On 10 Mar 2005 at 0:59, P�l Jensen wrote: > Rob wrote: > > > So who here would potentially buy a partial frame MF DSLR over a full frame > > 35mm DSLR? > > You could ask the question differently; who will buy a full frame 35mm sized > DSLR when APS sensor can be had much cheaper. The truth is that hardly anyone > does; most manufacturers doesn't even make full frame DSLR - not even Nikon in > spite of the companys pro ambitions. Olympus apparently thinks the 4/3 system > is > all you ever need whereas others think 35mm represent the whole grail for > sensor > sizes. I just think that bigger is always better and only limited by > price/hassle factors. A MF based DSLR must be able to outperform any 35mm > based > DSLR to such an extent that the price difference is worthwhile. When or if > this > will happen is an open question at present but I cannot believe that 35mm, > which > is an historical accident from film, represent some kind of brickwall of whats > viable for sensor sizes. As for whos going to buy a Pentax MF pro DSLR, it > probably targeted at Pentax pro users. Pentax have 40% market share of MF in > Japan (which is a huge market). They have virtually 100% market share among > outdoor/landscape photographers in Japan. Also globally Pentax is the leading > brand in this sector. This is Pentax professional basis and this sector hasn't > switched to digital yet and in order to do so the cameras needs to outperform > whats currently achievable by MF. And then tere are all the others who simply > want even better image quality.
Well the fact is that noise and latitude is diminished as sensor density increases, it's pretty easy to see that the 4/3 system has pretty finite print size restrictions if great improvements aren't made to sensor technologies. I would still far prefer to have a body which offers a full frame sensor at or around the density of the current 6MP APS sized sensors as it seems to provide a good compromise between resolution, noise and latitude. I'd rather that APS sensor weren't made more dense and I'm sure a lot of other actual DSLR users would agree. You can call it pro-or whatever you like I just need a body which with eliminate my need for film and full utilize the full image circle of my existing set of lenses, again I'm sure other Pentax users pro or otherwise would be willing to pay for such utility. I don't know where you got the line "They have virtually 100% market share among outdoor/landscape photographers in Japan." either, I have half dozen premium Japanese landscape books many are wide ranging compilations and there aren't too many Pentax users amongst the credits. > > Would price or practicality or some other factor be the main director of > > your > > decision? > > Price is a deciding factor. Practicality is granted; a 645D will almost > certainly be smaller than the Pentax film 645's. This means that it will be > smaller than Nikon/Canon high-end film or DSLR's. The lenses are similar in > size > to Canon L-lenses. Pentax also claims that the 645D will be a field camera not > needing a power outlet. There are probably a great deal of cheap P645 lenses out in the second hand market as I assume that the majority of previous new buyers have subsequently already sold their 645 kits in preference to top end DSLRs. So I don't expect that there would be a great market for Pentax in new 645 glass, so I think again that this is a foolhardy exercise. > > If you wouldn't buy a partial frame MF DSLR who do you suppose would? > > Why not full frame MF DSLR? The cost to produce any such sensor would put the device out of contention for all but top end studios, all of which I guess already have suitable digital back solutions. Similarly manufactured devices the silicon surface area primarily area sets the cost, this won't change with volume. > > Do you think that this supposed course of action by Pentax is positive or > > negative? > > I think it is positive and necessary. Pentax need to boost their credibility > and > such a camera can do just that. It will set them apart from the competition. Or potentially if they are wrong cause the failure of the company? > > I would be far more interested in the 35mm FF body for the record. > > I'm really not interested in any DSLR at present. The second generation 645D > and > the secoond generation Pentax prosumer 35mm based DSLR might though - in 3-4 > years time. I guess that says it all from your perspective, as an actual user of the current technologies I know what would really be useful to me. Cheers, Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://members.ozemail.com.au/~distudio/publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998
