Re: Lens Road Map revised
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 11:27:11PM -0500, Mishka wrote: i think they are leveraging that with small limited lenses quite nicely. if there was a choice, usm or small primes, i would pick the second. perhaps that's not what pros need -- than i'm happy pentax is not pro oriented. best, mishka I expect the 16-50/2.8 and 50-135/2.8 zooms to be quite good enough for a lot of so-called pro work - after all, the FA* 28-70 80-200 zooms were outstanding performers. It's interesting that the new lenses don't get called DA*; perhaps that's just too confusing with *ist bodies as well.
Re: Lens Road Map revised
LOL I don't think we're too far apart on many things ... Shel [Original Message] From: Godfrey DiGiorgi How is it that we agree so much on some things, Shel? ;-) Godfrey On Feb 23, 2006, at 8:50 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Some people care about specs, others care about making photographs.
Re: Lens Road Map revised
Why shouldn't the pancakes be considered as pro lenses? I'm wondering is they are aiming at the old rangefinder market. A lot of pros liked Leica M6 because of their compact size and good lenses... DagT fra: Mishka [EMAIL PROTECTED] i think they are leveraging that with small limited lenses quite nicely. if there was a choice, usm or small primes, i would pick the second. perhaps that's not what pros need -- than i'm happy pentax is not pro oriented. best, mishka On 2/23/06, Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: missing is USM
Re: Lens Road Map revised
On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, John Francis wrote: There's a DA 50-135/2.8 on the way as well. Looks like 2006 is going to be expensive. Not really, it's a DA. But they plan a DFA55/2.8. I will buy it in a flash. Not. Kostas
Re: Lens Road Map revised
On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: On Feb 23, 2006, at 10:52 PM, Rob Studdert wrote: I guess it does. Their conservatism however does little now for the photography that I like to pursue. ... And what kind of photography is that, really? Have you defined it? Yes, but you deleted it: The LX with its superb finders and the old array of high performance fast lenses made a pretty smick kit for low light work. If the new DLSR behaves similarly to the D200 at high ISO I doubt that I'm going to be overly excited, proof is in the pudding of course be it a year ore more away. It's apparent that Pentax are heading in a totally different direction now, they are carving a niche of kit biased towards small rather than fast. I too am changing my tack and will discuss with the powers that be to up my price for an MZ-S. I am also stuck with the F70-210, but hey-ho. Kostas
Re: Lens Road Map revised
You can get two of the new Pentax for the price of one 5D. Or you could make a sizable down payment on the 645D, which apparently will be much higher spec than the 5D. On Feb 23, 2006, at 11:35 PM, Tom C wrote: I was comparing it to that, largely because if I was going to make a jump, it wouldn't be a small one. Tom C. From: Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Lens Road Map revised Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 23:31:47 -0500 Tom C wrote: I don't see how you can call it under-spec'd compared to Canon (especially without seeing it's specs). You cannot compare it to the 5D. That's a whole other animal. You're right in a sense. Except that's what I was comparing it to. Tom C. You can only compare it to the 5D if it has a full-35mm-sized sensor. It doesn't so the only fair comparison is 20D/30D and D200. That's Pentax's target. Not the full-frame market. Apples-oranges. -- Christian http://photography.skofteland.net
Re: Re: Lens Road Map revised
From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/02/24 Fri AM 09:57:53 GMT To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Lens Road Map revised On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, John Francis wrote: There's a DA 50-135/2.8 on the way as well. Looks like 2006 is going to be expensive. Not really, it's a DA. But they plan a DFA55/2.8. I will buy it in a flash. Not. Now, now, Kostas. You know that sort of talk is frowned upon. If you can't say anything nice, just hold up your stick with the cut-out smile on it. - Email sent from www.ntlworld.com Virus-checked using McAfee(R) Software Visit www.ntlworld.com/security for more information
Re: Lens Road Map revised
What's wrong with the 55/2.8? It is for the 645D, after all - according to the english version of that roadmap. --- Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But they plan a DFA55/2.8. I will buy it in a flash. Not. __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Lens Road Map revised
On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, Jon Myers wrote: What's wrong with the 55/2.8? It is for the 645D, after all - according to the english version of that roadmap. Thanks, I read that later on. What is wrong is that it would benefit from not being on the same roadmap as the K-mount products. Kostas
Re: [Bulk] Re: Lens Road Map revised
- Original Message - From: John Francis [EMAIL PROTECTED] That make sense. It will be the new standard lens. The D FA label probably (almost certainly) indicate that it will be full frame and that it will fit film 645 as well. That strongly indicate that it have aperture ring (thank God). That's a bit of a stretch. I think the D prefix pretty much says that it is intended for the digital bodies. But D FA designates full frame for K-mount lenses. It would be confusing if they use different nomeclature for 645 lenses. If the 55/2.8 is not full frame I would presume they would have labeled it DA, not D FA. Pål
Re: Lens Road Map revised
I don't see a definition for a kind of photography in that quote, Kostas. I see a statement relating to a kind of equipment. What kind of PHOTOGRAPHS is the equipment intended to make? That's photography. Godfrey On Feb 24, 2006, at 2:09 AM, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: And what kind of photography is that, really? Have you defined it? Yes, but you deleted it: The LX with its superb finders and the old array of high performance fast lenses made a pretty smick kit for low light work. If the new DLSR behaves similarly to the D200 at high ISO I doubt that I'm going to be overly excited, proof is in the pudding of course be it a year ore more away. It's apparent that Pentax are heading in a totally different direction now, they are carving a niche of kit biased towards small rather than fast.
Re: Lens Road Map revised
On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: On Feb 24, 2006, at 2:09 AM, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: And what kind of photography is that, really? Have you defined it? Yes, but you deleted it: The LX with its superb finders and the old array of high performance fast lenses made a pretty smick kit for low light work. If the new DLSR behaves similarly to the D200 at high ISO I doubt that I'm going to be overly excited, proof is in the pudding of course be it a year ore more away. It's apparent that Pentax are heading in a totally different direction now, they are carving a niche of kit biased towards small rather than fast. I don't see a definition for a kind of photography in that quote, Kostas. I see a statement relating to a kind of equipment. What kind of PHOTOGRAPHS is the equipment intended to make? That's photography. It says low light work; that's photography. In it Rob expands that for that type of photographs he needs a combination of low noise in high ISO and bright lenses. He concludes that Pentax is not moving towards this direction. The subject of the thread is Lens Road Map revised. And don't shout, I read even without it. Kostas
Re: Lens Road Map revised
On 2006-02-24 06:08, Paul Stenquist wrote: You can get two of the new Pentax for the price of one 5D. Or you could make a sizable down payment on the 645D, which apparently will be much higher spec than the 5D. So the new roadmap indicates: - 'consumer cameras' use APS sized sensors and DA-lenses with PK mount - 'pro cameras' use a full frame sensor and DFA-lenses with PK mount The professional roadmap is 6x7 cm - 6x4.5 cm - 3.6x2.4? Now the body form factor still looks big, while the lens mount is PK, mixing medium format and 35 mm? ok, I'll take that - at least this will promise some new DFA lenses for my analog bodies ;-) - Martin
Re: Lens Road Map revised
The lens mount for the new pro camera is not PK, it's the 645 mount. And the sensor isn't 35mm full frame. It's somewhere in between that and 645. The DFA lens on the chart is apparently a 645 mount lens. -- Original message -- From: Martin Trautmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 2006-02-24 06:08, Paul Stenquist wrote: You can get two of the new Pentax for the price of one 5D. Or you could make a sizable down payment on the 645D, which apparently will be much higher spec than the 5D. So the new roadmap indicates: - 'consumer cameras' use APS sized sensors and DA-lenses with PK mount - 'pro cameras' use a full frame sensor and DFA-lenses with PK mount The professional roadmap is 6x7 cm - 6x4.5 cm - 3.6x2.4? Now the body form factor still looks big, while the lens mount is PK, mixing medium format and 35 mm? ok, I'll take that - at least this will promise some new DFA lenses for my analog bodies ;-) - Martin
Re: Lens Road Map revised
On 2006-02-24 16:20, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The lens mount for the new pro camera is not PK, it's the 645 mount. How do you know? And the sensor isn't 35mm full frame. I suppose that it's not really 35 mm. 36x24 mm - ø 43 mm, 60:45 @ 43 mm - 34.6 x 26.0 mm That's 4 % more area ;-) I missed the smc PENTAX-FA *645* on http://www.pentax.co.jp/japan/news/2006/press-image/200609-06.jpg So you're probably right that they'll keep the bigger format. - Martin
Re: Lens Road Map revised
-- Original message -- From: Martin Trautmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 2006-02-24 16:20, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The lens mount for the new pro camera is not PK, it's the 645 mount. How do you know? Pentax made that clear when they announced this camera some time ago.
Re: Lens Road Map revised
On Feb 24, 2006, at 8:09 AM, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: And what kind of photography is that, really? Have you defined it? Yes, but you deleted it: The LX with its superb finders and the old array of high performance fast lenses made a pretty smick kit for low light work. If the new DLSR behaves similarly to the D200 at high ISO I doubt that I'm going to be overly excited, proof is in the pudding of course be it a year ore more away. It's apparent that Pentax are heading in a totally different direction now, they are carving a niche of kit biased towards small rather than fast. I don't see a definition for a kind of photography in that quote, Kostas. I see a statement relating to a kind of equipment. What kind of PHOTOGRAPHS is the equipment intended to make? That's photography. It says low light work; that's photography. In it Rob expands that for that type of photographs he needs a combination of low noise in high ISO and bright lenses. He concludes that Pentax is not moving towards this direction. The subject of the thread is Lens Road Map revised. You do a lot of interpretation for the words low light work ... Rob didn't say that he was doing any, he said the LX and some older lenses was good for it. He said he liked the LX interchangeable finders. He's also making an assessment of the D200 without any experience with it. And presuming that it was substantially worse than the performance of, say, a D5. Types of photography I'd consider to be subject categories, like portraiture, landscape, sports-photo journalism, editorial, product and table-top, street photography, etc. Low Light work is too broad a term. It refers to a technical capability, not a photographic endeavor. To wit: my low light work ... people/street photography, hand held, with a fast lens and an *istDS: http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/26.htm ... night urbanscape, hand held, with a fast lens and an *ist DS: http://homepage.mac.com/ramarren/photo/PAW5/38p.htm My feeling is that Rob just wants a Canon 5D. He should just buy one. No one will think the worse of him for buying a Canon, or if they do they're being foolish. The problem with these equipment centric discussions is that they undermine the priority of photographic endeavors and aesthetics in favor of spec sheet comparisons. Godfrey
Re: Lens Road Map revised
*ist D ( or successor) +DA 40 F2.8 +DA 21 F3.2 +DA 70 F2.4 Together they mean that in my next fight with British Airways over carry-on weight, I'll win (again). These can just about all go in a pocket. Joe
Re: Lens Road Map revised
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 09:57:53AM +, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, John Francis wrote: There's a DA 50-135/2.8 on the way as well. Looks like 2006 is going to be expensive. Not really, it's a DA. So's the 12-24, and that's almost into four figures. The 10-17 fisheye isn't all that much cheaper. I fear that the new body, a new grip, and the 10-17, 16-50 and 50-135 won't leave any change from $5000.
Re: Lens Road Map revised
John Francis wrote: On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 09:57:53AM +, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, John Francis wrote: There's a DA 50-135/2.8 on the way as well. Looks like 2006 is going to be expensive. Not really, it's a DA. So's the 12-24, and that's almost into four figures. The 10-17 fisheye isn't all that much cheaper. I fear that the new body, a new grip, and the 10-17, 16-50 and 50-135 won't leave any change from $5000. I think Kostas' point was that he won't buy DA glass. -Adam
Re: Lens Road Map revised
I think Kostas' point was that he won't buy DA glass. -Adam I think that's all we're going to see in PK mount. I'm fine with that. Paul
Re: Lens Road Map revised
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think Kostas' point was that he won't buy DA glass. -Adam I think that's all we're going to see in PK mount. I'm fine with that. Paul Makes sense, since I don't expect Pentax to introduce any 35mm cameras in the future, and also don't expect the film offerings to stay in the catalog much longer (Barring maybe the ZX-M). In fact I wouldn't be shocked for Pentax to kill all the film bodies and sell the Cosina Camera as a 'student' film body (A la Nikon FM10) to keep a strong presence in education. -Adam
Re: Lens Road Map revised
I agree. They will be about as compact as an old range finder with lenses having corresponding fields of view. DagT Den 24. feb. 2006 kl. 18.31 skrev jtainter: *ist D ( or successor) +DA 40 F2.8 +DA 21 F3.2 +DA 70 F2.4 Together they mean that in my next fight with British Airways over carry-on weight, I'll win (again). These can just about all go in a pocket. Joe
Re: Lens Road Map revised
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 06:44:23PM +, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think Kostas' point was that he won't buy DA glass. -Adam I think that's all we're going to see in PK mount. I'm fine with that. Paul I'd say that the announcement of DA f2.8 zooms which replace the previous FA* ones pretty much confirms we won't see a 'full frame' K-mount body. I'm fine with that, too - I never expected one. I also expect that, if Pentax are going to offer USM and/or IS, it will have to show up on these lenses. They might, perhaps, get away with one more body without the feature (although even that would be pushing their luck, to my mind), but I don't see too many people prepared to buy the new zooms now who would pay yet again to add just those features - I certainly would not.
Re: Lens Road Map revised
On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, John Francis wrote: On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 09:57:53AM +, Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On Thu, 23 Feb 2006, John Francis wrote: There's a DA 50-135/2.8 on the way as well. Looks like 2006 is going to be expensive. Not really, it's a DA. So's the 12-24, and that's almost into four figures. I was being cheeky: I thought a DFA was suggested in the previous roadmap and had suggested this lens might be the first new lens I buy in years. The DA lens is useless to me. Kostas
Re: Lens Road Map revised
On 24 Feb 2006 at 8:01, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I don't see a definition for a kind of photography in that quote, Kostas. I see a statement relating to a kind of equipment. What kind of PHOTOGRAPHS is the equipment intended to make? That's photography. Just butting in here for a minute, my photographic endeavours include quite a lot of mid-high energy concert photography these days, and as a consequence generally I find myself shooting in very low light/poor quality light environs. Static low light or slow moving subjects of course I can tackle with other cameras, the problem is that I like to use the best equipment for the job so that I obtain the best result. Pentax used to provide very adequate solutions however now it seems they are off in another direction. 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: Lens Road Map revised
Hello Rob, Based on your description, am I to interpret that the issue with bodies has mostly to do with High ISO/Low Noise? Essentially a larger sensor becomes the real solution from the body side of things. That would mean either a full frame sensor or a MF body. So Nikon is no help to you either with problem? Seems that Canon full frame or MF becomes the choice. As for glass, high speed lenses are the order of the day - which has not been Pentax's direction for some time. For this, Canon becomes the only real option when combined with body requirements. Curious if I am understanding your issues? -- Best regards, Bruce Friday, February 24, 2006, 3:51:52 PM, you wrote: RS On 24 Feb 2006 at 8:01, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I don't see a definition for a kind of photography in that quote, Kostas. I see a statement relating to a kind of equipment. What kind of PHOTOGRAPHS is the equipment intended to make? That's photography. RS Just butting in here for a minute, my photographic endeavours include quite a RS lot of mid-high energy concert photography these days, and as a consequence RS generally I find myself shooting in very low light/poor quality light environs. RS Static low light or slow moving subjects of course I can tackle with other RS cameras, the problem is that I like to use the best equipment for the job so RS that I obtain the best result. Pentax used to provide very adequate solutions RS however now it seems they are off in another direction. RS Rob Studdert RS HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA RS Tel +61-2-9554-4110 RS UTC(GMT) +10 Hours RS [EMAIL PROTECTED] RS http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ RS Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
Re: Lens Road Map revised
On 2006-02-25, at 00:51, Rob Studdert wrote: Just butting in here for a minute, my photographic endeavours include quite a lot of mid-high energy concert photography these days, and as a consequence generally I find myself shooting in very low light/poor quality light environs. Static low light or slow moving subjects of course I can tackle with other cameras, the problem is that I like to use the best equipment for the job so that I obtain the best result. Pentax used to provide very adequate solutions however now it seems they are off in another direction. Rob, if you are looking for top-notch very low light performance from camera, then there's no choice - only Canon 5D is capable of giving you that. It seems that other producers continue to build APS-C sensor based bodies and it seems that it won't change in the nearest future, even Canon has shown new EF-S 17-50/2.8 IS lens. APS-C will probably stay as a standard for DSLRs while FF cameras will become niche for specific demands like yours. If I would be you and could only afford it I would really switch to 5D and a few high speed L lenses. -- Best regards Sylwek
Re: Lens Road Map revised
On 24 Feb 2006 at 15:02, Bruce Dayton wrote: Hello Rob, Based on your description, am I to interpret that the issue with bodies has mostly to do with High ISO/Low Noise? Essentially a larger sensor becomes the real solution from the body side of things. That would mean either a full frame sensor or a MF body. So Nikon is no help to you either with problem? Seems that Canon full frame or MF becomes the choice. Hi Bruce, yes pretty much, I'm after the best low noise performance, low ISO there is far less difference between bodies. Digital MF bodies/backs however are generally lower sensitivity and the lenses are generally slower by up to a few stops so any potential advantage would be lost in any case. The 5D looks good, yes. As for glass, high speed lenses are the order of the day - which has not been Pentax's direction for some time. For this, Canon becomes the only real option when combined with body requirements. Curious if I am understanding your issues? True again. The problem is that is that the turn-around in Pentax has been creeping to this point, but now as you know it's patently obvious given the official dumping of the majority of the FA line and the new roadmap items. I thought it might get better but Pentax seem now simply hell bent on heading done the pretty/compact/light niche end of the market, and that's not where I want to go. Cheers, 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: Lens Road Map revised
On Feb 24, 2006, at 8:14 PM, Rob Studdert wrote: Pentax seem now simply hell bent on heading done the pretty/compact/light niche end of the market, and that's not where I want to go. I don't know about pretty. I guess they're okay. And some of the new lenses seem to be upgrades in speed -- the 16-50/2,8 for example. It's the prosumer end of the market, and it offers some benefits you won't get from Canon and Nikon. I'd say that's good marketing. And for all but some highly specialized applications, it will produce as nice a photograph as any other camera. I would think the ten megapixel camera will have no problem producing excellent 16 x20 prints. Paul
Lens Road Map revised
http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/ja/lens/roadmap.pdf DA16-50/2.8! Cheers, Ken
Re: Lens Road Map revised
On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 09:20:47PM -0500, K.Takeshita wrote: http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/ja/lens/roadmap.pdf DA16-50/2.8! Now we know why there's a rebate on the 16-45/4 There's a DA 50-135/2.8 on the way as well. Looks like 2006 is going to be expensive.
Re: Lens Road Map revised
On 23 Feb 2006 at 21:20, K.Takeshita wrote: http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/ja/lens/roadmap.pdf DA16-50/2.8! Is anyone else more than a little confused over the inclusion of a DFA55/2.8 and DA70/2.4LTD? 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: Lens Road Map revised
- Original Message - From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Is anyone else more than a little confused over the inclusion of a DFA55/2.8 and DA70/2.4LTD? I am confused over the D-FA 55/2.8 but not the 70/2.4 Limited.
Re: [Bulk] Re: Lens Road Map revised
On 2/23/06 10:37 PM, Rob Studdert, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: DFA55/2.8 This is for 645D Ken
Re: Lens Road Map revised
On 2/23/06 9:32 PM, John Francis, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Feb 23, 2006 at 09:20:47PM -0500, K.Takeshita wrote: http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/ja/lens/roadmap.pdf DA16-50/2.8! Now we know why there's a rebate on the 16-45/4 There's a DA 50-135/2.8 on the way as well. Looks like 2006 is going to be expensive. If the new D has good performance in high ISO (low noise), and possibly with some sort of image stabilization, those small pocketable primes are wonderful. I would rather prefer compact and lighter lenses without going too fast an aperture. Chhers, Ken
Re: [Bulk] Re: Lens Road Map revised
- Original Message - From: K.Takeshita [EMAIL PROTECTED] DFA55/2.8 This is for 645D That make sense. It will be the new standard lens. The D FA label probably (almost certainly) indicate that it will be full frame and that it will fit film 645 as well. That strongly indicate that it have aperture ring (thank God).
Re: Lens Road Map revised
On 24 Feb 2006 at 3:41, Pål Jensen wrote: I am confused over the D-FA 55/2.8 but not the 70/2.4 Limited. Yes I guess it would look good next to my 77/1.8LTD if I was trying to find the smallest least usable lenses. All I can think is what the hell are they thinking, how many lenses at or around 50 and 70mm do we really need? 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: [Bulk] Re: Lens Road Map revised
On 23 Feb 2006 at 21:42, K.Takeshita wrote: On 2/23/06 10:37 PM, Rob Studdert, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: DFA55/2.8 This is for 645D Thanks Ken, that makes much more sense now, still doesn't account for the 70mm though? 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: Lens Road Map revised
Weird... Tom C. From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Lens Road Map revised Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 13:37:24 +1000 On 23 Feb 2006 at 21:20, K.Takeshita wrote: http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/ja/lens/roadmap.pdf DA16-50/2.8! Is anyone else more than a little confused over the inclusion of a DFA55/2.8 and DA70/2.4LTD? 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: [Bulk] Re: Lens Road Map revised
On 2/23/06 10:48 PM, Rob Studdert, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes I guess it would look good next to my 77/1.8LTD if I was trying to find the smallest least usable lenses. Didn't the original road map say something about pancake type? Maybe lens designers are having too much fun. But 70/2.4 in 1.6 crop would be a nice small (pocketable) midtele, no? Cheers, ken
Re: Lens Road Map revised
They must think we're stupid... I can see the *ist D and 40mm pancake becoming my point and shoot while a Canon 5D and 2 - 3 lenses, becoming my main system. Tom C. From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] All I can think is what the hell are they thinking, how many lenses at or around 50 and 70mm do we really need?
Re: Lens Road Map revised
If the new D has good performance in high ISO (low noise), and possibly with some sort of image stabilization, those small pocketable primes are wonderful. I would rather prefer compact and lighter lenses without going too fast an aperture. Chhers, Ken -- Thanks for posting the link, Ken. You are right about those pancake lenses. I got the 40 for times when the carry-on bag is packed so tightly that only that lens and the D can fit in. But I could pocket those other two. In fact, for some travel I could see that combination replacing my DA 16-45. Joe
Re: Lens Road Map revised
Sounds like the new D will pretty much match the Canon 5D in specs. Why would you want two incompatible systems? On Feb 23, 2006, at 9:59 PM, Tom C wrote: They must think we're stupid... I can see the *ist D and 40mm pancake becoming my point and shoot while a Canon 5D and 2 - 3 lenses, becoming my main system. Tom C. From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] All I can think is what the hell are they thinking, how many lenses at or around 50 and 70mm do we really need?
Re: Lens Road Map revised
It basically just gets down to that I've tired of waiting for Pentax. The 5D is a larger sensor (albeit 12.8 vs. 10) and is FF, therefore likely less noise at higher ISO. If I haven't purchased a 5D before the new Pentax is released I'll walk into the store and do some hard (albeit unscientifc comparisons), bring the memory cards home and look at the results very closely. I suspect the 5D buffer and throughput will still be faster/larger also. No proof for that statement obviously. Tom C. From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Lens Road Map revised Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 22:05:43 -0500 Sounds like the new D will pretty much match the Canon 5D in specs. Why would you want two incompatible systems? On Feb 23, 2006, at 9:59 PM, Tom C wrote: They must think we're stupid... I can see the *ist D and 40mm pancake becoming my point and shoot while a Canon 5D and 2 - 3 lenses, becoming my main system. Tom C. From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] All I can think is what the hell are they thinking, how many lenses at or around 50 and 70mm do we really need?
Re: [Bulk] Re: Lens Road Map revised
On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 03:47:41AM +0100, P?l Jensen wrote: - Original Message - From: K.Takeshita [EMAIL PROTECTED] DFA55/2.8 This is for 645D That make sense. It will be the new standard lens. The D FA label probably (almost certainly) indicate that it will be full frame and that it will fit film 645 as well. That strongly indicate that it have aperture ring (thank God). That's a bit of a stretch. I think the D prefix pretty much says that it is intended for the digital bodies.
Re: Lens Road Map revised
For that small a difference, I certainly wouldn't adapt a second system. If I switched, I would go all the way. But I don't think I could afford the lenses I need in Canon mount. Certainly not lenses that would match my Pentax glass in quality. I'm very pleased with the new D specs. I can''t imagine why it wouldn't do everything I need. On Feb 23, 2006, at 10:18 PM, Tom C wrote: It basically just gets down to that I've tired of waiting for Pentax. The 5D is a larger sensor (albeit 12.8 vs. 10) and is FF, therefore likely less noise at higher ISO. If I haven't purchased a 5D before the new Pentax is released I'll walk into the store and do some hard (albeit unscientifc comparisons), bring the memory cards home and look at the results very closely. I suspect the 5D buffer and throughput will still be faster/larger also. No proof for that statement obviously. Tom C. From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Lens Road Map revised Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 22:05:43 -0500 Sounds like the new D will pretty much match the Canon 5D in specs. Why would you want two incompatible systems? On Feb 23, 2006, at 9:59 PM, Tom C wrote: They must think we're stupid... I can see the *ist D and 40mm pancake becoming my point and shoot while a Canon 5D and 2 - 3 lenses, becoming my main system. Tom C. From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] All I can think is what the hell are they thinking, how many lenses at or around 50 and 70mm do we really need?
Re: [Bulk] Re: Lens Road Map revised
John Francis wrote: On Fri, Feb 24, 2006 at 03:47:41AM +0100, P?l Jensen wrote: - Original Message - From: K.Takeshita [EMAIL PROTECTED] DFA55/2.8 This is for 645D That make sense. It will be the new standard lens. The D FA label probably (almost certainly) indicate that it will be full frame and that it will fit film 645 as well. That strongly indicate that it have aperture ring (thank God). That's a bit of a stretch. I think the D prefix pretty much says that it is intended for the digital bodies. Well, every D-FA lens so far has been full-frame. DA indicates the dedicated Digital lenses. -Adam
Re: Lens Road Map revised
I understand your point totally. If I had either the money or the gumption to be an early adopter of a new system (on a newly released camera body) it would be less of a decision, as I would be gaining more benefit sooner. I do find it a little sad that the Pentax top of the line will be underspec'd compared to Canon's middle of the line. Tom C. From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Lens Road Map revised Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 22:44:56 -0500 For that small a difference, I certainly wouldn't adapt a second system. If I switched, I would go all the way. But I don't think I could afford the lenses I need in Canon mount. Certainly not lenses that would match my Pentax glass in quality. I'm very pleased with the new D specs. I can''t imagine why it wouldn't do everything I need. On Feb 23, 2006, at 10:18 PM, Tom C wrote: It basically just gets down to that I've tired of waiting for Pentax. The 5D is a larger sensor (albeit 12.8 vs. 10) and is FF, therefore likely less noise at higher ISO. If I haven't purchased a 5D before the new Pentax is released I'll walk into the store and do some hard (albeit unscientifc comparisons), bring the memory cards home and look at the results very closely. I suspect the 5D buffer and throughput will still be faster/larger also. No proof for that statement obviously. Tom C. From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Lens Road Map revised Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 22:05:43 -0500 Sounds like the new D will pretty much match the Canon 5D in specs. Why would you want two incompatible systems? On Feb 23, 2006, at 9:59 PM, Tom C wrote: They must think we're stupid... I can see the *ist D and 40mm pancake becoming my point and shoot while a Canon 5D and 2 - 3 lenses, becoming my main system. Tom C. From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] All I can think is what the hell are they thinking, how many lenses at or around 50 and 70mm do we really need?
Re: Lens Road Map revised
... and quite on par with nikon middle of the line. i just wish it were released earlier, like, before summer. otoh, 21/3.2 DA LTD is a *fantastic* news -- i don't think anyone else is commited to small, superbly built primes. kudos to pentax! if 70/2.4 is going to be 1/3 size/weight/price of 71LTD, it's going to be a winner too. i just wish they had something like a small and light 35/1.7 DA LTD to be a standard lens on D -- 31LTD is just too big and heavy. best, mishka On 2/23/06, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I do find it a little sad that the Pentax top of the line will be underspec'd compared to Canon's middle of the line. Tom C.
Re: Lens Road Map revised
Mr. gloom and doom is back. The 20D and 30D are Canon's middle of the line. The Pentax camera will be no more unproven than the 5D or Nikon 200 were. In fact, it should be less of an experiment, since it will use the same sensor as the 200. Paul On Feb 23, 2006, at 11:02 PM, Tom C wrote: I understand your point totally. If I had either the money or the gumption to be an early adopter of a new system (on a newly released camera body) it would be less of a decision, as I would be gaining more benefit sooner. I do find it a little sad that the Pentax top of the line will be underspec'd compared to Canon's middle of the line. Tom C. From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Lens Road Map revised Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 22:44:56 -0500 For that small a difference, I certainly wouldn't adapt a second system. If I switched, I would go all the way. But I don't think I could afford the lenses I need in Canon mount. Certainly not lenses that would match my Pentax glass in quality. I'm very pleased with the new D specs. I can''t imagine why it wouldn't do everything I need. On Feb 23, 2006, at 10:18 PM, Tom C wrote: It basically just gets down to that I've tired of waiting for Pentax. The 5D is a larger sensor (albeit 12.8 vs. 10) and is FF, therefore likely less noise at higher ISO. If I haven't purchased a 5D before the new Pentax is released I'll walk into the store and do some hard (albeit unscientifc comparisons), bring the memory cards home and look at the results very closely. I suspect the 5D buffer and throughput will still be faster/larger also. No proof for that statement obviously. Tom C. From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Lens Road Map revised Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 22:05:43 -0500 Sounds like the new D will pretty much match the Canon 5D in specs. Why would you want two incompatible systems? On Feb 23, 2006, at 9:59 PM, Tom C wrote: They must think we're stupid... I can see the *ist D and 40mm pancake becoming my point and shoot while a Canon 5D and 2 - 3 lenses, becoming my main system. Tom C. From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] All I can think is what the hell are they thinking, how many lenses at or around 50 and 70mm do we really need?
Re: Lens Road Map revised
Tom C wrote: I do find it a little sad that the Pentax top of the line will be underspec'd compared to Canon's middle of the line. In fairness to Pentax (this from a Canon defector) and with all due respect, the new 10MP D-whatever will be targeted at the advanced amateur audience and will compete with the 20D(30D) and D200 (just as the original D competed with the 10D and D100). This is Pentax's current top-of the line target market, and that's great. In this regard the new D-whatever, if it has the higher buffer and frame rate, will compete very nicely in specs and price. The only thing it's missing is USM and some sort of anti-shake and we don't know if this is the case yet. I don't see how you can call it under-spec'd compared to Canon (especially without seeing it's specs). You cannot compare it to the 5D. That's a whole other animal. -- Christian http://photography.skofteland.net
Re: Lens Road Map revised
Which is exactly what it should be. The Pentax pro camera is the 645D. It's there for anyone who needs that kind of horsepower. And of course the Canon top range models await you as well. I would argue that Nikon doesn't really have anything significantly better. Bigger and perhaps slightly faster, although we can't be sure of that.. But certainly not worth a switch. The new D seems to be exactly what most Pentax users want. Paul On Feb 23, 2006, at 11:09 PM, Mishka wrote: ... and quite on par with nikon middle of the line. i just wish it were released earlier, like, before summer. otoh, 21/3.2 DA LTD is a *fantastic* news -- i don't think anyone else is commited to small, superbly built primes. kudos to pentax! if 70/2.4 is going to be 1/3 size/weight/price of 71LTD, it's going to be a winner too. i just wish they had something like a small and light 35/1.7 DA LTD to be a standard lens on D -- 31LTD is just too big and heavy. best, mishka On 2/23/06, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I do find it a little sad that the Pentax top of the line will be underspec'd compared to Canon's middle of the line. Tom C.
Re: Lens Road Map revised
It's the truth... sorry it comes across as gloom and doom to you. It seems like Canon has a low-end, a low-middle, high-middle, and high-end. The 5D is in the high middle to me, price-wise and spec-wise. The 20D (haven't done more than glimpse at 30D) strikes me as being in the low-middle end of their current lineup. By saying early-adopter, I wasn't meaning to say that I was worried about reliability and such. The gumption just had to do with parting with the money (and explaining it to my wife). Maybe I'll just stick with the 67 and get an MF scanner. :-) Tom C. From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Lens Road Map revised Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 23:12:10 -0500 Mr. gloom and doom is back. The 20D and 30D are Canon's middle of the line. The Pentax camera will be no more unproven than the 5D or Nikon 200 were. In fact, it should be less of an experiment, since it will use the same sensor as the 200. Paul On Feb 23, 2006, at 11:02 PM, Tom C wrote: I understand your point totally. If I had either the money or the gumption to be an early adopter of a new system (on a newly released camera body) it would be less of a decision, as I would be gaining more benefit sooner. I do find it a little sad that the Pentax top of the line will be underspec'd compared to Canon's middle of the line. Tom C. From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Lens Road Map revised Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 22:44:56 -0500 For that small a difference, I certainly wouldn't adapt a second system. If I switched, I would go all the way. But I don't think I could afford the lenses I need in Canon mount. Certainly not lenses that would match my Pentax glass in quality. I'm very pleased with the new D specs. I can''t imagine why it wouldn't do everything I need. On Feb 23, 2006, at 10:18 PM, Tom C wrote: It basically just gets down to that I've tired of waiting for Pentax. The 5D is a larger sensor (albeit 12.8 vs. 10) and is FF, therefore likely less noise at higher ISO. If I haven't purchased a 5D before the new Pentax is released I'll walk into the store and do some hard (albeit unscientifc comparisons), bring the memory cards home and look at the results very closely. I suspect the 5D buffer and throughput will still be faster/larger also. No proof for that statement obviously. Tom C. From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Lens Road Map revised Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 22:05:43 -0500 Sounds like the new D will pretty much match the Canon 5D in specs. Why would you want two incompatible systems? On Feb 23, 2006, at 9:59 PM, Tom C wrote: They must think we're stupid... I can see the *ist D and 40mm pancake becoming my point and shoot while a Canon 5D and 2 - 3 lenses, becoming my main system. Tom C. From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] All I can think is what the hell are they thinking, how many lenses at or around 50 and 70mm do we really need?
Re: Lens Road Map revised
I don't see how you can call it under-spec'd compared to Canon (especially without seeing it's specs). You cannot compare it to the 5D. That's a whole other animal. -- Christian You're right in a sense. Except that's what I was comparing it to. Tom C.
Re: Lens Road Map revised
i think they are leveraging that with small limited lenses quite nicely. if there was a choice, usm or small primes, i would pick the second. perhaps that's not what pros need -- than i'm happy pentax is not pro oriented. best, mishka On 2/23/06, Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: missing is USM
Re: Lens Road Map revised
Tom C wrote: I don't see how you can call it under-spec'd compared to Canon (especially without seeing it's specs). You cannot compare it to the 5D. That's a whole other animal. You're right in a sense. Except that's what I was comparing it to. Tom C. You can only compare it to the 5D if it has a full-35mm-sized sensor. It doesn't so the only fair comparison is 20D/30D and D200. That's Pentax's target. Not the full-frame market. Apples-oranges. -- Christian http://photography.skofteland.net
Re: Lens Road Map revised
I was comparing it to that, largely because if I was going to make a jump, it wouldn't be a small one. Tom C. From: Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Lens Road Map revised Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 23:31:47 -0500 Tom C wrote: I don't see how you can call it under-spec'd compared to Canon (especially without seeing it's specs). You cannot compare it to the 5D. That's a whole other animal. You're right in a sense. Except that's what I was comparing it to. Tom C. You can only compare it to the 5D if it has a full-35mm-sized sensor. It doesn't so the only fair comparison is 20D/30D and D200. That's Pentax's target. Not the full-frame market. Apples-oranges. -- Christian http://photography.skofteland.net
Re: Lens Road Map revised
Some people care about specs, others care about making photographs. Shel On 2/23/06, Tom C wrote: I do find it a little sad that the Pentax top of the line will be underspec'd compared to Canon's middle of the line.
Re: Lens Road Map revised
...yet another deep insight from the Master. best, mishka On 2/23/06, Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Some people care about specs, others care about making photographs. Shel
Re: Lens Road Map revised
On 23 Feb 2006 at 20:50, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Some people care about specs, others care about making photographs. And some people used to care about chemistry, temperature and agitation, others cared about making photographs. 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: Lens Road Map revised
And so what a*e point are you trying to make? Tom C. From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Lens Road Map revised Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2006 20:50:43 -0800 Some people care about specs, others care about making photographs. Shel On 2/23/06, Tom C wrote: I do find it a little sad that the Pentax top of the line will be underspec'd compared to Canon's middle of the line.
Re: Lens Road Map revised
Godfrey wrote: I like their conservatism. I think it is what makes these cameras and lenses especially useful. This deserves a carefully worded reply. :-) Tom C. From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net Subject: Re: Lens Road Map revised Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2006 15:55:37 +1000 On 23 Feb 2006 at 20:50, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Some people care about specs, others care about making photographs. And some people used to care about chemistry, temperature and agitation, others cared about making photographs. 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: Lens Road Map revised
On 23 Feb 2006 at 22:36, Tom C wrote: Godfrey wrote: I like their conservatism. I think it is what makes these cameras and lenses especially useful. This deserves a carefully worded reply. :-) I guess it does. Their conservatism however does little now for the photography that I like to pursue. Pentax has been great for what I like to shoot however obviously now long gone are the days of the LX and great fast glass. The LX with its superb finders and the old array of high performance fast lenses made a pretty smick kit for low light work. If the new DLSR behaves similarly to the D200 at high ISO I doubt that I'm going to be overly excited, proof is in the pudding of course be it a year or more away. It's apparent that Pentax are heading in a totally different direction now, they are carving a niche of kit biased towards small rather than fast. This may be a good thing for some but I think that I may have to finally bite the bullet and start paring down my kit. BTW this isn't a whine it's a point of view. 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
English roadmap (was Re: [Bulk] Re: Lens Road Map revised)
Quoting K.Takeshita [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On 2/23/06 10:37 PM, Rob Studdert, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: DFA55/2.8 This is for 645D Ken Yes, English version of the roadmap here (sorry if someone has already posted this) http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/en/lens/roadmap.pdf D
Re: Lens Road Map revised
How is it that we agree so much on some things, Shel? ;-) Godfrey On Feb 23, 2006, at 8:50 PM, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Some people care about specs, others care about making photographs. Shel On 2/23/06, Tom C wrote: I do find it a little sad that the Pentax top of the line will be underspec'd compared to Canon's middle of the line.
Re: Lens Road Map revised
On 23 Feb 2006 at 22:36, Tom C wrote: Godfrey wrote: I like their conservatism. I think it is what makes these cameras and lenses especially useful. This deserves a carefully worded reply. :-) Word a reply any way you want. I'm quite happy with my position. On Feb 23, 2006, at 10:52 PM, Rob Studdert wrote: I guess it does. Their conservatism however does little now for the photography that I like to pursue. ... And what kind of photography is that, really? Have you defined it? If the equipment that Pentax is making now and planning to make no longer fits what you want to do, Rob, it's up to you to go with different equipment that works better for you. Given your insistence on technical perfection, I am not sure why you aren't dumping your Pentax gear and moving on to larger format film, like 4x5 etc. Pentax gear proves to be very lucrative on the used market ... rather unintentionally, I made a nice percentage from selling all the older lenses compared to what I'd paid for them a year ago. Certainly paid well for the use I got out of them. As I've said before, I just don't get all the maudlin and bitter words. It's just equipment. Photography is much more important to me than that. Godfrey
Re: Lens Road Map revised
On Feb 23, 2006, at 6:20 PM, K.Takeshita wrote: http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/ja/lens/roadmap.pdf Ken, Thanks for posting the new roadmap. Some interesting possibilities. I've been waiting for mount updates on several lenses ... I want quick-shift focusing on any new lenses I buy, which means DA and D-FA series lenses. :-) Godfrey
Re: English roadmap (was Re: [Bulk] Re: Lens Road Map revised)
FA50 1.4 still there :) http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/en/lens/ 2006/2/24, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Quoting K.Takeshita [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On 2/23/06 10:37 PM, Rob Studdert, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: DFA55/2.8 This is for 645D Ken Yes, English version of the roadmap here (sorry if someone has already posted this) http://www.digital.pentax.co.jp/en/lens/roadmap.pdf D -- -- Thibouille -- *ist-D,Z1,SFXn,SuperA,KX,MX, P30t and KR-10x ...
