, 2012, at 11:25 AM, David Parsons wrote: >>> ... Deciding only based on specs is foolhardy. >>> Buying a camera based only on specifications is like marrying someone based >>> only on their height, weight and hair color. Sometimes the numbers are >>> important, sometimes things like personality and how they feel in your >>> hands are much more important. >>> >> Particularly given the modern prevalence of plastic in bodies . . . >> >> stan > ... are you still taking about cameras Stan? Sorry, were we talking about cameras? I thought Larry had moved to a new topic . . . ;-) stan -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
On 12/15/2012 4:34 PM, Stan Halpin wrote: On Dec 15, 2012, at 3:27 PM, Larry Colen wrote: On Dec 15, 2012, at 11:25 AM, David Parsons wrote: ... Deciding only based on specs is foolhardy. Buying a camera based only on specifications is like marrying someone based only on their height, weight and hair color. Sometimes the numbers are important, sometimes things like personality and how they feel in your hands are much more important. Particularly given the modern prevalence of plastic in bodies . . . stan ... are you still taking about cameras Stan? -- Don't lose heart, they might want to cut it out, and they'll want to avoid a lengthly search. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
On Dec 15, 2012, at 3:27 PM, Larry Colen wrote: > > On Dec 15, 2012, at 11:25 AM, David Parsons wrote: > >> ... Deciding only based on specs is foolhardy. > > Buying a camera based only on specifications is like marrying someone based > only on their height, weight and hair color. Sometimes the numbers are > important, sometimes things like personality and how they feel in your hands > are much more important. > Particularly given the modern prevalence of plastic in bodies . . . stan -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
David Parsons wrote: > Photographers that want to shoot MFD are going to use MFD, not FF > 35mm. I agree with that. > It doesn't matter that the D800 has a similar number of pixels. It might. By far and away the biggest reason for shooting MF film was the increase in resolution and the ability to capture finer gradations in light and color as opposed to smaller media. Upper end 24x36 digital pretty much fulfills that for numerous photographers. > The DoF is different, handling is different, sensor performance is different. That's true. Are those differences always desired, or are they often just part and parcel with moving to a larger format for the gain in resolution and range? For the price difference, there'd better be some pretty specific attributes that aren't achievable or able to be duplicated in a smaller body. For a large number of MF film photographers, there wasn't enough difference to prevent them moving to high resolution 24x36 format Canon's. Especially in terms of nature, landscape, non-studio modeling, action, the portability and weight makes the smaller format mighty attractive. Price surely makes a difference. > Having held and looked through a D700 (close enough to a D800) and a > 645D, they are nothing alike. You'd never want to pick one over the > other without actually using them. Deciding only based on specs is > foolhardy. I suppose there will always be a reason for MF digital, and given that sensor technology and usable resolution continue to improve, there will no doubt be some applications that demand MF digital. However, the lines blurred and they continue to blur. True, deciding only on specs would be foolhardy. Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
On Dec 15, 2012, at 11:25 AM, David Parsons wrote: > Photographers that want to shoot MFD are going to use MFD, not FF > 35mm. It doesn't matter that the D800 has a similar number of pixels. > > The DoF is different, handling is different, sensor performance is different. > > Having held and looked through a D700 (close enough to a D800) and a > 645D, they are nothing alike. You'd never want to pick one over the > other without actually using them. Deciding only based on specs is > foolhardy. Buying a camera based only on specifications is like marrying someone based only on their height, weight and hair color. Sometimes the numbers are important, sometimes things like personality and how they feel in your hands are much more important. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
Photographers that want to shoot MFD are going to use MFD, not FF 35mm. It doesn't matter that the D800 has a similar number of pixels. The DoF is different, handling is different, sensor performance is different. Having held and looked through a D700 (close enough to a D800) and a 645D, they are nothing alike. You'd never want to pick one over the other without actually using them. Deciding only based on specs is foolhardy. On Sat, Dec 15, 2012 at 12:51 PM, Tom C wrote: >> From: "P. J. Alling" >> >> DxOMark gives sensor in the D800E with an overall rating of 96 for >> quality, and the Pentax 645D an 82. The Nikon has an effective EV range >> of over 14 stops the Pentax about 12. The Nikon has a 36.3mp sensor >> with linear values of 7360x4912, which gives a 300dpi print size without >> undue manipulation of 24 1/2" x 16 1/3". The 645D has a 40mp sensor >> with linear values of 7264x5440, which gives a 300dpi print size of >> roughly 24 1/5" x 18 1/10". Now the actual sensor size of the Nikon is >> 35.9mm x 24mm, and the Pentax is 44mm x 33mm so given that both >> manufactures decided to give 100% viewfinder coverage with say 90% >> magnification the Pentax would win out, but since neither manufacture >> decided to do that and I haven't actually been able to look through >> either finder, but only go by written specifications* I can't say which >> finder is better, at the cost differential, if I needed the resolution, >> I'd have to buy the Nikon. Especially as I'm starting from zero with >> both systems. >> >> Based on this it's evident that Pentax must upgrade the 645D to stay >> competitive, but that said the same is true of any maker of medium >> format backs for existing systems. The only advantage Pentax has here >> is that the whole 645D camera body usually costs less than a back for >> another system. Pentax's other disadvantages are it's lack of lenses, >> only two currently in production, and the fact that it was designed to >> medium format requirements, where as the Nikon is a general purpose >> camera, designed to near sports photography requirements, that delivers >> medium format image quality. >> >> *Based on those specifications of 100% coverage with 70% magnification >> for the Nikon and 95% coverage and 65% magnification for the Pentax, I'd >> say it's a wash anyway, once again given that I've never actually been >> able to look through either. > > The price difference is roughly $5700 ($6000 if the non-E D800). One > could have 2 D800's and almost $2800 left over for lenses or 1 D800 > and $5800 left over for lenses, or a new computer to process the > images, or photography vehicle, or X months mortgage payments. > > Not, to beat 'a dead horse until it's nothing but a smoking crater > where a greasy spot used to be', as Larry so eloquently put it. > > By the time the 645D was released many medium format shooters were > already moving from film to high-end Canon 24x36 DSLR's. It just > wasn't/isn't Pentax medium format that's feeling the pressure, it's > medium format in general. > > Tom C. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- David Parsons Photography http://www.davidparsonsphoto.com Aloha Photographer Photoblog http://alohaphotog.blogspot.com/ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
> From: "P. J. Alling" > > DxOMark gives sensor in the D800E with an overall rating of 96 for > quality, and the Pentax 645D an 82. The Nikon has an effective EV range > of over 14 stops the Pentax about 12. The Nikon has a 36.3mp sensor > with linear values of 7360x4912, which gives a 300dpi print size without > undue manipulation of 24 1/2" x 16 1/3". The 645D has a 40mp sensor > with linear values of 7264x5440, which gives a 300dpi print size of > roughly 24 1/5" x 18 1/10". Now the actual sensor size of the Nikon is > 35.9mm x 24mm, and the Pentax is 44mm x 33mm so given that both > manufactures decided to give 100% viewfinder coverage with say 90% > magnification the Pentax would win out, but since neither manufacture > decided to do that and I haven't actually been able to look through > either finder, but only go by written specifications* I can't say which > finder is better, at the cost differential, if I needed the resolution, > I'd have to buy the Nikon. Especially as I'm starting from zero with > both systems. > > Based on this it's evident that Pentax must upgrade the 645D to stay > competitive, but that said the same is true of any maker of medium > format backs for existing systems. The only advantage Pentax has here > is that the whole 645D camera body usually costs less than a back for > another system. Pentax's other disadvantages are it's lack of lenses, > only two currently in production, and the fact that it was designed to > medium format requirements, where as the Nikon is a general purpose > camera, designed to near sports photography requirements, that delivers > medium format image quality. > > *Based on those specifications of 100% coverage with 70% magnification > for the Nikon and 95% coverage and 65% magnification for the Pentax, I'd > say it's a wash anyway, once again given that I've never actually been > able to look through either. The price difference is roughly $5700 ($6000 if the non-E D800). One could have 2 D800's and almost $2800 left over for lenses or 1 D800 and $5800 left over for lenses, or a new computer to process the images, or photography vehicle, or X months mortgage payments. Not, to beat 'a dead horse until it's nothing but a smoking crater where a greasy spot used to be', as Larry so eloquently put it. By the time the 645D was released many medium format shooters were already moving from film to high-end Canon 24x36 DSLR's. It just wasn't/isn't Pentax medium format that's feeling the pressure, it's medium format in general. Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
On Dec 14, 2012, at 09:23 , William Robb wrote: > Pentax set themselves up to fail in this regard some 25 years ago when they > decided to become the budget brand. They set themselves up as a brand that no > one would spend real money on. > It's probably got a lot to do with why you bought into Pentax in the first > place. And is why many of us continue to invest in the brand. Joseph McAllister pentax...@mac.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
> From: Matthew Hunt > >> In retrospect it was an emotional expedient exaggeration influenced by >> a Canadian beverage which shall remain nameless. > > You gotta lay off the poutine smoothies. That's way over my head Matthew. I know it has something to do with french fries in a blender. :) I simply had some CC. Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
On 15 December 2012 01:38, William Robb wrote: > I guess viewfinders don't matter any more. The 645 is a joy to look through, > the D800 has, by comparison, a dinky little viewfinder with dancing lights > flashing seemingly at random. I realize this is a small thing that probably > won't matter to many people, but the 645 is a much nicer camera to work > with. I must say I'm still a bit baffled every time I read praise for the 645 finder, granted I've only had experience with the original 645 (I owned two over several years). As far as I'm aware all variations to date used the "telescope" finder device to extend the eyepiece from the rear of the prism in order the clear the bulky film cassette. I always found it a pain to centre my view in the finder (sans glasses), I found that often it was a chore to see the whole of the frame. Assuming that the 645 finder design hasn't transmogrified since the early days I am pretty sure that I would prefer the D800 finder over the 645D finder information overload or not. -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
DxOMark gives sensor in the D800E with an overall rating of 96 for quality, and the Pentax 645D an 82. The Nikon has an effective EV range of over 14 stops the Pentax about 12. The Nikon has a 36.3mp sensor with linear values of 7360x4912, which gives a 300dpi print size without undue manipulation of 24 1/2" x 16 1/3". The 645D has a 40mp sensor with linear values of 7264x5440, which gives a 300dpi print size of roughly 24 1/5" x 18 1/10". Now the actual sensor size of the Nikon is 35.9mm x 24mm, and the Pentax is 44mm x 33mm so given that both manufactures decided to give 100% viewfinder coverage with say 90% magnification the Pentax would win out, but since neither manufacture decided to do that and I haven't actually been able to look through either finder, but only go by written specifications* I can't say which finder is better, at the cost differential, if I needed the resolution, I'd have to buy the Nikon. Especially as I'm starting from zero with both systems. Based on this it's evident that Pentax must upgrade the 645D to stay competitive, but that said the same is true of any maker of medium format backs for existing systems. The only advantage Pentax has here is that the whole 645D camera body usually costs less than a back for another system. Pentax's other disadvantages are it's lack of lenses, only two currently in production, and the fact that it was designed to medium format requirements, where as the Nikon is a general purpose camera, designed to near sports photography requirements, that delivers medium format image quality. *Based on those specifications of 100% coverage with 70% magnification for the Nikon and 95% coverage and 65% magnification for the Pentax, I'd say it's a wash anyway, once again given that I've never actually been able to look through either. On 12/14/2012 9:51 AM, George Sinos wrote: I guess if all you look at is the megapixel count, the two cameras aren't all that different. And for a lot of applications the d800 is going to be sufficient. The tests certainly show that technical differences are small. But as Bill points out, there will be differences that go beyond counting bits. The sensor on the 645 is 33x44mm. This is larger than the 35mm full frame sensors in many DSLRs. That changes a few things. The size of the viewfinder image, the relationships among lens focal length, depth of field, angle of view, etc. Different sizes of media format usually bring a difference in experience other than numbers of pixels and information quality. Whether these differences are important to you, or worth the difference in price become personal decisions. gs George Sinos gsi...@gmail.com www.georgesphotos.net plus.georgesinos.com On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 8:38 AM, William Robb wrote: On 13/12/2012 11:25 PM, Tom C wrote: From: William Robb On 13/12/2012 11:57 AM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: And presto, you have a $10K obsolete piece o crap original 645D. How is it obsolete? I don't think they stop working when another camera comes out, and when the 645D was introduced, it was rather a game changer. I have spent some time with the 645D. It will take more than a 36mp small format camera to make the 645D obsolete. But, one would have to use both to know this. I have. Have you? Not intending to butt heads with you Bill. It's obviously not obsolete, but it loses a degree of relevance. If one can arguably get a camera that's quite close in resolution and other performance factors, with a huge lens catalog to choose from. for about 1/3 the price... I looked yesterday and cannot remember the figures, but the DxO scores were fairly close between the aforementioned bodies (one troll to another). Tom C, I guess viewfinders don't matter any more. The 645 is a joy to look through, the D800 has, by comparison, a dinky little viewfinder with dancing lights flashing seemingly at random. I realize this is a small thing that probably won't matter to many people, but the 645 is a much nicer camera to work with. That used to mean something. It seems these days, all that matters is the number of megapixels. -- William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- Don't lose heart, they might want to cut it out, and they'll want to avoid a lengthly search. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 1:57 PM, John Sessoms wrote: > Wouldn't bother me. With only a very few exceptions all of my lenses are > either DG (i.e. full frame digital) or legacy film lenses that already > cover 24x36 mm. Yep, yep. What John said. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
From: William Robb Possibly Pentax should have been a bit more down to earth and spent their R&D money on a FF system that far more people would be interested in obtaining. With the 645D, even most Pentaxophiles give it simply a cursory glance because it's more or less unattainable. It wouldn't have mattered what they did, people would still bitch about it. If they had released a 24x36 mm K-Mount, then people would be bitching that their present lens line up was deficient, and that Pentax had abandoned them with their smaller image circle lenses, and then they would have to deal with the inevitable complaints about too little/too late, and why are they wasting their money on a market niche they don't have a hope of breaking in to in any significant way. Wouldn't bother me. With only a very few exceptions all of my lenses are either DG (i.e. full frame digital) or legacy film lenses that already cover 24x36 mm. I might have to replace my 18-55 kit lens, but on a 24x36 mm sensor my 28-70f/2.8 has the same field of view, so maybe not. Other than that I don't think it would be that much problem. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
William Robb wrote: >I don't bother to complain any more, but it's pretty much a given that >APS-C sized viewfinders suck bunny bums. Quote of the year. -- Mark Roberts - Photography & Multimedia www.robertstech.com -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
On 14/12/2012 10:58 AM, Tom C wrote: From: William Robb I guess viewfinders don't matter any more. The 645 is a joy to look through, the D800 has, by comparison, a dinky little viewfinder with dancing lights flashing seemingly at random. I realize this is a small thing that probably won't matter to many people, but the 645 is a much nicer camera to work with. That used to mean something. It seems these days, all that matters is the number of megapixels. And in comparison to an APS-C K-5, how's the viewfinder on a D800? Big, bright, spacious and a joy to look through, but I don't hear complaints about the K-5 viewfinder. :) I don't bother to complain any more, but it's pretty much a given that APS-C sized viewfinders suck bunny bums. The D800 finder is very nice, albeit somewhat busy. One of the differences between the two cameras that's obvious is the price/performance ratio. The price of a 645D pretty much puts it out of most people's reach, and if not their reach, it's costly enough that it's hard to justify. At 1/3 of that, a D800/E is still a costly item, but is down in a range where many more people are willing and able to spend the money. One could easily say the same thing about any Pentax product as compared to any Nikon product, no matter what the price range. Pentax set themselves up to fail in this regard some 25 years ago when they decided to become the budget brand. They set themselves up as a brand that no one would spend real money on. It's probably got a lot to do with why you bought into Pentax in the first place. I haven't used a 645D, but buying into that system is more costly than buying into a FF system from another brand, not to mention lens choice being a bit sparse, especially in AF. My guess is that the D800/E outsells the 645D at a factor greater than 100-to-1. Nothing much has changed since the film days in this regard. Thirty-five mm "pro grade" cameras probably outsold medium format cameras of all types by a factor of over 100:1. While a camera may not become obsolete because of newer models, they do become unused. I've spent $1200 apiece on three Pentax paperweights (*ist D, K20D, K-7). Now more on Nikon/Sony and I plan on using it through at least several generations of upgrades. This is the nature of digital cameras. Had you bought into Nikon or Canon, you would have the same complaint. Every photographer I know has, if they are buying recent technology, has multiple DSLRs sitting around doing nothing. At this point, because the technology has matured, it will probably be easier to sit on today's technology for a lot longer. This applies to all manufacturers, not just Nikon or Sony. Possibly Pentax should have been a bit more down to earth and spent their R&D money on a FF system that far more people would be interested in obtaining. With the 645D, even most Pentaxophiles give it simply a cursory glance because it's more or less unattainable. It wouldn't have mattered what they did, people would still bitch about it. If they had released a 24x36 mm K-Mount, then people would be bitching that their present lens line up was deficient, and that Pentax had abandoned them with their smaller image circle lenses, and then they would have to deal with the inevitable complaints about too little/too late, and why are they wasting their money on a market niche they don't have a hope of breaking in to in any significant way. At least with the 645 they did a camera that operates in a niche that the "full frame" cameras don't operate in, and when the thing came out, 40mp was a lot of mp. That it no longer is points to how fast digital technology has matured. I would expect the next generation of 645D, if they follow up on it, will up the megapixel ante significantly. Tom C. (My favorite story is The Three Billy Goats Gruff) Mine is "The Courage of the Early Morning", even though Billy Bishop's war record has pretty much been debunked. -- William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: Pentax 645D IR
This looks like it's going to be fun. I probably should make popcorn before I settle in. From: AlunFoto - Jostein ?ksne J.C.O. is entirely right. Once superseded by another model, the 645D will stop taking pictures on any ISO other than 140, force JPG format, and introduce a lag of 30 seconds before writing exposures to card. During that lag, you will see a message on the chimp screen explaining what you have to do to re-enable the camera's functionality. For unknown reasons, this message will only appear in the language used by the Inuits of North-East Greenland, who refuse to translate because they find the text offensive. The next model will be a lot better. Among its most important achievents will be abandoning the hopelessly inaccurate way of relaying aperture information between camera and optics using a simple lever. According to Pentax officials, that's on par with steam engines for obsolence, and they are deeply ashamed about it still being there, despite their best efforts to move forward. Just FYI, you know, like, :-) Cheers, Jostein "J.C. O'Connell" wrote: And presto, you have a $10K obsolete piece o crap original 645D. - J.C.O'Connell hifis...@gate.net - -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of P. J. Alling Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 12:53 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Pentax 645D IR Unfortunatly this doesn't address the main problem, The Nikon D800 pretty much equals the image quality of low end medium format DSLRs in a 35mm body format. Pentax Ricoh needs to announce a higher resolution improved image quality upgrade to the 645d real soon now. On 12/13/2012 2:26 AM, Dario Bonazza wrote: Looks like it is: http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/pentax-645d-ir-announced.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
Maybe we should start a fantasy league for cameras. -- Walt On 12/14/2012 10:58 AM, Tom C wrote: From: William Robb I guess viewfinders don't matter any more. The 645 is a joy to look through, the D800 has, by comparison, a dinky little viewfinder with dancing lights flashing seemingly at random. I realize this is a small thing that probably won't matter to many people, but the 645 is a much nicer camera to work with. That used to mean something. It seems these days, all that matters is the number of megapixels. And in comparison to an APS-C K-5, how's the viewfinder on a D800? Big, bright, spacious and a joy to look through, but I don't hear complaints about the K-5 viewfinder. :) One of the differences between the two cameras that's obvious is the price/performance ratio. The price of a 645D pretty much puts it out of most people's reach, and if not their reach, it's costly enough that it's hard to justify. At 1/3 of that, a D800/E is still a costly item, but is down in a range where many more people are willing and able to spend the money. I haven't used a 645D, but buying into that system is more costly than buying into a FF system from another brand, not to mention lens choice being a bit sparse, especially in AF. My guess is that the D800/E outsells the 645D at a factor greater than 100-to-1. While a camera may not become obsolete because of newer models, they do become unused. I've spent $1200 apiece on three Pentax paperweights (*ist D, K20D, K-7). Now more on Nikon/Sony and I plan on using it through at least several generations of upgrades. Possibly Pentax should have been a bit more down to earth and spent their R&D money on a FF system that far more people would be interested in obtaining. With the 645D, even most Pentaxophiles give it simply a cursory glance because it's more or less unattainable. Tom C. (My favorite story is The Three Billy Goats Gruff) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
> From: William Robb > > I guess viewfinders don't matter any more. The 645 is a joy to look > through, the D800 has, by comparison, a dinky little viewfinder with > dancing lights flashing seemingly at random. I realize this is a small > thing that probably won't matter to many people, but the 645 is a much > nicer camera to work with. > That used to mean something. It seems these days, all that matters is > the number of megapixels. And in comparison to an APS-C K-5, how's the viewfinder on a D800? Big, bright, spacious and a joy to look through, but I don't hear complaints about the K-5 viewfinder. :) One of the differences between the two cameras that's obvious is the price/performance ratio. The price of a 645D pretty much puts it out of most people's reach, and if not their reach, it's costly enough that it's hard to justify. At 1/3 of that, a D800/E is still a costly item, but is down in a range where many more people are willing and able to spend the money. I haven't used a 645D, but buying into that system is more costly than buying into a FF system from another brand, not to mention lens choice being a bit sparse, especially in AF. My guess is that the D800/E outsells the 645D at a factor greater than 100-to-1. While a camera may not become obsolete because of newer models, they do become unused. I've spent $1200 apiece on three Pentax paperweights (*ist D, K20D, K-7). Now more on Nikon/Sony and I plan on using it through at least several generations of upgrades. Possibly Pentax should have been a bit more down to earth and spent their R&D money on a FF system that far more people would be interested in obtaining. With the 645D, even most Pentaxophiles give it simply a cursory glance because it's more or less unattainable. Tom C. (My favorite story is The Three Billy Goats Gruff) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Tom C wrote: > In retrospect it was an emotional expedient exaggeration influenced by > a Canadian beverage which shall remain nameless. You gotta lay off the poutine smoothies. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
> From: Larry Colen > Tom, your recent "Pentax is dead" post may not have been meant as a troll, > which I guess just shows your prowess when you can > do that good of a job without even trying. In retrospect it was an emotional expedient exaggeration influenced by a Canadian beverage which shall remain nameless. Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
> From: Stan Halpin >>> From: Darren Addy >>> >>> Just a reminder: The odds may be long that you will beat Tom, but >>> nominations for PDML Troll of the Year are still open until Dec. 31st. >> >> It's a shame when that word's misused to label one's who simply don't >> agree with a viewpoint or don't share one's enthusiasm.However, if you >> feel the word applies, so be it. At least I'm an honest one. >> >> Tom C. > > Tom, it is always useful and refreshing to hear a contrarian view from an > accomplished photographer, even when you are dead > wrong. Without differing views, we would be the PML, and what is the fun of > that? So, I say, hang in there! > > stan LOL. Stan. I'll take a complement like that any day. :) Thanks. Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
I guess if all you look at is the megapixel count, the two cameras aren't all that different. And for a lot of applications the d800 is going to be sufficient. The tests certainly show that technical differences are small. But as Bill points out, there will be differences that go beyond counting bits. The sensor on the 645 is 33x44mm. This is larger than the 35mm full frame sensors in many DSLRs. That changes a few things. The size of the viewfinder image, the relationships among lens focal length, depth of field, angle of view, etc. Different sizes of media format usually bring a difference in experience other than numbers of pixels and information quality. Whether these differences are important to you, or worth the difference in price become personal decisions. gs George Sinos gsi...@gmail.com www.georgesphotos.net plus.georgesinos.com On Fri, Dec 14, 2012 at 8:38 AM, William Robb wrote: > On 13/12/2012 11:25 PM, Tom C wrote: >>> >>> From: William Robb >>> >>> On 13/12/2012 11:57 AM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: And presto, you have a $10K obsolete piece o crap original 645D. >>> How is it obsolete? I don't think they stop working when another camera >>> comes out, and when the 645D was introduced, it was rather a game >>> changer. >>> I have spent some time with the 645D. It will take more than a 36mp >>> small format camera to make the 645D obsolete. >>> But, one would have to use both to know this. >>> I have. >>> Have you? >> >> >> Not intending to butt heads with you Bill. It's obviously not >> obsolete, but it loses a degree of relevance. If one can arguably get >> a camera that's quite close in resolution and other performance >> factors, with a huge lens catalog to choose from. for about 1/3 the >> price... >> >> I looked yesterday and cannot remember the figures, but the DxO >> scores were fairly close between the aforementioned bodies (one troll >> to another). >> >> Tom C, >> > > I guess viewfinders don't matter any more. The 645 is a joy to look through, > the D800 has, by comparison, a dinky little viewfinder with dancing lights > flashing seemingly at random. I realize this is a small thing that probably > won't matter to many people, but the 645 is a much nicer camera to work > with. > That used to mean something. It seems these days, all that matters is the > number of megapixels. > > -- > > William Robb > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
On 13/12/2012 11:25 PM, Tom C wrote: From: William Robb On 13/12/2012 11:57 AM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: And presto, you have a $10K obsolete piece o crap original 645D. How is it obsolete? I don't think they stop working when another camera comes out, and when the 645D was introduced, it was rather a game changer. I have spent some time with the 645D. It will take more than a 36mp small format camera to make the 645D obsolete. But, one would have to use both to know this. I have. Have you? Not intending to butt heads with you Bill. It's obviously not obsolete, but it loses a degree of relevance. If one can arguably get a camera that's quite close in resolution and other performance factors, with a huge lens catalog to choose from. for about 1/3 the price... I looked yesterday and cannot remember the figures, but the DxO scores were fairly close between the aforementioned bodies (one troll to another). Tom C, I guess viewfinders don't matter any more. The 645 is a joy to look through, the D800 has, by comparison, a dinky little viewfinder with dancing lights flashing seemingly at random. I realize this is a small thing that probably won't matter to many people, but the 645 is a much nicer camera to work with. That used to mean something. It seems these days, all that matters is the number of megapixels. -- William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
In 1979 I worked as an assistant at a small studio. Making colour prints was one of my duties. I can tell you with absolute authority that a print made on Kodak Ektaprint 2 paper from a C41 processed Kodak VPS negative that came out of a Leica M5 was inferior to the product of a 2MP point @ shoot in 2002. My conclusion therefore is that analogue Leicas no longer had a reason to exist 10 years ago, therefore they are no better than scrap metal. Anyone who possesses one of these wastes of resources is welcome to send it my way, and I'll dispose of it in the most environmentally sensitive way possible. regards, Anthony On 14 December 2012 19:09, AlunFoto - Jostein Øksne wrote: > J.C.O. is entirely right. Once superseded by another model, the 645D will > stop taking pictures on any ISO other than 140, force JPG format, and > introduce a lag of 30 seconds before writing exposures to card. During that > lag, you will see a message on the chimp screen explaining what you have to > do to re-enable the camera's functionality. For unknown reasons, this message > will only appear in the language used by the Inuits of North-East Greenland, > who refuse to translate because they find the text offensive. > > The next model will be a lot better. Among its most important achievents will > be abandoning the hopelessly inaccurate way of relaying aperture information > between camera and optics using a simple lever. According to Pentax > officials, that's on par with steam engines for obsolence, and they are > deeply ashamed about it still being there, despite their best efforts to move > forward. > > Just FYI, you know, like, :-) > > Cheers, > Jostein > > "J.C. O'Connell" wrote: > >>And presto, you have a $10K obsolete piece o crap original 645D. >> -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
On 13 December 2012 18:26, Dario Bonazza wrote: > Looks like it is: > http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/pentax-645d-ir-announced.html It's December, not April? :( -- Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio) Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: Pentax 645D IR
J.C.O. is entirely right. Once superseded by another model, the 645D will stop taking pictures on any ISO other than 140, force JPG format, and introduce a lag of 30 seconds before writing exposures to card. During that lag, you will see a message on the chimp screen explaining what you have to do to re-enable the camera's functionality. For unknown reasons, this message will only appear in the language used by the Inuits of North-East Greenland, who refuse to translate because they find the text offensive. The next model will be a lot better. Among its most important achievents will be abandoning the hopelessly inaccurate way of relaying aperture information between camera and optics using a simple lever. According to Pentax officials, that's on par with steam engines for obsolence, and they are deeply ashamed about it still being there, despite their best efforts to move forward. Just FYI, you know, like, :-) Cheers, Jostein "J.C. O'Connell" wrote: >And presto, you have a $10K obsolete piece o crap original 645D. > >- >J.C.O'Connell >hifis...@gate.net >- > >-Original Message- >From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of P. J. Alling >Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 12:53 PM >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >Subject: Re: Pentax 645D IR > >Unfortunatly this doesn't address the main problem, The Nikon D800 >pretty much equals the image quality of low end medium format DSLRs in >a >35mm body format. Pentax Ricoh needs to announce a higher resolution >improved image quality upgrade to the 645d real soon now. > >On 12/13/2012 2:26 AM, Dario Bonazza wrote: >> Looks like it is: >> http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/pentax-645d-ir-announced.html >> -- Sent from my Android phone with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
> From: William Robb > > On 13/12/2012 11:57 AM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: >> And presto, you have a $10K obsolete piece o crap original 645D. >> >> > How is it obsolete? I don't think they stop working when another camera > comes out, and when the 645D was introduced, it was rather a game changer. > I have spent some time with the 645D. It will take more than a 36mp > small format camera to make the 645D obsolete. > But, one would have to use both to know this. > I have. > Have you? Not intending to butt heads with you Bill. It's obviously not obsolete, but it loses a degree of relevance. If one can arguably get a camera that's quite close in resolution and other performance factors, with a huge lens catalog to choose from. for about 1/3 the price... I looked yesterday and cannot remember the figures, but the DxO scores were fairly close between the aforementioned bodies (one troll to another). Tom C, -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
On Dec 13, 2012, at 12:55 PM, Tom C wrote: >> From: Darren Addy >> >> Just a reminder: The odds may be long that you will beat Tom, but >> nominations for PDML Troll of the Year are still open until Dec. 31st. > > It's a shame when that word's misused to label one's who simply don't > agree with a viewpoint or don't share one's enthusiasm.However, if you > feel the word applies, so be it. At least I'm an honest one. > > Tom C. Tom, your recent "Pentax is dead" post may not have been meant as a troll, which I guess just shows your prowess when you can do that good of a job without even trying. -- Larry Colen l...@red4est.com sent from i4est -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
On 13/12/2012 11:57 AM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: And presto, you have a $10K obsolete piece o crap original 645D. How is it obsolete? I don't think they stop working when another camera comes out, and when the 645D was introduced, it was rather a game changer. I have spent some time with the 645D. It will take more than a 36mp small format camera to make the 645D obsolete. But, one would have to use both to know this. I have. Have you? -- William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
Ya coulda been a CONTENDA, John! A contenda, I tell ya. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
From: Darren Addy On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Tom C wrote: From: "J.C. O'Connell" And presto, you have a $10K obsolete piece o crap original 645D. -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of P. J. Alling Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 12:53 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Pentax 645D IR Unfortunatly this doesn't address the main problem, The Nikon D800 pretty much equals the image quality of low end medium format DSLRs in a 35mm body format. Pentax Ricoh needs to announce a higher resolution improved image quality upgrade to the 645d real soon now. On 12/13/2012 2:26 AM, Dario Bonazza wrote: Looks like it is: http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/pentax-645d-ir-announced.html Don't worry though Pentax isn't behind... Tom C. Just a reminder: The odds may be long that you will beat Tom, but nominations for PDML Troll of the Year are still open until Dec. 31st. Fat lot of good that'll do me when I can't even get organized enough to submit to the PUG; not even to the open gallery. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
On 13/12/12, Stan Halpin, discombobulated, unleashed: >it is always useful and refreshing to hear a contrarian view from an >accomplished photographer, even when you are dead wrong. OMG Mark! -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__Broadcast, Corporate, || (O) |Web Video Producion -- _ -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
All around--the whole thread--too funny! :-) Cheers, Christine On Dec 13, 2012, at 3:29 PM, Stan Halpin wrote: > > On Dec 13, 2012, at 3:55 PM, Tom C wrote: > >>> From: Darren Addy >>> >>> Just a reminder: The odds may be long that you will beat Tom, but >>> nominations for PDML Troll of the Year are still open until Dec. 31st. >> >> It's a shame when that word's misused to label one's who simply don't >> agree with a viewpoint or don't share one's enthusiasm.However, if you >> feel the word applies, so be it. At least I'm an honest one. >> >> Tom C. > > Tom, it is always useful and refreshing to hear a contrarian view from an > accomplished photographer, even when you are dead wrong. Without differing > views, we would be the PML, and what is the fun of that? So, I say, hang in > there! > > stan > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
On Dec 13, 2012, at 3:55 PM, Tom C wrote: >> From: Darren Addy >> >> Just a reminder: The odds may be long that you will beat Tom, but >> nominations for PDML Troll of the Year are still open until Dec. 31st. > > It's a shame when that word's misused to label one's who simply don't > agree with a viewpoint or don't share one's enthusiasm.However, if you > feel the word applies, so be it. At least I'm an honest one. > > Tom C. Tom, it is always useful and refreshing to hear a contrarian view from an accomplished photographer, even when you are dead wrong. Without differing views, we would be the PML, and what is the fun of that? So, I say, hang in there! stan -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
If I was a troll I'd say thinks like the next new release may be the "Pentax Twinkie". But you see, I'm not a troll, so I wouldn't say things like that, in anything but jest. :) Tom C. On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Tom C wrote: >> From: Darren Addy >> >> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Tom C wrote: >>>> From: "J.C. O'Connell" >>>> >>>> And presto, you have a $10K obsolete piece o crap original 645D. >>>> >>>> >>>> -Original Message- >>>> From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of P. J. Alling >>>> Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 12:53 PM >>>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>>> Subject: Re: Pentax 645D IR >>>> >>>> Unfortunatly this doesn't address the main problem, The Nikon D800 >>>> pretty much equals the image quality of low end medium format DSLRs in a >>>> 35mm body format. Pentax Ricoh needs to announce a higher resolution >>>> improved image quality upgrade to the 645d real soon now. >>>> >>>> On 12/13/2012 2:26 AM, Dario Bonazza wrote: >>>>> Looks like it is: >>>>> http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/pentax-645d-ir-announced.html >>>>> >>> >>> Don't worry though Pentax isn't behind... >>> >>> Tom C. >> >> >> Just a reminder: The odds may be long that you will beat Tom, but >> nominations for PDML Troll of the Year are still open until Dec. 31st. > > It's a shame when that word's misused to label one's who simply don't > agree with a viewpoint or don't share one's enthusiasm.However, if you > feel the word applies, so be it. At least I'm an honest one. > > Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
> From: Darren Addy > > On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Tom C wrote: >>> From: "J.C. O'Connell" >>> >>> And presto, you have a $10K obsolete piece o crap original 645D. >>> >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of P. J. Alling >>> Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 12:53 PM >>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> Subject: Re: Pentax 645D IR >>> >>> Unfortunatly this doesn't address the main problem, The Nikon D800 >>> pretty much equals the image quality of low end medium format DSLRs in a >>> 35mm body format. Pentax Ricoh needs to announce a higher resolution >>> improved image quality upgrade to the 645d real soon now. >>> >>> On 12/13/2012 2:26 AM, Dario Bonazza wrote: >>>> Looks like it is: >>>> http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/pentax-645d-ir-announced.html >>>> >> >> Don't worry though Pentax isn't behind... >> >> Tom C. > > > Just a reminder: The odds may be long that you will beat Tom, but > nominations for PDML Troll of the Year are still open until Dec. 31st. It's a shame when that word's misused to label one's who simply don't agree with a viewpoint or don't share one's enthusiasm.However, if you feel the word applies, so be it. At least I'm an honest one. Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
LOL On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 12:46 PM, Darren Addy wrote: > On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Tom C wrote: >>> From: "J.C. O'Connell" >>> >>> And presto, you have a $10K obsolete piece o crap original 645D. >>> >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of P. J. Alling >>> Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 12:53 PM >>> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> Subject: Re: Pentax 645D IR >>> >>> Unfortunatly this doesn't address the main problem, The Nikon D800 >>> pretty much equals the image quality of low end medium format DSLRs in a >>> 35mm body format. Pentax Ricoh needs to announce a higher resolution >>> improved image quality upgrade to the 645d real soon now. >>> >>> On 12/13/2012 2:26 AM, Dario Bonazza wrote: >>>> Looks like it is: >>>> http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/pentax-645d-ir-announced.html >>>> >> >> Don't worry though Pentax isn't behind... >> >> Tom C. > > > Just a reminder: The odds may be long that you will beat Tom, but > nominations for PDML Troll of the Year are still open until Dec. 31st. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 12:29 PM, Tom C wrote: >> From: "J.C. O'Connell" >> >> And presto, you have a $10K obsolete piece o crap original 645D. >> >> >> -Original Message- >> From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of P. J. Alling >> Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 12:53 PM >> To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> Subject: Re: Pentax 645D IR >> >> Unfortunatly this doesn't address the main problem, The Nikon D800 >> pretty much equals the image quality of low end medium format DSLRs in a >> 35mm body format. Pentax Ricoh needs to announce a higher resolution >> improved image quality upgrade to the 645d real soon now. >> >> On 12/13/2012 2:26 AM, Dario Bonazza wrote: >>> Looks like it is: >>> http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/pentax-645d-ir-announced.html >>> > > Don't worry though Pentax isn't behind... > > Tom C. Just a reminder: The odds may be long that you will beat Tom, but nominations for PDML Troll of the Year are still open until Dec. 31st. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
> From: "J.C. O'Connell" > > And presto, you have a $10K obsolete piece o crap original 645D. > > > -Original Message- > From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of P. J. Alling > Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 12:53 PM > To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > Subject: Re: Pentax 645D IR > > Unfortunatly this doesn't address the main problem, The Nikon D800 > pretty much equals the image quality of low end medium format DSLRs in a > 35mm body format. Pentax Ricoh needs to announce a higher resolution > improved image quality upgrade to the 645d real soon now. > > On 12/13/2012 2:26 AM, Dario Bonazza wrote: >> Looks like it is: >> http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/pentax-645d-ir-announced.html >> Don't worry though Pentax isn't behind... Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
RE: Pentax 645D IR
And presto, you have a $10K obsolete piece o crap original 645D. - J.C.O'Connell hifis...@gate.net - -Original Message- From: PDML [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of P. J. Alling Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2012 12:53 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Pentax 645D IR Unfortunatly this doesn't address the main problem, The Nikon D800 pretty much equals the image quality of low end medium format DSLRs in a 35mm body format. Pentax Ricoh needs to announce a higher resolution improved image quality upgrade to the 645d real soon now. On 12/13/2012 2:26 AM, Dario Bonazza wrote: > Looks like it is: > http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/pentax-645d-ir-announced.html > -- Don't lose heart, they might want to cut it out, and they'll want to avoid a lengthly search. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
Unfortunatly this doesn't address the main problem, The Nikon D800 pretty much equals the image quality of low end medium format DSLRs in a 35mm body format. Pentax Ricoh needs to announce a higher resolution improved image quality upgrade to the 645d real soon now. On 12/13/2012 2:26 AM, Dario Bonazza wrote: Looks like it is: http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/pentax-645d-ir-announced.html -- Don't lose heart, they might want to cut it out, and they'll want to avoid a lengthly search. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
Nice, but my Hoya R72 is cheaper:-) Dave On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 2:26 AM, Dario Bonazza wrote: > Looks like it is: > http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/pentax-645d-ir-announced.html > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. -- Documenting Life in Rural Ontario. www.caughtinmotion.com http://brooksinthecountry.blogspot.com/ York Region, Ontario, Canada -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
Sounds like Nietzsche was a Pentaxian... :) -c On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 10:26 AM, Darren Addy wrote: > Speaking of Nietzsche > "We have already gone beyond whatever we have words for. In all talk > there is a grain of contempt." > > On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Christine Nielsen wrote: >> (Ok, I'll start...) >> >> Just when I thought things couldn't get any more "niche-y" than a Q, a >> K-01, or a $10k camera... >> >> ;) >> -c >> >> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 2:26 AM, Dario Bonazza >> wrote: >>> Looks like it is: >>> http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/pentax-645d-ir-announced.html >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> PDML@pdml.net >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>> follow the directions. >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
Speaking of Nietzsche "We have already gone beyond whatever we have words for. In all talk there is a grain of contempt." On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 9:23 AM, Christine Nielsen wrote: > (Ok, I'll start...) > > Just when I thought things couldn't get any more "niche-y" than a Q, a > K-01, or a $10k camera... > > ;) > -c > > On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 2:26 AM, Dario Bonazza > wrote: >> Looks like it is: >> http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/pentax-645d-ir-announced.html >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >> follow the directions. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: Pentax 645D IR
(Ok, I'll start...) Just when I thought things couldn't get any more "niche-y" than a Q, a K-01, or a $10k camera... ;) -c On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 2:26 AM, Dario Bonazza wrote: > Looks like it is: > http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/pentax-645d-ir-announced.html > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and > follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Pentax 645D IR
Looks like it is: http://www.pentaxforums.com/news/pentax-645d-ir-announced.html -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
