Well, I'm sure you have seen this FF rumor (purported presentation slide):
http://photorumors.com/2015/10/15/new-slide-leaked-with-pentax-full-frame-dslr-camera-details/
If true... a couple of comments:
At first I really wondered about the "645 lens adapter". Then I
realized that all of the used
Darren Addy wrote:
>Well, I'm sure you have seen this FF rumor (purported presentation slide):
>http://photorumors.com/2015/10/15/new-slide-leaked-with-pentax-full-frame-dslr-camera-details/
It's a total fake and a badly done one at that. The graphic for the "3
layers composition" is stolen dire
On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 7:16 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
> "Diffraction Correction" is interesting. Anyone have any ideas on that one?
The K-3 has had it since firmware 1.10. Some sort of in-camera
sharpening that takes advantage of knowledge of the lens and aperture.
Not sure if it affects raw or ju
Yes, I've been reading the thread at dpreview and now regret posting
it to this list.
Friends don't let friends consume New Belgium Trippels and post to PDML.
:\
On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 6:26 PM, Mark Roberts
wrote:
> Darren Addy wrote:
>
>>Well, I'm sure you have seen this FF rumor (purported p
On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 7:29 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
> Friends don't let friends consume New Belgium Trippels
Yes they do.
> and post to PDML.
Eh, I assume at least half the posts here are under the influence. Cheers!
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/list
Hmmm? Well, i wonder why y'all might need more than 36 megglepixies. I don't
really find myself needing 24...
Godfrey
> On Oct 17, 2015, at 4:16 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
>
> Disappointed that the FF is a 36MP sensor (if true). That puts Pentax
> back to the D800/D800E introduction (which was QU
All things being equal, I’d *prefer* 36 over 42. I’d actually prefer 24 over
either (on the assumption that that would provide better low light
performance). Not likely, though.
- Marco
On Oct 17, 2015, at 5:23 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> Hmmm? Well, i wonder why y'all might need more than
>Hmmm? Well, i wonder why y'all might need more than 36 megglepixies. I
don't really find myself needing 24...
>
>Godfrey
There's a reason 645, 6x6/7/9/17, 4x5, 8x10 existed. We always want
more-better.
I wonder how long until the digital banquet camera comes into being ...
--
PDML Pentax-D
Larger formats bring other things to the table beyond resolution. You'll never
get the imaging characteristics of a banquet camera by stuffing more bazillion
pixels into a 35mm format sensor.
Godfrey
> On Oct 18, 2015, at 5:18 AM, Collin Brendemuehl
> wrote:
>
> There's a reason 645, 6x6/7
That "3 layers composition" thing bothered me too. The image is too
small to read the fine print. I recognized the image was a Foveon.
Wondered if it was saying the "super resolution created by SR" created a
virtual Foveon sensor?
Guess not.
On 10/17/2015 7:26 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
Darre
For the same reason "no one will ever need more than 640k RAM."
On 10/17/2015 8:23 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
Hmmm? Well, i wonder why y'all might need more than 36 megglepixies.
I don't really find myself needing 24...
Godfrey
On Oct 17, 2015, at 4:16 PM, Darren Addy
wrote:
Disappointed t
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
Larger formats bring other things to the table beyond resolution. You'll never
get the imaging characteristics of a banquet camera by stuffing more bazillion
pixels into a 35mm format sensor.
Higher resolution can bring other things than just more pixels. A lot of
c
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
Larger formats bring other things to the table beyond resolution. You'll never
get the imaging characteristics of a banquet camera by stuffing more bazillion
pixels into a 35mm format sensor.
Does the speed graphic really have that shallow of a depth of field wide
Depends on the focal length of the lens and aperture and film format.
But yes even with relatively slow lenses you can have very shallow DOF
even on large format.
A not uncommon lens for portraits with medium format would be something
like 210mm with a maximum aperture of f6.7. At a distance
Yes.
The Graflex Speed Graphic 4x5 I used at the Photo Staff when I was in high
school had a typical Wollensak Raptor 135mm f/4.7 lens, about the EFoV
equivalent of a 35 or 40 mm lens on a 35mm FF camera. One of the challenges was
getting the focus and focus zone right because you had so litt
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
Yes.
The Graflex Speed Graphic 4x5 I used at the Photo Staff when I was in high
school had a typical Wollensak Raptor 135mm f/4.7 lens, about the EFoV
equivalent of a 35 or 40 mm lens on a 35mm FF camera. One of the challenges was
getting the focus and focus zone rig
> On Oct 19, 2015, at 1:12 AM, Larry Colen wrote:
>
> Here are a couple of the shots that gave me pause, where the plane of focus
> seemed almost more geometrical then optical:
>
> http://i2.wp.com/roadsandkingdoms.com/uploads/2013/09/1200w_hor-talagante.jpg?w=2048&quality=75&strip=all
> http:
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
On Oct 19, 2015, at 1:12 AM, Larry Colen wrote:
Here are a couple of the shots that gave me pause, where the plane of focus
seemed almost more geometrical then optical:
http://i2.wp.com/roadsandkingdoms.com/uploads/2013/09/1200w_hor-talagante.jpg?w=2048&quality=75&st
> On Oct 19, 2015, at 2:04 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
> ...
>> Seems to me you should pick up a Speed Graphic 4x5 and explore a new realm
>> of photography. :-)
>
> I can't even afford to spend what I already do on gear, I don't need avenues
> to spend money, or for that matter time, on. If I did
In the first one, it looks like the Graphic camera might have a
teeny-tiny bit of tilt with the bottom of the front standard pushed out.
But it also looks like he's actually taking the photo with a DSLR he's
got perched on top of the Graphic, and that DSLR has a Lensbaby mounted.
On 10/19/2015 4
That monster lens in the second image doesn't appear to be this model, but
it's close.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Schneider-Xenotar-Technika-150mm-4x5-Linhof-Select-L
ate-Prod-Lens-NEAR-MINT-/272017615983?hash=item3f55836c6f:g:grcAAOSw14xWIBjn
Just imagine the shallow DOF!
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss M
Now that would have exceedingly narrow DOF.
On 10/20/2015 9:00 AM, Collin B wrote:
That monster lens in the second image doesn't appear to be this model, but
it's close.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/Schneider-Xenotar-Technika-150mm-4x5-Linhof-Select-L
ate-Prod-Lens-NEAR-MINT-/272017615983?hash=item3f
22 matches
Mail list logo