Re: OK Survey time (was:Paradigm change of Pentax...)
At 04:49 PM 6/9/2003 +1000, Rob Studdert wrote: >OK the D *ist isn't in our hands so we can only speculate based on what's >been >reported. So given what is known who of those of us that envisage moving into >digital are likely to purchase a D *ist and why? > >Who of us think it's time to move to the dark side and why? If, in fact, I can't meter with pre A lenses I will probably pass. I only own 1 lens that is A or newer and I have also found that finding Pentax AF primes used is not easy. If I can meter with the older lenses I will probably buy one. Everything I shoot goes into Photoshop and usually gets manipulated somehow before reprinting. So a digital camera would save me time and money. 6 MP is adequate for my needs and I seldom shoot wide angle so the multiplication factor is not a problem for me. BUTCH Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself. Hermann Hess (Demian)
Re: OK Survey time (was:Paradigm change of Pentax...)
All my lenses are of the compatible variety except one. Yet when multiplying the focal lengths with the 1.5 factor I only get two usable lenses, so digital looks like a more expensive proposition than just body and accessories. Add to this the relatively low resolution and loss of aperture ring control, and obviously at this stage the *ist d is of little interest to me. If I were hard pressed to go digital, I'd see no compelling advantage in staying with Pentax. That's why I'll stick with slide film for a while and wait for the dust to settle. Afterwards I'll have a hard look and by then Pentax better be very convincing, that is with full frame and decent lens compatibility or, if not the latter, then it better offer IS/USM. Servus, Alin Rob wrote: RS> OK the D *ist isn't in our hands so we can only speculate based on what's been RS> reported. So given what is known who of those of us that envisage moving into RS> digital are likely to purchase a D *ist and why? RS> Who of us think it's time to move to the dark side and why?
Re: OK Survey time (was:Paradigm change of Pentax...)
At 04:49 PM 6/9/2003 +1000, Rob Studdert wrote: OK the D *ist isn't in our hands so we can only speculate based on what's been reported. So given what is known who of those of us that envisage moving into digital are likely to purchase a D *ist and why? Who of us think it's time to move to the dark side and why? If the ist-D s up to par, I'll go with it. The kit I carry around has only A or F/FA or compatible lenses. My workhorse lenses are all compatible, even the rather old Kiron 105 f2.8 macro. I have a lot of old K and M lenses that won't work with it, but I don't use them much anyhow. I bought them to use with manual focus bodies, and they do fine for that. there are a couple of lenses I'd like to try on a DSLR - like the Rikenon 55 f1.2 or Bayonet Takumar 135 f2.5 - but not being able to use them on that particular body is not big probelm (especially since I almost never use them as is.) If the ist D is not up to par I'll have to mull things over. - MCC - - - - - - - - - - Mark Cassino Kalamazoo, MI [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - - - - - - - - - Photos: http://www.markcassino.com - - - - - - - - - -
Re: OK Survey time (was:Paradigm change of Pentax...)
I expect to treat digital as a new format. When the time comes, I will by a DSLR from whoever makes the one that fits my needs. Right now I don't see myself buying a DSLR for a couple of years no matter what -- the technology is still very immature. I have a digicam (Canon G2) for the time being and am keeping the pentax manual focus gear forever. Just like 6x6 gear. There are things (at this stage) is completely unsuitable for (like stereo slides, my latest "thing", that is, untill I can buy a moderate size monitor that'd do *at least* a 3200x1200 true color at 100Hz and for reasonable money). Mishka > Who of us think it's time to move to the dark side > and why? > > Cheers, > > Rob Studdert
Re: OK Survey time (was:Paradigm change of Pentax...)
I can't speak for anyone else, but my belief is that 3rd Generation electronics will be better than first. If I must live without aperture control on the lens and must buy all new lenses, I'll go with experience, unless Pentax shows clear superiority in ALL aspects of their product then I'll buy from someone who does. It could happen but that's not the way to bet. At 02:40 PM 6/9/03 +0200, you wrote: Gianfranco wrote: > I *really* cannot understand those who blaim the lack of a > aperture ring just to jump into a Canon system... That is because they want to use the aperture ring on the Canon lenses :o) The whole thing is mostly psychological. Pål Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog, it's too dark to read. --Groucho Marx
Re: OK Survey time (was:Paradigm change of Pentax...)
On 9 Jun 2003 at 14:40, Pål Jensen wrote: > Gianfranco wrote: > > > I *really* cannot understand those who blaim the lack of a > > aperture ring just to jump into a Canon system... > > > That is because they want to use the aperture ring on the Canon lenses :o) > The whole thing is mostly psychological. I'm just getting real. If I'm going to have to fundamentally change the way I shoot I may as well become a sheep and follow the flock. At least Canon is a known quantity with a high likelihood of remaining in the business. 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: OK Survey time (was:Paradigm change of Pentax...)
Think about what you wrote here for a minute: Aside from a couple moments Canon has had Nikon sucking wind since 1897. What makes you think that Pentax's Ist* D class camera will keep up with Canon's 10D class camera? BR "Steve Desjardins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: ... Assuming that the Ist*D is >comparable to the 10D, I can't see any good reason to switch. I do have >my suspicions about the AF quality of Pentax, but I suspect that all AF >technology will move to the point where brand will make little >difference. > >BTW, I'm not writing off Nikon quite yet, but I am surprised at how >they are letting Canon dominate this really important pro market >segment. __ McAfee VirusScan Online from the Netscape Network. Comprehensive protection for your entire computer. Get your free trial today! http://channels.netscape.com/ns/computing/mcafee/index.jsp?promo=393397 Get AOL Instant Messenger 5.1 free of charge. Download Now! http://aim.aol.com/aimnew/Aim/register.adp?promo=380455
Re: OK Survey time (was:Paradigm change of Pentax...)
Gianfranco wrote: > I *really* cannot understand those who blaim the lack of a > aperture ring just to jump into a Canon system... That is because they want to use the aperture ring on the Canon lenses :o) The whole thing is mostly psychological. Pål
Re: OK Survey time (was:Paradigm change of Pentax...)
On Mon, 09 Jun 2003 16:49:00 +1000, Rob Studdert wrote: >OK the D *ist isn't in our hands so we can only speculate based on what's been >reported. So given what is known who of those of us that envisage moving into >digital are likely to purchase a D *ist and why? > >Who of us think it's time to move to the dark side and why? I plan on buying an *istD when it is released, I have the money in the bank and all I need is for it to become available. Why? Well, I find myself taking pictures which will only ever be used digitally, on the web or in presentations and so on. I've tried using various digital cameras and while they are ok for some things all of them really SUCK when you try do anything close up (I can't even bring myself to call it macro). This includes a 5 megapixel Nikon I tried. I really HATE the pseudo SLR viewfinder which is only an LCD screen - give me ground glass any day, at least then I can tell if what I'm taking a picture of is actually in focus. And all my lenses will fit (I only own one pre A lens, an M50f1.7 which came with my MX which I bought new 22 years ago) and I will have control over my flashes - and wireless P-TTL at that. I looked at the *ist in a shop today, and it's too small. To small even for my wife. Put a grip on it and it would be nice though and that should be the size of the *ist D. While I agree that the thumbwheel of the *ist is cheap feeling I'm hoping for more from the *ist D. And no I'm not planning on buying an *ist. I'm also planning on putting my bellows and slide copying setup onto the *ist D and using it as a 6 megapixel slide scanner. Would I prefer a full size sensor? Well, yes, but I don't go that wide that often and particularly for pictures I want to only use digitally. And yes I would prefer to have 24 megapixels rather than 6, but that is why I will keep my film cameras. Given a choice between the *ist D or the MZ-D, I'd probably take the MZ-D for compatibility with my MZ-S, but the *ist D seems to have what I need and most of what I want and the price is a lot better than the US$7000 that the MZ-D was talked about having. Leon http://www.bluering.org.au http://www.bluering.org.au/leon
Re: OK Survey time (was:Paradigm change of Pentax...)
Most of my lenses are FA so there's no compatibility issue. From what I can see, IS lenses are too expensive for what I do, so having those available is no really an advantage. Assuming that the Ist*D is comparable to the 10D, I can't see any good reason to switch. I do have my suspicions about the AF quality of Pentax, but I suspect that all AF technology will move to the point where brand will make little difference. BTW, I'm not writing off Nikon quite yet, but I am surprised at how they are letting Canon dominate this really important pro market segment. There's this new Canon print ad where Andre Agassi is holding up a trophy so that all the PJ's can take his picture. The shot is from the top, and everyone is using "those white lenses". Pentax might be looking on wistfully, but Nikon must be cringing. Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: OK Survey time (was:Paradigm change of Pentax...)
I've got my name on the top of the waiting list at the local camera shop. I am very impressed with digital as a medium and plan on converting 90%. I'll keep the LX and MX for film. I have only 4 non-"A" lenses (in three focal lengths) so I'm not concerned about limitations in the mount. I just wish they'd release the damn thing already! Christian Skofteland [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Original Message - From: "Rob Studdert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 2:49 AM Subject: OK Survey time (was:Paradigm change of Pentax...) > On 9 Jun 2003 at 8:27, Dario Bonazza 2 wrote: > > > That's exactly my opinion too. > > > > > as well as a LX, a Z-1p and a Mz-s. > > > I will not buy anymore lenses, I will start to sell a part of my equipment to > > > have the money for buying a 10D and with 3 lenses. Now, I can understand Boz > > > (K-Mount page) very well, who changed to Canon. > > OK the D *ist isn't in our hands so we can only speculate based on what's been > reported. So given what is known who of those of us that envisage moving into > digital are likely to purchase a D *ist and why? > > Who of us think it's time to move to the dark side and why? > > 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: OK Survey time (was:Paradigm change of Pentax...)
Hi guys and gals, I tried to stay a bit apart from the current discussions about the changes, but I guess it is time to share some of my thoughts. I *really* cannot understand those who blaim the lack of a aperture ring just to jump into a Canon system... I cannot understand Rüdiger's statement about his 20 F/FA lenses... I can only think that he is not so happy with them, otherwise why decide to throw them away for a bunch of Canon zooms? Those lenses are already compatible with the incoming *istD, so what? Are you thinking of buying new lenses that 'probably' will be available in FAJ mount only and you are afraid of not being able to use them on the older cameras? With a camera of another brand it'll be the same, but you won't be able to use your F/FA lenses on it then... It seems to me that a lot of people is becoming too... frenzy about digital. If you are in a hurry and need a digital SLR now, no need to complain. Go out a buy one, of the desired brand. Even the Sigma SD9 and the Canon cameras can accommodate a 42x1 screwmount lens with the proper adapter, for the joy of the collectors and screwmount users... I'm not a luddite (well, maybe a bit...) and don't feel too brand loyal. I use Nikon as well as Pentax (not to mention a Canon XL1 camcorder with two lenses), and I have fine af lenses in N mount too. but I have more money invested in Pentax lenses, cameras and accessories. With a partial frame digital camera, like the *istD, I have equivalent lenses from 22mm to 600mm, af and mf (counting the A, F and FA lenses), while in N mount (ie. on a D100) I can currently cover from 27mm to 315mm (af, of course; adding one or two lenses to fill the gaps would be easy, though). I do need a digital camera. I would save a lot of money that I spend on film too many times. But not always. A Pentax brand camera is what I need for what I do, simply because that's what I use the most in the situations when I fell the need for digital. Ciao, Gianfranco PS: Just to add a bit of more confusion: according to various side by side tests in different Italian magazines (TuttiFotografi, Fotografia Reflex), wrt image quality (sharpness, contrast, detail), among the Canon 10D, Nikon D100, Fuji (S2 pro?) and Sigma SD9 the winner is... the Sigma! I'm not talking about billion of words, but the published test images. There's a picture where some banisters are in the center of the frame. The blown up detail shows colour fringes (if not a total lack of detail) in all the pictures except in the Sigma's, where the vertical lines are clearly visible (not to mention some oblique lines...). All cameras were tested with a 28-70/2.8 Sigma lens in different mounts. My thought is: I don't think I'm going to spend more for IS, USM etc. if I cannot have fine detail in a picture, if the added sharpness is not going to show in a print. - Original Message - From: Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Monday, June 09, 2003 8:49 AM Subject: OK Survey time (was:Paradigm change of Pentax...) > On 9 Jun 2003 at 8:27, Dario Bonazza 2 wrote: > > > That's exactly my opinion too. > > > > > as well as a LX, a Z-1p and a Mz-s. > > > I will not buy anymore lenses, I will start to sell a part of my equipment to > > > have the money for buying a 10D and with 3 lenses. Now, I can understand Boz > > > (K-Mount page) very well, who changed to Canon. > > OK the D *ist isn't in our hands so we can only speculate based on what's been > reported. So given what is known who of those of us that envisage moving into > digital are likely to purchase a D *ist and why? > > Who of us think it's time to move to the dark side and why? = __ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Calendar - Free online calendar with sync to Outlook(TM). http://calendar.yahoo.com
