Re: Pentax full-frame sensor direction (WAS: Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26)
Or simply a 12 MP FF 35 mm sensor in a back that will fit on a 645 nII. That could be below $6K and would given the MF types a digital option. There are few enough FF 35 mm- style cameras around to make this a viable option, especially since the Canon 1DS is competing with MF. Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/17/03 09:01PM On 16 Nov 2003 at 21:03, Pål Jensen wrote: Not very likely as Pentax according to the latest rumors already have a fully working full frame DSLR based on the 645 system. They are waiting for the price to come down. Apparently this price point is $6000; not too bad for a full frame 6 X 4,5 sensor in a rather compact camera! That's got to be some fantasy story. If Pentax could deliver a FF 645 digital camera for 6k or under at this moment they'd have the market sown up as there isn't even any add on backs approaching this price in the market at this moment. Next there will be stories of a 12Mp FF 35mm body for under 1k :-( Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
I really think they did. Canon pays attention to any potential competitor, which is why they do so well. If you let anyone back in the game, they can slowly encroach on you market share. Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/14/03 07:09PM i sincerely doubt that Canon paid the slightest attention to Pentax in their marketing plans for the 300D. Herb - Original Message - From: Robert Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 11:25 PM Subject: Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26 And Pentax may have made a mistake by not pricing the *istD more aggressively. Canon may have stolen the *istD's thunder by coming out with the 300D at $1000, which they may have thought the Pentax camera was going to priced at. By not competing with the 300D, in which Pentax would have been clearly superior to, it got lost in the noise. Lack of deep pockets to fight that war may have been the reason. It probably would have been unsustainable at those price levels, even for the lucrative market share it might have given them.
Pentax full-frame sensor direction (WAS: Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26)
I'll agree to this. The one niche really open to Pentax is the 645 style cameras, regardless of sensor size. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/16/03 03:03PM Steve Desjardins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I suspect that Pentax just can't even begin to compete with Canon anymore. Because of the sheer amount of RD money Canon had, it probably already has prototypes for a number of cameras. So, for example, if Pentax did come out with a full frame DSLR, I'm sure Canon would one-up it within a month or even produce an equivalent with a few months. Not very likely as Pentax according to the latest rumors already have a fully working full frame DSLR based on the 645 system. They are waiting for the price to come down. Apparently this price point is $6000; not too bad for a full frame 6 X 4,5 sensor in a rather compact camera! I doubt Canon will venture into what was once known as medium format anytime soon. With various sizes of sensors the 35mm standard doesn't really have much meaning anymore. Smaller sensor will always be cheaper than larger ones. The APS sized sensor are apparently good enough for professional quality anyway and there are lenses than only fit this format from both Nikon, Pentax and Canon. Besides, the smaller sensor gives you telephotos and super telephotos for a fraction of the price of 35mm image circle lenses. In other words we are already seeing a obliteration of the 35mm standard; now it is just different sensor size DSLR's that happens to use different lenses. Format is something that really belongs to film. I think Pentax is in a good position having both APS, 35mm, 645 and 67 all suitable platform for digital solutions. Pentax have already announced that they have digital solution ready for the 645 system. In addition, they have said that they plan a more compact 67. I refuse to believe that Pentax are designing film cameras these days without a digital future in mind. I belive that Pentax in digital, as they have with film, will venture in much higher areas of image qualiy than both Nikon and Canon. Also, that Pentax full frame solutions, at least initially, will be based on the MF platforms. That will give them their own niche and an edge to Nikon and Canon in the image quality area. As for RD: I don't think Canon is different from anyone else in that they want they RD cost back from selling the product. That is the real limit. Not lack of funds. Pål
Re: Pentax full-frame sensor direction (WAS: Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26)
On 16 Nov 2003 at 21:03, Pål Jensen wrote: Not very likely as Pentax according to the latest rumors already have a fully working full frame DSLR based on the 645 system. They are waiting for the price to come down. Apparently this price point is $6000; not too bad for a full frame 6 X 4,5 sensor in a rather compact camera! That's got to be some fantasy story. If Pentax could deliver a FF 645 digital camera for 6k or under at this moment they'd have the market sown up as there isn't even any add on backs approaching this price in the market at this moment. Next there will be stories of a 12Mp FF 35mm body for under 1k :-( Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
I think Pentax will be using the APS for a few years. I don't think the FF sensor will be a big market for a while, and it just doesn't make sense for Pentax to try to win over those people. They simply can't compete head to head with Canon. Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] 11/13/03 01:13PM Previously written; I was just wondering if anyone else agrees with me that the new DA lenses seem like a bit of a backward move. Shouldn't they be working toward incorporating full frame CCDs and reducing the cost of that technology first? Doesn't this new DA lens reduce the optical sweet spot (and isn't that bad?)? I always thought size alteration was more of a final phase of product evolution- like when they run out of things to do, they'll go I wonder if it'll fit into a matchbox or let's make this the biggest flat screen ever! (thus this seems a bit like jumping the gun). I wonder how much resources this direction takes away from moving towards full frame (maybe Pentax isn't even considering it!). Whole thing kinda reminds me of APS.. Could it be this is another Pentax nail in the pro coffin? I think what it signifies is that the *ist-D is not the last APS sized DSLR Pentax plans to make. As has been debated in this group before, there are a number of advantages to the sensor size. The advantage to making a lens with an image circle APS versus 35MM size is that it is easier to design and build and potentially could be smaller then the same lens for 35mm. I don't think this will have anything to do with a full 35mm size Pentax DSLR, should Pentax decide to make one. Given the lack of interest by 3rd party manufacturers to develop software in support of the *ist-D, I wonder if they know something we don't? I went to the Capture 1 folks and the Adobe booth at the Photo Plus show in NYC. Capture one doubted the *ist-d would get enough market share for them to develop for it. The RAW converter in the new Photoshop CS doesn't list the *ist-D and nobody has gotten back to me to let me know if they plan to support it. Butch Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself. Hermann Hesse (Demian)
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
More to the original point -- if one want the magnification of a 135 format 300/2.8 on a format 2/3 its size one should purchase a 200/2.8. It's that easy. Collin Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2003 15:27:59 +0100 (CET) From: Jan van Wijk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Good point Collin, One other thing I never see mentioned is that the size and weight reduction for these 'APS' size lenses will be (much) less for teles than it might be for Wide-angles. A 300mm f/2.8 will have a front-lens of just over 100mm by definition! Not much weight or size to be saved in my opinion ... With SLR wide-angles with retro-focus designs, where the fron-lens is often much larger than the calculated aperture, it makes more sense to me that size can be lower for a smaller image area. Regards, JvW
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
Ah yes, Pentax should sell the camera at a loss. A couple of hundred dollars a camera is nothing to worry about. After all they can make it up in film sales. -- Robert Gonzalez wrote: And Pentax may have made a mistake by not pricing the *istD more aggressively. Canon may have stolen the *istD's thunder by coming out with the 300D at $1000, which they may have thought the Pentax camera was going to priced at. By not competing with the 300D, in which Pentax would have been clearly superior to, it got lost in the noise. Lack of deep pockets to fight that war may have been the reason. It probably would have been unsustainable at those price levels, even for the lucrative market share it might have given them. rg Rob Studdert wrote: On 13 Nov 2003 at 9:11, Mark Roberts wrote: I'll bet that Canon has an economy version (less than $5000.00) full-frame DSLR already designed and ready to go into production... as soon as they need to sell it. That'll be when a serious full-frame competitor appears and not a moment before. Spot on, this is how the microprocessor industry works, I've been privy to information discussed under NDAs in the past (the market is being manipulated constantly). I am sure that the DSLR market is the same, look how damned fast the 300D hit the market when Pentax finally delivered. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com You might as well accept people as they are, you are not going to be able to change them anyway.
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
Well, yes I would. For one thing I see a lot of stuff that says Pentax on it in my doctor's examining rooms. Pentax does not just make cameras, I doubt that cameras are their main income. However I doubt that Pentax is big enough for one section of the company to subsidise another. In some ways Pentax cameras have always seemed to be a company advocation rather than a serious business. Plus Pentax pretty much dominated the PS business and they are strong in that segment of the digital world too. Pentax no doubt could get along fine without producing an SLR of any description, but it is nice for us that they don't want to. While they are seriously moving into digital, they don't seem to be betting the company on it like a few others seem to be doing. However, that said, Pentax and Nikon always have seemed to have some kind of ties. Just what they are has never been clear, but it always has seemed like Pentax and Nikon were on one side of the fence, and all the others on the other side even as far back as 1961. -- Sylwester Pietrzyk wrote: Would you be surprised if Pentax would marry Nikon??? I wouldn't. -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com You might as well accept people as they are, you are not going to be able to change them anyway.
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
i sincerely doubt that Canon paid the slightest attention to Pentax in their marketing plans for the 300D. Herb - Original Message - From: Robert Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 11:25 PM Subject: Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26 And Pentax may have made a mistake by not pricing the *istD more aggressively. Canon may have stolen the *istD's thunder by coming out with the 300D at $1000, which they may have thought the Pentax camera was going to priced at. By not competing with the 300D, in which Pentax would have been clearly superior to, it got lost in the noise. Lack of deep pockets to fight that war may have been the reason. It probably would have been unsustainable at those price levels, even for the lucrative market share it might have given them.
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
I know it sounds too flattering to Pentax, but it also seems too coincidental. Ever since Pentax announced the *istD in Feb, there had been rumors of its potential low release price. The idea that another company creating the first sub $1000 camera was too much for Canon, which obviously wanted that distinction. By cutting every corner and re-using as much technology out of the 10D as they could, Canon created the digi rebel and quickly announced it and its price right before Pentax did. Herb Chong wrote: i sincerely doubt that Canon paid the slightest attention to Pentax in their marketing plans for the 300D. Herb - Original Message - From: Robert Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 11:25 PM Subject: Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26 And Pentax may have made a mistake by not pricing the *istD more aggressively. Canon may have stolen the *istD's thunder by coming out with the 300D at $1000, which they may have thought the Pentax camera was going to priced at. By not competing with the 300D, in which Pentax would have been clearly superior to, it got lost in the noise. Lack of deep pockets to fight that war may have been the reason. It probably would have been unsustainable at those price levels, even for the lucrative market share it might have given them.
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
LOL. But companies do this all the time however (lose money to gain market share). Esp Japanese companies. Remember all the fuss over DRAM back in the 80's and the dumping below cost to put other DRAM companies out of business? Pentax doesn't have that deep of pockets however, hence the caveat at the end. graywolf wrote: Ah yes, Pentax should sell the camera at a loss. A couple of hundred dollars a camera is nothing to worry about. After all they can make it up in film sales. -- Robert Gonzalez wrote: And Pentax may have made a mistake by not pricing the *istD more aggressively. Canon may have stolen the *istD's thunder by coming out with the 300D at $1000, which they may have thought the Pentax camera was going to priced at. By not competing with the 300D, in which Pentax would have been clearly superior to, it got lost in the noise. Lack of deep pockets to fight that war may have been the reason. It probably would have been unsustainable at those price levels, even for the lucrative market share it might have given them. rg Rob Studdert wrote: On 13 Nov 2003 at 9:11, Mark Roberts wrote: I'll bet that Canon has an economy version (less than $5000.00) full-frame DSLR already designed and ready to go into production... as soon as they need to sell it. That'll be when a serious full-frame competitor appears and not a moment before. Spot on, this is how the microprocessor industry works, I've been privy to information discussed under NDAs in the past (the market is being manipulated constantly). I am sure that the DSLR market is the same, look how damned fast the 300D hit the market when Pentax finally delivered. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
I have the information that a pre-production DA16-45 just arrived at Pentax Europe (Hamburg), so I guess that it will be available soon. Arnold Rüdiger Neumann schrieb: Hallo infos on the coming DA16-45 are on http://www.aohc.it/pressrelease/lns0308e.htm regards Rüdiger
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
I was just wondering if anyone else agrees with me that the new DA lenses seem like a bit of a backward move. Shouldn't they be working toward incorporating full frame CCDs and reducing the cost of that technology first? Doesn't this new DA lens reduce the optical sweet spot (and isn't that bad?)? I always thought size alteration was more of a final phase of product evolution- like when they run out of things to do, they'll go I wonder if it'll fit into a matchbox or let's make this the biggest flat screen ever! (thus this seems a bit like jumping the gun). I wonder how much resources this direction takes away from moving towards full frame (maybe Pentax isn't even considering it!). Whole thing kinda reminds me of APS.. Could it be this is another Pentax nail in the pro coffin? Ryan PS. If I've made an early assumption which renders my rant foolish, I apologise in advance.. - Original Message - From: Rüdiger Neumann [EMAIL PROTECTED] Hallo infos on the coming DA16-45 are on http://www.aohc.it/pressrelease/lns0308e.htm regards Rüdiger
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
Ryan wrote: RL I was just wondering if anyone else agrees with me that the new DA lenses RL seem like a bit of a backward move. RL .. RL I wonder how RL much resources this direction takes away from moving towards full frame RL (maybe Pentax isn't even considering it!). Well Ryan, I suspect a majority on the list is with you on this one, though they're not that vocal anymore. I have resigned myself with the thought that Pentax is just another follower in the digital trend, while they have abandoned film almost completely. I doubt they give any serious consideration to a full frame and to a possible continuation of the current lens line. Other than at an academic level, it's unlikely they commit serious resources in this direction. It appears Pentax simply expects to see where others' developments lead and bends accordingly. Should the prices of full frame sensors drop they might consider incorporating one in a DSLR and reissue some FA lenses. Until then is highly unlikely we'll see anything new but some DA and maybe low level FAJ. Sadly, it comes down to Tamron / Sigma news to stir some interest among the rest of us... Servus, Alin
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
Hi Alin, And so they sat back and waited for a miracle.. Not that I'm regretting buying into languorous, apathetic Pentax.. and surely not like Pentax doesn't have a wide range of decent optics for most purposes. I'm beginning to suspect that the perfect sensibility in the mz5n's design, operability and interface etc. was probably accidental. The company seems all over the place (probably in the more negative sense) in most other respects. You know, if Canon didn't only offer chunky monkey bodies, I think that's where I'd be (Helloo IS.. and hello all you (so many of you!) affordable Canon compatible babies on eBay) while still actively monitoring the Sigma ranks (USM even..).. But that having been said, I just want to say that I really love my little 5n.. I think the way to go these days in the camera business is third party- them folk must be quietly sniggering in the corner while all the brand bickering goes on outside. With their income from all sides, I'm wondering how come their RD haven't come up with something truly unique and spectacular.. Rgds, Ryan - Original Message - From: Alin Flaider [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Ryan Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 8:46 PM Subject: Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26 Ryan wrote: RL I was just wondering if anyone else agrees with me that the new DA lenses RL seem like a bit of a backward move. RL .. RL I wonder how RL much resources this direction takes away from moving towards full frame RL (maybe Pentax isn't even considering it!). Well Ryan, I suspect a majority on the list is with you on this one, though they're not that vocal anymore. I have resigned myself with the thought that Pentax is just another follower in the digital trend, while they have abandoned film almost completely. I doubt they give any serious consideration to a full frame and to a possible continuation of the current lens line. Other than at an academic level, it's unlikely they commit serious resources in this direction. It appears Pentax simply expects to see where others' developments lead and bends accordingly. Should the prices of full frame sensors drop they might consider incorporating one in a DSLR and reissue some FA lenses. Until then is highly unlikely we'll see anything new but some DA and maybe low level FAJ. Sadly, it comes down to Tamron / Sigma news to stir some interest among the rest of us... Servus, Alin
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
Hi, Ryan wrote: I was just wondering if anyone else agrees with me that the new DA lenses seem like a bit of a backward move. snip Whole thing kinda reminds me of APS.. Could it be this is another Pentax nail in the pro coffin? I've been wondering for some time whether the present DSLR scenario is just a way of amortising costs from APS technology development. Might explain why Pentax was so late into the game, it having no APS film SLR to base its design on. mike
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
I suspect that Pentax just can't even begin to compete with Canon anymore. Because of the sheer amount of RD money Canon had, it probably already has prototypes for a number of cameras. So, for example, if Pentax did come out with a full frame DSLR, I'm sure Canon would one-up it within a month or even produce an equivalent with a few months. IMHO, I don't think its possible for Pentax to beat Canon with anything anymore unless there is a patent involved. I become very convinced of this when I look at Nikon, who already had a big share of the market and is apparently now content to play second fiddle to Canon. I also think the APS sensor is going to be around for a long while. 35 mm was never as good as MF, but it prospered. Many folks consider 6-8MP to be good enough and that is all that really matters from a sales perspective. Also, APS will always be cheaper and as soon as sub $500 DSLRs are available many won't wan to spend the extra on the FF version. So, I think those DA lenses will probably have a good 10-20 year run (at least). I suspect that APS and FF sensors will be the new 35 and MF format equivalents. Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
Steve Desjardins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I suspect that Pentax just can't even begin to compete with Canon anymore. Because of the sheer amount of RD money Canon had, it probably already has prototypes for a number of cameras. So, for example, if Pentax did come out with a full frame DSLR, I'm sure Canon would one-up it within a month or even produce an equivalent with a few months. I'll bet that Canon has an economy version (less than $5000.00) full-frame DSLR already designed and ready to go into production... as soon as they need to sell it. That'll be when a serious full-frame competitor appears and not a moment before. IMHO, I don't think its possible for Pentax to beat Canon with anything anymore unless there is a patent involved. I become very convinced of this when I look at Nikon, who already had a big share of the market and is apparently now content to play second fiddle to Canon. I agree - except that perhaps content to play second fiddle might be putting it a bit strongly. Resigned might be more like it! I also think the APS sensor is going to be around for a long while. 35 mm was never as good as MF, but it prospered. Many folks consider 6-8MP to be good enough and that is all that really matters from a sales perspective. Also, APS will always be cheaper and as soon as sub $500 DSLRs are available many won't wan to spend the extra on the FF version. So, I think those DA lenses will probably have a good 10-20 year run (at least). I give it about 5 years. I suspect that APS and FF sensors will be the new 35 and MF format equivalents. Yep. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
- Original Message - From: Ryan Lee Subject: Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26 I was just wondering if anyone else agrees with me that the new DA lenses seem like a bit of a backward move. Shouldn't they be working toward incorporating full frame CCDs and reducing the cost of that technology first? Doesn't this new DA lens reduce the optical sweet spot (and isn't that bad?)? I always thought size alteration was more of a final phase of product evolution- like when they run out of things to do, they'll go I wonder if it'll fit into a matchbox or let's make this the biggest flat screen ever! (thus this seems a bit like jumping the gun). I wonder how much resources this direction takes away from moving towards full frame (maybe Pentax isn't even considering it!). Whole thing kinda reminds me of APS.. Could it be this is another Pentax nail in the pro coffin? I doubt very much if Pentax is considering a 24x36mm sized sensor. From what I have seen so far, the cost is pretty prohibitive, which pretty much rules out Pentax's market. Think of digital as a new format, albeit one that can use some of your old lenses seamlessly. The comparison to APS isn't especially valid, as APS was never meant to be more than a point and shoot format (note there were only a couple of APS SLRs, and they didn't last long), and APS was, until the advent of digital PS, doing very well. Are you talking about the pro coffin in terms of Pentax as a pro 35mm outfitter? If so, you should rethink things. Pentax has never been a pro outfitter. They have never gone after that market, and it is just blind luck on their part that some (discerning) pros use their equipment. For Pentax, pro means larger than 35mm, and in this arena they make some fine equipment, and do very well. William Robb
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
- Original Message - From: Ryan Lee Subject: Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26 I agree with this totally. I give them points for identifying, and tending to this market, but if Canon unveils a full frame CCD in a 300D price range a bit too soon, it'll be a disaster for Pentax if they've committed too much to this APS sized sensors and lenses etc.. If Pentax decides to have a bit of foresight, they might have a ears up trying to find out whether Canon will follow suit with DA type lenses or is trying to tame full frame, because it does seem to have implications for Pentax eitherway. How long will DA last? I give it 2 years.. 3 optimistically.. but who knows :) If Canon releases a full frame DSLR priced like the 300D, it will be a disaster for a lot more companies than Pentax. However, Canon is also busily releasing lenses specifically for the 300D (or at least a lens anyway). There is no arguement that Canon is the market leader at the moment, if they are releasing lenses to cover the APS sized sensor, I would venture to speculate that they think that sensor size will be around for a while. It is entirely possible that 24x36mm sensors will stay prohibitively expensive, and not filter down to the mainstream user. William Robb
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
- Original Message - From: Sylwester Pietrzyk [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 8:53 AM Subject: Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26 Well, actually for 16-45/4 lens it is very small (just imagine this zoom range and brightness for 35mm lens)... Zuiko Digital lenses seem to be relatively small too. Speaking of body - we have made some comparisons, and except for thickness, it was rather no bigger than MX with winder... I think you are exaggerating a little :-) I'm not imagining it as a 35mm lens, since it doesn't cover the format. The whole point of the small sensors was to enable smaller cameras and lenses. The 16-45 takes a 67mm filter, and is larger than the 18-35. I happen to have that lens, and it is pretty big. Fortunately, it doesn't weigh anything, and has the advantage of covering the full 35mm frame. All of a sudden, we think lenses that take the same filter size as a Pentax 6x7 are small? William Robb
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
- Original Message - From: Sylwester Pietrzyk Subject: Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26 Never? LX was strictly marketed as a pure professional tool, and as such a system it won hearts of many pro photographers around the world. It took many customers away from Nikon F3 and Canon F1 New in the past. The LX was a one off camera. They had nothing of the same calibre as the Nikon F2 or Canon F1 when they were current (which was why I bought into Nikon in the first place), nor was there any follow up after the LX. They may have marketed it as as professional tool, but they didn't have a hell of a lot of credibility doing it. William Robb
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, William Robb wrote: I'm not imagining it as a 35mm lens, since it doesn't cover the format. The whole point of the small sensors was to enable smaller cameras and lenses. The 16-45 takes a 67mm filter, and is larger than the 18-35. I happen to have that lens, and it is pretty big. Fortunately, it doesn't weigh anything, and has the advantage of covering the full 35mm frame. All of a sudden, we think lenses that take the same filter size as a Pentax 6x7 are small? Compared to 35mm lenses in the same size it is small. For comparison lets look at the Sigma 15-30/f3.5-f4.5. This is a narrower zoom range, very slightly wider, and about the same speed overall. http://www.sigmaphoto.com/html/pages/15_30_ex.htm has these specs: Dimensions: 3.42 in. (dia) x 5.12 in. (length) 87mm (dia) x 130mm (length) Weight: 21.8 oz. (615g) Compare to the DA 16-45/4: Maximum Diameter Minimum Length 72.0mm x 92mm (2.8 x 3.6) Weight (wo/hood)T.B.A. So the DA is quite a bit smaller while offering 50% more zoom range. I can accept that. alex
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
- Original Message - From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] The whole point of the small sensors was to enable smaller cameras and lenses. Not to make it cheap? I don't think it was the lens size that motivated ccd size like you seem to be saying..
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
alex wetmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, William Robb wrote: I'm not imagining it as a 35mm lens, since it doesn't cover the format. The whole point of the small sensors was to enable smaller cameras and lenses. The 16-45 takes a 67mm filter, and is larger than the 18-35. I happen to have that lens, and it is pretty big. Fortunately, it doesn't weigh anything, and has the advantage of covering the full 35mm frame. All of a sudden, we think lenses that take the same filter size as a Pentax 6x7 are small? Compared to 35mm lenses in the same size it is small. For comparison lets look at the Sigma 15-30/f3.5-f4.5. Well, that's not a fair comparison. For *equivalent focal length*, you should be comparing it to a 23-67mm lens. Say a 24-70 f/4. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
Previously written; I was just wondering if anyone else agrees with me that the new DA lenses seem like a bit of a backward move. Shouldn't they be working toward incorporating full frame CCDs and reducing the cost of that technology first? Doesn't this new DA lens reduce the optical sweet spot (and isn't that bad?)? I always thought size alteration was more of a final phase of product evolution- like when they run out of things to do, they'll go I wonder if it'll fit into a matchbox or let's make this the biggest flat screen ever! (thus this seems a bit like jumping the gun). I wonder how much resources this direction takes away from moving towards full frame (maybe Pentax isn't even considering it!). Whole thing kinda reminds me of APS.. Could it be this is another Pentax nail in the pro coffin? I think what it signifies is that the *ist-D is not the last APS sized DSLR Pentax plans to make. As has been debated in this group before, there are a number of advantages to the sensor size. The advantage to making a lens with an image circle APS versus 35MM size is that it is easier to design and build and potentially could be smaller then the same lens for 35mm. I don't think this will have anything to do with a full 35mm size Pentax DSLR, should Pentax decide to make one. Given the lack of interest by 3rd party manufacturers to develop software in support of the *ist-D, I wonder if they know something we don't? I went to the Capture 1 folks and the Adobe booth at the Photo Plus show in NYC. Capture one doubted the *ist-d would get enough market share for them to develop for it. The RAW converter in the new Photoshop CS doesn't list the *ist-D and nobody has gotten back to me to let me know if they plan to support it. Butch Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself. Hermann Hesse (Demian)
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Mark Roberts wrote: alex wetmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Compared to 35mm lenses in the same size it is small. For comparison lets look at the Sigma 15-30/f3.5-f4.5. Well, that's not a fair comparison. For *equivalent focal length*, you should be comparing it to a 23-67mm lens. Say a 24-70 f/4. I think that would only be a fair comparison if the mount was redesigned and the mirror was smaller so that the lens could sit closer to the CCD. That is what Canon did with the EF-S lenses, but Pentax doesn't appear to be doing that with the DA lenses. alex
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
Hi Bruce, Yes, how about the Pentax company...? ;o) Well, the paradox is that Pentax has little company and that may be very well their only excuse. I don't think that Fuji (or Kodak for that matter) are players. They lack a SLR tradition nor do they have a client base - so it's nothing to lose and little to win for them. It just happens that Fuji and Kodak chose to promote their sensor technology in a SLR box. Whether the SLR market heads for APS or full frame sensors is of little significance for them other than for marketing reasons. Of course Nikon is in a different - and not an enviable - position. Under the pressure of a larger client base they are faced with tougher decisions. Yet they manage to maintain a coherent attitude, showing consistency both in the APS sensor approach and on the film front. Some of the new lenses are of pro grade; full frame lenses are not discontinued with no replacements. Users are more confident there's commitment on both levels and that Nikon keeps its options open. Yes, they don't have - yet - a full frame DSLR, but they do seem to know where they're heading... Servus, Alin Bruce wrote: BD I'm curious as to if you see anyone besides Canon as not being a BD follower. Assuming that Pentax is going to stay in a follower type BD role and only go down paths that are economically reasonable (not take BD any chances), would you consider Nikon or Fuji or anyone else besides BD Canon as being a leader?
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
A 300/2.8 is a 300/2.8 no matter the format it's on. Period. Now, 300mm on 8x10 is normal, but the magnification is EXACTLY THE SAME as on 35mm! It's just that 35mm has been seriously (severly) CROPPED! CRB Now imagine DA 300/2.8 - being 30% smaller andf lighter than A* 300/3.8 - wouldn't it be nice? ;-) That's why I prefere to compare rather real 35mm focal lengths. -- Best regards Sylwek
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Mark Roberts wrote: No. You'd have to compare a 450/2.8 FULL IMAGE CIRCLE lens on a film camera to a 300/2.8 limited image circle lens on a digital camera. Allright, but it doesn't matter. If 300/2.8 FULL IMAGE CIRCLE lens is two times smaller than 400/2.8 for film, then 300/2.8 limited image circle lens on a digital camera would be probably about three timnes smaller than 450/2.8 FULL IMAGE CIRCLE lens on a film camera. So we have come to conclusion that 16-45 is quite big compared to hypothetical 24-70/4 on 35mm camera, but longer lenses (equivalents) would be much smaller. But it is normal, you have to bear in mind, that 16-54 has to have similar optical construction to 16-54 for full frame coverage, it just has to throw smaller image circle. And 16-54 f4 full image circle lens would be much bigger than DA 16-45. -- Regards Sylwek
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
i think APS format sensor is going to be the standard now for DSLRs and that ones that are 35mm frame size will remain high strictly end to compete with medium format. Herb - Original Message - From: Ryan Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 10:10 AM Subject: Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26 Large format, Medium format, 35mm.. ladies and gentlemen, please put your hands together for Tiny format! :) I suppose creating DA lenses (with their alleged cost effectiveness) does have a short term viable market; since the digital scene isn't yet swamped with a whole lot of options, the adventurous PS abandoning, novice/hobby consumer just venturing into digital SLR would just look at how much camera they get for their buck, and how much focal length enablement too..
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
they can do that by continuing to increase resolution and holding the price point. that's effectively what is happening with PS digicams. Herb - Original Message - From: William Robb [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2003 12:24 PM Subject: Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26 It is entirely possible that 24x36mm sensors will stay prohibitively expensive, and not filter down to the mainstream user.
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
On 13 Nov 2003 at 9:11, Mark Roberts wrote: I'll bet that Canon has an economy version (less than $5000.00) full-frame DSLR already designed and ready to go into production... as soon as they need to sell it. That'll be when a serious full-frame competitor appears and not a moment before. Spot on, this is how the microprocessor industry works, I've been privy to information discussed under NDAs in the past (the market is being manipulated constantly). I am sure that the DSLR market is the same, look how damned fast the 300D hit the market when Pentax finally delivered. Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
- Original Message - From: alex wetmore Subject: Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26 That is what Canon did with the EF-S lenses, but Pentax doesn't appear to be doing that with the DA lenses. The Canon lens is about the same size as the Pentax 18-35 also. William Robb
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
Unfortunately, Pentax doesn't have the resources that Canon does, to fabricate their own chips. Pentax is at the mercy of Sony. Since Sony also provides the 6mp chips for Nikon, and Nikon is also creating their own line of APS dedicated lenses, it appears that they also believe that APS sensor cameras are going to be with us for a long time. Its not clear if Canon has or will recoup their investment in the 1DS, but it is sure making for a strong marketing story that they have all bases covered and should be the horse people should bet on. Just my $.02 worth. :) rg Ryan Lee wrote: - Original Message - From: alex wetmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm personally happy with the smaller chip size and lenses. I'd rather have smaller and lighter lenses. I'm very happy with the performance of current APS-sized sensors with regards to noise and pretty happy with their resolution. Yup.. I suppose my observation is that Pentax is like a mother bird coming back to feed a nest of squawking chicks with only so much worm to go round. If the mother feeds the skinniest to help it grow (probably not the case in real life.. I bet they brutally let the runt die in very economical manner) While some might be content with APS sized sensors, more demanding (and fatter..35mm fat to be exact) chicks sense the neglect and squawk louder.. (Please excuse the analogy..possibly obtuse to rational people- I blame it on midnight madness.. a sign I've been awake a bit too long) As long as there are cameras with the smaller sensors it makes sense for the DA lenses to exist. alex I agree with this totally. I give them points for identifying, and tending to this market, but if Canon unveils a full frame CCD in a 300D price range a bit too soon, it'll be a disaster for Pentax if they've committed too much to this APS sized sensors and lenses etc.. If Pentax decides to have a bit of foresight, they might have a ears up trying to find out whether Canon will follow suit with DA type lenses or is trying to tame full frame, because it does seem to have implications for Pentax eitherway. How long will DA last? I give it 2 years.. 3 optimistically.. but who knows :) Regards, Ryan
Re: New Pentax SMC-DA 3.5-4.5/15-26
Hallo infos on the coming DA16-45 are on http://www.aohc.it/pressrelease/lns0308e.htm regards Rüdiger - Von: Joseph Tainter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thank you, Rüdiger. It appears that you have more information than the rest of us about the forthcoming DA 16-45 (such as dimensions, filter size). Is there a web link for this information? Joe
