Re: Pentax digital news
The following is the translation of the web page using Babel Fish... The .. with the goal of 2 years later, increases the research and development member of camera business in 300 - 450 people of current 1.5 times. When the management resource is shifted to the digital camera, it judged reinforcement of the staff who takes charge of the development related to software is needed. With increase and the like, besides the fact that new product throwing interval of the digital camera, from 1 year of present condition is shortened in approximately 6 months, to optical lens development and the like for the portable telephone the thought of making the business territory expand. As for digital camera of the same company, other than compact camera . series 3 type, total 4 type of equipped binoculars 1 type. In the future, with the goal of next spring to the lens exchange type digital single-lens reflex camera the new entry and total 5 types efficient research and development is advanced to the base. Development of the although labor cost and development cost increase, raises profitability with business enlargement e.g., software development related to circuit and the electricity which are complicated becomes necessary. On one hand, the CCD (the charge-coupled device) and the complementary metal oxide semiconductor (the CMOS) the policy of not adhering to the respective company development e.g., sort it purchases until recently. As for sale ratio of the which is occupied business in the whole camera approximately 60%. The same company sees, it expands to 85% even in next year, the APS which discontinues development (the new photograph system) from the camera and the film camera, shifts the management resource at business, aims toward share enlargement. Iren Henry Chu wrote: Dear all, News from the Japan Industrial Journal Homepage on 22 November 2002: http://www.jij.co.jp/news/car/art-20021028222428-NFNKSJDDPP.nwc The major points are: 1. The RD staff for digital camera of Pentax will increase 150% to about 300-450 personnel. 2. The Pentax digital camera line-up will consist of 5 items: 3 optios, 1 digibino and 1 d-slr 3. The life-cycle period for each digital cameras model will be reduced to 6 months from the current 1 year 4. The revenue ratio from digital cameras related sales will be increased from 60% to 85% of the total company revenue. Due to my limited Japanese, I don't quite understand about the fifth paragraph related to the development of CCD and CMOS. Any body here can help? Regards, Henry Chu 22 Nov 2002 _ MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus -- Shaun Canning Cultural Heritage Services High Street, Broadford, Victoria, 3658. Phone: 0414-967644 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Pentax digital news
On 22 Nov 2002 at 12:01, Iren Henry Chu wrote: Due to my limited Japanese, I don't quite understand about the fifth paragraph related to the development of CCD and CMOS. Any body here can help? The translator seems to make little sense of it, hopefully it alludes to the fact that Pentax doesn't align its production with certain manufacturers (or technologies?) then they may adopt CMOS imaging technology. This would be a great move as from what I have read of CMOS imager specification sheets they don't suffer light fall off at the edges so badly. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html
Re: Pentax digital news
yeah, this is what I sort of thought the article was alluding too. Basically, that Pentax would shop around for the right bits, rather than get tied up in a supplier deal. .02 Cheers Shaun Rob Studdert wrote: On 22 Nov 2002 at 12:01, Iren Henry Chu wrote: Due to my limited Japanese, I don't quite understand about the fifth paragraph related to the development of CCD and CMOS. Any body here can help? The translator seems to make little sense of it, hopefully it alludes to the fact that Pentax doesn't align its production with certain manufacturers (or technologies?) then they may adopt CMOS imaging technology. This would be a great move as from what I have read of CMOS imager specification sheets they don't suffer light fall off at the edges so badly. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html -- Shaun Canning Cultural Heritage Services High Street, Broadford, Victoria, 3658. Phone: 0414-967644 e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
IMHO for a high end digital SLR camera to sell in sufficient quantities to be viable, you have to crack the PJ market. This is where this type of camera is most used and useful. And, this is where Nikon and Canon rule. As digital SLR camera's become more mainstream and start to replace 35 mm, the market might be right for Pentax to enter... but at this time I think they should concentrate on the PS market where Pentax does extremely well. Their present Optio 330 and upcoming Optio 430 are good examples. Cheers, Mike. Chaso DeChaso wrote: Wasn't there a time when Pentax actually cared about being a leader? Are they now content with always following (more and more distantly), at best offering products close to the others and cheaper? This would be sad. If they simply don't have the might to compete against N and C* anymore, at least they could do one thing really well - in the digital realm, this could have been the full-frame CCD SLR. Is Pentax to become the next Contax, who was fifteen (or however many) years late with autofocus? Maybe Pentax will release a fantastic digital SLR in 2016 when almost nobody remembers who Pentax is. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: DOF and format size (was: Re: Pentax Digital NEWS - FULL STORY from AP 27th OCT.)
I totally agree with your assessment of DOF. In addition I think the perceived DOF of digital prints is as good as it is possibly because as long as the DPI of the blowup is less than the eye can perceive and lower than the pixel count of the original image the DOF doesn't appear to shrink as the print gets larger. This maybe the reason 3-4 MP images looks so good in 8x10 blowups and why digital doesn't really have to match the theoretical 32 MP performance of fine grain film. Something to consider in the overall equation. Be interesting to try this with a digitally scanned negative or positive image and see if it holds as you get larger blowups compared to using an enlarger on the original negative. Anybody want to do a report on this? Kent Gittings -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Anthony Farr Sent: Friday, October 26, 2001 1:10 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: OT: DOF and format size (was: Re: Pentax Digital NEWS - FULL STORY from AP 27th OCT.) - Original Message - From: dave o'brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] (snip) DOF has to do with the focal length and the f-stop. Print magnification has nothing whatsoever to do with it. - But print magnification has EVERYTHING to do with it. Until now I have kept my silence WRT this subject but no more. Too frequently anecdote and intuition have been been offered as informed knowledge. The facts follow. The DOF concept is based on the circles of confusion (COC) of the out of focus part of a photograph being either smaller than the unaided eye can appreciate, in which case the subject matter will seem acceptably focussed, or large enough for the same unaided eye to see the unsharpness of it. Quite simply, when the enlargement factor of a print is increased then the COC of nearly focussed areas will become larger and will cross the threshold between small enough to pass as sharp and large enough to be deemed unsharp. Photographers who either criticise or praise different sized formats for their DOF characteristics are correct only as long as the developed film or a contact print (or 1:1 enlargement) is being viewed unmagnified. Otherwise, a 22mm standard lens on a 110 camera will produce the same DOF as will a 43mm lens on 35mm (the statistical standard lens), or a 75mm lens on 6x4.5cm, a 90mm lens on 6x7cm, or even a 320mm lens on 8x10in, as long as the shooting aperture is always the same and the prints being judged are always the same size, and regardless of differences in DOF of the unenlarged negatives. WARNING: ANECDOTE AND SUPPOSITION FOLLOWS. Digital cameras seem to bend theses rules somewhat because the imaging chips have optical characteristics of their own to confuse the equation. CCD pixels prefer to look straight ahead unlike film which easily accepts exposing light from oblique angles (the apparently fatal flaw of the full frame Philips chip proposed for the MZ-D). That narrow acceptance angle may lend CCD produced images more apparent DOF (my guess anyway) the same way as the CCD array in a scanner has great DOF even without a lens. That's my ~theory~ anyway for the long DOF that some list members have reported from their digicams. BTW the DOF scale on lenses for 35mm cameras are more suited to viewing as projections rather than as prints, and even when they're printed the overwhelming majority are 4x6in minilab prints. PS 35mm and smaller or low end digicams most often have small aperture wide angle lenses so have greater inherent DOF to begin with. Medium and large format photographs almost always end up as prints for sale or for serious scrutiny by serious amateurs. It's no wonder that their DOF of is more critically judged. Regards, Anthony Farr - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.mimesweeper.com ** - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
Actually except in the 60's they never had the might to challenge C or N. Only their loyal momentum kept them up near the top. As it is they are the leader still usually in PS so the Optio line looks like they have begun to switch over to digital. In high end cameras they don't have the infrastructure to compete with the top 2 who usually lose money on the pro stuff and make it back on the rest by convincing people the quality is the same as the pro stuff (which it is not). Being the smallest company and without the resources of conglomerates behind them like the other 3 they can't afford to pop up with pro cameras at will without knowing in advance they can sell enough to make money. Remember the prime job of the camera is something to hold the media up so the lens can form an image. And while both Pentax and Minolta have excellent pro lenses neither makes enough models to suit any of the pros I know personally. And the ones they do generally require a long lead time because they are special order, or you have to find them used. And the top 3rd party pro lines are made in Pentax (not as much as Minolta however), but just try finding, for example, a used last generation 500/4.5 Sigma in Pentax AF mount. Good luck with that. So who is going to buy a high end 6MP Pentax 35mm lens digital camera for around $7000? Certainly not the Pentax user who is using a PZ-1p/MZ-3/ZX-5n as his primary camera. He'd have to sell everything including his lenses to afford it. It just happens in marketing that a company making a good product that doesn't sell is in lots worse shape than one that doesn't make the product at all. Besides I'm sure one of the secret marketing criteria was how many MZ-S bodies they sold initially. If they can't sell their target with a $1400 body how can they justify a $7000 body? Just coming out with a great product like that is a sure way to go into the red and go under when you can't sell enough and you don't have big pockets behind you. The others know they have a ready market because of the investment in their pro glass most high end users have, which Pentax and Minolta can't say. I applaud Minolta for bringing out the Maxxum 9 and keeping at least one pro caliber body at the top of their line. I'm also sure they aren't making that much on them overall, especially with the Maxxum 7 out. I think Pentax probably made the correct, although possibly less popular decision in this case. A cheaper body with less resolution that possibly costs only a few hundred over an MZ-S is more likely to attract the Pentax loyalist to actually buy one, instead of screaming about not paying $7000 for the other one. Nothing Pentax and to a lesser extent Minolta brings out is going to convince a high end Canon or Nikon shooter to switch to Pentax or Minolta unless their is only one lens they use. Unless Pentax decided to bring a body out that used Nikon or Canon lenses. Unfortunately that would most likely sell better than one using their own line simply because the potential buyer list is much larger. Kent Gittings -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Chaso DeChaso Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 4:00 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one Wasn't there a time when Pentax actually cared about being a leader? Are they now content with always following (more and more distantly), at best offering products close to the others and cheaper? This would be sad. If they simply don't have the might to compete against N and C* anymore, at least they could do one thing really well - in the digital realm, this could have been the full-frame CCD SLR. Is Pentax to become the next Contax, who was fifteen (or however many) years late with autofocus? Maybe Pentax will release a fantastic digital SLR in 2016 when almost nobody remembers who Pentax is. In any case, they really have to release something serious soon or they'll be wiped off the map. (I don't care about digital products too much, I just want them to stay in business so that they can make lenses and film cameras for a while longer.) Olympus seems to be a model of a company managing their resources well and focusing on certain distinct areas very wisely. Pentax brand loyalty goes pretty far - the next couple years may be a test of just how far. Good point but if Pentax does We're no worse than the rest but it costs less ( we hope ). [Brendan] Make a great connection at Yahoo! Personals. http://personals.yahoo.com - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS - FULL STORY from AP 27th OCT.
I guess what I'm thinking is, there's a difference between interpolation and a raw pixel. Interpolation is still a *guesstimate* and in the end does not really fill in *what* was missing. It fills in *something*. I don't think their can be any substitute for raw pixel count. Tom C. - Original Message - From: Isaac Crawford [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 8:55 PM Subject: Re: Pentax Digital NEWS - FULL STORY from AP 27th OCT. Patrick White wrote: aimcompute writes: I guess it makes sense. Up to now. digital photography has never really been about quality. I find the Fuji Super CCD technology somewhat of a joke. You can't end up with more raw material than you start with. The Nikon D1x uses interpolation in one direction (the width I believe) without any obvious problems. Isaac - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
Chaso DeChaso wrote in regard to our favorite brand: I just want them to stay in business so that they can make lenses and film cameras for a while longer.) Pentax has already made quite enough cameras and lenses to service my needs until the day I die. And some very fine ones at that. I guess I don't really give a hoot whether or not they continue to make new ones. Paul - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: RE: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
Thanks, About a minute after I sent the message I decided to take my time and check. Thanks for your time, César Matamoros II Panama City, Florida -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 9:17 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: RE: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one It's the very first 35mm SLR digital camera listed, right before the D30. The lenses that are compatable with it and accessories are followed on the pages in between, including the very pricey Contax AF 645 lenses. - - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
-Original Message- From: Juan J. Buhler [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 1:56 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one On Wed, 24 Oct 2001, Matamoros, Cesar A. wrote: Looking at the specifications - Magnification 0.8x with 50-mm lens set to infinity and -1.0 m(-1) So that *does* mean a tiny viewfinder. Keep in mind that not all the 24x36 original frame is shown, so you start with a small image. Add that .8x magnification, and you get what, about 1/3 to 1/4 of the size of the MX viewfinder? Or am I still missing something? j -- -- - Juan J. Buhler | Sr. FX Animator @ PDI | Photos at http://www.jbuhler.com Juan, I just compared the viewfinder of the D1X with the one of an F3HP. The D1X makes you feel like you are looking into a tunnel. The viewfinder appears about 2/3 the size of the F3 if not smaller. Switching around the different cameras that I do I guess I would not notice as much. Though now that I look at the D1X it is as if you had the panorama switch set on a camera ;-) César Matamoros II Panama City, Florida - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS - FULL STORY from AP 27th OCT.
Actually, DOF has to do with nothing but magnification and the diameter of the aperture. Everything else is just another way of expressing those values. --graywolf - Original Message - From: dave o'brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2001 11:29 AM Subject: Re: Pentax Digital NEWS - FULL STORY from AP 27th OCT. A scroll of mail from Francis Tang [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Tue, 23 Oct 2001 14:15:08 +0100 Read it? y I am curious about your comment about increased DOF with a smaller format. I was always under the impression that we get more DOF with 35mm over MF because the typical print magnification is less. Am I missing something more subtle here? DOF has to do with the focal length and the f-stop. Print magnification has nothing whatsoever to do with it. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
OT: DOF and format size (was: Re: Pentax Digital NEWS - FULL STORY from AP 27th OCT.)
- Original Message - From: dave o'brien [EMAIL PROTECTED] (snip) DOF has to do with the focal length and the f-stop. Print magnification has nothing whatsoever to do with it. - But print magnification has EVERYTHING to do with it. Until now I have kept my silence WRT this subject but no more. Too frequently anecdote and intuition have been been offered as informed knowledge. The facts follow. The DOF concept is based on the circles of confusion (COC) of the out of focus part of a photograph being either smaller than the unaided eye can appreciate, in which case the subject matter will seem acceptably focussed, or large enough for the same unaided eye to see the unsharpness of it. Quite simply, when the enlargement factor of a print is increased then the COC of nearly focussed areas will become larger and will cross the threshold between small enough to pass as sharp and large enough to be deemed unsharp. Photographers who either criticise or praise different sized formats for their DOF characteristics are correct only as long as the developed film or a contact print (or 1:1 enlargement) is being viewed unmagnified. Otherwise, a 22mm standard lens on a 110 camera will produce the same DOF as will a 43mm lens on 35mm (the statistical standard lens), or a 75mm lens on 6x4.5cm, a 90mm lens on 6x7cm, or even a 320mm lens on 8x10in, as long as the shooting aperture is always the same and the prints being judged are always the same size, and regardless of differences in DOF of the unenlarged negatives. WARNING: ANECDOTE AND SUPPOSITION FOLLOWS. Digital cameras seem to bend theses rules somewhat because the imaging chips have optical characteristics of their own to confuse the equation. CCD pixels prefer to look straight ahead unlike film which easily accepts exposing light from oblique angles (the apparently fatal flaw of the full frame Philips chip proposed for the MZ-D). That narrow acceptance angle may lend CCD produced images more apparent DOF (my guess anyway) the same way as the CCD array in a scanner has great DOF even without a lens. That's my ~theory~ anyway for the long DOF that some list members have reported from their digicams. BTW the DOF scale on lenses for 35mm cameras are more suited to viewing as projections rather than as prints, and even when they're printed the overwhelming majority are 4x6in minilab prints. PS 35mm and smaller or low end digicams most often have small aperture wide angle lenses so have greater inherent DOF to begin with. Medium and large format photographs almost always end up as prints for sale or for serious scrutiny by serious amateurs. It's no wonder that their DOF of is more critically judged. Regards, Anthony Farr - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
On Tue, 23 Oct 2001 15:12:58 -0700 (PDT), Juan J. Buhler wrote: Ouch. That means a *really* tiny viewfinder then... No, not really, that depends on magnification factor in the viewfinder optical system just as much as the actual covered area itself. Regards, Jan van Wijk - Jan van Wijk; www.fsys.demon.nl - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
-Original Message- From: Mark Roberts [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 7:27 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one Juan J. Buhler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Matamoros, Cesar A. wrote: We received our Nikon D1H and D1X yesterday afternoon. I will begin playing with them today. The manual states that the viewfinder shows 96% of the frame recorded. Ouch. That means a *really* tiny viewfinder then... No, I think perhaps you're confusing image coverage with image magnification. 96% coverage (which is what's being discussed here) just means that 4% of what's recorded by the CCD will be cropped from the view in the viewfinder. The remaining 96% can be *magnified* (or reduced or presented life size). -- Mark Roberts www.robertstech.com Looking at the specifications - Magnification 0.8x with 50-mm lens set to infinity and -1.0 m(-1) César Matamoros II Panama City, Florida - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
On Wed, 24 Oct 2001, Matamoros, Cesar A. wrote: Looking at the specifications - Magnification 0.8x with 50-mm lens set to infinity and -1.0 m(-1) So that *does* mean a tiny viewfinder. Keep in mind that not all the 24x36 original frame is shown, so you start with a small image. Add that .8x magnification, and you get what, about 1/3 to 1/4 of the size of the MX viewfinder? Or am I still missing something? j -- --- Juan J. Buhler | Sr. FX Animator @ PDI | Photos at http://www.jbuhler.com --- - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS - FULL STORY from AP 27th OCT.
- Original Message - From: Rob Studdert [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 4:13 PM Subject: Re: Pentax Digital NEWS - FULL STORY from AP 27th OCT. On 22 Oct 2001, at 14:07, aimcompute wrote: When we get down to it, it's not the size of the 35mm frame that renders a high quality photo or not (stating the obvious... sorry). It's the overall quality of the lenses and recording device, regardless of the dimensions of the frame size. Certainly a CCD of higher density is overall more important than it's dimensions. Rob wrote: Certainly is not, what do you reckon the quality of a 6MP CCD of 2mm x 3mm dimension would be? Tom Says: Well I'm sure you're correct and I was technically vague. I was speaking more to the desire that a CCD be particular x dimension by y dimenson, than I was small vs. large. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS - FULL STORY from AP 27th OCT.
Hey... now that's the spirit! Tom C. - Original Message - From: Aaron Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 7:17 PM Subject: Re: Pentax Digital NEWS - FULL STORY from AP 27th OCT. Bah, I'll never buy it until they make a full size 6x7 sensor on a body that takes my 67 lenses! ;) If the price were right, I'd consider a smaller-than-35mm sensor body that took my existing lenses, provided that it was as backwards-compatible as the MZ-S -- I want to be able to use my 67 lenses on it with an adaptor. -Aaron - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital news
In a message dated 22/10/01 19:35:56 GMT Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Does anyone think that someone from Pentax reads this list!!!??? Can I place my order right now? As I recall, when the list was hosted by the Pentax site, someone from Pentax did keep an ear to the ground. Kind regards Peter - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS - FULL STORY from AP 27th OCT.
Mike Johnston [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mark wrote: This sudden change, whatever the rationale, is inexcusable. Yes, digital technology is advancing at a tremendous rate and the market for it isn't stable. But in October of 2001 they can't really expect me to believe that this is NEWS to them and that it's taken them by surprise. While I sympathize with you, Mark, I don't think I agree...if you're getting a complex cutting-edge electronic product from a subcontractor, and the subcontractor runs into unexpected problems and delays, what are you going to do? You can't very well will a product to market that you can't bring to market. Ah, you're assuming it's delays in availability of parts from the subcontractors driving this. I was assuming that they were telling the truth and had *decided* to halt or push back development of the digital SLR because the market's moving too fast. I believe you may be right. -- Mark Roberts www.robertstech.com - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital news
Yeah, they used to read the list then. They kicked us out because they were afraid that the things we were saying might be mistaken as official Pentax views. They probably didn't want to spend money in the courts, either, trying to defend the indefensible. Len --- - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 5:23 AM Subject: Re: Pentax Digital news In a message dated 22/10/01 19:35:56 GMT Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Does anyone think that someone from Pentax reads this list!!!??? Can I place my order right now? As I recall, when the list was hosted by the Pentax site, someone from Pentax did keep an ear to the ground. Kind regards Peter - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
The Acer Scanwit ain't bad if you ensure the particular one you get does focus accurately (I had to return the first example I had). The included software (Mira, in Australia) is reasonably competent and fast, and the only problem scans I have had so far have been with very old and thin colour slides. The software attempted to correct the density and cocked it up completely. No problems installing and running, and it does both 24-bit and 36-bit colour density. HTH John Coyle Brisbane, Australia On Tuesday, October 23, 2001 2:41 PM, Doug Franklin [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] wrote: On Tue, 23 Oct 2001 12:49:30 +1000, Rob Studdert wrote: SNIP PS. My latest field experience has pushed me over the edge. I'm going to get a film scanner and give up getting prints of my film. I've looked at the HP Photo Smart, the Canon CanoScan 2720, the Acer ScanWit 2700, and the Polaroid SprintScan 4000. With the rebate that Polaroid's running, they're about the same total cost. Can any of you give a thumbs up or down on any of these? Or others? - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
-Original Message- From: Juan J. Buhler [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 5:23 PM Subject: RE: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one On Mon, 22 Oct 2001, John Francis wrote: Longer, effectively. The lens produces an image of exactly the same size, but only the central portion of that image falls on the digital sensor. The effect is exactly the same as taking the central portion of a 35mm negative and using that to produce a standard print. One interesting possibility would be to still have a full viewfinder, with framelines, so you can see outside of the frame, as in a rangefinder. Anyone know if this is the way the Canon and Nikon bodies are designed? j -- -- - Juan J. Buhler | Sr. FX Animator @ PDI | Photos at http://www.jbuhler.com -- - - Juan, We received our Nikon D1H and D1X yesterday afternoon. I will begin playing with them today. The manual states that the viewfinder shows 96% of the frame recorded. César Matamoros II Panama City, Florida - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
Well one problem is that, at least right now, a 6MP camera in a 35mm capable body will be perceived as a professional camera with all the pros and cons that means for the company bringing it out. Not to mention that the top of the market is going to be very fluid when it comes to pixel counts and features. And to be honest Pentax has aimed more for the top of the amateur or semi-pro market for several years because you have to provide logistic support for your cameras if you want to compete and sell at the top of the heap. By aiming a digital more at the PZ-1p/MX-S level you can produce a camera with the kind of advance features you want without having to get into the pixel count race and without having to provide professional services which you don't currently have. Minolta has found out the pitfalls of this when they brought out the Maxxum 9. They can't afford to have mobile support services like Canon and Nikon so they provide the kind of 2nd tier service that gets you fast turnaround when you have a problem. But that's it. Just remember that a digital body as an add-on to a 35mm system camera could get by with 3-4 MP easily at a price that would compete with cameras like the E-10 and Dimage 7. Frankly I'd take a 35mm lens capable body with 3.5 MP over a permanent lens camera with over 5 MP. In fact most of the higher end Minolta users feel the same way. We'd all like a camera with a full size CCD array but if it's going to cost $5K-$7k I'd take something less that fit my lenses in the 3-4 MP range. Doesn't seem to bother the Canon/Nikon guys because the important thing is you get to use the lenses you want. You'd have about the same pixel count as a D30 or D1, but you could make it in the price range of your target consumer, somewhere in the range of the MZ-S. In fact a 3 MP with interpolation to 6MP would be good, like the Fuji, while saving a significant cost over a full 6 MP camera. Kent Gittings -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of aimcompute Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 2:03 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one Bruce wrote: My concern is if you are going to do no better than the competition, and they are more entrenched, how are you going to compete. The motto We're no worse than the rest comes to mind. Agreed. I guess all they want to do is have some offering, no matter what. A full frame CCD was, IMHO, one of the big differences between the Pentax and a D30 or D1. Pentax may be able to sell a lesser model to some of us, but it will *not* lure Canon and Nikon users away. You don't really gain any market share. At best, you may hang on to what you have. But it seems that you are sending the same old signal, we will not compete. Probably a dumb question, but I'll ask it anyway. I think I understand that a perceived advantage to using a full frame CCD was that the CCD captures the entire scene entering the camera thru the lens. Is this correct? It seems to me that the real issue is, do I like the results I get... does the captured scene match my vision through the viewfinder. Does the frame size really matter that much? Tom C. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.mimesweeper.com ** - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital news
On Tuesday, October 23, 2001, at 06:48 AM, lbparis wrote: Yeah, they used to read the list then. They kicked us out because they were afraid that the things we were saying might be mistaken as official Pentax views. I believe, at the time, we were also in the midst of a Kirkland/Mafud (or maybe it was Gregory/the who) flameup that had become pretty nasty. I don't blame 'em. I'm certain that certain Pentax people still monitor the list. Why wouldn't they? It's a free source of perfectly-targeted demographic research material. They'd be insane not to. -Aaron - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
On Tuesday, October 23, 2001, at 02:23 AM, Rob Studdert wrote: Can't say that I'm too fussed on the mechanical build and function of the SS4000, also the Polaroid software is just pathetic, I would really be looking at the new Nikons if I were you. Pssst want to buy a SS4000 cheap :-) I never had any issues with my SS4000...of course, I only used it for about a year before I took the plunge and bought an SS120. Yes, the Polacolor Insight software is clunky, and yes, sometimes the poor thing can't figure out what carrier you have loaded, but the SS4000 does make a great scan. Thank God the SS120 came with SilverFast, though. What are the resolutions and d-maxes of the others? 4000 dpi is a joy to work with, especially for bigger prints. By the way, if anyone in the Toronto/Oakville/Mississauga area wants to see what a 20x30 inch print from a 4000dpi scan (from the SprintScan 120) of a 6x7 Provia 100F transparency looks like, there's one up on the wall now at the store. The detail is just phenomenal...not that I needed the assurance, but this print shows me that I really did make the right decision when I bought this stuff. ;) When I think about it, the $4000 CDN that the SprintScan 120 cost was really a bargain compared to the estimated $10,000 CDN that the 6mp full-frame CCD Pentax digital would have cost. I can process a lot of film for $6000, and the final result, when printed big, is most certainly superior. By the way, anyone looking at an SS120, please note that if you have anything less than 500 megs of RAM, you'll scream and tear your hair out trying to manipulate a full-sized 48-bit scan (for reasons too complex to get into, I was down to 384 megs of RAM for about a week, and lemme tell you, it sucked. Good news is that RAM is cheap -- the computer store next door has 256 sticks for $55 CDN -- and now I'm running north of 700 megs, which is much nicer). -Aaron - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS - FULL STORY from AP 27th OCT.
Dear Mike, On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 02:37:11PM -0500, Mike Johnston wrote: P.S. I have to say that I'm totally NOT sold on the idea that a full-size sensor (meaning 35mm size, 24mm x 36mm) is a good idea. I'm really not sure it is. A smaller sensor size is really a great advantage: it means lenses can be significantly smaller and lighter and significantly faster, and depth of field can be greater for a given angle of view. All these are true advantages. I suspect that 24 x 36mm sensors will prove to be an evolutionary dead end in the long run. Right now we think we want this because it conforms to the old standards. But once digital shakes free of 35mm conventions, the smaller CCD size will seem like just one more natural advantage of digital. I am curious about your comment about increased DOF with a smaller format. I was always under the impression that we get more DOF with 35mm over MF because the typical print magnification is less. Am I missing something more subtle here? Yours sincrely, Frank. -- Francis Tang, Postgraduate Research Student. LFCS, Div. of Informatics, Uni. of Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK. Tel: +44 131 6505185. Fax: +44 131 6677209. Office: 1603, JCMB, KB. Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.dcs.ed.ac.uk/home/fhlt/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
Here's a thought: surely the only reason that the 3MP camera would not be full frame is the distance of the sensor array from the lens. If when designing the 3MP camera the array were place closer to the lens then surely full frame would be achieved. Wouldn't this solve the lens issue, (if not the resolution). I accept that this could mean major design issues such as mirror positioning and a different distance to the focusing screen, but if you are designing the camera from scratch, this may not be such a problem. As I said just a thought and perhaps I haven't thought it through enough... Regards, /\/\ick... ++ || __/) Mick Maguire | | Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (_/) ICQ: 48609010 | \/ | \ /---+ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Pentax Digital NEWS - FULL STORY from AP 27th OCT.
MF print magnification is less than 35mm, so that cant be the reason... -Original Message- From: Francis Tang [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 23 October 2001 14:15 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Pentax Digital NEWS - FULL STORY from AP 27th OCT. Dear Mike, On Mon, Oct 22, 2001 at 02:37:11PM -0500, Mike Johnston wrote: P.S. I have to say that I'm totally NOT sold on the idea that a full-size sensor (meaning 35mm size, 24mm x 36mm) is a good idea. I'm really not sure it is. A smaller sensor size is really a great advantage: it means lenses can be significantly smaller and lighter and significantly faster, and depth of field can be greater for a given angle of view. All these are true advantages. I suspect that 24 x 36mm sensors will prove to be an evolutionary dead end in the long run. Right now we think we want this because it conforms to the old standards. But once digital shakes free of 35mm conventions, the smaller CCD size will seem like just one more natural advantage of digital. I am curious about your comment about increased DOF with a smaller format. I was always under the impression that we get more DOF with 35mm over MF because the typical print magnification is less. Am I missing something more subtle here? Yours sincrely, Frank. -- Francis Tang, Postgraduate Research Student. LFCS, Div. of Informatics, Uni. of Edinburgh, EH9 3JZ, UK. Tel: +44 131 6505185. Fax: +44 131 6677209. Office: 1603, JCMB, KB. Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://www.dcs.ed.ac.uk/home/fhlt/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
I believe that (some of?)the Fuji cameras use a non-rectangular array of sensors (heaxagonal/honeycomb pattern maybe?). This requires them to re-map (interpolate) the data from the sensors to a rectangular pixel pattern. Eric From: Doug Franklin [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Mon, 22 Oct 2001 11:43:01 -0700, Shel Belinkoff wrote: Also, how does Fuji (?) get 6mp from a CCD that is only rated at 3mp? Doesn't that screw with quality, especially with larger prints? Interpolation. The same low-budget method used by a flatbed scanner with 600 dpi optical resolution to get 9600 dpi resolution in software. It takes the 600 dpi image (or 3mp image) and figures out what ought to be between the large pixels it has to get the small pixels it wants. For example, say you're interpolating from 100 dpi to 200 dpi. That means that for each pixel you have, you need to create three more, for a total of four, because four 200 dpi pixels fit underneath each 100 dpi pixel. _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
Trouble is - you would lose either infinity focus or close focus, as your sensor is no longer mounted on the normal plane of focus. -Original Message- From: Mick Maguire [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 23 October 2001 14:26 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one Here's a thought: surely the only reason that the 3MP camera would not be full frame is the distance of the sensor array from the lens. If when designing the 3MP camera the array were place closer to the lens then surely full frame would be achieved. Wouldn't this solve the lens issue, (if not the resolution). I accept that this could mean major design issues such as mirror positioning and a different distance to the focusing screen, but if you are designing the camera from scratch, this may not be such a problem. As I said just a thought and perhaps I haven't thought it through enough... Regards, /\/\ick... ++ || __/) Mick Maguire | | Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (_/) ICQ: 48609010 | \/ | \ /---+ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
You have to remember that with the smaller CCD array you basically cut out any edge distortion the lens may have. This is a bonus especially with wide angle lenses. I think this was the reason Sigma brought out the 15-30 EX zoom. However the multiplication ratio of these cameras vary some because some ,like the Nikon D1 series, comes in bodies with 2 different arrays with different sizes and therefore different multiplication ratios. Most fall in the 1.2-1.5 range. Kent Gittings -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Matamoros, Cesar A. Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 3:09 PM To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]' Subject: RE: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one The 'magnification' factor is one of the reasons I have not truly looked at a digital SLR. I have started to enjoy wide angle shooting and would not relish having to get a 17mm to get a 25mm. And I have heard of the problems with distortion with the 17mms. People have corrected this with photo s/w but again something I do not relish doing. Another aspect of the 'magnification' factor is that with only the central part of the lens being used people have been finding they have to really watch the shutter speed as any motion is more noticeable since the image is enlarged more to get the same size image as with a non-digital SLR. Though people point out that you are using the 'sweet spot' of lenses if you are not using toward the edges. By the end of next month I should have the possibility to begin spending some time with a Nikon D1x and D1H here at work. I am still looking at Pentax since most of my lenses are in that system and I love the glass I have. César Matamoros II Panama City, Florida -Original Message- From: Bruce Dayton [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 2:54 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one Currently, no SLR on the shelf from Nikon or Canon has a full frame CCD. Telephoto lenses are also multiplied. If you shoot lots of telephoto, this could be an advantage. The point I was making was that part of the reason to use Pentax is that I already have the lenses. But if the CCD isn't full frame, then I will have to do some changes on the wide end. If I am going to make changes, it gives me more reason to look seriously at the competition. Bruce Dayton - Original Message - From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 11:43 AM Subject: Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one Do other quality digital cameras offer FF CCD that can be used with the lenses from their SLRs? What happens with a telephoto lens - is, for example, a 300mm lens longer or shorter when used with a less than FF CCD? Also, how does Fuji (?) get 6mp from a CCD that is only rated at 3mp? Doesn't that screw with quality, especially with larger prints? Bruce Dayton wrote: The big advantage to a full frame CCD is that our existing wide angle lenses will remain as such. Nothing quite so exciting as having your 20mm behave like it was a 35mm. So, if I have to buy some new lenses (I like wides), then why buy Pentax. It seems to me, that lens compatibility with my *existing* lenses is a big reason to consider a digital Pentax. So now I look at a company who appears not to want to compete in this arena coupled with me having to revamp part of my system. Sure pushes me to want to look at competitors who are competing and providing equipment at a much faster rate. -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.mimesweeper.com ** - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
You know the real people who seem to be benefitting from this digital whatnot are Sigma. This is all due to the smaller sensors. Apparently none of the camera manufacturers make any money out of the bodies, but Sigma sell s**tloads of wide angle lenses now. I keep reading user reviews which say they couldnt afford the OEM version, but the Sigma is great. They dont have the development costs for doing anything digitalwise, they just make cheap wide angles and super wide angles which people need. The OEM versions are soo expensive that the manufacturers MUST be losing lens business as well as not making enough money on the bodies to cover the development costs. If pentax brings out a 'non-full-frame' digital SLR, how many people will be buying the Sigma 15mm, or the 17-35mm, or the 15.30mm? PEntax is either too expensive or they dont have a wide enough competitor, so they will lose lens sales. For this reason I think they should have waited until they could do full frame. I want an FA24/2, but I am not spending that much for what will be a 35mm equivalent!! Never mind the number of pixels (to a degree), BUT GIVE US FULL FRAME!!! - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Pentax Digital NEWS - FULL STORY from AP 27th OCT.
Correct. The chip technology itself is always changing which generally requires totally different technology around it to make it work. For sharpness CCD chips are going from front illumination to rear illumination because it eliminates the illumination hardware in front of the CCD pixel which the light has to filter through. However rear illumination has its own physical difficulties because to reach the same light recording levels the separation of the light has to be as little as possible, meaning the CCD array needs to be only around 10 microns thick. The only upgrades I've seen for CCD hardware is in the design and manufacture of a new version of the same chip array with some new performance like increased sensitivity to various light levels and reduced noise. Like going from the regular to the Kodak E CCD chips. Kent Gittings -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Mike Johnston Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 1:40 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Pentax Digital NEWS - FULL STORY from AP 27th OCT. Frits wrote: If the one that we already saw is upgradable, would it be possible it would hit the market with a smaller CCD to begin with? That might be an interesting upgrade path. The possibility of an earlier camera being upgradeable is very close to zero. --Mike - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.mimesweeper.com ** - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
Also the focus ability of the lens depends on the registration distance to the film plane. All the lenses would no longer focus at the normal ranges. Kent Gittings -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Mick Maguire Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 9:26 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one Here's a thought: surely the only reason that the 3MP camera would not be full frame is the distance of the sensor array from the lens. If when designing the 3MP camera the array were place closer to the lens then surely full frame would be achieved. Wouldn't this solve the lens issue, (if not the resolution). I accept that this could mean major design issues such as mirror positioning and a different distance to the focusing screen, but if you are designing the camera from scratch, this may not be such a problem. As I said just a thought and perhaps I haven't thought it through enough... Regards, /\/\ick... ++ || __/) Mick Maguire | | Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (_/) ICQ: 48609010 | \/ | \ /---+ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . ** This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the system manager. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.mimesweeper.com ** - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Matamoros, Cesar A. wrote: We received our Nikon D1H and D1X yesterday afternoon. I will begin playing with them today. The manual states that the viewfinder shows 96% of the frame recorded. Ouch. That means a *really* tiny viewfinder then... j -- --- Juan J. Buhler | Sr. FX Animator @ PDI | Photos at http://www.jbuhler.com --- - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
You forgot the small matter of focus. :) --graywolf - Original Message - From: Mick Maguire [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2001 9:25 AM Subject: RE: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one Here's a thought: surely the only reason that the 3MP camera would not be full frame is the distance of the sensor array from the lens. If when designing the 3MP camera the array were place closer to the lens then surely full frame would be achieved. Wouldn't this solve the lens issue, (if not the resolution). I accept that this could mean major design issues such as mirror positioning and a different distance to the focusing screen, but if you are designing the camera from scratch, this may not be such a problem. As I said just a thought and perhaps I haven't thought it through enough... Regards, /\/\ick... ++ || __/) Mick Maguire | | Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (_/) ICQ: 48609010 | \/ | \ /---+ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
Juan J. Buhler [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Matamoros, Cesar A. wrote: We received our Nikon D1H and D1X yesterday afternoon. I will begin playing with them today. The manual states that the viewfinder shows 96% of the frame recorded. Ouch. That means a *really* tiny viewfinder then... No, I think perhaps you're confusing image coverage with image magnification. 96% coverage (which is what's being discussed here) just means that 4% of what's recorded by the CCD will be cropped from the view in the viewfinder. The remaining 96% can be *magnified* (or reduced or presented life size). -- Mark Roberts www.robertstech.com - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS - FULL STORY from AP 27th OCT.
Does anyone think that someone from Pentax reads this list!!!??? Can I place my order right now? Cotty ___ Personal email traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] MacAds traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Check out the UK Macintosh ads www.macads.co.uk - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
So we go from 6MP release this year to 3MP first glimpse next year (and probably released 2003!). This is not good Pentax!! -Original Message- From: Cotty [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: 22 October 2001 16:52 To: Pentax List Subject: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one News in AP regarding the Pentax Digital. Scrapping launch of Pentax 6 MP digital slr in favour of lower-end digital k mount slr more along the lines of the Canon D30 and Fuji S1. First appearance will probably be next year's PMA. Full story soon - It'll take me a few minutes to type it all in... Cotty ___ Personal email traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] MacAds traffic to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Check out the UK Macintosh ads www.macads.co.uk - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS - FULL STORY from AP 27th OCT.
Interesting I guess it makes sense. Up to now. digital photography has never really been about quality. I find the Fuji Super CCD technology somewhat of a joke. You can't end up with more raw material than you start with. Tom C. - Original Message - From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 10:11 AM Subject: Pentax Digital NEWS - FULL STORY from AP 27th OCT. From Amateur Photographer (27 Oct): 'Pentax set to scrap plan for flagship digital launch' 'Pentax is likely to shelve plans to launch a 6 MP flagship digital camera in favour of a 'lower-end' SLR to be unveiled next year. 'Pentax UK's John Dickins admitted that Pentax wants to move away from the 'cost no object, best quality possible' area of the digital arena because, he said, 'things change so fast we have to change direction'. He claimed: 'What seems to be happening is that cameras like the Canon D30 and the Fuji S1 Pro are creating much more consumer interest than cameras at the higher end of the scale'. The Fuji S1 Pro uses the company's Super CCD technology to increase the image file size to 6.1 megapixels. The camera itself uses a 3.34 million pixel CCD. 'Commenting on the expected launch of a new 'consumer' SLR next year, he added: 'I don't know the exact details but what we are talking about is something interesting like the Fuji S1 Pro or the Canon D30. 'The announcement comes a week after [Amateur Photographer] reported on delays in launching the high-end camera, codenamed MR-52, which had been due to appear in UK stores last month. 'When it was first announced at last year's Photokina trade show in Germany the camera was billed by Pentax as a 'high-spec' model based on the company's 35mm SLRs. It was to be compatible with Pentax K-mount lenses and to use a digital chip jointly developed with Philips. 'However, Dickins denied that Pentax was lowering it's target market. 'We are just broadening it,' he insisted. 'Though he did not know when the camera will be out in the UK, Dickins confirmed it would probably make it's first appearance at next year's PMA show in the US. 'Pentax also recently ditched plans to launch a 3.43 MP SLR to be called the El-3000, a camera it developed with Hewlett-Packard. Instead, as [Amateur Photographer] reported last week, Pentax wanted to concentrate on launching the Optio 330 digital compact because it felt that the 'ease of use' and small size of the Optio would more fully meet customer needs.' ** Amateur Photographer is a really great magazine and I subscribe and I love it to bits, so please don't sue me for reproducing that report!!! Honest!!! - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
Rob Brigham wrote: So we go from 6MP release this year to 3MP first glimpse next year (and probably released 2003!). This is not good Pentax!! Plus the ccd is probably not full-frame. tv - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
This might be a good thing!! a decent d30 class digital SLR may get more K-mount development going. --- tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rob Brigham wrote: So we go from 6MP release this year to 3MP first glimpse next year (and probably released 2003!). This is not good Pentax!! Plus the ccd is probably not full-frame. tv - Get your free @yahoo.ca address at http://mail.yahoo.ca - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
My concern is if you are going to do no better than the competition, and they are more entrenched, how are you going to compete. The motto We're no worse than the rest comes to mind. A full frame CCD was, IMHO, one of the big differences between the Pentax and a D30 or D1. Pentax may be able to sell a lesser model to some of us, but it will *not* lure Canon and Nikon users away. You don't really gain any market share. At best, you may hang on to what you have. But it seems that you are sending the same old signal, we will not compete. Gives all of use considering digital more reason to examine Nikon and Canon offerings. Bruce Dayton - Original Message - From: Brendan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 10:18 AM Subject: Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one This might be a good thing!! a decent d30 class digital SLR may get more K-mount development going. --- tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rob Brigham wrote: So we go from 6MP release this year to 3MP first glimpse next year (and probably released 2003!). This is not good Pentax!! Plus the ccd is probably not full-frame. tv - Get your free @yahoo.ca address at http://mail.yahoo.ca - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org . - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
Bruce wrote: My concern is if you are going to do no better than the competition, and they are more entrenched, how are you going to compete. The motto We're no worse than the rest comes to mind. Agreed. I guess all they want to do is have some offering, no matter what. A full frame CCD was, IMHO, one of the big differences between the Pentax and a D30 or D1. Pentax may be able to sell a lesser model to some of us, but it will *not* lure Canon and Nikon users away. You don't really gain any market share. At best, you may hang on to what you have. But it seems that you are sending the same old signal, we will not compete. Probably a dumb question, but I'll ask it anyway. I think I understand that a perceived advantage to using a full frame CCD was that the CCD captures the entire scene entering the camera thru the lens. Is this correct? It seems to me that the real issue is, do I like the results I get... does the captured scene match my vision through the viewfinder. Does the frame size really matter that much? Tom C. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
Good point but if Pentax does We're no worse than the rest but it costs less ( we hope ). --- Bruce Dayton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My concern is if you are going to do no better than the competition, and they are more entrenched, how are you going to compete. The motto We're no worse than the rest comes to mind. A full frame CCD was, IMHO, one of the big differences between the Pentax and a D30 or D1. Pentax may be able to sell a lesser model to some of us, but it will *not* lure Canon and Nikon users away. You don't really gain any market share. At best, you may hang on to what you have. But it seems that you are sending the same old signal, we will not compete. Gives all of use considering digital more reason to examine Nikon and Canon offerings. Bruce Dayton - Original Message - From: Brendan [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 10:18 AM Subject: Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one This might be a good thing!! a decent d30 class digital SLR may get more K-mount development going. --- tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rob Brigham wrote: So we go from 6MP release this year to 3MP first glimpse next year (and probably released 2003!). This is not good Pentax!! Plus the ccd is probably not full-frame. tv - Get your free @yahoo.ca address at http://mail.yahoo.ca Get your free @yahoo.ca address at http://mail.yahoo.ca - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
The big advantage to a full frame CCD is that our existing wide angle lenses will remain as such. Nothing quite so exciting as having your 20mm behave like it was a 35mm. So, if I have to buy some new lenses (I like wides), then why buy Pentax. It seems to me, that lens compatibility with my *existing* lenses is a big reason to consider a digital Pentax. So now I look at a company who appears not to want to compete in this arena coupled with me having to revamp part of my system. Sure pushes me to want to look at competitors who are competing and providing equipment at a much faster rate. Bruce Dayton - Original Message - From: aimcompute [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 11:03 AM Subject: Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one snip Probably a dumb question, but I'll ask it anyway. I think I understand that a perceived advantage to using a full frame CCD was that the CCD captures the entire scene entering the camera thru the lens. Is this correct? It seems to me that the real issue is, do I like the results I get... does the captured scene match my vision through the viewfinder. Does the frame size really matter that much? Tom C. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
aimcompute wrote: Bruce wrote: Probably a dumb question, but I'll ask it anyway. I think I understand that a perceived advantage to using a full frame CCD was that the CCD captures the entire scene entering the camera thru the lens. Is this correct? Nope, The full CCD means that your 28-70 mm lens is still 28-70 mm. If CCD is smaller than 35 mm frame that means your 28 mm lens is longer than that. There is a multiplication factor to get the 35 mm equivalent focal distance. The main disadvantage of that is, if you want a 28 mm equivalent you probably needs a 17 mm lens. Alex -- --- Alexandre A. P. Suaide, PhD mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] STAR/EMC group Phone: (WSU) (313) 577-5419 Wayne State University (BNL) (631) 344-7635 --- - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
The 'magnification' factor is one of the reasons I have not truly looked at a digital SLR. I have started to enjoy wide angle shooting and would not relish having to get a 17mm to get a 25mm. And I have heard of the problems with distortion with the 17mms. People have corrected this with photo s/w but again something I do not relish doing. Another aspect of the 'magnification' factor is that with only the central part of the lens being used people have been finding they have to really watch the shutter speed as any motion is more noticeable since the image is enlarged more to get the same size image as with a non-digital SLR. Though people point out that you are using the 'sweet spot' of lenses if you are not using toward the edges. By the end of next month I should have the possibility to begin spending some time with a Nikon D1x and D1H here at work. I am still looking at Pentax since most of my lenses are in that system and I love the glass I have. César Matamoros II Panama City, Florida -Original Message- From: Bruce Dayton [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 2:54 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one Currently, no SLR on the shelf from Nikon or Canon has a full frame CCD. Telephoto lenses are also multiplied. If you shoot lots of telephoto, this could be an advantage. The point I was making was that part of the reason to use Pentax is that I already have the lenses. But if the CCD isn't full frame, then I will have to do some changes on the wide end. If I am going to make changes, it gives me more reason to look seriously at the competition. Bruce Dayton - Original Message - From: Shel Belinkoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 11:43 AM Subject: Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one Do other quality digital cameras offer FF CCD that can be used with the lenses from their SLRs? What happens with a telephoto lens - is, for example, a 300mm lens longer or shorter when used with a less than FF CCD? Also, how does Fuji (?) get 6mp from a CCD that is only rated at 3mp? Doesn't that screw with quality, especially with larger prints? Bruce Dayton wrote: The big advantage to a full frame CCD is that our existing wide angle lenses will remain as such. Nothing quite so exciting as having your 20mm behave like it was a 35mm. So, if I have to buy some new lenses (I like wides), then why buy Pentax. It seems to me, that lens compatibility with my *existing* lenses is a big reason to consider a digital Pentax. So now I look at a company who appears not to want to compete in this arena coupled with me having to revamp part of my system. Sure pushes me to want to look at competitors who are competing and providing equipment at a much faster rate. -- Shel Belinkoff mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
Shel Belinkoff asked: Do other quality digital cameras offer FF CCD that can be used with the lenses from their SLRs? No - all current digital SLRs built around 35mm bodies have sensors smaller than full frame. This gives a focal length multiplier for all lenses - somewhere between 1.3 and 1.5 is typical for the most recent modles (more on earlier models). What happens with a telephoto lens - is, for example, a 300mm lens longer or shorter when used with a less than FF CCD? Longer, effectively. The lens produces an image of exactly the same size, but only the central portion of that image falls on the digital sensor. The effect is exactly the same as taking the central portion of a 35mm negative and using that to produce a standard print. The one good thing is that the f-stop remains the same; that 300mm/f2.8, used on the latest bodies, acts like a 400mm/2.8. (Caveat: on some digital bodies there was an absolute maximum aperture limit from the internal camera design, so some lenses can not be used at their full aperture. I don't believe any of the recent bodies suffer from this problem). Also, how does Fuji (?) get 6mp from a CCD that is only rated at 3mp? By interpolation (a less charitable answer would be 'by lying'). Doesn't that screw with quality, especially with larger prints? Yes (according to reviews posted on the digital camera review sites). -- John Francis . . . . . . . . . . (650) 565-4427 MyWay.com 1070 Arastradero Rd, Palo Alto,CA 94306 Hello. My name is Darth Vader. I am your Father. Prepare to die. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS - FULL STORY from AP 27th OCT.
Cotty wrote: News in AP regarding the Pentax Digital. Scrapping launch of Pentax 6 MP digital slr in favour of lower-end digital k mount slr more along the lines of the Canon D30 and Fuji S1. First appearance will probably be next year's PMA. And then in another post: Does anyone think that someone from Pentax reads this list!!!??? Of course. They're smart folks. I have reason to believe that Pentax is not SCRAPPING the 6-mp 1:1 size SLR, but rather delaying it. If I'm right in my supposition that PART of the reason for developing the MZ-S was to have a new modern body on which to base digital SLRs, then the RD expended certainly represents a major investment even for a company the size of Pentax, and a higher risk than the typical introduction of a new 35mm SLR (even a high-end one). Pentax is certainly researching the market and attempting to adapt to the market as carefully and intelligently as possible. What Pentax is telling us with this latest news is that it's seeing that ultimate digital SLRs in a fast-changing market are not repaying development costs, and most consumer have a greater interest in more affordable equipment. Also, I suspect there are frustrating delays in the perfecting of the 6-mp chip. Pentax has both a well-designed SLR camera base AND a good 3- and 4-mp sensors NOW (and may 5 mp, who knows?), so there's really no reason for it to sit on its hands and wait, wait, wait, for the vaporware 6-mp version to be ready. It can build and offer for sale a very good medium-level digital system SLR soon, and so it's going to do so. All this smacks of great good sense to me. What they're going to do is release a smaller-CCD-size, LOWER COST, 3-5-mp digital SLR ASAP, and put off MR-42 until both the market and the technology are more stable. I like the idea. What it means for the Pentax loyalist is that we will have a potentially MUCH more affordable digital SLR to cut our teeth on, technology we buy now will be more reliable and more tried-and-true, and we will still be able to use all our existing lenses and system accessories. All of this represents an educated guess on my part. --Mike J. P.S. I have to say that I'm totally NOT sold on the idea that a full-size sensor (meaning 35mm size, 24mm x 36mm) is a good idea. I'm really not sure it is. A smaller sensor size is really a great advantage: it means lenses can be significantly smaller and lighter and significantly faster, and depth of field can be greater for a given angle of view. All these are true advantages. I suspect that 24 x 36mm sensors will prove to be an evolutionary dead end in the long run. Right now we think we want this because it conforms to the old standards. But once digital shakes free of 35mm conventions, the smaller CCD size will seem like just one more natural advantage of digital. P.P.S. I've requested a sample Optio 330/430 from Pentax for a review (through a friend who works for Pentax), and if I end up getting one I'll post ongoing updates of my findings here in advance of the published review. P.P.S. In issue #3 of The 37th Frame newsletter (www.37thframe.com), I'm going to be presenting a review of the Canon S800 photo printer (an expanded review will also appear on photo.net), and if I can afford to I'll be including an original S800 inkjet print in the newsletter so subscribers can see with their own eyes. If I can get the necessary permissions, I hope to make the sample a Pentax Optio 330 or 430 picture, and thus kill two birds, you might say, with one stone, since the sample picture could then act to augment a future Optio review. We'll see if this all works out. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
Bruce Dayton wrote: The big advantage to a full frame CCD is that our existing wide angle lenses will remain as such. Nothing quite so exciting as having your 20mm behave like it was a 35mm. So, if I have to buy some new lenses (I like wides), then why buy Pentax. It seems to me, that lens compatibility with my *existing* lenses is a big reason to consider a digital Pentax. This is all true...however, Canon and Nikon user have been happy to buy up D30's and D1's, so I guess Pentax believes the same of Pentax users. Apparently the smaller frame size sells ok, and I guess Pentax thinks they can make some cash. So now I look at a company who appears not to want to compete in this arena coupled with me having to revamp part of my system. Sure pushes me to want to look at competitors who are competing and providing equipment at a much faster rate. I can see your point. I too am disappointed that the full frame ccd will not be made available when they said it would. Just out of curiousity, would you have paid $7000 for the full frame version? I don't think I would have unless it had good sensitivity down around EI 800 or 1600. BTW, as I understand it, the full frame version hasn't been scrapped, it's been delayed. tv - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
The price tag would be high. Could I afford one? Good question. I, too, would be somewhat concerned with low light performance. The real disappointment is not just that it is delayed, but I keep seeing a pattern. Rather than driving the market, Pentax is only responding to market changes. Response takes time. So they are always a day late and a dollar short as they say. While I really like my MZ-S, I could of had an F100 quite a while ago or an N80 more recently or a D1 or D1 follow ons, etc. In the meantime, I can read about what Pentax might do. To start and stop and start and stop, doesn't get much product to market. Sorry for the rant. I just worked for the last 10 years for a company that was always a day late and a dollar short on their product. It was frustrating to never be ahead of the curve and to always explain why being behind was a *good* thing. There is a difference between just surviving and actually thriving. Bruce Dayton - Original Message - From: tom [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, October 22, 2001 3:43 PM Subject: Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one Snip Bruce wrote: So now I look at a company who appears not to want to compete in this arena coupled with me having to revamp part of my system. Sure pushes me to want to look at competitors who are competing and providing equipment at a much faster rate. Tom wrote: I can see your point. I too am disappointed that the full frame ccd will not be made available when they said it would. Just out of curiousity, would you have paid $7000 for the full frame version? I don't think I would have unless it had good sensitivity down around EI 800 or 1600. BTW, as I understand it, the full frame version hasn't been scrapped, it's been delayed. tv - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS - FULL STORY from AP 27th OCT.
Mike wrote... snip P.S. I have to say that I'm totally NOT sold on the idea that a full-size sensor (meaning 35mm size, 24mm x 36mm) is a good idea. I'm really not sure it is. A smaller sensor size is really a great advantage: it means lenses can be significantly smaller and lighter and significantly faster, and depth of field can be greater for a given angle of view. All these are true advantages. I suspect that 24 x 36mm sensors will prove to be an evolutionary dead end in the long run. Right now we think we want this because it conforms to the old standards. But once digital shakes free of 35mm conventions, the smaller CCD size will seem like just one more natural advantage of digital. snip That was, in part, where I was coming from with my earlier ignorant post. The only real reason for wanting a full frame CCD is so that the resulting image size matches 1-to-1 with film (and as explained to me, that lenses render the image the same as film with the same focal length lenses). When we get down to it, it's not the size of the 35mm frame that renders a high quality photo or not (stating the obvious... sorry). It's the overall quality of the lenses and recording device, regardless of the dimensions of the frame size. Certainly a CCD of higher density is overall more important than it's dimensions. I can certainly understand the desirability of a digital body that performs like it's 35mm counterpart using the same lenses. In the end though, the resulting image matters more than anything else. When I pick up a digital camera, I'm not paying attention to focal length really. I'm paying attention to what I see in the viewfinder. Tom C. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
Ah... that's what I thought. only the central portion of that image falls on the digital sensor. The effect is exactly the same as taking the central portion of a 35mm negative and using that to produce a standard print. Tom C. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
On Mon, 22 Oct 2001 15:43:35 -0700, tom wrote: This is all true...however, Canon and Nikon user have been happy to buy up D30's and D1's, so I guess Pentax believes the same of Pentax users. Apparently the smaller frame size sells ok, and I guess Pentax thinks they can make some cash. I like the idea too, I'd rather have a 4MP K-mount digital SLR for $2000 to $3000 in a few months then the 6MP full-frame for maybe $7000 now ... (and a factor of 1.3 in focal-length would suit me, using more tele than wide :-) Build quality and speed (frame-rate, shutter-delay etc) DO matter though ... Regards, Jan van Wijk - Jan van Wijk; www.fsys.demon.nl - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS - FULL S TORY from AP 27th OCT.
Mike wrote: All this smacks of great good sense to me. What they're going to do is release a smaller-CCD-size, LOWER COST, 3-5-mp digital SLR ASAP, and put off MR-42 until both the market and the technology are more stable. I like the idea. What it means for the Pentax loyalist is that we will have a potentially MUCH more affordable digital SLR to cut our teeth on, technology we buy now will be more reliable and more tried-and-true, and we will still be able to use all our existing lenses and system accessories. I certainly hope you're correct. Right now I'm still *furious* at this latest development. I spent several thousand dollars on equipment this year, largely based on the confidence that the digital SLR was coming and what I bought would be compatible. This sudden change, whatever the rationale, is inexcusable. Yes, digital technology is advancing at a tremendous rate and the market for it isn't stable. But in October of 2001 they can't really expect me to believe that this is NEWS to them and that it's taken them by surprise. P.S. I have to say that I'm totally NOT sold on the idea that a full-size sensor (meaning 35mm size, 24mm x 36mm) is a good idea. I am. At least if your statement that we will still be able to use all our existing lenses is important. It is to me and I love wide angles, so I'd be totally screwed by a smaller CCD. Hell, I'm totally pissed off just *thinking* about my recently acquired Pentax 80-200/2.8 becoming a 90-260 (I almost bought the Sigma because it went down to 70mm rather than 80). I'm really not sure it is. A smaller sensor size is really a great advantage: it means lenses can be significantly smaller and lighter and significantly faster, and depth of field can be greater for a given angle of view. All these are true advantages. I suspect that 24 x 36mm sensors will prove to be an evolutionary dead end in the long run. Right now we think we want this because it conforms to the old standards. No, I want it because it makes all my lenses (an investment of several thousand dollars) compatible: my 20mm will still give me the angle of view of a 20mm. But once digital shakes free of 35mm conventions, the smaller CCD size will seem like just one more natural advantage of digital. Having the *option* of using a smaller size CCD would certainly be an advantage. But one of the natural advantages of Pentax is backwards and forwards lens compatibility and I don't think having a 15mm lens act like a 22mm really qualifies. That said, if Pentax doesn't have *some* kind of digital SLR on the market by spring I think they'll have missed the boat for good. -- Mark Roberts www.robertstech.com - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Pentax Digital NEWS - FULL STORY from AP 27th OCT.
Your order for the ditched 6MB or for the new one with the smaller CCD? I am not sure how to take this news. Perhaps it means the camera is more affordable? If the one that we already saw is upgradable, would it be possible it would hit the market with a smaller CCD to begin with? That might be an interesting upgrade path. However, before someone wants to buy the camera with the smaller CCD with this upgrade path in mind, he needs to be sure Pentax will have the upgrade available sometime in the future, and not ditch it. Is this all the information we have? No one with inside knowledge from Pentax? Where is Pål now we need him? Frits Wüthrich Cotty wonders: Does anyone think that someone from Pentax reads this list!!!??? Can I place my order right now? Cotty - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
Bruce Dayton wrote: The price tag would be high. Could I afford one? Good question. I, too, would be somewhat concerned with low light performance. The real disappointment is not just that it is delayed, but I keep seeing a pattern. Rather than driving the market, Pentax is only responding to market changes. Response takes time. So they are always a day late and a dollar short as they say. I see your point, but I kind of look at their product line as a whole. If you factor in the medium format stuff, they're actually pretty active. Plus I'd say the limited line is sort ahead of the market. At least they're not reacting to anything I know of... Anyway, Pentax is a pretty small company, as I understand it. tv - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
Jan van Wijk wrote: On Mon, 22 Oct 2001 15:43:35 -0700, tom wrote: This is all true...however, Canon and Nikon user have been happy to buy up D30's and D1's, so I guess Pentax believes the same of Pentax users. Apparently the smaller frame size sells ok, and I guess Pentax thinks they can make some cash. I like the idea too, I'd rather have a 4MP K-mount digital SLR for $2000 to $3000 in a few months then the 6MP full-frame for maybe $7000 now ... I didn't say I liked it, I just suspect there's probably a reason for their decision. I can't believe Pentax could stay in business this long making dumb decisions. (and a factor of 1.3 in focal-length would suit me, using more tele than wide :-) I'm a wide guy, but I'd be happy to see a FA 14mm to match the thing. ;) Of course they need to release the FA 645 25mm fisheye and 66 Rangefinder first. tv - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
Jan van Wijk remarked: I like the idea too, I'd rather have a 4MP K-mount digital SLR for $2000 to $3000 in a few months (or, more realistically, in probably around a year) than the 6MP full-frame for maybe $7000 now ... That's pretty much what I've been saying for the last six months, too. Let's face it - a digital camera becomes obsolete extremely quickly. It's bad enough if a $2000 camera turns into a $2000 paperweight in a few years, but how many of us can write off $7000 in that same time? Perhaps, once the digital camera market matures, we'll see cameras that last a while (perhaps not the 25+ years some of us are getting from out old manual bodies, but at least something in the 5-10 year range). But at present the digital camera bodies aren't quite good enough for that. They're getting good enough to be used for quite a few purposes, but with a digital body you are at best stuck with the level of technology current when the camera was built (and, to be realistic, liable to find things deteriorating as the sensor ages; pixels will fail, and the sensitivity will probably decrease). While some things on manual cameras are limiting (the 1/1000 top end speed of my MX occasionally causes me a few problems) not all of the technology is embedded in the camera; I'm getting better pictures today than I was back in 1976 because I'm able to take advantage of improvements in film emulsions. A digital camera won't be able to take advantage of improvements in sensor technology (and before any one suggests it: user-upgradable digital camera bodies aren't going to be cost effective - by the time you've changed all the expensive stuff like the sensor, memory, processors data paths, you might as well get a whole brand new box to put the pieces in). So until the sensor technology ceases to be the limiting factor in the quality of digital images we can expect to see the cameras continuing to become obsolete at around the current rate. -- John Francis . . . . . . . . . . (650) 565-4427 MyWay.com 1070 Arastradero Rd, Palo Alto,CA 94306 Hello. My name is Darth Vader. I am your Father. Prepare to die. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS
P.P.S. I've requested a sample Optio 330/430 from Pentax for a review (through a friend who works for Pentax), and if I end up getting one I'll post ongoing updates of my findings here in advance of the published review. My brother bought one and he let me play with it last Friday for about 30 minutes. It is pretty impressive in size and quality feel. Very tiny and seems very sturdy. It does get a little warm along the front side in one area. I have nothing to compare it to, but it certainly is no stinker. I was fairly impressed with the quality of the zoom lens. I found it strange how I had no desire to put my eye up to the viewfinder and just looked at the LCD on the back to frame the shot. It was very easy to get the picture onto a tv screen. P.P.S. In issue #3 of The 37th Frame newsletter (www.37thframe.com), I'm going to What happened to the second issue? Did that already get sent out? dave ___ Send a cool gift with your E-Card http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/ - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
On Mon, 22 Oct 2001, John Francis wrote: Longer, effectively. The lens produces an image of exactly the same size, but only the central portion of that image falls on the digital sensor. The effect is exactly the same as taking the central portion of a 35mm negative and using that to produce a standard print. One interesting possibility would be to still have a full viewfinder, with framelines, so you can see outside of the frame, as in a rangefinder. Anyone know if this is the way the Canon and Nikon bodies are designed? j -- --- Juan J. Buhler | Sr. FX Animator @ PDI | Photos at http://www.jbuhler.com --- - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
RE: Pentax Digital NEWS - FULL STORY from AP 27th OCT.
Mark Roberts fumed: I certainly hope you're correct. Right now I'm still *furious* at this latest development. I spent several thousand dollars on equipment this year, largely based on the confidence that the digital SLR was coming and what I bought would be compatible. Gambling on just when the cutting edge of the technology curve will produce real products in the marketplace is a risky business. And it's not just Pentax that have slipped the product schedule (which was never an official Pentax schedule, anyway); Contax are said to be having similar problems with their full-frame sensor. We, the Pentax users, feel this pain more deeply than Canon/Nikon users because we don't have any alternative K-mount digital body to tide us over until the eventual high-end bodies become reality. -- John Francis . . . . . . . . . . (650) 565-4427 MyWay.com 1070 Arastradero Rd, Palo Alto,CA 94306 Hello. My name is Darth Vader. I am your Father. Prepare to die. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
No, I don't think so. It'll be at least a 4MP, and probably a 5MP camera. It's really too late already for anything as small as 3MP. Len --- Oh, this is very bad news. Pentax is again playing catch-up on last year's technology. They could have been ahead of the pack with the digital MZ-S. Instead (in two years or so) we'll get something about 3 megapixels that will turn all of our lenses into telephotos. Well, it'll be good for sports photographers. Joe - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
On Tue, 23 Oct 2001, Rob Studdert wrote: But at least a flat-bed or film scanner scans the three primary colours for each absolute pixel whereas in a digital camera the CCD is masked by a matrix of colour filters ie for every cluster of four pixels there are a red, blue and two green sensitive CCD pixels. I would totally go for a digital camera that can only do BW, and doesn't have to use this kind of filters. I guess there won't be a market for such a thing, though... j -- --- Juan J. Buhler | Sr. FX Animator @ PDI | Photos at http://www.jbuhler.com --- - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
On Tue, 23 Oct 2001 10:37:57 +1000, Rob Studdert wrote: [...] in a digital camera the CCD is masked by a matrix of colour filters ie for every cluster of four pixels there are a red, blue and two green sensitive CCD pixels. These sensors and the surrounding ones are used to interpolate the actual colour of the pixels in the output file [...] I wasn't even going to get into that. The questions in my mind are 1) Can I rely on color fidelity with this sort of undersampling? 2) How does the absolute resolution of the captured image compare between this undersampling and the full sampling performed by, e.g., a flatbed or film scanner. TTYL, DougF - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
On 22 Oct 2001, at 21:13, Doug Franklin wrote: On Tue, 23 Oct 2001 10:37:57 +1000, Rob Studdert wrote: 2) How does the absolute resolution of the captured image compare between this undersampling and the full sampling performed by, e.g., a flatbed or film scanner. Well we can only postulate if we aren't in the business but I would bet that there ain't much chance of seeing 48bit (or 12/14 bits per colour plus padding) too soon. This means that for the mean time, there will be a broadening gap between the quality of a good film scan vs the output of a digital camera most notably in the areas of subtle gradation such as cloudy skies. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications.html - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
Bruce Dayton wrote: My concern is if you are going to do no better than the competition, and they are more entrenched, how are you going to compete. The motto We're no worse than the rest comes to mind. A full frame CCD was, IMHO, one of the big differences between the Pentax and a D30 or D1. Pentax may be able to sell a lesser model to some of us, but it will *not* lure Canon and Nikon users away. You don't really gain any market share. At best, you may hang on to what you have. But it seems that you are sending the same old signal, we will not compete. Gives all of use considering digital more reason to examine Nikon and Canon offerings. It's sad to say, but I cannot imagine a company the size of Pentax being able to one-up companies like Nikon and Canon. I have always looked at Pentax as a manufacturer that learns a lot from their competition and improves upon them... eventually... Isaac Bruce Dayton - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
Chaso DeChaso wrote: Wasn't there a time when Pentax actually cared about being a leader? Are they now content with always following (more and more distantly), at best offering products close to the others and cheaper? This would be sad. If they simply don't have the might to compete against N and C* anymore, at least they could do one thing really well - in the digital realm, this could have been the full-frame CCD SLR. If this could have been done, Nikon, Canon, or Kodak would have already released it. Pentax is at a huge disadvantage in the fact that they are almost completely reliant on other manufacturers to supply chips. Kodak and Canon can make their own and Nikon has dedicated enough money to stay ahead of the curve. I for one saw the writing on the wall after the zillionth delay of the Pentax and Contax cameras... Isaac Is Pentax to become the next Contax, who was fifteen (or however many) years late with autofocus? Maybe Pentax will release a fantastic digital SLR in 2016 when almost nobody remembers who Pentax is. In any case, they really have to release something serious soon or they'll be wiped off the map. (I don't care about digital products too much, I just want them to stay in business so that they can make lenses and film cameras for a while longer.) That is what this announcement is all about... To show Pentax users that we will have a digital body to use. How many D1 (X.h), D30, and S1 cameras do you think have been sold? I'm willing to bet that the combined sales (in units) of those cameras wouldn't equal a tenth of the ZX-M sales. It was important for Nikon to release the D1 so that they could (re)capture the PJ market, and Canon will try and strike back. But what do companies like Pentax, Minolta, and Olympus have to gain? What they need are strong sales in the mid level markets. The release of a high end and expensive digital body would do nothing but hurt the bottom line of Pentax. Isaac - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS - FULL STORY from AP 27th OCT.
Patrick White wrote: aimcompute writes: I guess it makes sense. Up to now. digital photography has never really been about quality. I find the Fuji Super CCD technology somewhat of a joke. You can't end up with more raw material than you start with. The Nikon D1x uses interpolation in one direction (the width I believe) without any obvious problems. Isaac - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Pentax Digital NEWS! Part one
BH's new digital catalog lists the new Contax N1 which is a 6MP camera and uses new AF lenses (50f1.4 lists for $595). So the 6 MP is here. Canon suprised me by coming out with a 4 MP EOS1D for @ $6,500 list. I use the D30 at work and enjoy using it, especially when my 80-200 f/2.8 becomes a 320 f/2.8, but hate the 20mm now a 32mm. The 1D will have firewire and only a 1.3 lens magnification, but for a street price of $5,000 you still only get a 5.5 x7.5 photo-quality image. The D30 when it first came out sold for $3,000 a year ago. The price has only come down $500 (with a free 1 gig Micro-drive and extra battery), so it is definitly holding its value. I hope Pentax comes out ahead of the pack with a 5 MP SLR since Minolta, Olympus and Sony already have fixed lens cameras available now in this size, and the Sony is less than $1,000. Jay - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
