My daughter is shooting mostly weddings and portraits and she much prefers her
K20D over my K5 because of the skintone renderings. I have to agree that the
smoothness of the Samsung sensor is much better than what is found in the K5.
High ISO performance however, is an entirely different
It's also unlikely that a camera company will release a new level of camera
without accompanying lenses, because lenses is where the greater profit lies,
not in the camera, especially since I don't think Ricoh can put out a FF at
$4,000 and expect anyone to buy it.
Cheers,
--M.
Boris
On 20/11/2013 1:49 PM, Miserere wrote:
It's also unlikely that a camera company will release a new level of
camera without accompanying lenses, because lenses is where the
greater profit lies, not in the camera, especially since I don't
think Ricoh can put out a FF at $4,000 and expect anyone
Bill anotherdrunken...@gmail.com wrote:
On 20/11/2013 1:49 PM, Miserere wrote:
It's also unlikely that a camera company will release a new level of
camera without accompanying lenses, because lenses is where the
greater profit lies, not in the camera, especially since I don't
think Ricoh
Bill wrote:
On 20/11/2013 1:49 PM, Miserere wrote:
It's also unlikely that a camera company will release a new level of
camera without accompanying lenses, because lenses is where the
greater profit lies, not in the camera, especially since I don't
think Ricoh can put out a FF at $4,000 and
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 6:31 PM, Mark Roberts
postmas...@robertstech.com wrote:
Bill wrote:
On 20/11/2013 1:49 PM, Miserere wrote:
It's also unlikely that a camera company will release a new level of
camera without accompanying lenses, because lenses is where the
greater profit lies, not in
On 20/11/13, Miserere, discombobulated, unleashed:
It's also unlikely that a camera company will release a new level of
camera without accompanying lenses, because lenses is where the greater
profit lies, not in the camera, especially since I don't think Ricoh can
put out a FF at $4,000 and
On 20/11/13, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed:
I expect it to be closer to $2000-$2500, the hot price range for full
frame. I wouldn't be surprised if the camera were pretty much ready
and they're waiting to have a couple of new full-frame lenses ready
before they announce.
Well, they
Time to revive the Super, as in K-3 Super for the 24MP full frame edition?
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Steve Cottrell co...@seeingeye.tv wrote:
On 20/11/13, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed:
I expect it to be closer to $2000-$2500, the hot price range for full
frame. I wouldn't be
You seem to be assuming that it would be k mount.
Steve Cottrell co...@seeingeye.tv wrote:
On 20/11/13, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed:
I expect it to be closer to $2000-$2500, the hot price range for full
frame. I wouldn't be surprised if the camera were pretty much ready
and they're
On 20/11/2013 5:40 PM, Steve Cottrell wrote:
On 20/11/13, Mark Roberts, discombobulated, unleashed:
I expect it to be closer to $2000-$2500, the hot price range for full
frame. I wouldn't be surprised if the camera were pretty much ready
and they're waiting to have a couple of new full-frame
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Larry Colen l...@red4est.com wrote:
You seem to be assuming that it would be k mount.
Given that Ricoh is now the owner perhaps we should all expect the FF
camera to be a PK/R mount.
--
I don't have a problem with idiots.
I have a problem with the fact that
Maybe they will do something creative and call it the Pentax π (pi).
Then the marketing department can do clever things like:
Take your photography to infinity and beyond!
or
Finally, a full frame DSLR that is easy as pi.
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 5:57 PM, Bill anotherdrunken...@gmail.com wrote:
I know. I know. My idea is half-baked.
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 6:01 PM, Darren Addy pixelsmi...@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe they will do something creative and call it the Pentax π (pi).
Then the marketing department can do clever things like:
Take your photography to infinity and beyond!
or
K-0 for the imagined 24 x 36 camera. ( The K-3 has a full frame.)
Paul via phone
On Nov 20, 2013, at 6:47 PM, Darren Addy pixelsmi...@gmail.com wrote:
Time to revive the Super, as in K-3 Super for the 24MP full frame edition?
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 5:40 PM, Steve Cottrell
On 20/11/2013 6:02 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
I know. I know. My idea is half-baked.
We are talking about the company that put an * in the name of a camera.
nothing is impossible.
bill
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE
K-square-root-of-minus-one
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 7:04 PM, Paul Stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote:
K-0 for the imagined 24 x 36 camera. ( The K-3 has a full frame.)
Paul via phone
On Nov 20, 2013, at 6:47 PM, Darren Addy pixelsmi...@gmail.com wrote:
Time to revive the Super, as in
Good point, Bill.
And they still use it in their lenses: DA*
They do not seem to understand the Google/internet. Or concept of
wildcard characters.
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 6:10 PM, Bill anotherdrunken...@gmail.com wrote:
On 20/11/2013 6:02 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
I know. I know. My idea is
That's a good thing or we might end up with markings like
[PR][ei][nc][to][ah]x?
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 7:41 PM, Darren Addy pixelsmi...@gmail.com wrote:
Good point, Bill.
And they still use it in their lenses: DA*
They do not seem to understand the Google/internet. Or concept of
wildcard
Bruce Walker wrote:
K-square-root-of-minus-one
They've had the K-x and the K-r. So next is the K-i obviously!
--
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
On Nov 21, 2013, at 3:44 pm, Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote:
Bruce Walker wrote:
K-square-root-of-minus-one
They've had the K-x and the K-r. So next is the K-i obviously!
Would there be a K-j for electrical engineers?
Cheers,
Dave
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
I'm waiting for the K-y. With their recent price hikes on lenses, it
seems like the next logical upgrade.
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 11:17 PM, David Mann dmann...@gmail.com wrote:
On Nov 21, 2013, at 3:44 pm, Mark Roberts postmas...@robertstech.com wrote:
Bruce Walker wrote:
Saw this thread on dpreview: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52547225
The guy has 3 year's experience with the K-5. His verdict is There is
more visible noise at high ISO starting ISO 640. K-5 shots looked
cleaner. But, man, cropping ability and details of K-3 on top of
faster and more
On Nov 19, 2013, at 10:10 AM, Darren Addy pixelsmi...@gmail.com wrote:
Saw this thread on dpreview: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52547225
The guy has 3 year's experience with the K-5. His verdict is There is
more visible noise at high ISO starting ISO 640. K-5 shots looked
cleaner.
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 7:31 PM, Paul Stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net wrote:
But there's no guarantee that there will be a full frame body. In fact, based
on the lens roadmap, it seems unlikely. That's the fly in the ointment.
I agree, with the current lens lineup a FF body wouldn't make
Quoting Paul Stenquist pnstenqu...@comcast.net:
On Nov 19, 2013, at 10:10 AM, Darren Addy pixelsmi...@gmail.com wrote:
This is the main reason that I think that K-5 and K-5ii owners could
pretty easily wait for the FF in 2014, rather than hopping on the K-3
now. Think of it as putting $1299
H
Well, that was odd.
Not sure what happened to the subject line in my previous message. A
phantom copy and paste, perhaps :-)
Cheers
Brian
++
Brian Walters
Western Sydney Australia
http://lyons-ryan.org/southernlight/
Quoting Brian Walters
We, in northern CA, just experienced a short power failure at 12:05 PM. Lasted
perhaps 4 min's.
- Original Message -
From: Brian Walters apathy...@lyons-ryan.org
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Cc:
Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2013 1:08 PM
Subject: Re: More K-3 BIF: more noise
/
- Original Message -
From: Brian Walters apathy...@lyons-ryan.org
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Cc:
Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2013 1:08 PM
Subject: Re: More K-3 BIF: more noise, but more detail
H
Well, that was odd.
Not sure what happened to the subject line
On 19/11/2013 9:10 AM, Darren Addy wrote:
Saw this thread on dpreview: http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52547225
The guy has 3 year's experience with the K-5. His verdict is There is
more visible noise at high ISO starting ISO 640. K-5 shots looked
cleaner. But, man, cropping ability and
Interesting. I guess I'm not alone in preferring the out of the box
skin tones of the k-7 vs the k-5. Sometimes for skin tones the
embedded profile on the k-5 is better FWIW. In fact the embedded
profile is better for the k-5 than it was th the k-7. Just an opinion.
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 4:26
I'm glad to see that after a long absence you guys are still debating Pentax
FF. It's like I never left!
Sign me up for not buying the definitely for sure (really this time it is)
up-coming FF. I'll continue to slum it with my APS-C equipment :-)
Cheers,
--M.
Paul Stenquist
Welcome back, Miserere!
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 4:02 PM, Miserere miser...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm glad to see that after a long absence you guys are still debating Pentax
FF. It's like I never left!
Sign me up for not buying the definitely for sure (really this time it is)
up-coming FF.
On 19/11/2013 3:55 PM, Zos Xavius wrote:
Interesting. I guess I'm not alone in preferring the out of the box
skin tones of the k-7 vs the k-5. Sometimes for skin tones the
embedded profile on the k-5 is better FWIW. In fact the embedded
profile is better for the k-5 than it was th the k-7. Just
On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 12:02 AM, Miserere miser...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm glad to see that after a long absence you guys are still debating Pentax
FF. It's like I never left!
Sign me up for not buying the definitely for sure (really this time it is)
up-coming FF. I'll continue to slum it
I grew to dislike the K-7. Hard to deal with the noise, even at ISO 400.
Tonality was never a problem for me with the K-5. I usually tweak the image to
display the pallet I want anyway. I didn't do a lot of studio shooting with the
K-5, but I did do one major job, shooting about a dozen
Thanks, Darren! I really missed these edifying discussions on FF vs APS-C ;-)
Cheers,
--M.
Darren Addy pixelsmi...@gmail.com wrote:
Welcome back, Miserere!
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 4:02 PM, Miserere miser...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm glad to see that after a long absence you guys are still
On 19/11/2013 4:24 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
I grew to dislike the K-7. Hard to deal with the noise, even at ISO
400. Tonality was never a problem for me with the K-5. I usually
tweak the image to display the pallet I want anyway. I didn't do a
lot of studio shooting with the K-5, but I did do
Its not you. The K-5 misses focus. I often focus and recompoe a couple
of times to make sure I have a shot. Especially in low light. Stopping
down gives a margin of error too.
On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 6:24 PM, Bill anotherdrunken...@gmail.com wrote:
On 19/11/2013 4:24 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
On 19/11/2013 6:11 PM, Zos Xavius wrote:
Its not you. The K-5 misses focus. I often focus and recompoe a couple
of times to make sure I have a shot. Especially in low light. Stopping
down gives a margin of error too.
I ended up having to use LiveView with face detect AF to make my K5 work
On 11/20/2013 1:24 AM, Bill wrote:
On 19/11/2013 4:24 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
I grew to dislike the K-7. Hard to deal with the noise, even at ISO
400. Tonality was never a problem for me with the K-5. I usually
tweak the image to display the pallet I want anyway. I didn't do a
lot of studio
On 11/20/2013 1:24 AM, Bill wrote:
On 19/11/2013 4:24 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
I grew to dislike the K-7. Hard to deal with the noise, even at ISO
400. Tonality was never a problem for me with the K-5. I usually
tweak the image to display the pallet I want anyway. I didn't do a
lot of studio
I'm with you on this one, Paul.
On 11/20/2013 12:24 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
I grew to dislike the K-7. Hard to deal with the noise, even at ISO
400. Tonality was never a problem for me with the K-5. I usually
tweak the image to display the pallet I want anyway. I didn't do a
lot of studio
Shalom :-).
Yep, small APS-C gear can be far more advantageous than big and heavy FF
one.
On 11/20/2013 12:02 AM, Miserere wrote:
I'm glad to see that after a long absence you guys are still debating
Pentax FF. It's like I never left!
Sign me up for not buying the definitely for sure
On 11/19/2013 7:31 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
But there's no guarantee that there will be a full frame body. In
fact, based on the lens roadmap, it seems unlikely. That's the fly in
the ointment.
Paul
Indeed. I especially like the notion where people notice that certain
lenses produce imagery
On 19/11/2013 11:23 PM, Boris Liberman wrote:
On 11/20/2013 1:24 AM, Bill wrote:
On 19/11/2013 4:24 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
I grew to dislike the K-7. Hard to deal with the noise, even at ISO
400. Tonality was never a problem for me with the K-5. I usually
tweak the image to display the
46 matches
Mail list logo
