On Oct 16, 2006, at 1:34 AM, Digital Image Studio wrote:
On 16/10/06, Gonz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There might be some improvements to the hardware, i.e. faster and
more
accurate autofocus, wireless, etc. But the only real direction I can
see is software. I.e. focus fix after the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 16/10/06, Gonz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There might be some improvements to the hardware, i.e. faster and more
accurate autofocus, wireless, etc. But the only real direction I can
see is software. I.e. focus fix after the fact, software guided
panoramic
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Oct 16, 2006, at 1:34 AM, Digital Image Studio wrote:
On 16/10/06, Gonz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There might be some improvements to the hardware, i.e. faster and
more
accurate autofocus, wireless, etc. But the only real direction I can
see is software.
On Oct 16, 2006, at 5:13 PM, Gonz wrote:
Kinda like 35mm SLR cameras since 1982, in my opinion. I never found
anything that did a substantially better job than my Nikon FM/FE2/F3
SLRs or Leica M6 in 35mm.
Exactly. No real progress. It seems like sensors are reaching the
zone
of
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What I'm
interested to see is how the manufacturers will sell the next gen
cameras give than in all reality APS sized sensors are at 12MP IOW as
dense as is practical WRT lens technology and minimum photo site size.
Should be interesting.
thats the 12million
On 16/10/06, Gonz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There might be some improvements to the hardware, i.e. faster and more
accurate autofocus, wireless, etc. But the only real direction I can
see is software. I.e. focus fix after the fact, software guided
panoramic stitching in camera, automatic
- Original Message -
From: David Savage
Subject: Re: The JCO survey
And this is the point some are try to help you understand. Pentax
makes more profit from new users ( long time users) who buy new
products accessories, as apposed to the minimal profit they make
from longtime
On 10/14/06, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Lenses that cover the 35mm frame will likely be phased out as soon as
Pentax stops making film SLR cameras altogether.
Don't forget the D-FA 200 300 on the lens Roadmap
I still have hopes for a future Pentax full frame body.
Dave
--
PDML
On 14/10/06, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If one were to be technically accurate, then one would understand that
an APS-C sized digital sensor represents a different format from 35mm
film.
The different format being 18x27mm (or whatever, I'm not going to go
look it up).
This is as
- Original Message -
From: Digital Image Studio
Subject: Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey
On 14/10/06, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then the legacy will be a register distance that was designed to
accommodate 35mm FF image area and lenses that mos
On Sat, 14 Oct 2006, William Robb wrote:
From: Digital Image Studio
Subject: Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey
On 14/10/06, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then the legacy will be a register distance that was designed to
accommodate 35mm FF image area and lenses
On 14/10/06, Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Didn't Olympus do that with the 4/3? How are they doing?
Maintaining the K mount (to a degree) means that Pentax can crawl back
to a 36x24mm sensor body if APS sensor line runs out of steam. 4/3 was
destined to fail from the start (and
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: David Savage
Subject: Re: The JCO survey
And this is the point some are try to help you understand. Pentax
makes more profit from new users ( long time users) who buy new
products accessories, as apposed to the minimal profit they
I like to use 16x24 actually a bit smaller for Pentax sensors a tiny bit
bigger for actual film APS. But close enough.
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: David Savage
Subject: Re: The JCO survey
And this is the point some are try to help you understand. Pentax
makes
Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote:
On Sat, 14 Oct 2006, William Robb wrote:
From: Digital Image Studio
Subject: Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey
On 14/10/06, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then the legacy will be a register distance that was designed to
accommodate
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Digital Image Studio
Subject: Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey
On 14/10/06, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then the legacy will be a register distance that was designed to
accommodate 35mm FF image
Subject: Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey
On 14/10/06, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then the legacy will be a register distance that was designed to
accommodate 35mm FF image area and lenses that mos likely aren't
optimal for the APS DSLR format. IE one big
Kavoussanakis wrote:
On Sat, 14 Oct 2006, William Robb wrote:
From: Digital Image Studio
Subject: Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey
On 14/10/06, William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then the legacy will be a register distance that was designed
I wouldn't say fail, it depends on your definition of success. After
all it's from the same people who brought us instamatic 126, 110, aps
cartridge and disk film. It was just meant to be redundant in 15-20
years, too bad the digital world moves so much faster.
Digital Image Studio wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Adam Maas
Subject: Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey
An interesting idea would be to keep the mount, shorten the register
and
sell an AF extension tube for older lenses that makes up the
difference.
Best of both worlds.
Good idea
William Robb wrote:
Lenses that cover the 35mm frame will likely be phased out as soon as
Pentax stops making film SLR cameras altogether.
Haven't they already stoped manufacturing film SLR's? I know there
three currently on their web site, but I was under the impression they
were just
- Original Message -
From: Mark Roberts
Subject: Re: Thoughts on the digital format. Re: The JCO survey
Haven't they already stoped manufacturing film SLR's? I know there
three currently on their web site, but I was under the impression they
were just selling off stock that has
By rights, they should have introduced a whole new lens line with a
shorter register difference. I imagine that they both knew how that
would have gone over with the present user base, and didn't have the
financial resources to do it.
A compromise on several levels.
Didn't Olympus do that
23 matches
Mail list logo
