RE: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
My dream Pentax DSLR? - Inbody IS, or better useable ISO. - Weather proof body. - Faster/better AF. - Customable Fn buttons. - Upgradeable buffer. - Better resolution, with same/better noise. FF or APS or a new format. The ergonomics of the Ds, with two wheels. AA batteries. My main concern is machinery I know I can trust for at least 10 years. In other words, a light weight tank. I also like the idea of an inbody ND filter like feature. Something that adjusts the sensitivity from parts of the sensor. Tim Mostly harmless (just plain Norwegian) Never underestimate the power of stupidity in large crowds (Very freely after Arthur C. Clarke, or some other clever guy) > -Original Message- > From: Scott Loveless [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: 21. september 2005 20:25 > To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > Subject: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera? > > Howdy gang! > > After spending about four lifetimes following the recent spew about > non-A lens support, I started to think about what I would really WANT > in a digital camera. (This has nothing to do with the possible > petition to Pentax.) Just for kicks (and a bit of flame-free fun) I'd > like to know what you would WANT if you could have your DSLR your way. > Throw caution to the wind. Don't even consider what is feasible or > marketable. Just let us know what your dream digital camera looks > like. > > Here's mine: > I wanna be able to select ISO and shutter speed with knobs. > It should support an available line of manual focus lenses. K-mount > (un-crippled) is good. Screw mount or M-mount would be cool, too. > I don't need auto focus, auto aperture, or auto anything. > Monochrome sensor. Something in the 4 to 6 MP range is good. > Metal chassis. Metal body. > RAW and JPEG. > PC sync. > No built-in flash. > Less than $1500 US. > > > Things I don't need, but could live with: > Hot shoe. > Picture modes. > > Features I would like, but could live without: > In-camera DNG support. > > That's about it. > > -- > Scott Loveless > http://www.twosixteen.com > > -- > "You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman >
RE: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
This is a good poll. Pentax users stating what they would like to see in future PENTAX DSLR cameras. Great idea. But could someone please explain to me why the K/M open aperture and AE function ( AKA Full support of ALL PK lenses) being disussed this week isnt a valid desireable function just like all the other ones on this wish list? I say this because the standard and numerous opposition to K/M OA metering & AE has been "it adds cost". Well so does all these other things everyone is asking for. I do not agree that features should not be added just because they add ANY cost to produce them. Build better models and charge more for them is the solution. Should the survey be limited to features that should be added to future DSLRS that can only be added for free? I think NOT. jco
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
a SanDisk CF memory card draws about 100mA at 3V when writing. it is one of the least power consuming parts of a digital camera. if you stuck a dynamo the size of one in a hand cranked emergency radio, you probably could run a camera off of that. look at the power supply for slimline P&S digicam. my Optio S5z says 4.2V at 630mA. figure 2/3 is for running the LCD, which i think is generous, and you still come up with more than 200mA. it takes about 5 seconds to write an image. that's 4.2 joules. try it some time. those hand cranked radios draw less power than the average digicam. Herb - Original Message - From: "Frantisek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Herb Chong" Sent: Friday, September 23, 2005 9:09 AM Subject: Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera? Friday, September 23, 2005, 12:55:47 AM, Herb wrote: HC> if it has a digital sensor, the winding won't generate enough new power to HC> put up the low battery warning. it "might" be enough to run the K1000 light HC> meter. Any hard mA figures, if you are so sure, as usual?
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
And I was being ironic, although no one will be able to tell that from your quote. Oh well. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" --- P. J. Alling wrote: No, I was being sarcastic. graywolf wrote: The components most likely to fail in a piece of electrical/electronic equipment are switchs. So the way to make cameras more reliable is to remove the mechanical aperture ring from the lens that is used only with that lens and replace it with a multi-position, multi-function switch that is not only used to set aperture with every lens, but also as a shutter speed switch, an ISO switch, etc. Almost guaranteed to reduce the usable life of the camera by a factor of 100 or so (To be honest it also reduces the cost of manufacture by a factor of 2 or 3). This is progress? graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" --- P. J. Alling wrote: Aperture rings are redundant, you will learn to love wheels. (Repeat 10,000 times, if you still like aperture rings start over).
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
graywolf wrote: The components most likely to fail in a piece of electrical/electronic equipment are switchs. So the way to make cameras more reliable is to remove the mechanical aperture ring from the lens that is used only with that lens and replace it with a multi-position, multi-function switch that is not only used to set aperture with every lens, but also as a shutter speed switch, an ISO switch, etc. Almost guaranteed to reduce the usable life of the camera by a factor of 100 or so (To be honest it also reduces the cost of manufacture by a factor of 2 or 3). This is progress? My point exactly. graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" --- P. J. Alling wrote: Aperture rings are redundant, you will learn to love wheels. (Repeat 10,000 times, if you still like aperture rings start over).
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
I've been meaning to get around to this for a few days, so, perhaps better late than never. I'd like to see a simpler camera with higher build quality ... less modes and menus with controls like a basic, older camera, although it would be nice to have some controls on a dial/knob as well. Autofocus would be nice, as would good (read full) support for manual lenses as well. A large, bright, pentaprism finder, no goofy pop-up flash. A larger than APS-sized 14-bit or 16-bit sensor, but it needn't have to be full frame, with high quality output in the 10 to 12 megapixel range - more is better as long as quality is not compromised. RAW and JPEG recording. True spot metering (one or two degrees) plus whatever other metering the manufacturer wants, as long as I can turn 'em all off completely. Minimal information in the finder ... no blinking lights, bells, whistles, sound effects, or colorful displays. Nothing anywhere on the camera with a "happy face," in fact, no picture modes at all. Put the money into quality rather than a plethora of cute features. Metal frame, of course. Fast, large buffer memory. Must be able to use AA type batteries. DNG support ... hmm, sounds like a good idea ;-)) Shel > Scott Loveless wrote: I wanna be able to select ISO and shutter speed with knobs. It should support an available line of manual focus lenses. K-mount (un-crippled) is good. Screw mount or M-mount would be cool, too. I don't need auto focus, auto aperture, or auto anything. Monochrome sensor. Something in the 4 to 6 MP range is good. Metal chassis. Metal body. RAW and JPEG. PC sync. No built-in flash. Less than $1500 US. Things I don't need, but could live with: Hot shoe. Picture modes. Features I would like, but could live without: In-camera DNG support. That's about it. -- Scott Loveless http://www.twosixteen.com
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
No, I was being sarcastic. graywolf wrote: The components most likely to fail in a piece of electrical/electronic equipment are switchs. So the way to make cameras more reliable is to remove the mechanical aperture ring from the lens that is used only with that lens and replace it with a multi-position, multi-function switch that is not only used to set aperture with every lens, but also as a shutter speed switch, an ISO switch, etc. Almost guaranteed to reduce the usable life of the camera by a factor of 100 or so (To be honest it also reduces the cost of manufacture by a factor of 2 or 3). This is progress? graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" --- P. J. Alling wrote: Aperture rings are redundant, you will learn to love wheels. (Repeat 10,000 times, if you still like aperture rings start over). -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
While I suspect that in this case you are right, it's quite possible that replacing four or five mechanical switches with a single multi-function switch might improve reliability. But to do that you'd have to use a better multi-fuction switch, and I don't see the extra expense being put in on something that will only make a difference after more use than any casual owner will have. On Fri, Sep 23, 2005 at 12:38:58PM -0400, graywolf wrote: > Irony (probably does not translate well). > > graywolf > http://www.graywolfphoto.com > "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" > --- > > > > Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: > > >On Fri, 23 Sep 2005, graywolf wrote: > > > >>So the way to make cameras more reliable is to remove > > > > ^ > > > >>the mechanical aperture ring from the lens that is used only with > >>that lens and replace it with a multi-position, multi-function switch > >>that is not only used to set aperture with every lens, but also as a > >>shutter speed switch, an ISO switch, etc. Almost guaranteed to reduce > >>the usable life of the camera by > > > >^^ > > > >Contradiction? Or am I too tired anymore? > > > >Kostas > > > >
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Irony (probably does not translate well). graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" --- Kostas Kavoussanakis wrote: On Fri, 23 Sep 2005, graywolf wrote: So the way to make cameras more reliable is to remove ^ the mechanical aperture ring from the lens that is used only with that lens and replace it with a multi-position, multi-function switch that is not only used to set aperture with every lens, but also as a shutter speed switch, an ISO switch, etc. Almost guaranteed to reduce the usable life of the camera by ^^ Contradiction? Or am I too tired anymore? Kostas
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
On Fri, 23 Sep 2005, graywolf wrote: So the way to make cameras more reliable is to remove ^ the mechanical aperture ring from the lens that is used only with that lens and replace it with a multi-position, multi-function switch that is not only used to set aperture with every lens, but also as a shutter speed switch, an ISO switch, etc. Almost guaranteed to reduce the usable life of the camera by ^^ Contradiction? Or am I too tired anymore? Kostas
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
The components most likely to fail in a piece of electrical/electronic equipment are switchs. So the way to make cameras more reliable is to remove the mechanical aperture ring from the lens that is used only with that lens and replace it with a multi-position, multi-function switch that is not only used to set aperture with every lens, but also as a shutter speed switch, an ISO switch, etc. Almost guaranteed to reduce the usable life of the camera by a factor of 100 or so (To be honest it also reduces the cost of manufacture by a factor of 2 or 3). This is progress? graywolf http://www.graywolfphoto.com "Idiot Proof" <==> "Expert Proof" --- P. J. Alling wrote: Aperture rings are redundant, you will learn to love wheels. (Repeat 10,000 times, if you still like aperture rings start over).
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Aperture rings are redundant, you will learn to love wheels. (Repeat 10,000 times, if you still like aperture rings start over). Toralf Lund wrote: Cotty wrote: On 22/9/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED], discombobulated, unleashed: So I am going to something irreverent in this irrelevant poll: What I'd really, really like is a Canon DSLR with a Pentax interface. Marnie, that's just plain sick ;-) So, what you're saying is you like the idea? Seriously, though, I guess I have a Pentax (or more than one, actually) because I'm somewhat sceptical to Canon. This scepticism is partly based on what I see as too much emphasis on buzzwords, 3 letter abbreviations, exotic features, modern gimmickry - over usability, reliability etc. The "all electronic" lens mount is part of that, I guess, so replacing it with a K-variant would make the situation better. Oh, and I like aperture rings, too... - T -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Friday, September 23, 2005, 12:55:47 AM, Herb wrote: HC> if it has a digital sensor, the winding won't generate enough new power to HC> put up the low battery warning. it "might" be enough to run the K1000 light HC> meter. Any hard mA figures, if you are so sure, as usual? Good light! fra
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Cotty wrote: On 22/9/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED], discombobulated, unleashed: So I am going to something irreverent in this irrelevant poll: What I'd really, really like is a Canon DSLR with a Pentax interface. Marnie, that's just plain sick ;-) So, what you're saying is you like the idea? Seriously, though, I guess I have a Pentax (or more than one, actually) because I'm somewhat sceptical to Canon. This scepticism is partly based on what I see as too much emphasis on buzzwords, 3 letter abbreviations, exotic features, modern gimmickry - over usability, reliability etc. The "all electronic" lens mount is part of that, I guess, so replacing it with a K-variant would make the situation better. Oh, and I like aperture rings, too... - T
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Pentax hopes to sell 120K cameras at an average sales price of $600 this fiscal year. if Pentax truly meets its sales goal of 10% market share in 2 years, that will mean about 500-700K cameras at about the same average price. since they have stated that they also hope to make 10% on their DSLRs by then, you can make some reasonable estimates. Herb - Original Message - From: "John Francis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2005 12:07 PM Subject: Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera? What Pentax can't afford to do is go after a sale that costs them more to make than the profit margin on the sale. If this is something that corporate minds can understand, but which ordinary minds can't, I'd say this points more to a problem with the ordinary mind than the corporate one.
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
if it has a digital sensor, the winding won't generate enough new power to put up the low battery warning. it "might" be enough to run the K1000 light meter. Herb - Original Message - From: "Frantisek" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pål Jensen" Sent: Thursday, September 22, 2005 7:56 AM Subject: Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera? The "film" winding crank coupled to a dynamo and super-capacitator with a small Li-Ion battery can almost surely generate enough power for next few frames, the backup battery making sure you have power enough even if you keep the camera sitting for few weeks in your bag.
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Hey, it's a wish list, that keeps the sensor density the same as it is currently. Cotty wrote: On 22/9/05, P. J. Alling, discombobulated, unleashed: 13mp full frame sensor Bad luck. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
In a message dated 9/22/2005 1:36:08 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On 22/9/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED], discombobulated, unleashed: >So I am going to something irreverent in this irrelevant poll: What I'd >really, really like is a Canon DSLR with a Pentax interface. Marnie, that's just plain sick ;-) Cheers, Cotty Finally! I knew I could count on you Cotty. Marnie aka Doe ;-)
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
In a message dated 9/22/2005 1:30:13 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Any time Pentax keeps us waiting too long (in our sometimes not so humble opinion) for a new flagship, we get testy. William Robb = Good point. :-) Marnie
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
On 22/9/05, P. J. Alling, discombobulated, unleashed: >13mp full frame sensor Bad luck. Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
On 22/9/05, [EMAIL PROTECTED], discombobulated, unleashed: >So I am going to something irreverent in this irrelevant poll: What I'd >really, really like is a Canon DSLR with a Pentax interface. Marnie, that's just plain sick ;-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
On Thu, 22 Sep 2005, John Francis wrote: Let's face it - we've seen some feature-lists here that are never going to show up on a $2000 body in the next 3 years (and even some that will never show up on a camera aimed at any market Pentax stand a hope of capturing). I am *so* pleased you are in the petition effort; I don't need to talk at all, other than to show my appreciation. Thanks John. (I also expect that a few of us - including Paul Stenquist, Bruce Dayton, and myself - will purchase one, and find that it is perfectly capable of capturing wonderful images) While I will not buy one, certainly not new (and I need no excuse for that), I am quite pleased for you all. I will be particularly pleased if some of your requests actually go into this or (perhaps more realistically) into the next one. Kostas
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
- Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera? I am trying to be nice on a list that has been fairly contentious lately, if not downright nasty, and one that has been contentious, quite frankly, on subject I could give a hoot about. Any time Pentax keeps us waiting too long (in our sometimes not so humble opinion) for a new flagship, we get testy. William Robb
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
John, You've made the same point over and over, unable to recognize any other argument, you haven't said anything new on this subject since you started responding to JCO. I guess the truth hurts. John Francis wrote: Oooh, look - Insults! I guess this means you're still in the denial stage. On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 01:13:16PM -0400, P. J. Alling wrote: You're just as much a broken record as JCO. (I can't think of anything worse I could say about it). John Francis wrote: On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 11:46:52AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 9/22/2005 8:41:34 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: They should, they can't afford to lose a sale. === I really hope the petition does some good. And, actually, I agree with you. It's just that it doesn't seem that corporate minds work the same way as ordinary minds do. What Pentax can't afford to do is go after a sale that costs them more to make than the profit margin on the sale. If this is something that corporate minds can understand, but which ordinary minds can't, I'd say this points more to a problem with the ordinary mind than the corporate one. -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout). -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Marnie, I was responding to John, not to you, you have been very nice in all this. He's just gotten annoying. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 9/22/2005 10:09:26 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You're just as much a broken record as JCO. (I can't think of anything worse I could say about it). I am trying to be nice on a list that has been fairly contentious lately, if not downright nasty, and one that has been contentious, quite frankly, on subject I could give a hoot about. To do this, and to bring in another viewpoint to try to balance the discussion, I believe I have repeated myself about three times. So you can stick your sacrasm where the sun don't shine. It gets old PDQ. And it is as repetitive as anything anyone else does around here. Have a Nice Day! Marnie aka Doe (I know I am going to regret this post. I just know it.) ;-) -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
In a message dated 9/22/2005 10:09:26 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: You're just as much a broken record as JCO. (I can't think of anything worse I could say about it). I am trying to be nice on a list that has been fairly contentious lately, if not downright nasty, and one that has been contentious, quite frankly, on subject I could give a hoot about. To do this, and to bring in another viewpoint to try to balance the discussion, I believe I have repeated myself about three times. So you can stick your sacrasm where the sun don't shine. It gets old PDQ. And it is as repetitive as anything anyone else does around here. Have a Nice Day! Marnie aka Doe (I know I am going to regret this post. I just know it.) ;-)
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Oooh, look - Insults! I guess this means you're still in the denial stage. On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 01:13:16PM -0400, P. J. Alling wrote: > You're just as much a broken record as JCO. (I can't think of anything > worse I could say about it). > > John Francis wrote: > > >On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 11:46:52AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > >>In a message dated 9/22/2005 8:41:34 AM Pacific Standard Time, > >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > >>They should, they can't afford to lose a sale. > >>=== > >>I really hope the petition does some good. And, actually, I agree with > >>you. It's just that it doesn't seem that corporate minds work the same > >>way as ordinary minds do. > >> > >> > > > >What Pentax can't afford to do is go after a sale that costs > >them more to make than the profit margin on the sale. > > > >If this is something that corporate minds can understand, > >but which ordinary minds can't, I'd say this points more > >to a problem with the ordinary mind than the corporate one. > > > > > > > > > > > -- > When you're worried or in doubt, > Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Why not, I'll play, there will be some either or items since some wishes technically preclude others. What I want in the Next Pentax DSLR 1.) 13mp full frame sensor [or] 11mp 1.3 crop sensor with in camera IS. 2.) Full K/M support with an aperture simulator. 3.) 3-5 frame per second for 20-35 Frames. (Jpeg is fine, RAW would be better). 4.) Substantially the same control layout as the *ist-D including the pc socket, (though doors over the camera connections would be nice), with some customization possible. 5.) CF cards not SD. (SD cards are just too f***ing small). 6.) Better focusing/ maybe even intelligent focus tracking in continuous focus mode. 7.) Better bundled software, especially Photo laboratory, which should be the best raw converter for PEF files not the worst! What would be nice, in addition: 8.) Automatic histogram available on review, (with faster review for critical work). 9.) Out of range indicator in review, (its on the *ist-Ds). 10.) Better auto ISO handling, (the *ist-Ds has it why not). 11.) If in body IS is implemented, a method to dial in K/M/A focal lengths to allow it's use with these lenses. What I don't ever want! 12.) No picture modes, especially no :-)faces! -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
John Francis wrote: On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 11:46:52AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 9/22/2005 8:41:34 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: They should, they can't afford to lose a sale. === I really hope the petition does some good. And, actually, I agree with you. It's just that it doesn't seem that corporate minds work the same way as ordinary minds do. What Pentax can't afford to do is go after a sale that costs them more to make than the profit margin on the sale. It's been mentioned by several people on this list in the past: If this will give them a new, loyal customer that can give them a lot of profitable sales opportunities in the future, they can't afford not to. The same is true if the investment done in going after the sale can "rub off" on enough future products. If this is something that corporate minds can understand, but which ordinary minds can't, I'd say this points more to a problem with the ordinary mind than the corporate one. Those problems with some corporate minds is that they lack perspective and completely fail to see a bigger picture. - T
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
You're just as much a broken record as JCO. (I can't think of anything worse I could say about it). John Francis wrote: On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 11:46:52AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 9/22/2005 8:41:34 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: They should, they can't afford to lose a sale. === I really hope the petition does some good. And, actually, I agree with you. It's just that it doesn't seem that corporate minds work the same way as ordinary minds do. What Pentax can't afford to do is go after a sale that costs them more to make than the profit margin on the sale. If this is something that corporate minds can understand, but which ordinary minds can't, I'd say this points more to a problem with the ordinary mind than the corporate one. -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
On 9/22/05, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > And some just are tools... You talking to me? Are you talking to me? I don't see anybody else here. sincerely, Travis -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Here's my list, in order of importance to me: 1) 16-bit color depth RAW. This is more dependent on semiconductor/sensor manufacturers than camera makers (I wouldn't be surprised to see Sony beat Canon to this one) 2) Larger sensor. Full-frame would obviously be ideal, but I could live with the 1.3 crop factor of the 1D, really. 3) Greater pixel count. 10 megapixels would be fine with me (more than fine if either of my first two wishes were granted) A lot of people have mentioned #2 and #3 but I don't think anyone else has asked for the first one, and that's what I'd like most if I could only get one. From the large prints I've seen, I place a higher priority on pixel size than pixel count (up to a point), so I'd go for a 1.3 crop 6-megapixel sensor over a 10 megapixel 1.5 crop sensor. If I could get two of the above three things, I'd have a much more difficult time ranking the various combinations, so I won't try now. I expect we'll just get #3 at first. If Pentax produced an ist-D with any *one* of the above three things I'd buy. I have a secondary list, too. Not as critical as the first but still desirable stuff. Also in order of importance: 1) Dedicated control for ISO setting. No more "twist a special dial to ISO setting position, spin another dial to set and then return the first dial to shooting position" nonsense. Instant access ISO. 2) Full-time display of ISO setting (*without* pushing any buttons) Some things I haven't mentioned because the DS already has them so I expect they'll make it onto the high end camera that will replace the ist-D without anyone asking for them: Bigger, faster buffer, histogram display with instant image review, spot-white-balance. Finally, there are some things I wouldn't want to lose from the ist-D: Separate control wheels for aperture and shutter speed Wireless off-camera flash Illuminated top-panel display (wedding shooters know why this is important!) -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Well, right now I actually want the camera ;) -- Best regards, Alex Sarbu
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
In a message dated 9/22/2005 9:34:07 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > Hmmm, on further relfection, I shouldn't have said that. Some people on > this > list buy new tools all the time. And some just are tools... WW == You said it. Not me. Marnie aka Doe ;-)
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
- Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Hmmm, on further relfection, I shouldn't have said that. Some people on this list buy new tools all the time. And some just are tools... WW
RE: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Since I have only been using fixed lens digicams for the last 6 years I will not comment as fully as I should but I definitely would want based on what I do know: The following: 1. Full support of all FF pentax bayonet mount lens functions (surprise?) APS lenses to of course if the sensor is APS 2. More MP. I havent seen ANY 6 MP images to get too exicted over. If I was a pure 35mm film user I proably would be satisfied with 6MP but I have been exposed to and gotten accustomed to LF too much to find 6MP fully satisfying. 3. Better viewfinder for APS, these are too tiny to my eyes. If it means a higher magnication finder with lower eyepoint and mandatory diopters, Id rather have that because by 35mm SLR standards these are too tiny. 4. USER Interchangeable screens. I like the ability to change as well as if not even more the fact you can easily clean them ( NOTE- this might be in error because they have them already? I am not sure). 5. DUST control features if possible- arent there some sensor self cleaning techniques on some other DSLR cameras now? 6. Bigger or FF sensor- but only if cost is reasonable. I wouldn't pay an unlimited amount of money to get this but even if at same pixel density, its better in two ways lens angle maintenance and lens resolution utilization. That's about it for now
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
>I also seem to replace my tools more frequently. >Later, Marnie aka Doe === Hmmm, on further relfection, I shouldn't have said that. Some people on this list buy new tools all the time. Marnie aka Doe ;-)
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
In a message dated 9/22/2005 9:08:43 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What Pentax can't afford to do is go after a sale that costs them more to make than the profit margin on the sale. If this is something that corporate minds can understand, but which ordinary minds can't, I'd say this points more to a problem with the ordinary mind than the corporate one. == Personally, John, I think the *istD is prefectly fine. So is the Digital Rebel. I can understand why people want more. I want quicker writer rate or whatever it is called, ie. the ability to take more fast shots in a row, and a larger buffer. But I am happy with what I have -- for now. To me a camera is just a tool. A lens is just a tool. And while I can like and even love some tools, that is all they are. Tools can be replaced. The results, photography, is what matters to me. Much more than any tools. Imagination and skill cannot be replaced. Although one always wants the best tools one can afford. But being able to afford the best tools is also always the hitch for me, personally. So I make do with tools that are less than top notch. I am on a camera list, so I expect concern with tools. But I have a lot less concern with them than many do. I also seem to replace my tools more frequently. Later, Marnie aka Doe
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 11:46:52AM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > In a message dated 9/22/2005 8:41:34 AM Pacific Standard Time, > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > They should, they can't afford to lose a sale. > === > I really hope the petition does some good. And, actually, I agree with you. > It's just that it doesn't seem that corporate minds work the same way as > ordinary minds do. What Pentax can't afford to do is go after a sale that costs them more to make than the profit margin on the sale. If this is something that corporate minds can understand, but which ordinary minds can't, I'd say this points more to a problem with the ordinary mind than the corporate one.
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Oh, they can afford to lose a sale; it costs them far less than trying to please everybody. Let's face it - we've seen some feature-lists here that are never going to show up on a $2000 body in the next 3 years (and even some that will never show up on a camera aimed at any market Pentax stand a hope of capturing). I anticipate that when Pentax *do* release their next camera (which I confidently predict will have neither a mechanical aperture simulator coupler nor a full-frame sensor) all the loudest complainers will, yet again, find reasons not to purchase one. (I also expect that a few of us - including Paul Stenquist, Bruce Dayton, and myself - will purchase one, and find that it is perfectly capable of capturing wonderful images) On Thu, Sep 22, 2005 at 11:45:12AM -0400, P. J. Alling wrote: > They should, they can't afford to lose a sale. > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >In a message dated 9/22/2005 8:31:26 AM Pacific Standard Time, > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > >Wish all you want Canon don't care... > >= > >The question is, sorry, does Pentax care a lot more? > > > >Hehehehehe. I think companies they is companies. > > > >Marnie aka Doe ;-) > > > > > > > > > > > -- > When you're worried or in doubt, > Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
In a message dated 9/22/2005 8:41:34 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: They should, they can't afford to lose a sale. === I really hope the petition does some good. And, actually, I agree with you. It's just that it doesn't seem that corporate minds work the same way as ordinary minds do. IMHO. Marnie aka Doe
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
They should, they can't afford to lose a sale. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 9/22/2005 8:31:26 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Wish all you want Canon don't care... = The question is, sorry, does Pentax care a lot more? Hehehehehe. I think companies they is companies. Marnie aka Doe ;-) -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
In a message dated 9/22/2005 8:31:26 AM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Wish all you want Canon don't care... = The question is, sorry, does Pentax care a lot more? Hehehehehe. I think companies they is companies. Marnie aka Doe ;-)
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Wish all you want Canon don't care... [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I really can't think of specifics. Faster write speed, bigger buffer, more mp. But there are already Canon cameras that have that, higher up the line the Digital Rebel I have. So I am going to something irreverent in this irrelevant poll: What I'd really, really like is a Canon DSLR with a Pentax interface. Sorry! Marnie aka Doe ;-) -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Here is my list: FF sensor. Full support for K/M series lenses. Low base ISO, like maybe 25 or 50 (Maybe interchangeable sensors to get the right base ISO). Interchangeable viewfinders (One with a popup flash would be ok for those who want it). Interchangeable focus screens (with a decent selection of screens). 5 fps, with bracketing, up to 15-20 frames (Maybe make the buffer memory upgradeable). Both CF and SD memory slots. Weather sealed body No Picture modes. Selectable TTL or P-TTL (thanks for the idea Godfrey) Its not much, but I think that would be sufficient for me. Derek > Howdy gang! > > After spending about four lifetimes following the recent spew about > non-A lens support, I started to think about what I would really WANT > in a digital camera. (This has nothing to do with the possible > petition to Pentax.) Just for kicks (and a bit of flame-free fun) I'd > like to know what you would WANT if you could have your DSLR your way. > Throw caution to the wind. Don't even consider what is feasible or > marketable. Just let us know what your dream digital camera looks > like. > > Here's mine: > I wanna be able to select ISO and shutter speed with knobs. > It should support an available line of manual focus lenses. K-mount > (un-crippled) is good. Screw mount or M-mount would be cool, too. > I don't need auto focus, auto aperture, or auto anything. > Monochrome sensor. Something in the 4 to 6 MP range is good. > Metal chassis. Metal body. > RAW and JPEG. > PC sync. > No built-in flash. > Less than $1500 US. > > > Things I don't need, but could live with: > Hot shoe. > Picture modes. > > Features I would like, but could live without: > In-camera DNG support. > > That's about it. > > -- > Scott Loveless > http://www.twosixteen.com > > -- > "You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman >
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
I really can't think of specifics. Faster write speed, bigger buffer, more mp. But there are already Canon cameras that have that, higher up the line the Digital Rebel I have. So I am going to something irreverent in this irrelevant poll: What I'd really, really like is a Canon DSLR with a Pentax interface. Sorry! Marnie aka Doe ;-)
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Sounds like an Epson, RD1... Chan Yong Wei wrote: I'd want a digital sensor sitting in a manual, mechanical body. I don't need an LCD screen behind. Just give me the usual knobs on top of the body to control ISO, shutter speed (need not be stepless), and the ring around lenses to control aperture. Manual focus lenses work fine for me as well. The shutter can be mechanical as well - I don't need aperture-priority, and I like cocking the shutter. It would be a bonus if the body and lenses were also metal, resilient and weathersealed. Basically, take a Spotmatic and stick a digital sensor that has low noise, little chromatic aberration, and the ability to save in RAW. The camera should also take either SD or CF... none of that overpriced MemoryStick stuff. YW On 9/22/05, Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 1. Ultra compact magnesium weather sealed body. 2. Ultra compact weather sealed lenses made of magnesium (and glass of course!) too. 3. Lots of megapixels giving image quality better than whats achieveable with film (which ever way you measure) 4. Possible to switch from manual mode to aperture priority with the green button like on the MZ-S. 5. Significantly larger dynamic range than whats possible on any film known to man. Something that make graduated nd filters redundant. Pål -- When you're worried or in doubt, Run in circles, (scream and shout).
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Wow, I hadn't even thought of that dynamo idea. It would be pretty cool if the camera could generate its own power just by winding it up... like those radios and torchlights they distribute to certain parts of Africa. On 9/22/05, Frantisek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > hungry, be it traditional or USM, doesn't matter). The "film" winding > crank coupled to a dynamo and super-capacitator with a small Li-Ion > battery can almost surely generate enough power for next few frames, > >
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
My bad; of course there'll be some sort of power source to power the electronic aspects of the camera like the sensor and writing to the CF/SD cards, maybe even a meter. But I'm happy controlling shutter speed/aperture totally mechanically, using a mechanical shutter... though the ISO knob would have to be coupled to the sensor electronically, for obvious reasons. YW On 9/22/05, Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > - Original Message - > From: "Chan Yong Wei" > > > I'd want a digital sensor sitting in a manual, mechanical body. > > > Whats the point with that? It won't work without batteries anyway. > > > Pål > > >
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
On 9/22/05, frank theriault <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 9/21/05, cbwaters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > other than that, my camera is better than I am at this point. > > "...at this point"? > Oops! Forgot the smiley. -frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
On 9/21/05, cbwaters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: other than that, my camera is better than I am at this point. "...at this point"? -frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Thursday, September 22, 2005, 12:34:25 PM, Pål wrote: PJ> - Original Message - PJ> From: "Chan Yong Wei" >> I'd want a digital sensor sitting in a manual, mechanical body. PJ> Whats the point with that? It won't work without batteries anyway. Well, this is a dream camera for any travelling photojournalist! Just ask around. Now we are all waiting for the Leica M digital, which will be "a little" pricey. According to some rumours Nikon did develop a prototype digital like that, FM3D or what. With modern sensor and electronics, it wouldn't need much power (without AF, which is power hungry, be it traditional or USM, doesn't matter). The "film" winding crank coupled to a dynamo and super-capacitator with a small Li-Ion battery can almost surely generate enough power for next few frames, the backup battery making sure you have power enough even if you keep the camera sitting for few weeks in your bag. Swivel display like on Epson RD-1 (where you can reverse and hide the LCD would be good too, though). This would be a niche camera, but there is in my opinion definitely a good market for it. A lot of journalists and traveling amateurs would buy one. A lot of pros are complaining there was no high-quality digital SLR in a small body, who were tired of lugging the 1Ds or D1X/D2X on extended assignments in the middle of nowhere where there is no need for huge FPS. Now the EOS 5D could be quite popular for these reasons, just as a lot of people brought F3 or LX or whatever instead of F5 and 1V. Frantisek
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
> Besides, the 24/2 is out of stock at BHPhoto. Again. Adorama doesn't > even list it. What's this "available" thing Herb is talking about? B&H will get more. I suggest that you click on the "notify when in stock" button and enter your e-mail address. They'll let you know when it comes in. Tom Reese
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
- Original Message - From: "Chan Yong Wei" > I'd want a digital sensor sitting in a manual, mechanical body. Whats the point with that? It won't work without batteries anyway. Pål
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
- Original Message - From: "Pål Jensen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > 1. Ultra compact magnesium weather sealed body. Actually, this is quite important to me as I had had both the MZ-S and the 645NII at repair due to seawater seeping in to the body. The selector around the release button on the 645NII was totally stucked due to rust! Pål
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
I'd want a digital sensor sitting in a manual, mechanical body. I don't need an LCD screen behind. Just give me the usual knobs on top of the body to control ISO, shutter speed (need not be stepless), and the ring around lenses to control aperture. Manual focus lenses work fine for me as well. The shutter can be mechanical as well - I don't need aperture-priority, and I like cocking the shutter. It would be a bonus if the body and lenses were also metal, resilient and weathersealed. Basically, take a Spotmatic and stick a digital sensor that has low noise, little chromatic aberration, and the ability to save in RAW. The camera should also take either SD or CF... none of that overpriced MemoryStick stuff. YW On 9/22/05, Pål Jensen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > 1. Ultra compact magnesium weather sealed body. > 2. Ultra compact weather sealed lenses made of magnesium (and glass of > course!) too. > 3. Lots of megapixels giving image quality better than whats achieveable with > film (which ever way you measure) > 4. Possible to switch from manual mode to aperture priority with the green > button like on the MZ-S. > 5. Significantly larger dynamic range than whats possible on any film known > to man. Something that make graduated nd filters redundant. > > Pål > > > >
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
1. Ultra compact magnesium weather sealed body. 2. Ultra compact weather sealed lenses made of magnesium (and glass of course!) too. 3. Lots of megapixels giving image quality better than whats achieveable with film (which ever way you measure) 4. Possible to switch from manual mode to aperture priority with the green button like on the MZ-S. 5. Significantly larger dynamic range than whats possible on any film known to man. Something that make graduated nd filters redundant. Pål
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Besides, the 24/2 is out of stock at BHPhoto. Again. Adorama doesn't even list it. What's this "available" thing Herb is talking about? On 9/21/05, Tim Sherburne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Yeah, but Scott said anything goes... :) > > On 9/21/05 18:24, Herb Chong wrote: > > > the 24/2 is available, but you might find its CA too high to be livable. the > > 20/2.8 is the closest you are going to get otherwise. > > > > Herb > > - Original Message - > > From: "Tim Sherburne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: "Pentax Discussion List" > > Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 4:56 PM > > Subject: Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera? > > > > > >> There are two lenses I'm looking for specifically: > >> > >> - A 180° fisheye; it appears that Nikon is the only vendor with a FE made > >> for the 4/3 sensor. To bad it uses the wrong mount! > >> > >> - A discrete f2 (or faster) lens, 20mm to 24mm focal length > > > > > > > > > > -- Scott Loveless http://www.twosixteen.com -- "You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Yeah, but Scott said anything goes... :) On 9/21/05 18:24, Herb Chong wrote: > the 24/2 is available, but you might find its CA too high to be livable. the > 20/2.8 is the closest you are going to get otherwise. > > Herb > - Original Message - > From: "Tim Sherburne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Pentax Discussion List" > Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 4:56 PM > Subject: Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera? > > >> There are two lenses I'm looking for specifically: >> >> - A 180° fisheye; it appears that Nikon is the only vendor with a FE made >> for the 4/3 sensor. To bad it uses the wrong mount! >> >> - A discrete f2 (or faster) lens, 20mm to 24mm focal length > > >
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
if that is the case, the D200 ought to be the same spec of camera that Pentax should release as the high end body. Herb - Original Message - From: "Adam Maas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 9:59 PM Subject: Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera? RAW buffer does make a difference, I was thinking JPEG. As to pricing, I'm expecting to see the D200 come in with those specs (Apart from buffer, I only expect a 10 RAW buffer), build similar to an F100 and a $2300 MSRP (Streeting at $2k). The 20D is only a $1400 body.
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
RAW buffer does make a difference, I was thinking JPEG. As to pricing, I'm expecting to see the D200 come in with those specs (Apart from buffer, I only expect a 10 RAW buffer), build similar to an F100 and a $2300 MSRP (Streeting at $2k). The 20D is only a $1400 body. -Adam Herb Chong wrote: Paul wants a 20 shot buffer in RAW at 5fps, more or less what i want. the 20D doesn't have a 20 frame buffer when shooting RAW, it's 6. the DSC-R1 uses a Sony sensor, so they can undercut everyone on retail price. i can see $2.5-3K, but only if it is missing a lot of physical ruggedness. Herb - Original Message - From: "Adam Maas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 9:45 PM Subject: Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera? Probably not. Apart from the resolution, that's a 20D. And the new 10MP 1.7x crop Sony DSC-R1 coming in at $999 argues that the resolution is in the pricerange.
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
The only SLR mechanical bits the DSLRs lack is the film transport. There's still a traditional shutter, mechanical aperture stopdown and all the other mechanical bits unrelated to the film transport. -Adam Mishka wrote: or $50K, if it were to be made a few years ago. DSLR (unblike SLR) is electronic, which means, it's $50 + sensor cost + mark up. mishka On 9/21/05, Herb Chong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: unfortunately, i think you have just spec'd a $4K camera, ignoring the noise requirement. Herb
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
i think the noise requirement is going to be the most expensive to meet. Herb - Original Message - From: "Paul Stenquist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 9:46 PM Subject: Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera? Perhaps by today's prices. I expect it will be a 2k camera before long.
RE: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Hey Scott, you keepin' track of these? Sounds like everyone wants to submit a wishlist, maybe I can convert them to petitioners. ;-) Don (The wet plumber) > -Original Message- > From: Scott Loveless [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 1:25 PM > To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net > Subject: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera? > > > Howdy gang! > > After spending about four lifetimes following the recent spew about > non-A lens support, I started to think about what I would really WANT > in a digital camera. (This has nothing to do with the possible > petition to Pentax.) Just for kicks (and a bit of flame-free fun) I'd > like to know what you would WANT if you could have your DSLR your way. > Throw caution to the wind. Don't even consider what is feasible or > marketable. Just let us know what your dream digital camera looks > like. > > Here's mine: > I wanna be able to select ISO and shutter speed with knobs. > It should support an available line of manual focus lenses. K-mount > (un-crippled) is good. Screw mount or M-mount would be cool, too. > I don't need auto focus, auto aperture, or auto anything. > Monochrome sensor. Something in the 4 to 6 MP range is good. > Metal chassis. Metal body. > RAW and JPEG. > PC sync. > No built-in flash. > Less than $1500 US. > > > Things I don't need, but could live with: > Hot shoe. > Picture modes. > > Features I would like, but could live without: > In-camera DNG support. > > That's about it. > > -- > Scott Loveless > http://www.twosixteen.com > > -- > "You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman >
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Paul wants a 20 shot buffer in RAW at 5fps, more or less what i want. the 20D doesn't have a 20 frame buffer when shooting RAW, it's 6. the DSC-R1 uses a Sony sensor, so they can undercut everyone on retail price. i can see $2.5-3K, but only if it is missing a lot of physical ruggedness. Herb - Original Message - From: "Adam Maas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 9:45 PM Subject: Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera? Probably not. Apart from the resolution, that's a 20D. And the new 10MP 1.7x crop Sony DSC-R1 coming in at $999 argues that the resolution is in the pricerange.
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Perhaps by today's prices. I expect it will be a 2k camera before long. On Sep 21, 2005, at 9:16 PM, Herb Chong wrote: unfortunately, i think you have just spec'd a $4K camera, ignoring the noise requirement. Herb - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 2:59 PM Subject: Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera? I want relatively high resolution, 12 megapixels or so. I want low noise at speeds up to 1600. If that can be accomplished with an APS sensor, fine. I want five frames per second and a buffer large enough for 20 shots. $2000. Controls just like the *ist D would be perfect.
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Probably not. Apart from the resolution, that's a 20D. And the new 10MP 1.7x crop Sony DSC-R1 coming in at $999 argues that the resolution is in the pricerange. In fact, he's pretty much nailed the expected specs and pricing of the supposed Nikon D200. My wishlist: In-body IS 3fps to 20 JPEG frames/10 RAW frames. CF support or CF+SD support with better write speed, ideally 7-8MB/sec DNG support or better compression in RAW RAW+JPEG, with B&W JEPG support (Preferably with selectable colour filters a la 20D) Full K/M support (A man can dream) beefier AF motor. Something akin to a Nikon F100's motor. Support for in-lens AF motors (Leading to USM, Pentax lacks this, Nikon, Canon, Sigma and Konica Minolta all offer this) ISO and WB settings via buttons so that selection doesn't force you to drop out of shooting mode. ISO listed in VF LCD 100% 0.95x pentaprism viewfinder -Adam Herb Chong wrote: unfortunately, i think you have just spec'd a $4K camera, ignoring the noise requirement. Herb - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 2:59 PM Subject: Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera? I want relatively high resolution, 12 megapixels or so. I want low noise at speeds up to 1600. If that can be accomplished with an APS sensor, fine. I want five frames per second and a buffer large enough for 20 shots. $2000. Controls just like the *ist D would be perfect.
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
or $50K, if it were to be made a few years ago. DSLR (unblike SLR) is electronic, which means, it's $50 + sensor cost + mark up. mishka On 9/21/05, Herb Chong <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > unfortunately, i think you have just spec'd a $4K camera, ignoring the noise > requirement. > > Herb
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
the 24/2 is available, but you might find its CA too high to be livable. the 20/2.8 is the closest you are going to get otherwise. Herb - Original Message - From: "Tim Sherburne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax Discussion List" Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 4:56 PM Subject: Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera? There are two lenses I'm looking for specifically: - A 180° fisheye; it appears that Nikon is the only vendor with a FE made for the 4/3 sensor. To bad it uses the wrong mount! - A discrete f2 (or faster) lens, 20mm to 24mm focal length
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
unfortunately, i think you have just spec'd a $4K camera, ignoring the noise requirement. Herb - Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 2:59 PM Subject: Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera? I want relatively high resolution, 12 megapixels or so. I want low noise at speeds up to 1600. If that can be accomplished with an APS sensor, fine. I want five frames per second and a buffer large enough for 20 shots. $2000. Controls just like the *ist D would be perfect.
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
at least: full frame sensor 12MP full K/M compatibility intercahngeable screens IS in the body N (N>5) RAW buffer nice to have: open source firmware auto sensor cleaning wifi mishka
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Hmm.. wish list: twice the linear resolution of my D, so 24Mpix, but I'd settle for 12Mpix auto image rotation display of ISO setting 20 frame buffer RAW 5 or more fps until buffer full warp speed CF card write custom EXIF annotation filter removal option for B&W images direct removable screens open source firmware 1/250 flash sync iso 25-3200 auto hot pixel removal rg Scott Loveless wrote: Howdy gang! After spending about four lifetimes following the recent spew about non-A lens support, I started to think about what I would really WANT in a digital camera. (This has nothing to do with the possible petition to Pentax.) Just for kicks (and a bit of flame-free fun) I'd like to know what you would WANT if you could have your DSLR your way. Throw caution to the wind. Don't even consider what is feasible or marketable. Just let us know what your dream digital camera looks like. Here's mine: I wanna be able to select ISO and shutter speed with knobs. It should support an available line of manual focus lenses. K-mount (un-crippled) is good. Screw mount or M-mount would be cool, too. I don't need auto focus, auto aperture, or auto anything. Monochrome sensor. Something in the 4 to 6 MP range is good. Metal chassis. Metal body. RAW and JPEG. PC sync. No built-in flash. Less than $1500 US. Things I don't need, but could live with: Hot shoe. Picture modes. Features I would like, but could live without: In-camera DNG support. That's about it. -- Scott Loveless http://www.twosixteen.com -- "You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Scott, All Yall's lists are really long. I'd ask for only a few things but three of them are my main niggles with my *ist D. I wana shoot until the card is full. Continously. With no stopping or slowing. Same reason I want a Porsche 911 Turbo, really. It's not that I'm GOING to go that fast but I'd like to be able to if the need asrises. I'll settle for twenty shots but really, why stop there? I think this could be an upgrade they could make if we sent our cameras into the shop... Move the damned exposure lock button somewhere that works. My thumb isn't nearly long enough to work it where it is. There's too much noise at the higher ISOs. That's it, other than that, my camera is better than I am at this point. CW -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.344 / Virus Database: 267.11.3/107 - Release Date: 9/20/2005
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
On Sep 21, 2005, at 4:06 PM, Scott Loveless wrote: I tried a 77 ltd and really liked the feel and build quality. I remember thinking "I could get used to this" Same here on that one. I don't use that particular focal length range very often or I'd push up its priority, but that's probably the next lens I go for. That said, I think a new printer is going to be the next large purchase I make. I'm going nuts with the old 1270 the past couple of days trying to get a decent print out of it ... something seems to have changed in the print head/tanks: it's spattering ink all over the place now. sigh. Godfrey
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
On 9/21/05, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I dunno, Scott. I only need one lens each of a few focal lengths. I > certainly don't need to own 12, not to mention 29. I don't know > Nikon's current line-up very well, and I'm not interested in Leica's > either for the same reason you aren't. Me, either. But the variety available is comforting. > > >> A 20 and a 50 will give you about the same FoV pairing as you are > >> currently using on your MX (a little shorter on the long end, a > >> little longer on the wide end, but not by much). > > > > The 50 on an APS sensor is a bit short for my tastes. I had the opportunity, thanks to Amita, to take a few shots with the FA50/1.4 on her *ist D. It just didn't feel right. However, you're probably right that I would get used to it - I tried a 77 ltd and really liked the feel and build quality. I remember thinking "I could get used to this". So, on my > > Field of View angles >First letter indicates D=DSLR, F=35mm SLR. >Horizontal - Vertical - Diagonal degrees > --- > FL - H - V - D > D 50.0 - 26.9 - 18.2 - 32.2 > D 55.0 - 24.6 - 16.6 - 29.4 > F 85.0 - 23.9 - 16.1 - 28.6 > D 60.0 - 22.6 - 15.2 - 27.0 > > What you want is about 58mm FL, although I can't see how less than > four degrees in diagonal FoV makes enough difference to matter. I > think you could get used to it. :-) > > Godfrey > > -- Scott Loveless http://www.twosixteen.com -- "You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
On Wed, Sep 21, 2005 at 11:00:50PM +0200, Toralf Lund wrote: > Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > > People on this list have expressed doubts about whether anyone can > deliver the FA50/1.4. It certainly leaves a hole if it's gone... B&H were reported to have them in stoch at present.
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
- Original Message - From: "Cotty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Howdy doody. Here's my list: metal weather-sealed body 28.7x19.1mm sensor say about 8MP ISO 50-3200 1/8000sec with full high speed flash sync speeds 20 frame RAW buffer, 40 frame jpeg buffer at nearly 9 FPS CF and SD (why not?) 2" LCD 10x playback zoom IS support good range of lenses, flash, accessories *sigh* maybe one day HAR! Christian
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Scott Loveless wrote: Howdy gang! After spending about four lifetimes following the recent spew about non-A lens support, I started to think about what I would really WANT in a digital camera. (This has nothing to do with the possible petition to Pentax.) Just for kicks (and a bit of flame-free fun) I'd like to know what you would WANT if you could have your DSLR your way. Throw caution to the wind. Don't even consider what is feasible or marketable. Just let us know what your dream digital camera looks like. Like a ZX-5n with digital innards. Perhaps in a black body, but otherwise just like the ZX-5n. This includes the full compatibility with pre-A lenses that the ZX-5n has.
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
On 21/9/05, Scott Loveless, discombobulated, unleashed: >Howdy gang! Howdy doody. Here's my list: metal weather-sealed body 28.7x19.1mm sensor say about 8MP ISO 50-3200 1/8000sec with full high speed flash sync speeds 20 frame RAW buffer, 40 frame jpeg buffer at nearly 9 FPS CF and SD (why not?) 2" LCD 10x playback zoom IS support good range of lenses, flash, accessories *sigh* maybe one day Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
On Sep 21, 2005, at 2:03 PM, Scott Loveless wrote: At last count, there are 12 Pentax brand primes between 14mm and 135mm listed at B&H Photo: 29 from Nikon, 16 from Canon, and 24 from Leica (not that I can afford anything they currently offer). I dunno, Scott. I only need one lens each of a few focal lengths. I certainly don't need to own 12, not to mention 29. I don't know Nikon's current line-up very well, and I'm not interested in Leica's either for the same reason you aren't. In the Canon line-up, the ones worth looking at are the USM lenses and L series. The cheaper ones are pretty nasty, that cuts the number by 1/3 at least. I bought primes for the 10D: the 20/2.8, 28/1.8, 50/1.4 and 100/2. Pretty much the same choices available for the Pentax, but I went for a slightly different mix: 14, 20-35, 35, 50, and 135. (I wanted but couldn't afford the Canon EF 14mm f/2.8L ... that lens alone is $1800 street price, the Pentax is a bargain for its quality. It's one of the reasons why I moved to the Pentax ... There were more lens options available. ;-) A 20 and a 50 will give you about the same FoV pairing as you are currently using on your MX (a little shorter on the long end, a little longer on the wide end, but not by much). The 50 on an APS sensor is a bit short for my tastes. Field of View angles First letter indicates D=DSLR, F=35mm SLR. Horizontal - Vertical - Diagonal degrees --- FL - H - V - D D 50.0 - 26.9 - 18.2 - 32.2 D 55.0 - 24.6 - 16.6 - 29.4 F 85.0 - 23.9 - 16.1 - 28.6 D 60.0 - 22.6 - 15.2 - 27.0 What you want is about 58mm FL, although I can't see how less than four degrees in diagonal FoV makes enough difference to matter. I think you could get used to it. :-) Godfrey
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
On 9/21/05, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sep 21, 2005, at 12:37 PM, Scott Loveless wrote: > > > The increasing lack of Pentax fixed length lenses is one of > > the lesser reasons I haven't drank the *istD/DS Kool-Aid. > > At last count, there are 12 Pentax brand primes between 14mm and > 135mm listed at B&H Photo: > 29 from Nikon, 16 from Canon, and 24 from Leica (not that I can afford anything they currently offer). These counts are from the manufacturer's web sites. From Cameraquest, VC has 8 SLR lenses, some of which are available in KA mount, and at least 16 for Leica (some are not available for both mounts). I've left out everything longer than 135mm. > > A 20 and a 50 will give you about the same FoV pairing as you are > currently using on your MX (a little shorter on the long end, a > little longer on the wide end, but not by much). > The 50 on an APS sensor is a bit short for my tastes. -- Scott Loveless http://www.twosixteen.com -- "You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: On Sep 21, 2005, at 1:22 PM, Toralf Lund wrote: At last count, there are 12 Pentax brand primes between 14mm and 135mm listed at B&H Photo: I think we have discussed this before: Different distributors and/ or importer's versions of the lens lineup seem to differ quite a bit. For instance, many do not include a normal (as in 50mm) lens other than the D-FA 1:2.8 macro, and (clearly related) do not have a single low-cost prime. B&H Photo sells worldwide, and I listed from their website rather than from Pentax websites due to the discrepancies in the latter. Good decision, I think. People on this list have expressed doubts about whether anyone can deliver the FA50/1.4. It certainly leaves a hole if it's gone... For a D/DS/DL camera, the 31/1.8 ($875), 35/2 ($300) or 28/2.8 ($225) would all be considered normal lenses. A 50mm lens is a portrait telephoto; This thread is about future cameras, though, and the post you responded to mentioned full-frame sensors. But yes, I think it was full-frame *or* more primes... B&H sell the Pentax-A50/2 for $70 new. I didn't include that one in my list. That's more like it... The thing is, I smiled to myself (because I wouldn't have to give nearly as much for a zoom for my cameras) the other day when I overheard a discussion in about how much you had to pay for a decent Canon zoom in a camera shop - and subsequently did a brief check that confirmed what they were saying. Then, however, I found that the same shop lists 3 Canon EF primes on their web site, and they all cost less than anything offered by Pentax. - Toralf
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
On 9/21/05 13:05, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: > At last count, there are 12 Pentax brand primes between 14mm and > 135mm listed at B&H Photo: [list snipped] > How many more did you need? There are two lenses I'm looking for specifically: - A 180° fisheye; it appears that Nikon is the only vendor with a FE made for the 4/3 sensor. To bad it uses the wrong mount! - A discrete f2 (or faster) lens, 20mm to 24mm focal length t
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
- Original Message - From: "Scott Loveless" Subject: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera? Full frame sensor in the 12 mp range. Full K mount integration (just to shut the whiners up, you know). A fast buffer that will hold a dozen or more images. 2-3 FPS shooting rate until the buffer fills. I like the istD size and build for the most part. Smaller, sleeker RAW files. For me, the DNG format would be about perfect. Glass prism, good viewfinder. Fast AF, and more importantly, accurate metering (my istD seems a bit of a shambles in this regard). William Robb
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
- Original Message - From: "Scott Loveless" Subject: Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera? Agreed. The increasing lack of Pentax fixed length lenses is one of the lesser reasons I haven't drank the *istD/DS Kool-Aid. If more people bought em, they'd still be making them. William Robb
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
My vote is for something that I could dial in the film equivalent for shots at the picture taking stage. (This shot would look good on Velvia, and the next would be better on Provia), together with enough resolution to produce prints of equivalent quality to my standard 35mm set up (I haven't a scooby what that means in MP and I suspect neither has anyone else), and have interchangeable viewfinders a la LX. Oh and something that would maintain my focal lengths would also be useful, except when I'm taking bird photos when the magnification factor for my telephotos would be very nice. Peter Howdy gang! After spending about four lifetimes following the recent spew about non-A lens support, I started to think about what I would really WANT in a digital camera. (This has nothing to do with the possible petition to Pentax.) Just for kicks (and a bit of flame-free fun) I'd like to know what you would WANT if you could have your DSLR your way. Throw caution to the wind. Don't even consider what is feasible or marketable. Just let us know what your dream digital camera looks like. Here's mine: I wanna be able to select ISO and shutter speed with knobs. It should support an available line of manual focus lenses. K-mount (un-crippled) is good. Screw mount or M-mount would be cool, too. I don't need auto focus, auto aperture, or auto anything. Monochrome sensor. Something in the 4 to 6 MP range is good. Metal chassis. Metal body. RAW and JPEG. PC sync. No built-in flash. Less than $1500 US. Things I don't need, but could live with: Hot shoe. Picture modes. Features I would like, but could live without: In-camera DNG support. That's about it. -- Scott Loveless http://www.twosixteen.com -- "You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
On Sep 21, 2005, at 1:22 PM, Toralf Lund wrote: At last count, there are 12 Pentax brand primes between 14mm and 135mm listed at B&H Photo: I think we have discussed this before: Different distributors and/ or importer's versions of the lens lineup seem to differ quite a bit. For instance, many do not include a normal (as in 50mm) lens other than the D-FA 1:2.8 macro, and (clearly related) do not have a single low-cost prime. B&H Photo sells worldwide, and I listed from their website rather than from Pentax websites due to the discrepancies in the latter. For a D/DS/DL camera, the 31/1.8 ($875), 35/2 ($300) or 28/2.8 ($225) would all be considered normal lenses. A 50mm lens is a portrait telephoto; B&H sell the Pentax-A50/2 for $70 new. I didn't include that one in my list. Godfrey
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: On Sep 21, 2005, at 12:37 PM, Scott Loveless wrote: The increasing lack of Pentax fixed length lenses is one of the lesser reasons I haven't drank the *istD/DS Kool-Aid. At last count, there are 12 Pentax brand primes between 14mm and 135mm listed at B&H Photo: I think we have discussed this before: Different distributors and/or importer's versions of the lens lineup seem to differ quite a bit. For instance, many do not include a normal (as in 50mm) lens other than the D-FA 1:2.8 macro, and (clearly related) do not have a single low-cost prime. - Toralf
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Scott Loveless wrote: Howdy gang! After spending about four lifetimes following the recent spew about non-A lens support, I started to think about what I would really WANT in a digital camera. I seem to be in the PDML mood today, so why not. List follows. Some of the items are just wild ideas and/or stuff I've mentioned before: * Metal body * Removable LCD screen (for increased robustness and power saving.) * No popup-flash * Old-style dials, or at least direct controls instead of shifts, modes, menus, ifs, ands, buts... * No "custom functions"/configuration options (this is my list, so the camera will be perfect for me out of the box, and I don't need to configure it.) * Interchangable sensor module, where I could swap between RGB and monochrome, from APS-C to full-frame, and so on and so forth. * Full-frame option in particular for the above. * Square and 4/3 ratio sensor support for the above. * Interchangable viewfinders. * Spot metering, exposure lock, DOF preview (maybe those are given.) * No picture modes. * Genuine KAF2 mount. * Better file format support, possibly. 16-bit TIFF? JPEG-2000 as a replacement for normal JPEG? * Exposure time display that's more readable than the MZ-5n LCD in bright light. Yeah, maybe a needle would do the trick... * "Native" storage media with a cost-per-picture in uncompressed mode no higher than the one of film, and with at least the same life-time. (So that I don't have to transfer pictures to a different media to get a cost saving, or worry so much about backups.) If you want a list of features that is realistic in a camera released tomorrow, I guess you have to remove some things. I'll leave that as an exercise... - Toralf
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
No exceptions :-). Seriously, neither would satisfy me in regard to noise level, and of course I want a Pentax mount. > Except for the 5 fps and 20 shot buffer, he wants an S3 Pro. > > On 9/21/05, Christian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > - Original Message - > > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > To: > > Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 2:59 PM > > Subject: Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera? > > > > > > >I want relatively high resolution, 12 megapixels or so. I want low noise at > > >speeds up to 1600. If that can be accomplished with an APS sensor, fine. I > > >want five frames per second and a buffer large enough for 20 shots. $2000. > > >Controls just like the *ist D would be perfect. > > > Paul > > > > except for the 12MP, you want a 20D. :-) > > > > Christian > > > > > > > > > -- > Scott Loveless > http://www.twosixteen.com > > -- > "You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman >
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
On Sep 21, 2005, at 12:37 PM, Scott Loveless wrote: The increasing lack of Pentax fixed length lenses is one of the lesser reasons I haven't drank the *istD/DS Kool-Aid. At last count, there are 12 Pentax brand primes between 14mm and 135mm listed at B&H Photo: DA14 FA20 FA24 FA28 FA28 Soft FA31 FA35 DA40 FA43 FA50 D-FA50 Macro FA77 FA85 Soft D-FA100 Macro FA135 How many more did you need? A 20 and a 50 will give you about the same FoV pairing as you are currently using on your MX (a little shorter on the long end, a little longer on the wide end, but not by much). Godfrey
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Hi, I'd like 5fps/s for at least 4-5 secs High Speed flash sync Sealed body against dust and hunidity Buttons for stuff like speed, focus select, Button for metering mode Button for exposure compensation Full compataibility with older lenses If possible full frame. Cheers, Ronald After spending about four lifetimes following the recent spew about non-A lens support, I started to think about what I would really WANT in a digital camera. (This has nothing to do with the possible petition to Pentax.) Just for kicks (and a bit of flame-free fun) I'd like to know what you would WANT if you could have your DSLR your way. Throw caution to the wind. Don't even consider what is feasible or marketable. Just let us know what your dream digital camera looks like. Here's mine: I wanna be able to select ISO and shutter speed with knobs. It should support an available line of manual focus lenses. K-mount (un-crippled) is good. Screw mount or M-mount would be cool, too. I don't need auto focus, auto aperture, or auto anything. Monochrome sensor. Something in the 4 to 6 MP range is good. Metal chassis. Metal body. RAW and JPEG. PC sync. No built-in flash. Less than $1500 US. Things I don't need, but could live with: Hot shoe. Picture modes. Features I would like, but could live without: In-camera DNG support. That's about it.
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
What I would like: Full 24x36mm frame (I use wide-angle a lot more than telephoto) 6mp or more Exposure control similar to istD and (P)Z-1p Multipattern and spot metering Pop-up flash with exposure compensation Direct selection of sensitivity (ISO), meter pattern, autofocus mode, shutter mode, exposure compensation User-changable finder screens, with a good grid screen Mirror lock (linked to 2sec timer would be fine) USB2 or FireWire data transfer JPEG plus RAW recording Solid (but not necessarily hockey-puck) construction Rick --- Scott Loveless <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Howdy gang! > > After spending about four lifetimes following the > recent spew about > non-A lens support, I started to think about what I > would really WANT > in a digital camera. (This has nothing to do with > the possible > petition to Pentax.) Just for kicks (and a bit of > flame-free fun) I'd > like to know what you would WANT if you could have > your DSLR your way. > Throw caution to the wind. Don't even consider > what is feasible or > marketable. Just let us know what your dream > digital camera looks > like. > > Here's mine: > I wanna be able to select ISO and shutter speed with > knobs. > It should support an available line of manual focus > lenses. K-mount > (un-crippled) is good. Screw mount or M-mount would > be cool, too. > I don't need auto focus, auto aperture, or auto > anything. > Monochrome sensor. Something in the 4 to 6 MP range > is good. > Metal chassis. Metal body. > RAW and JPEG. > PC sync. > No built-in flash. > Less than $1500 US. > > > Things I don't need, but could live with: > Hot shoe. > Picture modes. > > Features I would like, but could live without: > In-camera DNG support. > > That's about it. > > -- > Scott Loveless > http://www.twosixteen.com > > -- > "You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman > > __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
On 9/21/05, Tim Sherburne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Scott, I like your list, but there's a few things I'd add (from the > perspective of a happy *istDS owner): > > Full-frame sensor w/o a second mortgage > ~or~ > A better selection of fixed short focal lengths > > Agreed. The increasing lack of Pentax fixed length lenses is one of the lesser reasons I haven't drank the *istD/DS Kool-Aid. More often than not the MX has either a 28 or 85 mounted. However, my recently aquired 35/2.8 (Thanks, Don!) is quickly replacing the 28. I can live with either, though. That said, with an APS sensor, I'd need something in the 20-24mm range (not currently a problem) and another lens in the 55-65mm range. That last one is a big problem. I don't like using zooms. So far I've found a 60mm macro bearing the Nikkor badge that might suit my real world needs. As far as my fictional B&W digital goes, a screw mount or K-mount body with a 55/1.8 would be killer. Full frame without a mortgage is good, too. -- Scott Loveless http://www.twosixteen.com -- "You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
Except for the 5 fps and 20 shot buffer, he wants an S3 Pro. On 9/21/05, Christian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > - Original Message - > From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: > Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 2:59 PM > Subject: Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera? > > > >I want relatively high resolution, 12 megapixels or so. I want low noise at > >speeds up to 1600. If that can be accomplished with an APS sensor, fine. I > >want five frames per second and a buffer large enough for 20 shots. $2000. > >Controls just like the *ist D would be perfect. > > Paul > > except for the 12MP, you want a 20D. :-) > > Christian > > > -- Scott Loveless http://www.twosixteen.com -- "You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
An *istD with a metal body, no popup flash, the Nikon D2x 12MP sensor and a larger buffer would be great. DagT Den 21. sep. 2005 kl. 20.24 skrev Scott Loveless: Howdy gang! After spending about four lifetimes following the recent spew about non-A lens support, I started to think about what I would really WANT in a digital camera. (This has nothing to do with the possible petition to Pentax.) Just for kicks (and a bit of flame-free fun) I'd like to know what you would WANT if you could have your DSLR your way. Throw caution to the wind. Don't even consider what is feasible or marketable. Just let us know what your dream digital camera looks like. Here's mine: I wanna be able to select ISO and shutter speed with knobs. It should support an available line of manual focus lenses. K-mount (un-crippled) is good. Screw mount or M-mount would be cool, too. I don't need auto focus, auto aperture, or auto anything. Monochrome sensor. Something in the 4 to 6 MP range is good. Metal chassis. Metal body. RAW and JPEG. PC sync. No built-in flash. Less than $1500 US. Things I don't need, but could live with: Hot shoe. Picture modes. Features I would like, but could live without: In-camera DNG support. That's about it. -- Scott Loveless http://www.twosixteen.com -- "You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
On Sep 21, 2005, at 11:24 AM, Scott Loveless wrote: ... I started to think about what I would really WANT in a digital camera. ... Throw caution to the wind. Don't even consider what is feasible or marketable. Just let us know what your dream digital camera looks like. .. For most intents and purposes, the Pentax DS is very close to the ideal of what I want/need in a DSLR at this time. I like the control layout, size, weight, and versatility. It's lens compatibility is fine for me (I really only want new lenses, but the ability to conveniently use older lenses is satisfactory just as is). The resolution is satisfactory as well, more is always nicer as long as there's no added noise. What I could do without: - program preset modes (Auto Picture, etc) - "Bright" color tone What I'd add with some priority ranking: - program shift (biggest omission in the metering system) - customizable Fn menu system (I'd like to put af pattern and meter pattern there, instead of flash mode and white balance which I only rarely use) - DNG format for RAW (save space, reduce post processing steps) - improved AF speed/accuracy, maybe in-lens USM motors - greater responsiveness of all controls - quieter shutter/mirror - higher quality build with high quality switches, buttons etc (chassis is already steel or aluminum, a magnesium skin would be great) - ability to elect C-AF in any exposure mode - more options for noise reduction and color temperature settings - 8-10 Mpixels (with no increase in noise at ISO 1600) - option for image stabilization (either in lens or in body, but defeatable) - PC sync terminal - ability to elect TTL vs P-TTL vs manual flash metering for built-in flash - wireless flash built-in - faster operation and larger capture buffer for sequences - removable IR-block filter for enhanced IR photography What I would not want: - larger, heavier - more knobs and buttons added to exterior - different format - greatly higher price ($1000-1200 street price is where I draw the line, $1500 MSRP) Godfrey
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
- Original Message - From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Sent: Wednesday, September 21, 2005 2:59 PM Subject: Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera? I want relatively high resolution, 12 megapixels or so. I want low noise at speeds up to 1600. If that can be accomplished with an APS sensor, fine. I want five frames per second and a buffer large enough for 20 shots. $2000. Controls just like the *ist D would be perfect. Paul except for the 12MP, you want a 20D. :-) Christian
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
I want relatively high resolution, 12 megapixels or so. I want low noise at speeds up to 1600. If that can be accomplished with an APS sensor, fine. I want five frames per second and a buffer large enough for 20 shots. $2000. Controls just like the *ist D would be perfect. Paul > Howdy gang! > > After spending about four lifetimes following the recent spew about > non-A lens support, I started to think about what I would really WANT > in a digital camera. (This has nothing to do with the possible > petition to Pentax.) Just for kicks (and a bit of flame-free fun) I'd > like to know what you would WANT if you could have your DSLR your way. > Throw caution to the wind. Don't even consider what is feasible or > marketable. Just let us know what your dream digital camera looks > like. > > Here's mine: > I wanna be able to select ISO and shutter speed with knobs. > It should support an available line of manual focus lenses. K-mount > (un-crippled) is good. Screw mount or M-mount would be cool, too. > I don't need auto focus, auto aperture, or auto anything. > Monochrome sensor. Something in the 4 to 6 MP range is good. > Metal chassis. Metal body. > RAW and JPEG. > PC sync. > No built-in flash. > Less than $1500 US. > > > Things I don't need, but could live with: > Hot shoe. > Picture modes. > > Features I would like, but could live without: > In-camera DNG support. > > That's about it. > > -- > Scott Loveless > http://www.twosixteen.com > > -- > "You have to hold the button down" -Arnold Newman >
Re: Irrelevant Poll: What do you WANT in a digital camera?
On 9/21/05, Vic Mortelmans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sounds fabulous! > > What about adding a needle light meter? Like on my Spotmatic F. > > Nah. No built in meter at all. It should come in a kit with a handheld incident/flash meter and a spotmeter. cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson
