Boris Liberman wrote:
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 8:53 AM, mike wilson wrote:
Desjardins, Steve wrote:
In theory I guess you could also make an interchangeable sensor with a
lens mount on it. Or someone else could.
Such an obvious next step that I am astonished that nobody at Ricoh thought
I was thinking of doing this cheaply (<$1000) as a novel step. ;-)
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Adam
Maas
Sent: Thursday, November 12, 2009 10:06 AM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Ricoh GXR interchan
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 1:53 AM, mike wilson wrote:
> Desjardins, Steve wrote:
>
>> In theory I guess you could also make an interchangeable sensor with a
>> lens mount on it. Or someone else could.
>
> Such an obvious next step that I am astonished that nobody at Ricoh thought
> of it. Actually
On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 8:53 AM, mike wilson wrote:
> Desjardins, Steve wrote:
>
>> In theory I guess you could also make an interchangeable sensor with a
>> lens mount on it. Or someone else could.
>
> Such an obvious next step that I am astonished that nobody at Ricoh thought
> of it. Actually
that I have interacted with, I am not really that suprised.
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Mark
Roberts
Sent: Tuesday, November 10, 2009 1:45 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: Ricoh GXR interchanges electronics
On Nov 10, 2009, at 3:22 PM, P. J. Alling wrote:
Mark Roberts wrote:
Desjardins, Steve wrote:
In theory I guess you could also make an interchangeable sensor
with a lens mount on it. Or someone else could.
Two words:
Cotty
Hacksaw
You meant three words, you forgot Oxyacetylene Torch
OK so I can't count, that's four words...
P. J. Alling wrote:
Mark Roberts wrote:
Desjardins, Steve wrote:
In theory I guess you could also make an interchangeable sensor with
a lens mount on it. Or someone else could.
Two words:
Cotty
Hacksaw
You meant three words, you forgot O
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 10:45 AM, Mark Roberts wrote:
>>...But it's certainly not for me.
>
> I think it might be for me.
>
> I'd get just one fast prime and leave it at that. I think most people
> will get just one lens. I look at this as not an interchangeable-lens
> camera but at a customizable
Mark Roberts wrote:
Desjardins, Steve wrote:
In theory I guess you could also make an interchangeable sensor with a lens
mount on it. Or someone else could.
Two words:
Cotty
Hacksaw
You meant three words, you forgot Oxyacetylene Torch...
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pd
Desjardins, Steve wrote:
>In theory I guess you could also make an interchangeable sensor with a lens
>mount on it. Or someone else could.
Two words:
Cotty
Hacksaw
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, pleas
Subject: Re: Ricoh GXR interchanges electronics together with lenses!
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
>While the notion of a "unit interchangeable" camera like the GXR is
>interesting, technically, I'm not at all interested in it. I can only
>imagine the price of premiu
Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
>While the notion of a "unit interchangeable" camera like the GXR is
>interesting, technically, I'm not at all interested in it. I can only
>imagine the price of premium lens-sensor units, the difficulties in
>calibration across different lenses, etc.
>
>And, of course, the
While the notion of a "unit interchangeable" camera like the GXR is
interesting, technically, I'm not at all interested in it. I can only
imagine the price of premium lens-sensor units, the difficulties in
calibration across different lenses, etc.
And, of course, there will be no ability to use an
I'd like to apologize for that, I never intended to post to the list
from this address...
aggrivated wrote:
Just because I forgot to mention it, look at the large light gathering
sensor! 1:1.7! Wow!
P. J. Alling wrote:
What do you want to bet that it's actually underpowered for it's
concep
Just because I forgot to mention it, look at the large light gathering
sensor! 1:1.7! Wow!
P. J. Alling wrote:
What do you want to bet that it's actually underpowered for it's
concept. Looks like an opportunity to sell lots of expensive
accessories though...
Desjardins, Steve wrote:
This
What do you want to bet that it's actually underpowered for it's
concept. Looks like an opportunity to sell lots of expensive
accessories though...
Desjardins, Steve wrote:
This makes more sense as sensor technology approaches the "good enough" limit
for entire groups of customers. I wonde
This makes more sense as sensor technology approaches the "good enough" limit
for entire groups of customers. I wonder how upgradable the lens/sensor unit
is?
-Original Message-
From: pdml-boun...@pdml.net [mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of Dario
Bonazza
Sent: Tuesday, Novemb
I am thinking that this is so much not mainstream, that it may as well
produce a necessary quake effect and lead to more choices, better
technology, more enjoyable picture taking and in general development
of the industry, craft and art.
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 9:42 AM, Dario Bonazza
wrote:
> Uh,
I like the idea - it costs more but also eliminates dust issues
altogether plus sensor and lens are always a perfect match - assuming
ricoh do their homework on each unit that is... great for people who
want one camera, interchangeable lenses AND a no-brainer - now can I
have a viewfinder please?
C
Larry Colen wrote:
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 08:42:44AM +0100, Dario Bonazza wrote:
Uh, strange solution indeed:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0911/09111001ricohgxr.asp
I'm not sure I'm thrilled with it.
Funny, I was thinking that this was exactly where things were going if
you want to optimize
On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 08:42:44AM +0100, Dario Bonazza wrote:
> Uh, strange solution indeed:
> http://www.dpreview.com/news/0911/09111001ricohgxr.asp
> I'm not sure I'm thrilled with it.
Funny, I was thinking that this was exactly where things were going if
you want to optimize registration dista
21 matches
Mail list logo
