Re: It's HERE!... NOT Bah!
Dario wrote: Where they're trying (not sure they'll succeed) to step from current 2% to 5%, when the big five (Sony, Olympus and three more manufacturers) are 15% to 20% each :-( Something I believe is realistic as their digital PS are competitive and Optio S is going to be huge succes. Unfortunately, Pentax doesn't apply any of their lateral thinking in the 35mm slr line. Pål
Re: It's HERE!... NOT Bah!
Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really beg to differ. This would not be dumb at all, it would be SMART. Canon and Nikon have already started doing it (Canon's digital-only lenses are expected at this PMA or in Japan). One of the MAJOR advantages of digital is that you can get high quality out of a smaller-than-35mm sensor, In terms of capture area, it makes no difference whether it's film or a digital sensor: A larger area allows higher resolution form a given lens. It's the same principle as the difference between 35mm and 645 or APS and 35mm. Now for your style of shooting - generally not making large prints - the smaller format is acceptable, but the greater resolution possible with a larger capture area is important to those of us who like to make large prints. and this in turn paves the way for smaller, lighter, faster lenses. There's no reason to be forced to buy a telephoto that covers 35mm when you're trying to do nature and wildlife work with a DSLR like the *ist D; That's true. And that's what sub-size sensors are good for. there's no reason to have to bear the expense, size, and slow speed of what for 35mm is super-wide-angle, when all you need to cover is the smaller sensor of the *ist D. As long as you don't need the resolution required for large prints. I will be surprised and disappointed if Pentax doesn't follow through with at least a limited series of lenses specifically for the *ist D. Perhaps, but there are many people who will be disappointed if they don't move toward a full-frame DSLR like Canon, Kodak and soon Nikon. There are certainly a lot of us who'll be royally p*ist off if our huge investment in glass (including my 15mm f/3.5) is made obsolete or irrelevant; that is, if we have to have two different lenses to serve the same purpose on a DSLR and a film SLR. Not everyone is going to *abandon* film for digital. Many of us plan on using both...if it's possible/practical. Canon has made this possible with the EOS 1Ds (while also demonstrating the superior quality possible with a larger sensor). This is exactly what is needed in digital photography, not the continued application f vestigial technology that's clearly on the way out. I side with Michael Reichmann on this one. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: It's HERE!... NOT Bah!
Mike wrote: I will be surprised and disappointed if Pentax doesn't follow through with at least a limited series of lenses specifically for the *ist D. This is exactly what is needed in digital photography, not the continued application of vestigial technology that's clearly on the way out. I agree. This is the only thing that can tempt me into digital in the next five years or so. Makes something with reach of a 600/4 to a fraction size, weight and costs. Pål
Re: It's HERE!... NOT Bah!
There are certainly a lot of us who'll be royally p*ist off if our huge investment in glass (including my 15mm f/3.5) is made obsolete or irrelevant; that is, if we have to have two different lenses to serve the same purpose on a DSLR and a film SLR. Not everyone is going to *abandon* film for digital. Many of us plan on using both...if it's possible/practical. Canon has made this possible with the EOS 1Ds Well, maybe you're right, although I wonder exactly how many there are in a lot of us Unlike Nikon and Canon, Pentax hasn't served the pro market for many years, so I doubt there's a huge base of people with both a huge investment in lenses and the need to shoot digital side-by-side with film. As for the EOS-1Ds, I'd personally rather buy a $1700 DSLR and three or four new lenses for it than have to pay $8000 for the DSLR body so I can use my old 35mm lenses. Let alone the fact that for many amateurs, their biggest investment is in long telephotos that they'd be more than happy to see getting even longer. How many times have we overheard discussions on this list from people who have 300mms wishing they could afford 400mms, people who have 400mms wishing they could afford 600mms, and so on? So in half the cases or more, the smaller sensor turns into a material _advantage_ for amateur photographers vis-à-vis the pre-existing investment. Hardly supports your contentions. The worst that happens for most people is that their existing telephoto glass gets longer and then they'll have to buy a new wide-angle or two. This just doesn't seem like such a big downside to me. --Mike
Re: It's HERE!... NOT Bah!
I agree. Cutting edge stuff like the EOS 1Ds at $8k is for Canon (and maybe not Nikon). Pentax will do better 1 or 2 years behind the curve after these sensors have come down in price. People for whom the EOS 1Ds is a serious option (in terms of price and timing) should really switch to Canon becuase Pentax will never make them happy I seriously doubt that Pentax could go head to head with Canon in their chosen market - it doesn't even appear that Nikon can compete. Canon is moving too fast. But at the same time, it is really big bucks to be in their market. You need to be a working pro to be able to justify the cost. Pentax is very smart to come out with a feature laden DSLR who's greatest features are small size and price - something for the rest of us. Like Mike, I would welcome some smaller, designed for digital lenses to match this camera and would probably pick one or more up over time. Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: It's HERE!... NOT Bah!
Steve Desjardins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I agree. Cutting edge stuff like the EOS 1Ds at $8k is for Canon (and maybe not Nikon). Pentax will do better 1 or 2 years behind the curve after these sensors have come down in price. Yes. There's no sense in trying to compete at the bleeding edge. Not only will the sensors come down in price, as the technology becomes more mainstream, full-frame sensors will find their way into less expensive bodies. I wonder how much of the eight grand price of the 1Ds is in the sensors and how much is in the rest of the package (mechanics and electronics for the high frame rate, magnesium body, weather sealing, etc., etc.) The Kodak/Nikon full-frame is now shipping at $4995. This time next year, there'll be full-frame cameras under three thousand. I think I'll be ready to buy about a year after that. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: It's HERE!... NOT Bah!
William wrote: Pentax hasn't made anything bleeding edge for 4 decades. Thats a long time for a corporation to be a failure and still be in business. Pentax have been bleeding edge in everything they have done except 35mm slr's where they havent been bleeding edge for 20 years. This has sent their marketshare for slr's from 30% to 4%. Digital is a totally different ballgame anyway. Pål
Re: It's HERE!... NOT Bah!
Whether your selling film cameras, digital cameras or toasters it's still the same game of selling. It's always played the same way: you pick your product, you pick your market, set up shop and then try to out sell everyone else. BR [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Digital is a totally different ballgame anyway.
Re: It's HERE!... NOT Bah!
Pål wrote: Pentax have been bleeding edge in everything they have done except 35mm slr's where they havent been bleeding edge for 20 years. This has sent their marketshare for slr's from 30% to 4%. Digital is a totally different ballgame anyway. Where they're trying (not sure they'll succeed) to step from current 2% to 5%, when the big five (Sony, Olympus and three more manufacturers) are 15% to 20% each :-( Dario Bonazza http://www.dariobonazza.com
It's HERE!... NOT Bah!
Throwing away compatibility to a really huge extent, like building small-image-circle lenses for the DSLR, would *really* go against Pentax history. I'm feeling more confident they won't do something that dumb. Mark, I really beg to differ. This would not be dumb at all, it would be SMART. Canon and Nikon have already started doing it (Canon's digital-only lenses are expected at this PMA or in Japan). One of the MAJOR advantages of digital is that you can get high quality out of a smaller-than-35mm sensor, and this in turn paves the way for smaller, lighter, faster lenses. There's no reason to be forced to buy a telephoto that covers 35mm when you're trying to do nature and wildlife work with a DSLR like the *ist D; and there's no reason to have to bear the expense, size, and slow speed of what for 35mm is super-wide-angle, when all you need to cover is the smaller sensor of the *ist D. I will be surprised and disappointed if Pentax doesn't follow through with at least a limited series of lenses specifically for the *ist D. This is exactly what is needed in digital photography, not the continued application of vestigial technology that's clearly on the way out. --Mike
