Cheers,
frank
--- Original Message ---
From: Steve Cottrell
Sent: February 7, 2013 2/7/13
To: pentax list
Subject: Why would you buy a Pentax FF camera?
I mean, aside from the obvious reasons like, bigger sensor, better image
quality, better use with lenses designed to work with a 36X24mm frame,
On 8/2/13, Tom C, discombobulated, unleashed:
>Why? The steering wheel's on the wrong side. What good would it do you?
>
>:)
Humour arf arf
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__Broadcast, Corporate,
|| (O) |Web Video Producion
--
_
--
PDML Pentax-D
Why? The steering wheel's on the wrong side. What good would it do you?
:)
Tom C
> From: "Steve Cottrell"
>
> On 7/2/13, Tom C, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
>>Buying the newest Corvette Stingray wouldn't make Paul Stenquist any
>>more desirable to women, but if he had the money and that's wha
On Fri, Feb 8, 2013 at 12:43 PM, P. J. Alling
wrote:
> On 2/7/2013 6:37 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
>>
>> But would a full frame camera make me more desirable?
>
> That probably depends upon the woman, but in general, no... unfortunately.
I've found that a larger camera helps by hiding more of my f
That probably depends upon the woman, but in general, no... unfortunately.
On 2/7/2013 6:37 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
But would a full frame camera make me more desirable?
Paul via phone
On Feb 7, 2013, at 6:15 PM, Tom C wrote:
John Sessoms wrote: I think the thing that has been lost is all
I think I'd actually be more inclined to buy a Pentax FF DSLR if it were
24mp than 36mp. Especially if Pentax worked the same magic with that
sensor that they have with the 16mp sensor in the K-5. A 300 dpi, image
would be 13 1/3" x 20" in size if you printed the full frame. Assuming a
high def
On 7/2/13, Tom C, discombobulated, unleashed:
>Buying the newest Corvette Stingray wouldn't make Paul Stenquist any
>more desirable to women, but if he had the money and that's what he
>desired, I wouldn't begrudge him the pleasure.
I would!!!
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__Broadcast, Corpor
On 2/7/2013 5:42 PM, John Sessoms wrote:
I think the thing that has been lost is all the discussion is the
simplest reason of all ... Because I want one!
Not "need". I do understand the difference. I "want" one, and I have
the money set aside to buy what I "want".
Absolutely. IMO, there are tw
On 2/7/2013 1:28 PM, Steve Cottrell wrote:
I mean, aside from the obvious reasons like, bigger sensor, better image
quality, better use with lenses designed to work with a 36X24mm frame,
better lighting, better heating, better sewer systems, the roads (yes we
can't forget the roads)
At this
You will give me a shout if you decide to sell your Ricoh stuff,
Godders, won't you?
On 2/7/2013 10:12 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
The primary reason I jumped to a full frame body was that I had
acquired a nice set of lenses in M-bayonet mount designed for the
24x36 mm format. They perform bril
On Feb 7, 2013, at 7:06 PM, Mark Roberts wrote:
> Tom C wrote:
>
>> Buying the newest Corvette Stingray wouldn't make Paul Stenquist any more
>> desirable to women
>
> Make Paul Stenquist *more* desirable to women? Such a thing is
> scarcely imaginable.
Yeah, just scarcely.
> --
> Mark Rob
On Feb 7, 2013, at 8:07 PM, Rob Studdert wrote:
> On 8 February 2013 11:48, Mark C wrote:
>
>> So -
>>
>> 1. A 36 megapixel FF I'd buy ASAP. It owuld replae my K-5 for virtually all
>> shooting since I could crop down to K-5 image sizes with the same
>> resolution.
>> 2. A 24 megapixel FF I'd
On 8 February 2013 11:48, Mark C wrote:
> So -
>
> 1. A 36 megapixel FF I'd buy ASAP. It owuld replae my K-5 for virtually all
> shooting since I could crop down to K-5 image sizes with the same
> resolution.
> 2. A 24 megapixel FF I'd probably buy, but I'd alternate between the K-5 and
> the the
I'd probably buy a FF body just because I've been itching to buy a new
Pentax DSLR for a while now
But the rationale really depends on the specifications of a new FF DSLR.
*IF* the sensor resolution / pixel size was comparable to the K-5 and
the image image quality was just as good, then a
My response is interspersed below.
Thu Feb 7 06:28:17 EST 2013
Steve Cottrell wrote:
> I mean, aside from the obvious reasons like, bigger sensor, better
> image
> quality, better use with lenses designed to work with a 36X24mm frame,
> better lighting, better heating, better sewer systems, the
Tom C wrote:
>Buying the newest Corvette Stingray wouldn't make Paul Stenquist any more
>desirable to women
Make Paul Stenquist *more* desirable to women? Such a thing is
scarcely imaginable.
--
Mark Roberts - Photography & Multimedia
www.robertstech.com
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
But would a full frame camera make me more desirable?
Paul via phone
On Feb 7, 2013, at 6:15 PM, Tom C wrote:
> John Sessoms wrote: I think the thing that has been lost is all the
> discussion is the
> simplest reason of all ... Because I want one!
>
> Not "need". I do understand the differe
John Sessoms wrote: I think the thing that has been lost is all the discussion
is the
simplest reason of all ... Because I want one!
Not "need". I do understand the difference. I "want" one, and I have the
money set aside to buy what I "want".
Of course. This idea that only guys with mor
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 11:04 AM, Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu
wrote:
> The natural order of things:
>
> Step 1. Buy it
> Step 2. Find the reasons why you "needed" that.
I'll probably own a D600 before Pentax comes out with thiers.
Dave
>
> I think such discussions are premature ;)
>
> Alex
>
> On Th
If I *needed* a full-frame camera I'd have bailed on Pentax a long time
ago. I do understand that this is something I want, rather than need.
But that doesn't make my wanting it any less valid.
"You can't please everybody, so you've got to please yourself."
From: Alexandru-Cristian Sarbu
Th
On 8 February 2013 01:29, Steve Cottrell wrote:
> On 7/2/13, John Sessoms, discombobulated, unleashed:
>
>>I think the thing that has been lost is all the discussion is the
>>simplest reason of all ... Because I want one!
>>
>>Not "need". I do understand the difference. I "want" one, and I have th
On 7/2/13, John Sessoms, discombobulated, unleashed:
>I think the thing that has been lost is all the discussion is the
>simplest reason of all ... Because I want one!
>
>Not "need". I do understand the difference. I "want" one, and I have the
>money set aside to buy what I "want".
Can't argue
The natural order of things:
Step 1. Buy it
Step 2. Find the reasons why you "needed" that.
I think such discussions are premature ;)
Alex
On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 5:42 PM, John Sessoms wrote:
> I think the thing that has been lost is all the discussion is the simplest
> reason of all ... Becaus
I think the thing that has been lost is all the discussion is the
simplest reason of all ... Because I want one!
Not "need". I do understand the difference. I "want" one, and I have the
money set aside to buy what I "want".
From: "Steve Cottrell"
I mean, aside from the obvious reasons like,
I think the only thing that would make me buy one is if they stopped tanking
the 16x24 format seriously, and stopped the K-5 type camera. And then I might
as well jump to something else, like Fujifilm X.
The files I get from K-5 are big enough, ISO are good enough, DOF is suffiently
shallow and
I mean, aside from the obvious reasons like, bigger sensor, better image
quality, better use with lenses designed to work with a 36X24mm frame,
better lighting, better heating, better sewer systems, the roads (yes we
can't forget the roads)
Back in 2000, this camera came onto the scene:
26 matches
Mail list logo