On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 10:48:17AM -0300, Luiz Felipe scripsit:
> Sorry, Gradon - meant to place "longer" but skipped the "". But actually
> the concept of how "long" and "short" lenses are takes the sensor size
> in consideration, the way I see it. "Long lens" being an accepted buzz
> word f
Sorry, Gradon - meant to place "longer" but skipped the "". But actually
the concept of how "long" and "short" lenses are takes the sensor size
in consideration, the way I see it. "Long lens" being an accepted buzz
word for teleobjective, when I was learning about photo gear names... :-)
lf
G
Well, I do agree with your proposed system for general purposes - while
I can imagine lotsa situations where a FF longish prime lens would fit
into my go-anywhere bag with the {still in the far future} m4/3 camera
and everyday zoom. Details indeed.
While I am currently shaping my needs to a Ds
I wrote:
Thinking about an ideal solution, starting from scratch, I think m4/3 + FF
is even better. It allows even more benefit in size and weight, with
little if any sacrifice on performance. That wasn't true in the past, as
4/3 equipment was not smaller than APS-C, while its quality was. Lat
Luiz Felipe wrote:
Dario, your point about a FF system and micro 4/3 is interesting, but
there is a simple solution. One that includes the use of the big FF lenses
with suitable adapters in the m4/3, for some specific uses.
Those would be exactly the big, expensive and fast teles, made even
There's not much marketing way in "harder to use" . . .
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Graydon
Sent: Wednesday, September 09, 2009 12:02 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera
On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 12:58:04PM -0300, Luiz Felipe scripsit:
> Those would be exactly the big, expensive and fast teles, made even
> longer by the format diff. Not to be used everyday, but often enough.
Gr.
Not longer; reach is reach. Made more difficult to get the subject in
the field
Dario, your point about a FF system and micro 4/3 is interesting, but
there is a simple solution. One that includes the use of the big FF
lenses with suitable adapters in the m4/3, for some specific uses.
Those would be exactly the big, expensive and fast teles, made even
longer by the format
P. J. Alling wrote:
There may be no scandal in owning two manufactures systems, but there
is a serious duplication of effort, and cost. If I were going to have
a 24x36mm sensor camera and a APS-C sensor camera, I think it would
make a whole lot more sense to buy into Canon, Nikon or Sony, and be
-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Miserere
Sent: Monday, September 07, 2009 2:15 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
2009/9/5 P. J. Alling :
> There may be no scandal in owning two manufactures systems, but there
> i
2009/9/5 P. J. Alling :
> There may be no scandal in owning two manufactures systems, but there is a
> serious duplication of effort, and cost. If I were going to have a 24x36mm
> sensor camera and a APS-C sensor camera, I think it would make a whole lot
> more sense to buy into Canon, Nikon or So
l.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Adam Maas
Sent: Sunday, September 06, 2009 7:22 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 7:08 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote:
> that doesn't sound like something inherent in the f
Not to be a PITA or anything, (Oh, hell, let's face it yes I'm being a
PITA), but if you could when you refer to mini 4:3 cameras by their nic.
could you use "m4/3". I read this early in the morning and was confused
about what a Spotmatic might have to do with this discussion
Adam Maas wr
On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 7:08 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote:
> that doesn't sound like something inherent in the format.
> That sounds like a design choice on a particular camera.
>
> --
> J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net)
It's inherent to the use of live view, although the length of the
delay co
--Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Adam Maas
Sent: Sunday, September 06, 2009 8:00 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 6:37 AM, J.C. O'Connell wrote:
>
On Sun, Sep 6, 2009 at 6:37 AM, J.C. O'Connell wrote:
> You would probably love one of those non reflex micro 4/3
> type cameras, they don't black out much if at all from
> what I read, no mirror.
>
> --
> J.C. O'Connell (mailto:hifis...@gate.net)
No mirror, but they reset the Live View feed leadi
.com/group/cdplayers/
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
John Francis
Sent: Saturday, September 05, 2009 9:36 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
On Sat, Sep 05, 2009 at 06:56:01PM -060
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 8:56 PM, William Robb wrote:
>
> One thing I noticed right away when I switched over to the K-7 was how fast
> the mirror returns. The unheralded advantage of a fast frame rate is a fast
> viewfinder.
>
> William Robb
>
The responsiveness necessary to exceed 4fps is the only
I just want to send him some Tabasco to go with it...
Gonz wrote:
Will you put it on youtube?
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Cotty wrote:
On 31/8/09, Miserere, discombobulated, unleashed:
I believe Pentax will *HAVE* TO GO FULL-FRAME
My feast awaits.
--
Cheers,
There may be no scandal in owning two manufactures systems, but there is
a serious duplication of effort, and cost. If I were going to have a
24x36mm sensor camera and a APS-C sensor camera, I think it would make a
whole lot more sense to buy into Canon, Nikon or Sony, and be able to
re-use a
ml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Bob
Sullivan
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 3:00 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
Excellent suggestion Paul. You ought to be in Marketing. :-)
Seriously, that makes sense and gives a rationale
On Sat, Sep 05, 2009 at 06:56:01PM -0600, William Robb wrote:
>
> One thing I noticed right away when I switched over to the K-7 was how
> fast the mirror returns. The unheralded advantage of a fast frame rate is
> a fast viewfinder.
>
> William Robb
I've always stressed that that was one of th
Supposed to be released in 2010. However Pentax already has a
"Flagship". The 645D will be their "Professional" offering.
Bob Sullivan wrote:
For your zoom, try the old A35-105 f3.5.
For a FF camera, I wouldn't be surprised to see Pentax skip to
a 645 format sensor as the flagship.
Regards,
ing to remember. Will the DA 40 work for FF (without significant
problems)?
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Miserere
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 2:05 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Ca
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message - From: "P. J. Alling"
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
Well, I was never able to use the 5 fps on the Pentax LX, so while
8fps is a selling point, I'm not sure what it's really worth, unless
- Original Message -
From: "P. J. Alling"
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
Well, I was never able to use the 5 fps on the Pentax LX, so while 8fps is
a selling point, I'm not sure what it's really worth, unless you work for
/Sports/ /Illu
I see Pentax in as many places as Olympus.
Paul
On Sep 5, 2009, at 6:45 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
Yes, but technical viability is different from sales viability. I
see a lot of E-450 and E-620, (OK, maybe E-5XX bodies), in big box
stores. However I've never seen a K-2000/K-m body in any of th
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 6:45 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
> Yes, but technical viability is different from sales viability. I see a lot
> of E-450 and E-620, (OK, maybe E-5XX bodies), in big box stores. However
> I've never seen a K-2000/K-m body in any of those stores. It's difficult to
> comparison
Yes, but technical viability is different from sales viability. I see a
lot of E-450 and E-620, (OK, maybe E-5XX bodies), in big box stores.
However I've never seen a K-2000/K-m body in any of those stores. It's
difficult to comparison sell Josephine Six-Pack, on a smaller lighter
camera if
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 6:06 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
> Well, I was never able to use the 5 fps on the Pentax LX, so while 8fps is a
> selling point, I'm not sure what it's really worth, unless you work for
> /Sports/ /Illustrated/, and then I expect the magazine would be supplying a
> 1D something o
Well, I was never able to use the 5 fps on the Pentax LX, so while 8fps
is a selling point, I'm not sure what it's really worth, unless you work
for /Sports/ /Illustrated/, and then I expect the magazine would be
supplying a 1D something or other. It looks more like Canon has repealed
the laws
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 5:49 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
>>
>
> I don't know, Cannon seems to think if they pack enough MP into their 1.6x
> crop sensor they can command $1700US for one. Sure it has specifications
> out the wazoo*, but when you come down to it it's noise characteristics will
> be a lot
Miserere wrote:
2009/8/28 Mark Roberts :
In June at GFM I said I expected full-frame to hit the $2000 price
point in 2010. Seems I was off the mark a bit. This means we might see
full-frame at actual street prices around $1500 by next summer.
Exactly, which makes me wonder if Pentax ca
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 1:04 PM, Miserere wrote:
Interesting and varied opinions (thanks guys!) although nobody
brought up the issue that bothers me most.
I believe Pentax will *HAVE* TO GO FULL-FRAME, like Mark said, out
of necessity. When this happens (not *if*), what will they do with
APS-C?
2009/9/1 paul stenquist :
> The new Canon 7D is an APS-C camera with a street price of around $1700 and
> a heavy feature set. So I guess the format isn't quite dead.
> Paul
Yes, I saw it this morning and was VERY pleased. If Canikon think
high-end APS-C is worth pursuing, then the market will be
iscuss Mail List"
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 2:52 PM
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
Mark Roberts wrote:
paul stenquist wrote:
I don't think Pentax will HAVE to go full frame. The 645D will fill
the bill as a high end flagship.
Good lord, even the most wildly
On Sep 1, 2009, at 4:56 PM, Christine Aguila wrote:
I've seen magazine headlines read: "Is FF the New Medium Format?"--
which suggests there are others who might agree with you, Dario.
That's what I'd call lowering standards... :(
Dave
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://p
- Original Message -
From: "Dario Bonazza"
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 2:52 PM
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
Mark Roberts wrote:
paul stenquist wrote:
I don't think Pentax will HAVE to go
On 01/09/2009, Cotty wrote:
> On 31/8/09, Miserere, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
> >I believe Pentax will *HAVE* TO GO FULL-FRAME
>
> My feast awaits.
You'll probably have lost your teeth by then...
--
Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio)
Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours
Gmail, eBay,
Isn't it getting a bit cold?
On Aug 31, 2009, at 5:42 PM, Cotty wrote:
On 31/8/09, Miserere, discombobulated, unleashed:
I believe Pentax will *HAVE* TO GO FULL-FRAME
My feast awaits.
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cotty
Will you put it on youtube?
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 4:42 PM, Cotty wrote:
> On 31/8/09, Miserere, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
>>I believe Pentax will *HAVE* TO GO FULL-FRAME
>
> My feast awaits.
>
> --
>
>
> Cheers,
> Cotty
>
>
> ___/\__
> || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
> ||==
n
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 3:00 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
Excellent suggestion Paul. You ought to be in Marketing. :-)
Seriously, that makes sense and gives a rationale to the lens line-up.
Why tote around the heavy and expensi
On 31/8/09, Miserere, discombobulated, unleashed:
>I believe Pentax will *HAVE* TO GO FULL-FRAME
My feast awaits.
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com
_
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail Lis
- Original Message -
From: "Dario Bonazza"
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
On a side note: any info about Shel? I haven't heard of him for ages. I
rather miss our gentlemen's disagreement.
Theres at least a couple of hundred rea
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 02:04:42PM -0400, Miserere scripsit:
> I believe Pentax will *HAVE* TO GO FULL-FRAME, like Mark said, out of
> necessity. When this happens (not *if*), what will they do with APS-C?
But they don't have to go full-frame.
IF Pentax-the-brand wants to go compete at the 2 kUSD
On a side note: any info about Shel? I haven't heard of him for ages. I
rather miss our gentlemen's disagreement.
Dario
- Original Message -
From: "Dario Bonazza"
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 9:52 PM
Subject: Re: OT: So
The 24x36 vs APS-C wankfest is fun and all, but it seems to me that
everyone is missing the most critical thing Pentax needs in order to
sell cameras: Get them in stores where people can buy them.
--
The first step is learning to take great photos,
the second step is learning to throw away ones
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 02:24:54PM -0400, Desjardins, Steve wrote:
> I'm trying to remember. Will the DA 40 work for FF (without significant
> problems)?
I just put one on a P30t and it looks slightly darker in the corners,
but not bad.
--
The first step is learning to take great photos,
the
CD PLAYER DISCUSSION list -
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdplayers/
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Mark Roberts
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 3:26 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera
Mark Roberts wrote:
paul stenquist wrote:
I don't think Pentax will HAVE to go full frame. The 645D will fill
the bill as a high end flagship.
Good lord, even the most wildly optimistic price predictions for the
645D have it costing roughly equal to a Canon 1Ds-III! As of this week
35mm full
I didn't say the 645D would be cost competitive with low-end full
frame cameras, but it will fill the need for a flagship offering.
Although I could see a follow-up to that camera with a smaller sensor
but the 645D lens mount providing an entry level offering.
Small companies need not try t
paul stenquist wrote:
>I don't think Pentax will HAVE to go full frame. The 645D will fill
>the bill as a high end flagship.
Good lord, even the most wildly optimistic price predictions for the
645D have it costing roughly equal to a Canon 1Ds-III! As of this week
35mm full-frame is $2000 and b
, 2009 3:00 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
Excellent suggestion Paul. You ought to be in Marketing. :-)
Seriously, that makes sense and gives a rationale to the lens line-up.
Why tote around the heavy and expensive Nikon/Canon FF stuff wh
Excellent suggestion Paul. You ought to be in Marketing. :-)
Seriously, that makes sense and gives a rationale to the lens line-up.
Why tote around the heavy and expensive Nikon/Canon FF stuff when
you can get excellent Image Quality with Pentax.
'Oh, and if you really need to go FF, you should u
I don't think Pentax will HAVE to go full frame. The 645D will fill
the bill as a high end flagship. There's room for someone to be a
leader in APS-C, and with their lens lineup, Pentax is a perfect fit
for that role.
Paul
On Aug 31, 2009, at 2:04 PM, Miserere wrote:
Interesting and varied
For your zoom, try the old A35-105 f3.5.
For a FF camera, I wouldn't be surprised to see Pentax skip to
a 645 format sensor as the flagship.
Regards, Bob S.
On Mon, Aug 31, 2009 at 1:04 PM, Miserere wrote:
> Interesting and varied opinions (thanks guys!) although nobody brought
> up the issue tha
I'm trying to remember. Will the DA 40 work for FF (without significant
problems)?
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Miserere
Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 2:05 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases
Interesting and varied opinions (thanks guys!) although nobody brought
up the issue that bothers me most.
I believe Pentax will *HAVE* TO GO FULL-FRAME, like Mark said, out of
necessity. When this happens (not *if*), what will they do with APS-C?
They cannot give up on it given how much they've in
al Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Mark
Roberts
Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 2:32 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
Resolution. LPM. Register distance. Etc. Etc.
There are good technical
Yeah but the Michellin Pilot Sport Cup tires are the best.
Kenneth Waller
http://www.tinyurl.com/272u2f
- Original Message -
From: "Larry Colen"
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
It occurs to me that arguing what sort of lenses you need to ge
sage-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
John Francis
Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 8:51 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 07:19:45PM -0400, Adam Maas wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 2
dam Maas
Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 7:20 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 7:00 PM, J.C. O'Connell
wrote:
> huh, pentax doesn't have a FF sensor. If they did
> it would around $2K like Sony, no?
>
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 07:19:45PM -0400, Adam Maas wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 7:00 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote:
> > huh, pentax doesn't have a FF sensor. If they did
> > it would around $2K like Sony, no?
> >
> > How many much cheaper non-DA lenses would it take to make
> > up the extra $800 or
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 7:00 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote:
> huh, pentax doesn't have a FF sensor. If they did
> it would around $2K like Sony, no?
>
> How many much cheaper non-DA lenses would it take to make
> up the extra $800 or so for the FF Penatx body
> vs the APS body?
>
> Answer - not many at
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 05:40:42PM -0400, J.C. O'Connell wrote:
> ff bodies don't need as high a peformance lenses as APS
> bodies do to achieve same level of system peformance.
> That's the main appeal of FF bodies. No super tweeked,
> super performance leneses are required, mortal lenses
> can be
Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 5:40 PM, J.C. O'Connell
wrote:
> ff bodies don't need as high a peformance lenses as APS bodies do to
> achieve same level of system peformance. That's the main appeal of FF
> bodies. N
lf Of
Graydon
Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 6:23 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 05:37:41PM -0400, J.C. O'Connell scripsit:
> people don't just buy DSLR bodies, they buy DSLR systems (bodies and
> lenses
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 5:40 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote:
> ff bodies don't need as high a peformance lenses as APS
> bodies do to achieve same level of system peformance.
> That's the main appeal of FF bodies. No super tweeked,
> super performance leneses are required, mortal lenses
> can be applied
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 05:37:41PM -0400, J.C. O'Connell scripsit:
> people don't just buy DSLR bodies, they buy DSLR systems (bodies and
> lenses) .
> Since FF system can match or outperform an APS system with lower
> performance,
> less costly lenses, a FF system could cost less, not more
> for s
August 29, 2009 5:16 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
It occurs to me that arguing what sort of lenses you need to get the
full performance out of a full frame camera is like arguing what sort of
tires you need to get the full performance o
lf Of
John Francis
Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 4:54 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 10:42:15PM +0200, Dario Bonazza wrote:
>
> 3) An ever-increasing number of DSLR users want FF. When they will be
> the
It occurs to me that arguing what sort of lenses you need to get the
full performance out of a full frame camera is like arguing what sort
of tires you need to get the full performance out of a Ferrari. Most
of us can't afford it, and most of those who can afford it don't have
the skill to make use
- Original Message -
From: "John Francis"
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 10:54 PM
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 10:42:15PM +0200, Dario Bonazza wrote:
3) An ever-increasing
John Francis wrote:
>And whatever they may *say*
>they want, 99% of DSLR purchasers will vote with their wallet and
>buy the cheaper DSLR.
So no one on this list owns a K7 then? Or bought a K20 when it was
new? Or a Nikon D700? (Hi, Dave Savage!)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
h
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 10:42:15PM +0200, Dario Bonazza wrote:
>
> 3) An ever-increasing number of DSLR users want FF. When they will be the
> majority, it will make No.2 irrelevant to 99% of DSLR users, thus
> resurrecting No.1.
You're forgetting the most important point - a FF DSLR will alway
Some refinements in my thoughts below:
J.C. O'Connell wrote:
FF should not only be able to achieve higher system resolution
at same or larger sensor resolutions, it should also be able
to achieve same low noise performance at higher ISO sensitivities
than APS sensor due to larger area sensor pi
J.C. O'Connell wrote:
FF should not only be able to achieve higher system resolution
at same or larger sensor resolutions, it should also be able
to achieve same low noise performance at higher ISO sensitivities
than APS sensor due to larger area sensor pixels. Just like APS
images better than
@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Dario Bonazza
Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 3:44 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
Mark Roberts wrote:
> Resolution. LPM. Register distance. Etc. Etc.
>
> There are good technical argu
Mark Roberts wrote:
Resolution. LPM. Register distance. Etc. Etc.
There are good technical arguments both for and against full-frame.
None of it makes any difference. Full-frame is about marketing,
consumer needs (desires, really) and fashion. And Pentax can no more
choose not to go full-frame
st 29, 2009 2:32 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
Resolution. LPM. Register distance. Etc. Etc.
There are good technical arguments both for and against full-frame. None
of it makes any difference. Full-frame is about marketing, consumer
ust 29, 2009 2:07 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 1:24 PM, J.C. O'Connell
wrote:
> I think maybe your overlooking the fact that APS SLRs are really
> retrofits of FF slrs and use the same size lens mo
PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 1:56 PM, J.C. O'Connell
wrote:
> That's sorta my point,
> A FF Pentax DSLR is not going to be that much bigger
> than the current APS DSLR because APS is already us
st -
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdplayers/
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Adam Maas
Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 1:57 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009
Resolution. LPM. Register distance. Etc. Etc.
There are good technical arguments both for and against full-frame.
None of it makes any difference. Full-frame is about marketing,
consumer needs (desires, really) and fashion. And Pentax can no more
choose not to go full-frame than they could have ch
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 1:24 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote:
> I think maybe your overlooking the fact that APS SLRs are
> really retrofits of FF slrs and use the same size lens mounts,
> registration etc as FF cameras. The bottom line is that FF
> DSLRs and lenses are hardly much bigger than the APS DSL
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 1:56 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote:
> That's sorta my point,
> A FF Pentax DSLR is not going to be that much bigger
> than the current APS DSLR because APS is already using
> the same size lens mount, registration etc
> and those will not increase in size with a FF Pentax DSLR.
list -
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdplayers/
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Graydon
Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 1:45 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
On Sat, A
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 1:13 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote:
> I don't follow your logic, the higher the overall sensor resolution
> and sensor pixel densities get with time, the more the overall system
> resolution depends
> on the lens' absolute resolution AND FORMAT SIZE. If you use two lenses
> with
:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Dario Bonazza
Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 1:41 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
J.C. O'Connell wrote:
>I think maybe your overlooking the fact that APS SLRs are really
>retrofits of FF slrs
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 01:24:27PM -0400, J.C. O'Connell scripsit:
> I think maybe your overlooking the fact that APS SLRs are
> really retrofits of FF slrs and use the same size lens mounts,
> registration etc as FF cameras.
[snip]
Which is a very good thing for in-body anti-shake systems.
Also
quot;
To: "Pentax-Discuss Mail List"
Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 7:41 PM
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
J.C. O'Connell wrote:
I think maybe your overlooking the fact that APS SLRs are
really retrofits of FF slrs and use the same size lens mount
J.C. O'Connell wrote:
I think maybe your overlooking the fact that APS SLRs are
really retrofits of FF slrs and use the same size lens mounts,
registration etc as FF cameras. The bottom line is that FF
DSLRs and lenses are hardly much bigger than the APS DSLRs/lenses
for these reasons. If APS h
..@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Desjardins, Steve
Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 10:14 AM
To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List'
Subject: RE: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
I admit I'm more amenable to the "APS-C forever", unless it is beaten
out by 4/3. The point is
AYER DISCUSSION list -
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdplayers/
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Adam Maas
Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 7:19 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for
I agree. I should have said micro-4/3 since that's what the G1 and E-P1 are.
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Adam
Maas
Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 10:23 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A8
I'm unsure of 4/3rds viability long-term. I suspect strongly that the
lower-end 4/3rds DSLR's will be killed off by Micro4/3rds and the
higher-end line will be on life support and exist mostly to fill in
the gaps for Micro-4/3rds users. 4/3rds simply hasn't been able to
capitalize on the promise o
I admit I'm more amenable to the "APS-C forever", unless it is beaten out by
4/3. The point is that even though MF and LF existed, the smaller 35 mm
dominated because the IQ was good enough. I think that's where APS-C or 4/3 is
now. Of course, "good enough" doesn't make sense to many on this
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 6:30 AM, J.C. O'Connell wrote:
> Adam wrote : "Unfortunately while that's a nice theory it is not born
> out in practice."edit, see full quote below.
>
> No, I don’t agree. Are you trying to say that a FF lens has to have
> the same resolution across the board as an APS
.com/group/cdplayers/
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Adam Maas
Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2009 1:27 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 10:54 PM, J.C. O
On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 10:54 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote:
> FF Systems can achieve higher image quality despite using
> inferior "average" lenses. Lens cost can be less with FF systems
> because the lens doesn't have to be as good with
> a FF system as it does for a APS-C system for same or even bett
1 - 100 of 113 matches
Mail list logo
