but the many other MF digitals have a removable/replaceable back
making upgrades easy. However, if Pentax can keep the price low, I see
this as a positive step. The advantage of replacing the whole body is
that you get the benifits of any new technology in focusing etc.
Kevin
On 10/18/06, P. J.
Op Wed, 11 Oct 2006 22:56:57 +0200 schreef frank theriault
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 10/11/06, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think I'll go buy all the used 645 glass. ;-)
Will the 645D have an aperture simulator? ;-)
I know you were kidding, but I actually looked at a 645 and A-lens: they
- Original Message -
From: Lucas Rijnders (Privé)
Subject: Re: 645D estimated street price - unbeleivable it must be a
mistake!
I know you were kidding, but I actually looked at a 645 and A-lens:
they
do appear to have the same setup as the Ka-mount, including the
aperture
So what is the estimated street price???
Pål
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Op Tue, 17 Oct 2006 15:30:32 +0200 schreef Pål Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
So what is the estimated street price???
Some website (something like rangefindermagazine.com) published $2000,-
The same site calls the DA12-24 a fish-eye, so draw your conclusions :o)
--
Regards, Lucas
--
PDML
Op Tue, 17 Oct 2006 15:27:25 +0200 schreef William Robb
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
- Original Message -
From: Lucas Rijnders (Privé)
Subject: Re: 645D estimated street price - unbeleivable it must be a
mistake!
I know you were kidding, but I actually looked at a 645 and A-lens:
they
do
9,000-10,000
Dario
- Original Message -
From: Pål Jensen [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 3:30 PM
Subject: Re: 645D estimated street price - unbeleivable it must be a
mistake!
So what is the estimated street price
On 17/10/06, Lucas Rijnders (Privé) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And control from the body was one step too far at the time? Technically
everything is ready for it, isn't it?
Even the original P645 offered aperture control from the body or on
the aperture ring from what I can recall.
--
Rob
Op Tue, 17 Oct 2006 16:26:46 +0200 schreef Digital Image Studio
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On 17/10/06, Lucas Rijnders (Privé) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And control from the body was one step too far at the time? Technically
everything is ready for it, isn't it?
Even the original P645 offered
The aperture simulator is there to support the aperture ring. The 645
lens mount is electro-mechanically equivalent of a KFA lens mount.
Pentax could then use exactly the same electronics in the 645 and all of
their 35mm cameras, a significant cost savings. I expect that the 645D
will no
Under $2000. US.
Pål Jensen wrote:
So what is the estimated street price???
Pål
--
Things should be made as simple as possible -- but no simpler.
--Albert Einstein
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
Huh? Pentax started with what are said to be very fine FA-series 645
lenses several years ago, primes and 2-3 good zooms. They were the
first medium format camera to go to auto-focus and did it very well.
With backward compatibility to the older A lenses.
If you mean that they had nothing
I guess I just think in object these days, FA lenses are extensions of A
lenses containing all the A capabilities therefore they are the same for
this discussion. I didn't think it needed saying.
Stan Halpin wrote:
Huh? Pentax started with what are said to be very fine FA-series 645
lenses
William Robb wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Mark Roberts
Subject: Re: 645D estimated street price - unbeleivable it must be a
mistake!
Na. Those poor sods still earn most of their income from _film_.
Can you believe it?
They probably don't, as of 2006.
(And I *know
If they're selling the Digital version for less than the film version
they'll clean up.
Patrick Genovese wrote:
Has anyone seen this.
http://www.rangefindermag.com/magazine/Oct06/showpage.taf?page=BG69
It must be a mistake OTOH I really hope its true :-)
Regards
Patrick Genovese
--
Pentax probably never made anything other than A lenses for the 645.
I'd bet that they're even electronically equivalent to the KA mount
lenses. So no they don't need an aperture simulator for full
compatibility. (Thought that's probably more information than you
really needed for a
On 14/10/06, P. J. Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pentax probably never made anything other than A lenses for the 645.
I'd bet that they're even electronically equivalent to the KA mount
lenses. So no they don't need an aperture simulator for full
compatibility. (Thought that's probably
and if you look at the prices of the other MF digitals in that list, it's
_very_ competitive
John Coyle
Brisbane, Australia
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Thursday, October 12, 2006 12:05 PM
Subject: Re: 645D estimated street price - unbeleivable
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006, Joseph Tainter wrote:
Well, buyers can't turn to Sigma for lenses. As long as they don't lose
money on the cameras, or don't lose too much, they have a captive market
for lenses. The only competition is used lenses.
Ah, but they know what to do about that, don't they?
From: Kostas Kavoussanakis [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2006/10/12 Thu AM 08:26:22 GMT
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: 645D estimated street price - unbeleivable it must be a mistake!
On Wed, 11 Oct 2006, Joseph Tainter wrote:
Well, buyers can't turn to Sigma
On 12/10/06, Patrick Genovese [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Has anyone seen this.
http://www.rangefindermag.com/magazine/Oct06/showpage.taf?page=BG69
It must be a mistake OTOH I really hope its true :-)
Shoot me down in flames but I think it's utter BS, if they could do
that then why the hell
On Oct 11, 2006, at 6:17 PM, Bruce Dayton wrote:
Seems like a price like that on a high Megapixel camera would
really turn
some heads. Like you, I was quite surprised about the K10D. Perhaps
Pentax is aware that a medium format digital that is priced as high as
the Canon full frames
Bob Shell wrote:
On Oct 11, 2006, at 6:17 PM, Bruce Dayton wrote:
Seems like a price like that on a high Megapixel camera would
really turn
some heads. Like you, I was quite surprised about the K10D. Perhaps
Pentax is aware that a medium format digital that is priced as high as
the
On Oct 12, 2006, at 5:26 AM, Digital Image Studio wrote:
Shoot me down in flames but I think it's utter BS, if they could do
that then why the hell isn't there a FF 35mm body for US$1299?
I agree. It's probably a typo and was supposed to be $ 10,999.
Bob
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
On Oct 12, 2006, at 10:13 AM, Mark Roberts wrote:
My guess is that the sensor itself (with no camera around it) sells
for
about $2000!
I was hoping to travel to Rochester this weekend (for a race) and ask
my contact at Kodak for an approximate price for the sensor, but it
turns out I
Don't they have phones or email in Rochester?
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Mark Roberts
My guess is that the sensor itself (with no camera around it) sells for
about $2000!
I was hoping to travel to Rochester this weekend (for a race) and ask
my contact at Kodak for an approximate
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Don't they have phones or email in Rochester?
Don't have his home phone and this is not something I'd want him to get
into on a work phone or email account.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Good question, and none of that was the consumer's fault.
Tom C.
Original Message Follows
From: Digital Image Studio [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: 645D estimated street price - unbeleivable
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Don't they have phones or email in Rochester?
Shel
Na. Those poor sods still earn most of their income from _film_.
Can you believe it?
[Original Message]
From: Mark Roberts
My guess is that the sensor itself (with no camera around it) sells for
about
mike wilson wrote:
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Don't they have phones or email in Rochester?
Na. Those poor sods still earn most of their income from _film_.
Can you believe it?
They probably don't, as of 2006.
(And I *know* the ones in Rochester don't!)
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006, Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Don't they have phones or email in Rochester?
Kodak never believed in modernization before, why start now??
--
http://www.infotainment.org - more fun than a poke in your eye.
http://www.eighteenpercent.com- photography and portfolio.
- Original Message -
From: Mark Roberts
Subject: Re: 645D estimated street price - unbeleivable it must be a
mistake!
Na. Those poor sods still earn most of their income from _film_.
Can you believe it?
They probably don't, as of 2006.
(And I *know* the ones in Rochester
Has anyone seen this.
http://www.rangefindermag.com/magazine/Oct06/showpage.taf?page=BG69
It must be a mistake OTOH I really hope its true :-)
Regards
Patrick Genovese
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Patrick Genovese wrote:
Has anyone seen this.
http://www.rangefindermag.com/magazine/Oct06/showpage.taf?page=BG69
It must be a mistake OTOH I really hope its true :-)
Regards
Patrick Genovese
If it comes in at that cost, I'll buy one. Definitely. Will even buy a
bunch of Pentax
I think I'll go buy all the used 645 glass. ;-)
Tom C.
Original Message Follows
From: Patrick Genovese [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: 645D estimated street price - unbeleivable it must be a mistake
On 10/11/06, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think I'll go buy all the used 645 glass. ;-)
Will the 645D have an aperture simulator? ;-)
-frank
--
Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
On Wed, Oct 11, 2006 at 04:00:41PM -0400, Adam Maas wrote:
Patrick Genovese wrote:
Has anyone seen this.
http://www.rangefindermag.com/magazine/Oct06/showpage.taf?page=BG69
It must be a mistake OTOH I really hope its true :-)
Regards
Patrick Genovese
If it comes in at
On Wed, Oct 11, 2006 at 09:52:46PM +0200, Patrick Genovese wrote:
Has anyone seen this.
http://www.rangefindermag.com/magazine/Oct06/showpage.taf?page=BG69
It must be a mistake OTOH I really hope its true :-)
Regards
Patrick Genovese
Would it have been *that* hard to quote the
Thank you John - that's been suggested here before but for some reason
people like us to guess - as if it's some great mystery. What a crock -
it's always nice to have some idea about what we'll find.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: John Francis
Patrick Genovese wrote:
Has anyone seen
Seems like a price like that on a high Megapixel camera would really turn
some heads. Like you, I was quite surprised about the K10D. Perhaps
Pentax is aware that a medium format digital that is priced as high as
the Canon full frames just may not sell very well. This could get
very interesting
estimated street price - unbeleivable it must be a mistake!
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 21:52:46 +0200
Has anyone seen this.
http://www.rangefindermag.com/magazine/Oct06/showpage.taf?page=BG69
It must be a mistake OTOH I really hope its true :-)
Regards
Patrick Genovese
--
PDML Pentax
John Francis wrote:
On Wed, Oct 11, 2006 at 04:00:41PM -0400, Adam Maas wrote:
Patrick Genovese wrote:
Has anyone seen this.
http://www.rangefindermag.com/magazine/Oct06/showpage.taf?page=BG69
It must be a mistake OTOH I really hope its true :-)
Regards
Patrick Genovese
If it comes in
Patrick Genovese wrote:
Has anyone seen this.
http://www.rangefindermag.com/magazine/Oct06/showpage.taf?page=BG69
It must be a mistake OTOH I really hope its true :-)
That simply has to be a misprint.
If it isn't I'm buying one
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
In a message dated 10/11/2006 4:28:40 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Has anyone seen this.
http://www.rangefindermag.com/magazine/Oct06/showpage.taf?page=BG69
It must be a mistake OTOH I really hope its true :-)
That simply has to be a misprint.
If it isn't I'm buying
You're too late. Some of us have got there already! vvvbg
Peter
- Original Message -
From: Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: pdml@pdml.net
Sent: Wednesday, October 11, 2006 9:20 PM
Subject: RE: 645D estimated street price - unbeleivable it must be a
mistake!
I think I'll go buy all
@pdml.net
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: 645D estimated street price - unbeleivable it must be a
mistake!
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2006 21:52:46 +0200
Has anyone seen this.
http://www.rangefindermag.com/magazine/Oct06/showpage.taf?page=BG69
It must be a mistake OTOH I really hope
I wouldn't be terribly surprised if that was the price. Pentax seems to
have wised up on how to make money over the last few years.
Actually, as has been suggested, investing in some older MF glass
definitely looks like a very good idea. :-)
Marnie aka Doe
-
Well, buyers can't turn to
In a message dated 10/11/2006 7:32:09 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, buyers can't turn to Sigma for lenses. As long as they don't lose
money on the cameras, or don't lose too much, they have a captive market
for lenses. The only competition is used lenses.
Joe
48 matches
Mail list logo
