Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
On 4 Jan 2004 at 12:34, Steve Desjardins wrote: > This explains a lot. I had no idea what you meant when I first read > this because I have never had any problem pressing the A-lock button on > the end. I also have no trouble removing my CF card, although I can > easily see how someone might. My fingers must be a lot thinner than > yours. I've always been comfy with Pentax because the cameras are > small. It just shows how personal some of these calls can be. My fingers are quite small too, I should have qualified the statement a little better. For instance when using the 77Ltd I can depress the "A" lock button however when using most lenses that taper to a larger diameter it becomes a difficult feat. I guess my card seats in more securely, some listers indicated that they could tip the cards out or give the camera tap, no way will mine come out using these methods. 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: Pentax's dSLR future?
"The funny thing is that I suspect the reasoning surrounding dropping the aperture ring control may have partly been a function of the move to make this body as small as possible. Anyone who actually owns a *ist will well know that you have to set the lens in the "A" position before it's mounted, the simple reason is that there is such a small gap between the overhanging prism/rtf that even I can't get my finger in to depress the lock button :-( " This explains a lot. I had no idea what you meant when I first read this because I have never had any problem pressing the A-lock button on the end. I also have no trouble removing my CF card, although I can easily see how someone might. My fingers must be a lot thinner than yours. I've always been comfy with Pentax because the cameras are small. It just shows how personal some of these calls can be. On a more general note, my FA 100 2.8 macro has decide to start working with the *ist D again. When I get home I'll try the FA 135 and the FA 50. I just have no idea what when wrong. I have been fiddling with these lenses every other day for about two weeks in the hope that I would see the problem. The only thing different is that this is the first time I had the grip on the camera. In addition, I took out the batteries in the camera itself so that the entire package would be lighter but I would still have the vertical grip. Could removing the batteries have reset some function that was causing me problems? Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, John Francis wrote: > > On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, John Francis wrote: > > > > > In any case, think of it as the final model in the "old" MZ/ZX range > > > (which includes the ZX-5n and ZX-3); very capable cameras, but which > > > all use the lens aperture ring, not body-mounted aperture controls. > > > > Not all. The cripple mount MZs do body-mounted aperture control. Not > > sure about the -6, the -7 or the -10. > > Yes. That's why I said "old" MZs; Pentax didn't change the nomenclature > when they switched to the "new" MZs. Vey confusing. Which are the old and which are the new? -6 is newer than (say) -50 and -10 is older than both. -10 (and probably -6) do both from the lens and from the body; -50 is a cripple and does from the body only, of course. I am curious to learn the technical issue about the mechanical coupling in the *ist-D and the other cripples. Perhaps it's the fact that I picked up a mint, boxed K135/3.5 for 10.50 pounds from ebay the other day, and that my most used lens, the M75-150/4 cost me 40 with a year's warranty from Jessops. Kostas (New Year, old whinge :-)
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
On 31 Dec 2003 at 11:23, George Sinos wrote: > My complaint? That 4-way button on the back needs to be bigger or have a > more positive feel. The other controls on this camera work so well. This > one just doesn't fit in with the feel of the others. It's annoying. Got to agree with you on that one (and the lack of histogram overlay on review), the button isn't positive enough and the outside lip prevents the button from being depressed easily. Post view zoomed navigation is a real pain. I've also experienced problems with some of the smaller buttons losing their "click" feel, some have gone limp and are no longer particularly responsive. I bought my E-10 used and had it in hard service for over two years and the buttons remained perfect, it was a "first" for Olympus just like the *ist D. Let's hope the next camera is pro orientated. 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: Pentax's dSLR future?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>In a message dated 12/30/2003 2:09:23 PM Pacific Standard Time, >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: >But Canon changed the mount for technical improvements, pentax hasnt changed >the mount for technical improvements, they just abandoned a still very >possible feature. >JCO > >I am still not sure that we actually KNOW that. I'm betting it *was* for technical reasons regarding new technology to come. -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
> > On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, John Francis wrote: > > > In any case, think of it as the final model in the "old" MZ/ZX range > > (which includes the ZX-5n and ZX-3); very capable cameras, but which > > all use the lens aperture ring, not body-mounted aperture controls. > > Not all. The cripple mount MZs do body-mounted aperture control. Not > sure about the -6, the -7 or the -10. > Yes. That's why I said "old" MZs; Pentax didn't change the nomenclature when they switched to the "new" MZs. Vey confusing.
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
The comm port will be used for firmware upgrades, and I've heard that computer control is coming via a firmware update. Bill > The argument about USB 1.1, 2.0 or Firewire doesn't interest me. If the > only thing I can do with the comm port is download info from the card, you > may as well leave it off. I find a card reader much more convenient and > would rather have one less hole in the camera body. On the other hand, if > I could use that port to control the camera with my computer, that would be > great. > > See you later, gs > www.georgesphotos.net > > -- > >
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
Rob Studdert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote that he didn't see the concern about CF card slot or the AA batteries used in the istD. Frankly, I think most of the negative comments that I've read are a testament to the fact that there is not much to complain about on this camera. The CF card tightness issue seems to depend a bit on the card. I have a couple that slide right out into my hand, and a couple that stop about half way out. The design could have been better, but this isn't a big deal. My guess is the micro-drives experience the worst of it. As Rod says, easily fixed with a piece of tape. In my opinion, the use of AA's is not a negative but a big positive. I think the istD has the most versatile battery system of all the 6 Mp DSLR's. I fully admit that changing 4 AA's is a bit more cumbersome that sliding in a customer designed battery pack. For me, I'll gladly trade the flexibility for a little convenience. My complaint? That 4-way button on the back needs to be bigger or have a more positive feel. The other controls on this camera work so well. This one just doesn't fit in with the feel of the others. It's annoying. What do I want in the next generation? In general, I think the SLR makers are all going through a learning curve with the photographers. The adjustability of the digital camera is changing the thought. process. I think many of us are just starting to realize that cameras now have three exposure adjustments: shutter speed, aperture and ISO sensitivity. All three need to be quickly and easily adjustable and displayed in the viewfinder. When this generation of cameras was designed we all were thinking that ISO doesn't get changed very often. In the digital era, ISO is the third variable and can be considered on every shot. I also like one of Michael Riechman's comments on the histogram display. He recommended that the camera should display blown highlights with flashing pixels This would be pretty useful and I hope they make the change in a code update. I don't miss the mini-movie mode from Optio S, but I do miss the ability to record a comment with an image. I'd like to see that capability added. The argument about USB 1.1, 2.0 or Firewire doesn't interest me. If the only thing I can do with the comm port is download info from the card, you may as well leave it off. I find a card reader much more convenient and would rather have one less hole in the camera body. On the other hand, if I could use that port to control the camera with my computer, that would be great. See you later, gs www.georgesphotos.net --
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
On: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 23:48:20 -0500, Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: "In its present configuration its still a snapshot camera.", referring to the istD. Paul - I use my istD for snapshots, but it's a heck of a lot more than a snapshot camera. I'm not sure what you meant by the above comment. Are you referring to the 6 Mpixl slr's in general? The Canon, Nikon and Pentax are all pretty similar. Or are you referring to something specific about this camera? See you later, gs www.georgesphotos.net
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
Kostas posted > Not all. The cripple mount MZs do body-mounted aperture control. Not > sure about the -6, the -7 or the -10. The -10 can do both. Haven't tried the -6 and -7.
RE: Pentax's dSLR future?
-- -Original Message- -- From: Mark Cassino [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 11:00 PM -- -- At 11:35 AM 12/31/2003 +1000, you wrote: -- -- >The stupid design of the memory card access port is -- probably another -- >compromise -- >due to the design size constraints. Unfortunately the *ist -- D review on -- >luminous- -- >landscape -- >(http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/pentax-is td.shtml) >highlights these problems and others and for the first occasion I tend to >agree >with Mr Reichmann. I really don't understand the hoo-ha about the CF card slot on the *ist-D. After pressing the eject button, my cards slide right out with a little assist from right thumb. I've read complaints that you can't grasp the cards and pull it out - but you don't _need_ to grasp it to pull it out... - MCC - Mark Cassino Photography Kalamazoo, MI http://www.markcassino.com - Mark, It is a question of having to come up with a method to remove it. I instinctively tilt the camera to remove the card. I have used the Nikon D1H and D1X extensively. The card just pops out and there is no fumbling around with a particular method to remove the card. I have small hands, it was a little cumbersome to just reach in and get the card, thus my complaint. Cesar Panama City, Florida
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
On Wed, 31 Dec 2003, John Francis wrote: > In any case, think of it as the final model in the "old" MZ/ZX range > (which includes the ZX-5n and ZX-3); very capable cameras, but which > all use the lens aperture ring, not body-mounted aperture controls. Not all. The cripple mount MZs do body-mounted aperture control. Not sure about the -6, the -7 or the -10. Kostas
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
"William Robb" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >My objection to the camera from the start was the loss of lens >compatability. >When I picked it up, I guess I decided that wasn't such an important issue >after all. In fact the only K/M lenses for which Pentax doesn't currently make an equivalent focal length (or very close) are the 15/3.5, the 18/3.5, and the 1000mm and 2000mm telephotos. (And the 15/3.5 was later made in an "A" version). -- Mark Roberts Photography and writing www.robertstech.com
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
Bill said: "And this is in no way to imply that I find you or your internet company tiresome. Quite the opposite, I find your posts delightful, and enjoy poking around your website as well." Must admit, I *was* starting to wonder if I should take the hint when you said "Of course, I could also tell someone to piss off, which would mean that I find their company tiresome." hehe. We too, use the term "pissed off", "piss off" etc in Oz, but rarely is it shortened to just "pissed", which is kind of ironic really considering how famous Aussies are for shortening almost every common phrase that they use. eg afternoon/arvo, sandwich/sanga, spaghetti bolognaise/spag bog. etc... Oh, and then there are peoples names - such as Caroline, Darren, Barry, Russell, Sharon, Kerry, Gary, Larry, Murray, Geraldine (my best friend's name), who in the traditional Aussie way, are generally shortened to result in "Cazza, Dazza, Bazza, Rusty, Shazza, Kezza, Gaza, Lazza, Muzza and Gezza"... lol... try saying that quickly after a few New Year's Eve drinks... tan. (who is dying to hear Cotty's "comeback" on Bill's use of the term "poking around" in reference to him viewing my website)...
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
Mark Cassino a écrit: At 11:35 AM 12/31/2003 +1000, you wrote: The stupid design of the memory card access port is probably another compromise due to the design size constraints. Unfortunately the *ist D review on luminous- landscape (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/pentax-istd.shtml) highlights these problems and others and for the first occasion I tend to agree with Mr Reichmann. I really don't understand the hoo-ha about the CF card slot on the *ist-D. After pressing the eject button, my cards slide right out with a little assist from right thumb. I've read complaints that you can't grasp the cards and pull it out - but you don't _need_ to grasp it to pull it out... My card with a tape: http://perso.wanadoo.fr/krg/temp/cftape.jpg No more problem ! Michel
RE: Pentax's dSLR future?
I know what you mean about the quality of your posts/writing. I just learned to touch type this year and I am getting a lot of typos in my posts as well as complete words missing! Seems my brain runs faster than my fingers and I havent got into the using of the spell checker mode yet. So you are not alone. JCO J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com -Original Message- From: William Robb [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, December 31, 2003 12:49 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future? - Original Message - From: "J. C. O'Connell" Subject: RE: Pentax's dSLR future? > I dont understand William's comment, you were pissed AFTER > you picked it up or before? Past tense. I was pissed (about the lens issue) until I picked the camera up. Then I was no longer pissed, outraged, annoyed or in any way feeling negative. Sorry for the bad syntax, sometimes English seems to not be my first language.. William Robb
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
- Original Message - From: "Tanya Mayer Photography" Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future? In Australia, the term > "pissed" is taken to mean "drunk" or "intoxicated", Same here, but there are contextual vagaries. "Pissed" is drunk. "Pissed off" is angry. Being pissed about or at something is to be angry about or at that something. It's a diminuization of pissed off. Of course, I could also tell someone to piss off, which would mean that I find their company tiresome. Ain't slang wonderful? William Robb
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
- Original Message - From: "Mark Cassino" Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future? > I really don't understand the hoo-ha about the CF card slot on the > *ist-D. After pressing the eject button, my cards slide right out with a > little assist from right thumb. I've read complaints that you can't grasp > the cards and pull it out - but you don't _need_ to grasp it to pull it out... I still find it kinda fiddly: Get the camera strap out of the way so the door can be opened, then kill a chicken and draw it's entrails, press the release button while standing in the middle of a pentagon invoking demons, and pluck the card out. Works every time. William Robb
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
- Original Message - From: "J. C. O'Connell" Subject: RE: Pentax's dSLR future? > I dont understand William's comment, you were pissed AFTER > you picked it up or before? Past tense. I was pissed (about the lens issue) until I picked the camera up. Then I was no longer pissed, outraged, annoyed or in any way feeling negative. Sorry for the bad syntax, sometimes English seems to not be my first language.. William Robb
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
- Original Message - From: "Tanya Mayer Photography" Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future? > ", but to > release a "flagship" model camera and then lenses that can't be used on it > in that mode, that is just ridiculous (well, to me anyways). This seems to have become the Pentax way. Actually, I am pretty sure that when the MZ-S was released, there were no FA-J (no aperture ring) lenses. This seems to be something new to go along with the ist cameras. As long as they continue to support cameras like the MZ-S with FA type lenses that are close to the same range as the FA-J optics, they are probably doing fine. It would be really unnacceptable if they start releasing cameras now that can't use the FA-J lenses, I suppose. William Robb
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
- Original Message - From: "Paul Stenquist" Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future? > Will, > When you picked up an ist D for the first time your angst diminished, > and you were pissed. Prior to that you were outraged? Homicidal? I > picked up an ist D for the first time and was pleased. But I'm not > buying until it's useful to me. In its present configuration its still > a snapshot camera. I think I was the one that called it a whore with a wooden leg or some such. I happen to like the thing, but there is room in my life for a high end snapshot camera. The thing is fun to use, and at this stage of my life I can afford some flights of fancy. When I went downtown to see the ist D, I was expecting a digital MZ-S of some sort, and was quite prepared to hate it since that was my reaction to the MZ-S. I was very surprised to find myself buying it within a few minutes of picking it up. My objection to the camera from the start was the loss of lens compatability. When I picked it up, I guess I decided that wasn't such an important issue after all. William Robb
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
lol! I was talking to Rob about this comment today. In Australia, the term "pissed" is taken to mean "drunk" or "intoxicated", so when I read it for the first time, I was even more confused, thinking that he meant he was drunk at the time and so wasn't as angry as he had anticipated! lol... But, upon rereading it, I *thought* it was intended to read as: "My angst diminished when I picked up an ist D the first time. I *was* pissed." meaning that he had been previously annoyed, UNTIL he picked it up at which time his "angst diminished" and so his state of being "pissed" was in past tense ie "was". hehe, how silly to be deliberating over such trivial things. I am procrastinating as I should be working, I have more of those product shots that Shel hates so much to shoot. Already, "wasted" much of my day gas-bagging to Rob on the phone, so I really should get back to it... tan.
RE: Pentax's dSLR future?
I dont understand William's comment, you were pissed AFTER you picked it up or before? JCO J.C. O'Connell mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://jcoconnell.com -Original Message- From: Paul Stenquist [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 11:48 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future? Will, When you picked up an ist D for the first time your angst diminished, and you were pissed. Prior to that you were outraged? Homicidal? I picked up an ist D for the first time and was pleased. But I'm not buying until it's useful to me. In its present configuration its still a snapshot camera. On Dec 30, 2003, at 8:07 PM, William Robb wrote: > > - Original Message - > From: "graywolf" > Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future? > >> >> Now, Robb, and others, are pissed at Pentax because they do not get >> full >> compatability with lenses that Pentax has not sold for over 20 years >> when > using >> them on the new cameras. > > My angst diminished when I picked up an ist D the first time. > I was pissed. > > William Robb >
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
Will, When you picked up an ist D for the first time your angst diminished, and you were pissed. Prior to that you were outraged? Homicidal? I picked up an ist D for the first time and was pleased. But I'm not buying until it's useful to me. In its present configuration its still a snapshot camera. On Dec 30, 2003, at 8:07 PM, William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: "graywolf" Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future? Now, Robb, and others, are pissed at Pentax because they do not get full compatability with lenses that Pentax has not sold for over 20 years when using them on the new cameras. My angst diminished when I picked up an ist D the first time. I was pissed. William Robb
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
Ok, so after reading some of your responses and after chatting with Rob Studdert today, I now "get" this. The one MAJOR point to me, is one that Rob pointed out. The MZ-S doesn't have aperture priority from the body. I had NO IDEA of this, and to me, this alone is a huge mistake that Pentax is making. If they are releasing new lenses that can't be used on their self proclaimed "flagship" camera in Aperture Priority mode, then that is just downright crazy. Being unable to use old lenses on newer bodies and vice versa isn't SUCH a big thing for me, as we all know that there will come a time where technology just doesn't allow for them to all "gel", but to release a "flagship" model camera and then lenses that can't be used on it in that mode, that is just ridiculous (well, to me anyways). William, of course I do understand that the aperture ring controls the aperture and that its absence can prevent this. What I was thinking was that this would only affect the older bodies that are completely manual, and as such wouldn't facilitate any control over exposure settings if it can't be set on the body. I thought that this was, at least, "acceptable" as the concept of being unable to use a new lens on a body that is 20 plus years old, really doesn't phase me. BUT, I hadn't looked at it from the opposite perspective whereby, even Pentax's newer cameras wouldn't be able to support their newer lenses. That is just crazy I "get" now, your statement about "the dictates of the camera intruding", as before this, I was just thinking to myself, "well, why don't they just set the aperture on the body of the camera", of course, I now realise that this isn't always possible. I wasn't assuming that everyone shoots in "program" mode though. If that were the case, then this discussion wouldn't even be happening as many of the older cameras that this applies to don't even support any form of "program" mode. I shoot almost exclusively on AV or M, mode, and usually with manual focus too, believe it or not. I don't know so little that I "spend my entire life shooting on programmed exposure mode". In fact, I don't think I ever have, except if I set the camera up for my hubby to take a pic of me with our kids etc. Aperture priority would be much to complex for him to understand... ;-) tan. > > > I have to ask, maybe naively, BUT, what is the big deal about the aperture > > ring? Exactly what does it "add" to in regards to camera function, or > more > > to the point, what does it take away when it isn't availalble? Is it only > > really a problem for those trying to use newer lenses with older bodies? > Or > > is there something else in the way that they function that I don't yet > know > > about? > > Well Tanya, an aperture ring lets you control the aperture. > That can be a pretty big deal if you want to explore the world of > photography without the dictates of the camera intruding. > If you spend your entire life on programmed exposure mode, then its no big > deal at all. > > William Robb >
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
At 11:35 AM 12/31/2003 +1000, you wrote: The stupid design of the memory card access port is probably another compromise due to the design size constraints. Unfortunately the *ist D review on luminous- landscape (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/pentax-istd.shtml) highlights these problems and others and for the first occasion I tend to agree with Mr Reichmann. I really don't understand the hoo-ha about the CF card slot on the *ist-D. After pressing the eject button, my cards slide right out with a little assist from right thumb. I've read complaints that you can't grasp the cards and pull it out - but you don't _need_ to grasp it to pull it out... - MCC - Mark Cassino Photography Kalamazoo, MI http://www.markcassino.com -
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
- Original Message - From: "graywolf" Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future? > > Now, Robb, and others, are pissed at Pentax because they do not get full > compatability with lenses that Pentax has not sold for over 20 years when using > them on the new cameras. My angst diminished when I picked up an ist D the first time. I was pissed. William Robb
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
- Original Message - From: "Tanya Mayer Photography" Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future? > I have to ask, maybe naively, BUT, what is the big deal about the aperture > ring? Exactly what does it "add" to in regards to camera function, or more > to the point, what does it take away when it isn't availalble? Is it only > really a problem for those trying to use newer lenses with older bodies? Or > is there something else in the way that they function that I don't yet know > about? Well Tanya, an aperture ring lets you control the aperture. That can be a pretty big deal if you want to explore the world of photography without the dictates of the camera intruding. If you spend your entire life on programmed exposure mode, then its no big deal at all. William Robb
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
Tan, Manual aperture setting on the lens is considered more accurate, there've been reports that from-the-body aperture control can err by as much as 1/3 or 1/2 stop and is inconsistant in its degree and direction of error. In addition, lenses from before the A-series can't support from-the body aperture control. regards, Anthony Farr - Original Message - From: "Tanya Mayer Photography" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I have to ask, maybe naively, BUT, what is the big deal about the aperture > ring? Exactly what does it "add" to in regards to camera function, or more > to the point, what does it take away when it isn't availalble? Is it only > really a problem for those trying to use newer lenses with older bodies? Or > is there something else in the way that they function that I don't yet know > about? > > tan. > >
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
- Original Message - From: "Tanya Mayer Photography" Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future? > Rob (and others have mentioned it also) said "The transition to EOS mount > was not executed in a clandestine > manner." > > Just wondering what this means? Maybe, it was "before my time", but I was > just curious about it all... Canon and Minolta both made complete breaks from their manual focus lens mounts when they went to autofocus cameras. Canon survived quite nicely, and the EOS mount is serving them very well, and I expect will continue to do that. I think Minolta didn't do so well, as they were quickly eclipsed by Canon, even though they were first off the mark with an auto focus camera system. Their recent aquisition by Konica makes me think they haven't been doing so well for quite a while. Canon came along and pretty much clobbered everyone with the EOS system, but there was a lot of anger over the rapid loss of support for the FD mount at the time. Pentax showed that they were no longer commited to K and M lens compatability prior to the release of the ist D. While I am not happy about it, I think one has to accept reality. I registered my displeasure with Pentax over this, both on list and directly to the company, and stopped whinging about it. William Robb
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
- Original Message - From: "Francis Alviar" Subject: Pentax's dSLR future? > I can't wait to get an *ist D. However I would like > to ask everyone's opinion whether it's a good time to > jump in now or wait for the next Pentax dSLR. Where > do you see this going in the near future? Will Pentax > release a higher resolution camera (8 or 9 MP) or just > continue to update the *istD with more features. Or > will they release another 6.*MP dSLR based on the MZ-S > or PZ-1p platform? How long are you prepared to wait, and for what are you waiting? The ist D, while not perfect, is certainly a nice little camera. Pentax doesn't realy give a lot of hints about direction, and you can't depend on past performance as an indication of future products either. I expect that they will release a higher resolution camera at some point, as hardware becomes available, but count on them being on the trailing edge of the technology curve, as that does seem to be where they have positioned themselves of late. If Nikon or Canon releases a nine MP camera, then count on a Pentax a couple of years later. If you don't have an investment in K or M lenses, then the loss of usage of these two lens series won't be an issue, but if you do, then you also need to look at this. All of your lenses are no longer usable for what you are used to using them for, because of the format change. I don't think K or M lens compatability is in the cards at the moment, though I would love to be proven wrong. A release of a full mount compatable camera would probably coerce me into opening my wallet again. William Robb
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
It's those wanting to use new lenses on old bodies. Actually, when using a zoom without a constant aperture value, using the aperture ring is a real pain since the aperture changes as you zoom. Bill - Original Message - From: "Tanya Mayer Photography" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 7:37 PM Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future? > I have to ask, maybe naively, BUT, what is the big deal about the aperture > ring? Exactly what does it "add" to in regards to camera function, or more > to the point, what does it take away when it isn't availalble? Is it only > really a problem for those trying to use newer lenses with older bodies? Or > is there something else in the way that they function that I don't yet know > about? > > tan. > >
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
I have no doubt you are correct. I'm only saying that Pentax didn't totally change their mount and that they are more compatible with their older lenses than Canon. According to my Pentax rep, FWIW, there was a technical reason for dropping the aperture coupler. Bill - Original Message - From: "Cotty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "pentax list" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 7:40 PM Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future? > On 30/12/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: > > >At least the Pentax K and M lenses are usable, granted with restrictions, on > >the *ist D. This is more than can be said about 20-30 year old Canon lenses > >on their DSLR's > > With the greatest of respect Uncle Bill, a while back when Canon dumped > on their obviously very loyal customer base, some saw it as a brave move. > Canon took the bull by the horns and said right chaps, there's no way > around this, we simply need to move on and get on with a new design - it > paves the way for the future. It's simply no good to try and bodge with > what we have already, it simply isn't going to work. > > At that time, it could have been the most disastrous thing that Canon > could do - many thought that it was a big mistake and consumers would > drift away to Nikon and Pentax and Minolta. Some did. > > Years on, the pain of those days has now paid dividends and Canon is > where it is today.
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
No, I'm not dumping them all. I intend to keep all the lenses and use them on my film Pentaxes. These are great lenses. Jim A. > From: Kostas Kavoussanakis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 21:43:07 + (GMT) > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future? > Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 16:43:09 -0500 > > On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Jim Apilado wrote: > >> I am one who eagerly wanted to get the *istD only to be disappointed that it >> would not offer full compatibility with older K and M lenses as my PZ1-p >> does. I no longer think of myself as owning any new Pentax equipment. As >> long as film is around, I will continue to use my current film based >> Pentaxes fully. Frankly, I think the way to go is Canon. > > Hi Jim, > > Let me try to understand this: you are (rightly IMHO) pissed off that > the *ist-D is incompatible with a subset of your lenses. And your > solution is to dump them all? > > I understand a (possible) stance against Pentax's sneaky idea, is this > why you are suggesting it? > > Kostas >
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
I have to ask, maybe naively, BUT, what is the big deal about the aperture ring? Exactly what does it "add" to in regards to camera function, or more to the point, what does it take away when it isn't availalble? Is it only really a problem for those trying to use newer lenses with older bodies? Or is there something else in the way that they function that I don't yet know about? tan.
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
On 30 Dec 2003 at 19:33, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Now, I must ask, did Pentax ever SAY they were going to continue to do what > they'd been doing? Did they ever say they'd keep the A rings or continue to > fully support the K&M lenses? I know it seems like they had a good thing going > with their compatibility but did you just assume they would continue that trend? > Seems to me they don't really say much of anything about their intentions and > future plans. They led us to believe the direction that they were taking but no you are right they rarely commit to anything even after they present future goods at trade shows. > I think you misled yourself. I'm the idiot who continued to purchase Pentax kit (including an MZ-S) yes. 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: Pentax's dSLR future?
On 30/12/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: >At least the Pentax K and M lenses are usable, granted with restrictions, on >the *ist D. This is more than can be said about 20-30 year old Canon lenses >on their DSLR's With the greatest of respect Uncle Bill, a while back when Canon dumped on their obviously very loyal customer base, some saw it as a brave move. Canon took the bull by the horns and said right chaps, there's no way around this, we simply need to move on and get on with a new design - it paves the way for the future. It's simply no good to try and bodge with what we have already, it simply isn't going to work. At that time, it could have been the most disastrous thing that Canon could do - many thought that it was a big mistake and consumers would drift away to Nikon and Pentax and Minolta. Some did. Years on, the pain of those days has now paid dividends and Canon is where it is today. Now, I'm not defending Canon. Oddly enough, I could not give a pig's trotter what the name of the brand is on the front of the cameras that I hold. I choose them on individual merits. Hence, for shooting 35mm film, I wouldn't really consider anything else other than a Pentax MX or LX. Jostein showed me his PZ-1p and frankly I wouldn't have one as a gift. It says Pentax on the front, but that's the only thing it has in common with those manual focus stalwarts that I know and love. I haven't seen a single Pentax camera that has been built after the LX that I liked enough to want to buy. The MZ-S was a pretty little thing. I wouldn't possibly consider owning one! The MX/LX gear heavily participated in forming the way I take pics - and nothing is lost by getting ahold of an ultra-modern AF plastic camera - I still shoot aperture priority in manual focus on the D60. It's what I'm used to. Now - the *ist D. Let me tell a little secret. One of the reasons I got myself a D60 fifteen months ago, was because I had had a play with the MZ-S, and I thought to myself - if Pentax are going to base their DSLR on the MZ-S, I don't want one! I didn't like the size, the design, the feel of it. It was a decisive factor in me not waiting to see the eventual Pentax DSLR - and so I sold my LX and some lenses, and got myself a Canon. The D60 is plastic (even though it has a metal chassis) and I hate it for that - but I also fell in love with it because it allowed me access to a whole world of things that Pentax used to have, now seemingly fallen by the wayside. Along with the D60 came a lens and accessory line that - well, there's no point in going into those woods right now. Suffice it to say, that when I had a pair of MXs in the early 1980s, I only had to look in the back of Amateur Photographer and under the 'Pentax' heading (on various dealers' pages), there were a long line of lenses and accessories listed that I craved and craved. In fact, over 20 years on, in the back of AP, under the 'Pentax' heading, there's now a trickle of lenses with ridiculous zooms like 28-380mm f/5.6 - 6.3 for £169 and so on. What the hell is that ?? About as much use to me a chocolate tea pot. I want lenses that are useful and sleek and perform well. The Pentax Limiteds are the only lenses I would consider buying from Pentax today. Sure I know Pentax still make an 80-200 2.8 and a 300 2.8, but why aren't they advertised? Why don't we see them being used? Pentax today is sadly a shallow ghost of it's former glory. I'm living in the past ...until the *ist D. Came along. I was really impressed with that camera. It is nothing like the MZ-S, mercifully. It is well-built, purposeful, and sleek. It looks right and feels right. Having seen and held one, I feel slight sense of guilt - is this the camera that is going to turn around Pentax and start it back up the slope towards the peak it once shared with other mighty manufacturers? I sincerely hope so. And if it does, my sense of guilt will deepen and who knows, I might even sell off my current gear and buy back into Pentax. I'm quite happy to wait and see. Best, (sorry for the length, go easy on me - plenty of wine tonight *hic* - scrabbling for the nomex suit :-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
On 30 Dec 2003 at 19:24, Bill Owens wrote: > Yes. LOL The *ist D is actually more compatible with old screw lenses than K and M lenses. 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: Pentax's dSLR future?
On 30 Dec 2003 at 19:18, graywolf wrote: > Now, Robb, and others, are pissed at Pentax because they do not get full > compatability with lenses that Pentax has not sold for over 20 years when using > them on the new cameras. Make that 2 years. The funny thing is that I suspect the reasoning surrounding dropping the aperture ring control may have partly been a function of the move to make this body as small as possible. Anyone who actually owns a *ist will well know that you have to set the lens in the "A" position before it's mounted, the simple reason is that there is such a small gap between the overhanging prism/rtf that even I can't get my finger in to depress the lock button :-( The stupid design of the memory card access port is probably another compromise due to the design size constraints. Unfortunately the *ist D review on luminous- landscape (http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/cameras/pentax-istd.shtml) highlights these problems and others and for the first occasion I tend to agree with Mr Reichmann. 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: Pentax's dSLR future?
I hate to put my foot into this ring since I never had any of the old lenses but... Rob typed this: "Pentax have removed lens aperture rings, disabled > aperture ring operation on bodies etc and this is just over a year after the > last limited lens hit the shelves and not so long after we were teased with the > MZ-D. Talk about misleading." Now, I must ask, did Pentax ever SAY they were going to continue to do what they'd been doing? Did they ever say they'd keep the A rings or continue to fully support the K&M lenses? I know it seems like they had a good thing going with their compatibility but did you just assume they would continue that trend? Seems to me they don't really say much of anything about their intentions and future plans. I think you misled yourself. Cory --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.556 / Virus Database: 348 - Release Date: 12/26/2003
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
Yes. - Original Message - From: "Shel Belinkoff" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 7:09 PM Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future? > And didn't someone write that the Super Tak screw mount lenses were entirely > workable when used stopped down to the working aperture? > > Bill Owens wrote: > > > At least the Pentax K and M lenses are usable, granted with restrictions, on > > the *ist D. This is more than can be said about 20-30 year old Canon lenses > > on their DSLR's > > > >
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
On 30 Dec 2003 at 19:00, graywolf wrote: > Ya, Rob. Pentax and Nikon have kicked their users in the shins. Canon on the > other hand cut their users feet off. If you had had a bunch of FD lenses you > would not have forgiven Canon yet. At least they were up front, I could deal with that, same as Contax just did, I had Contax SLRs, I don't now. Pentax have removed lens aperture rings, disabled aperture ring operation on bodies etc and this is just over a year after the last limited lens hit the shelves and not so long after we were teased with the MZ-D. Talk about misleading. 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: Pentax's dSLR future?
Well, Tanya, back when Canon went to autofocus, they intoduced a completely new mount. The new lenses would not fit on the old cameras, and the old lenses would not fit on the new cameras. Note that is NOT FIT, not NOT WORK IN ALL MODES. So the Canon SLR, maybe an F1N you had bought the previos year and the lenses you had accumulated over a decade would no longer work with Canon equipment made after that. Now, Robb, and others, are pissed at Pentax because they do not get full compatability with lenses that Pentax has not sold for over 20 years when using them on the new cameras. Any lens manufactured in the past 20 years or so works fine. All Pentax did was abandon the mechanical linkage that told the camera what f-stop the old lenses were set to. No lens since the A series was introduced (in what '84?) have used that linkage. But Pentax continued to put the linkage into all but their cheapest cameras until this past year. Of course being as I actually prefer those 20+ year old cameras and lenses, I find this whole thing silly as hell. I mean they abandoned me when they quit making the MX . -- Tanya Mayer Photography wrote: Rob (and others have mentioned it also) said "The transition to EOS mount was not executed in a clandestine manner." Just wondering what this means? Maybe, it was "before my time", but I was just curious about it all... tan. -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com "You might as well accept people as they are, you are not going to be able to change them anyway."
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
And didn't someone write that the Super Tak screw mount lenses were entirely workable when used stopped down to the working aperture? Bill Owens wrote: > At least the Pentax K and M lenses are usable, granted with restrictions, on > the *ist D. This is more than can be said about 20-30 year old Canon lenses > on their DSLR's >
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
Ya, Rob. Pentax and Nikon have kicked their users in the shins. Canon on the other hand cut their users feet off. If you had had a bunch of FD lenses you would not have forgiven Canon yet. -- Rob Studdert wrote: On 30 Dec 2003 at 15:38, Bill Owens wrote: At least the Pentax K and M lenses are usable, granted with restrictions, on the *ist D. This is more than can be said about 20-30 year old Canon lenses on their DSLR's I know we've been through it before but I find the lack of functionality using older lenses a pain. The fact that there is no aperture feedback coupling and other restrictions reeks of a ploy to ensure new lens sales, no less. It can't be compared it to the Canon system, they offer so much more and are honest to their users. The transition to EOS mount was not executed in a clandestine manner. 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 -- graywolf http://graywolfphoto.com "You might as well accept people as they are, you are not going to be able to change them anyway."
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Jim Apilado wrote: > I am one who eagerly wanted to get the *istD only to be disappointed that it > would not offer full compatibility with older K and M lenses as my PZ1-p > does. I no longer think of myself as owning any new Pentax equipment. As > long as film is around, I will continue to use my current film based > Pentaxes fully. Frankly, I think the way to go is Canon. Hi Jim, Let me try to understand this: you are (rightly IMHO) pissed off that the *ist-D is incompatible with a subset of your lenses. And your solution is to dump them all? I understand a (possible) stance against Pentax's sneaky idea, is this why you are suggesting it? Kostas
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
On 30 Dec 2003 at 15:38, Bill Owens wrote: > At least the Pentax K and M lenses are usable, granted with restrictions, on the > *ist D. This is more than can be said about 20-30 year old Canon lenses on > their DSLR's I know we've been through it before but I find the lack of functionality using older lenses a pain. The fact that there is no aperture feedback coupling and other restrictions reeks of a ploy to ensure new lens sales, no less. It can't be compared it to the Canon system, they offer so much more and are honest to their users. The transition to EOS mount was not executed in a clandestine manner. 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: Pentax's dSLR future?
At least the Pentax K and M lenses are usable, granted with restrictions, on the *ist D. This is more than can be said about 20-30 year old Canon lenses on their DSLR's Bill - Original Message - From: "Jim Apilado" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 3:32 PM Subject: Re: Pentax's dSLR future? > I am one who eagerly wanted to get the *istD only to be disappointed that it > would not offer full compatibility with older K and M lenses as my PZ1-p > does. I no longer think of myself as owning any new Pentax equipment. As > long as film is around, I will continue to use my current film based > Pentaxes fully. Frankly, I think the way to go is Canon. > > Jim A. > > > From: Francis Alviar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 09:34:30 -0800 (PST) > > To: Pentax Discuss List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > Subject: Pentax's dSLR future? > > Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 12:34:31 -0500 > > > > I can't wait to get an *ist D. However I would like > > to ask everyone's opinion whether it's a good time to > > jump in now or wait for the next Pentax dSLR. Where > > do you see this going in the near future? Will Pentax > > release a higher resolution camera (8 or 9 MP) or just > > continue to update the *istD with more features. Or > > will they release another 6.*MP dSLR based on the MZ-S > > or PZ-1p platform? > > > > > > > > __ > > Do you Yahoo!? > > Find out what made the Top Yahoo! Searches of 2003 > > http://search.yahoo.com/top2003 > > > >
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
I am one who eagerly wanted to get the *istD only to be disappointed that it would not offer full compatibility with older K and M lenses as my PZ1-p does. I no longer think of myself as owning any new Pentax equipment. As long as film is around, I will continue to use my current film based Pentaxes fully. Frankly, I think the way to go is Canon. Jim A. > From: Francis Alviar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 09:34:30 -0800 (PST) > To: Pentax Discuss List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Pentax's dSLR future? > Resent-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Resent-Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 12:34:31 -0500 > > I can't wait to get an *ist D. However I would like > to ask everyone's opinion whether it's a good time to > jump in now or wait for the next Pentax dSLR. Where > do you see this going in the near future? Will Pentax > release a higher resolution camera (8 or 9 MP) or just > continue to update the *istD with more features. Or > will they release another 6.*MP dSLR based on the MZ-S > or PZ-1p platform? > > > > __ > Do you Yahoo!? > Find out what made the Top Yahoo! Searches of 2003 > http://search.yahoo.com/top2003 >
RE: Pentax's dSLR future?
Francis Alviar wrote: > I can't wait to get an *ist D. However I would like to ask > everyone's opinion whether it's a good time to jump in now or > wait for the next Pentax dSLR. Where do you see this going > in the near future? Will Pentax release a higher resolution > camera (8 or 9 MP) or just continue to update the *istD with > more features. Or will they release another 6.*MP dSLR based > on the MZ-S or PZ-1p platform? The real question is does the current Pentax DSLR do what you want now and you feel it is the right price. I have no intention of moving to a later model for many years, so living with what it does now is important. With this technology, like computers, there will always be better models coming along at the same prices. You have to choose the point you want to jump aboard - for some the arrival of the *ist D was not quick enough. I had enough lenses to not want to change manufacturer, even with any limitation that may bring with it and didn't mind waiting and waiting.. Then I waited for the reviews, which were brilliant, which meant getting one was difficult :-) You could just consider it as a different format and look at other manufacturers offerings. I seriously did for a while, but felt I could wait and, as I use film, didn't want to carry two sets of lenses. Malcolm
RE: Pentax's dSLR future?
I think Pop Photo just did a little piece on Pentax's upcoming offerings... > -Original Message- > From: Francis Alviar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 12:35 PM > To: Pentax Discuss List > Subject: Pentax's dSLR future? > > > I can't wait to get an *ist D. However I would like > to ask everyone's opinion whether it's a good time to > jump in now or wait for the next Pentax dSLR. Where > do you see this going in the near future? Will Pentax > release a higher resolution camera (8 or 9 MP) or just > continue to update the *istD with more features. Or > will they release another 6.*MP dSLR based on the MZ-S > or PZ-1p platform? > > > > __ > Do you Yahoo!? > Find out what made the Top Yahoo! Searches of 2003 http://search.yahoo.com/top2003
Re: Pentax's dSLR future?
Has there been an "official" announcement from Pentax stating that there will be future DSLRs? Do you want a DSLR now or can you wait years? It took 3 years I believe from the "announcement" of the MZ-D to the actual shipping of the *ist-D (two very different cameras). I LIKE Pentax cameras and lenses. I didn't want to jump ship so I bought their first DSLR because I felt it would fit my needs just fine. And it has. But I am also realistic when it comes to Pentax's product development and release schedule. I can't hold my breath very long, can you? You need to ask yourself if you want a camera now (with one major limitation) or if you can hold your breath for the next one. Who's to say the next one will be more feature-rich, more MPs or have a 24x36mm sensor? It could be a long wait for something that doesn't fit your needs or it could be a long wait that pays off in the end. Either way, I think it's going to be a long wait. Only you can decide. Christian - Original Message - From: "Francis Alviar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Pentax Discuss List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, December 30, 2003 12:34 PM Subject: Pentax's dSLR future? > I can't wait to get an *ist D. However I would like > to ask everyone's opinion whether it's a good time to > jump in now or wait for the next Pentax dSLR. Where > do you see this going in the near future? Will Pentax > release a higher resolution camera (8 or 9 MP) or just > continue to update the *istD with more features. Or > will they release another 6.*MP dSLR based on the MZ-S > or PZ-1p platform? > > > > __ > Do you Yahoo!? > Find out what made the Top Yahoo! Searches of 2003 > http://search.yahoo.com/top2003 >
