On Sep 30, 2013, at 12:40 AM, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu
wrote:
> You're overextending the meaning of a "system"
No, I'm not. When Olympus and Panasonic released Micro-FourThirds in 2008, the
system picture they presented included all the FourThirds lenses as an integral
part of the system. The
On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 7:06 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> On Sep 29, 2013, at 8:08 AM, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu
> wrote:
>
>>> Regardless of the speed of the AF, all FT SLR lenses have autofocused with
>>> all Olympus mFT cameras from day one of the Pen E-P1. The E-M1 provides a
>>> better AF
On Sep 29, 2013, at 8:08 AM, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu
wrote:
>> Regardless of the speed of the AF, all FT SLR lenses have autofocused with
>> all Olympus mFT cameras from day one of the Pen E-P1. The E-M1 provides a
>> better AF solution, that's all.
>>
>> You will never have auto-diaphragm o
On Sat, Sep 28, 2013 at 3:29 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
>
> On Sep 26, 2013, at 11:11 AM, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu
> wrote:
>
>> Let me rephrase that: would a newly designed telecentric lens have
>> issues, with offset microlenses? (it's the other way around)
>> Of course, new sensors could mak
On Sep 26, 2013, at 11:11 AM, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu
wrote:
> Let me rephrase that: would a newly designed telecentric lens have
> issues, with offset microlenses? (it's the other way around)
> Of course, new sensors could make this a non-issue.
It shouldn't, but depends on the implementatio
On 9/27/2013 1:24 AM, Bob W wrote:
On 27 Sep 2013, at 00:23, Larry Colen wrote:
[...]
I'm also willing to bet that most of the people who own Leicas are
graduates of the Dunning-Kruger school of expert photography.
Methinks the Larry doth protest too much.
B
I think they must go back
On 9/26/2013 10:11 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
Why would I need AF?
When it focuses on the right thing, AF can focus more precisely
than manual.
Indeed. "When" is an important word here.
Why would Ricoh need AF on the mount?
Because these days, to all intents and purposes you cannot sell a
camera
On Fri, Sep 27, 2013 at 06:05:03PM +1200, David Mann wrote:
> On Sep 27, 2013, at 10:28 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
>
> > Why are they so expensive? Because they are built an old fashioned way, in
> > small numbers, with high quality materials and lots of individual attention
> > to each one in
That's a very beautiful piece. Thanks for sharing it. :-)
Godfrey
> On Sep 26, 2013, at 11:05 PM, David Mann wrote:
>
> Those who appreciate craftsmanship at any price might be interested in this
> short video about a watch maker...
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-24211691
--
PDML P
On Sep 27, 2013, at 10:28 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> Why are they so expensive? Because they are built an old fashioned way, in
> small numbers, with high quality materials and lots of individual attention
> to each one in testing and QA.
Those who appreciate craftsmanship at any price migh
On 26 Sep 2013, at 23:51, "Steve Cottrell" wrote:
>
> On 26/9/13, Larry Colen, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
>> If they wanted to, they could could probably
>> build one to sell for $2,000, rather than $8,000, but that wouldn't
>> appeal to their niche market. A niche market which is undoubtab
On 27 Sep 2013, at 00:23, Larry Colen wrote:
>
>> [...]
>
> I'm also willing to bet that most of the people who own Leicas are
> graduates of the Dunning-Kruger school of expert photography.
>
Methinks the Larry doth protest too much.
B
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http:/
On Sep 26, 2013, at 4:23 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 03:28:50PM -0700, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
>> You don't read many industry journals.
>>
>>
>> Just like the statement that "AF can focus more precisely". Hogwash.
>> Critical focus achieved with AF cannot be more precis
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 03:28:50PM -0700, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> You don't read many industry journals.
>
>
> Just like the statement that "AF can focus more precisely". Hogwash. Critical
> focus achieved with AF cannot be more precise than critical focus achieved
> with manual focus becaus
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 11:51:28PM +0100, Steve Cottrell wrote:
> On 26/9/13, Larry Colen, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
> > If they wanted to, they could could probably
> >build one to sell for $2,000, rather than $8,000, but that wouldn't
> >appeal to their niche market. A niche market which i
On 26/9/13, Larry Colen, discombobulated, unleashed:
> If they wanted to, they could could probably
>build one to sell for $2,000, rather than $8,000, but that wouldn't
>appeal to their niche market. A niche market which is undoubtably
>far more profitable than a bunch of middle aged curmudgeon
You don't read many industry journals.
Camera sales on average are off by over 40% in the past year across the
industry, except for Leica. Leica is selling every camera it can produce, with
gross margins that are very similar to everyone else. Since the introduction of
the M9 in 2009, they've
>From what I understand Leica has operated at a loss or near break even
for many years now. Part of their high costs are firstly their high
cost of manufacturing. Secondly economies of scale play a major
factor. For ever $2000 FF DSLR Canikon sells, they certainly profit
less, but then they sell ma
Not every company is Leica, and they were struggling a few years ago.
On 9/26/2013 3:52 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
Leica seem to be having no issues selling all manual focus Leica M bodies and
lenses, Larry. They are the camera company with the highest growth rate in
camera sales by unit volu
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 12:52:55PM -0700, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> Leica seem to be having no issues selling all manual focus Leica M bodies and
> lenses, Larry. They are the camera company with the highest growth rate in
> camera sales by unit volume and profitability since 2009. :-)
I grant y
precedent I meantsent too fast there...I'm just pointing out that
their growth rate means nothing when canikon sells hundreds of cameras
every day
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Zos Xavius wrote:
> oh please. growing from selling 20 cameras to 30 is hardly setting
> precedent! and their pro
oh please. growing from selling 20 cameras to 30 is hardly setting
precedent! and their profit margins are insane because they keep
ramping prices on their gear. the new noctilux is like $10,000. No
wonder they are profitable
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 3:52 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> Leica se
Leica seem to be having no issues selling all manual focus Leica M bodies and
lenses, Larry. They are the camera company with the highest growth rate in
camera sales by unit volume and profitability since 2009. :-)
Godfrey
> On Sep 26, 2013, at 12:11 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
>
> Because these
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 09:34:21PM +0300, Boris Liberman wrote:
> On 9/24/2013 9:02 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
> >What if the new high end, full frame sensor, camera coming from
> >Ricoh were not a Pentax mount, but a Leica mount? Ideally a mount
> >that is mechanically compatible with traditional Lei
On 9/24/2013 9:02 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
What if the new high end, full frame sensor, camera coming from
Ricoh were not a Pentax mount, but a Leica mount? Ideally a mount
that is mechanically compatible with traditional Leica glass, but
with contacts for autofocus etc. And what if, just for the
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 11:03 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
>
> On Sep 25, 2013, at 10:19 AM, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu
> wrote:
>
>>> The M mount has a short registration, but the lenses designed for the M
>>> mount were not originally designed for a digital sensor. That's the issue
>>> there, n
Very nice lens! I keep thinking of one of them too. It works well on all three
format cameras.
Godfrey
> On Sep 26, 2013, at 2:40 AM, Steve Cottrell wrote:
>
> On 25/9/13, Godfrey DiGiorgi, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
>> I'm truly delighted by the old Zeiss uncoated lenses I've acquired wi
On 25/9/13, Godfrey DiGiorgi, discombobulated, unleashed:
>I'm truly delighted by the old Zeiss uncoated lenses I've acquired with
>the Robot cameras, and the new-yet-old Voigtländer designs epitomized by
>the Color Skopar 21, 28, 35 and 50 mm. I was just testing the Color
>Skopar 28mm f/3.5 with
On Sep 25, 2013, at 3:42 PM, Zos Xavius wrote:
> I prefer vintage glass actually for rendering qualities. ...
Similar feelings here, for some lenses in particular. Actually, moving away
from SLR lenses, I find more of the image qualities I like in RF lenses
overall, at least for the shorter fo
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 4:03 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> Many pre-digital SLR lenses do work very well indeed. Few to none work as
> well as lenses which are optimized for digital sensors with respect to
> measurable lens performance criteria. However, I often use older lenses
> because they
On 9/25/2013 4:45 AM, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu wrote:
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 9:02 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
I've been thinking about upcoming cameras from a Pentax-centric point
of view. We keep asking for a Pentax "full frame" camera, and the
latest rumors seem to have being mirrorless. There
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 01:03:13PM -0700, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
>
> But obsolete isn't a criteria for dead and buried IMO.
A signficant percentage of the PDML are examples of the difference
between obsolete and "dead and buried".
--
Larry Colen l...@red4est.com http
On Sep 25, 2013, at 10:19 AM, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu
wrote:
>> The M mount has a short registration, but the lenses designed for the M
>> mount were not originally designed for a digital sensor. That's the issue
>> there, not the short registration. The reason a short registration distance
On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 6:27 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
>
> On Sep 25, 2013, at 2:02 AM, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu
> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 10:19 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
>>> ...However, neither M nor F mounts are ideal for 24x36mm digital
>>> sensors—they can be made to work,
On Sep 25, 2013, at 2:02 AM, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu
wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 10:19 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
>> ...However, neither M nor F mounts are ideal for 24x36mm digital
>> sensors—they can be made to work, but ideally a lens mount for a digital
>> sensor should be larger
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 10:19 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> This should be qualified. Leica, just like Nikon and Pentax, deemed that it
> was more important to maintain compatibility with their existing lens lines
> than to redesign the lens mount on the M and F mount bodies, respectively.
> Ho
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 9:02 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
> I've been thinking about upcoming cameras from a Pentax-centric point
> of view. We keep asking for a Pentax "full frame" camera, and the
> latest rumors seem to have being mirrorless. There are a lot of
> technical advantages in terms of lig
PS: Lets face it. The FF DSLR market is like 5% of the overall market.
It would make very little sense for Pentax to just introduce another
"me too" DSLR with a limited lens selection and hope to compete with
Canikon or even Sony, which all have extensive lens lineups. The pros
that really wanted F
I personally think (and hope) they go for a mirrorless solution with a
super short flange distance that will adapt any other system's full
frame lenses. Since they need to create a bunch of new lenses for full
frame they might as well start from scratch like sony did with
e-mount. Being able to ada
On Sep 24, 2013, at 11:28 AM, Larry Colen wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 01:14:54PM -0500, Darren Addy wrote:
>> What are you calling "traditional Leica glass"?
>> M-mount has a 27.8mm flange to film/sensor distance.
>> M39 is 28.8.
>> Leica R-mount is 47mm (longer than the "kludge" K-mount 45.
On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 01:14:54PM -0500, Darren Addy wrote:
> What are you calling "traditional Leica glass"?
> M-mount has a 27.8mm flange to film/sensor distance.
> M39 is 28.8.
> Leica R-mount is 47mm (longer than the "kludge" K-mount 45.46.)
Oh well, it was a nice theory. Since folks seem to
What are you calling "traditional Leica glass"?
M-mount has a 27.8mm flange to film/sensor distance.
M39 is 28.8.
Leica R-mount is 47mm (longer than the "kludge" K-mount 45.46.)
PS... would you please be so kind as to pass along the name and number
of your pharmacist?
: )
On Tue, Sep 24, 201
I've been thinking about upcoming cameras from a Pentax-centric point
of view. We keep asking for a Pentax "full frame" camera, and the
latest rumors seem to have being mirrorless. There are a lot of
technical advantages in terms of light path to mirrorless, and there is
the advantage of you se
43 matches
Mail list logo
