Pentax Joins Olympus - Opts out of Pixel Wars

[europanorama]

What a load of crap.

Just wait till the olympus micro 4/3rds come out.

Also, I assume you haven't tried an olympus e-3 with top end zuiko digital glass. There's a reason why it's so damned good - it's the 4/3rds sensor.

the sensor and lenses are good but sensor-size limits the output to 30x40cm. olympus finally confessed. i am sure one day-when the right sensor is ready we will appreciate the tiny sizes of 4/3 and m43-systems.
the problem are the high prices of the top-lenses. at least one can adapt older highclass-ones.

 

[Al Kaplan]

Composition and content. The rest is decoration or distraction.

 

[bmattock]

Composition and content. The rest is decoration or distraction.

You say that like it's a bad thing.

 

[Al Kaplan]

Not a bad thing. That's a personal call.

 

[wblanchard]

Just come to the dark side people, we have cookies and all sorts of glass available for our canon's. plus canon puts out more press releases per day about digital products. that must mean i invested in a good camera, right? - (all this said sarcastically)

You know you want to strut around with a black body and white lens like all the good lemmings.

 

[charjohncarter]

Pixels bah! If a photo has been well taken and is tack sharp you could interpolate to double of the size and nobody would know. Give me smoth contrast and colour rendition instead.

Oh yes, and if you have smooth contrast and good color, you don't have to double the size. I have two DSLRs (I know, how stupid) one is a six and the other a ten. I don't think I could tell the difference between the two if I had to.

 

[funkpilz]

When I want high resolution, I use 50ISO film and scan it. Digital is for available light, so I don't even want 10 megapixels there.

 

[eleskin]

645 Digital in 2010

645 Digital in 2010

I have read that in Japan at a recent photo expo, Pentax intends to release the 645 in digital form with 30+ megapixels. I am a Leica M shooter, but I have a 645n for weddings and commercial work and quite a few 645 lenses.
This is proof that Pentax may have opted out of the MP wars in the consumer market, but has its eyes set on the PRO market with this camera.

I would take the bigger sensor at 30mp any day over a smaller 35mm size sensor crammed with megapixels for image quality and shadow detail (noise issues). I hear it may cost 9,000 or so. Nice thing about the 645 is there are tons of cheap lenses on ebay that you can buy NOW before this thing comes out. I am sure once it does, lens prices will rise. Look at what the M8 did to used Leica M lenses.

 

[Avotius]

You know I dont know what the big problem of the modern digital camera is. Remember the Olympus Stylus Epic? What a neat camera that was "full format" and small, even with a good enough viewfinder. Now I know that circuits and stuff take up space but so does film. I mean really, how hard would it be to build a tiny body like that with the sensor from say a......Canon 20D and go from there? Heck even the lens could be smaller because of the APS-C format....

They just don't know how to make that kind of stuff anymore...and its a real shame. How many people here would salivate over a Hexar RF with a large digital sensor in it and that was not a small camera to start with!

Today I saw a little camera that really caught my eye, the Canon Ixus 100 IS. Very small, very fast, but no manual operation and a pitiful finder, and when I got back, not the best reviews on it. Oh well, how many more "fake" cameras do we need?

 

[David Murphy]

Pentax and Olympus are throwing in the towel apparently and all the delusional marketing glitz in the world won't help them. It is a major technological challenge to develop and mass produce the large and complex sensors needed to push forward with digital imaging technology. Marketing lens mount systems, low performance, but feature-filled lenses, and camera bodies with lots of handy features will not compensate for this - that's all technology left over from the film era. It takes a significant investment in applied research to develop and make large sensors practical, and only a few companies have the needed capital and legacy of experience to take this on.

 

[Papa Smurf]

Just come to the dark side people, we have cookies and all sorts of glass available for our canon's. plus canon puts out more press releases per day about digital products. that must mean i invested in a good camera, right? - (all this said sarcastically)

You know you want to strut around with a black body and white lens like all the good lemmings.

Platinum,
You're only right from the viewpoint of the professional. However, most of the camera-buying public isn't--that's why there are only a few FF DSLRs on the market, but about 100 point-and-shoot model. The average person doesn't need FF. They want light weight, ease of use, and good photo quality for moderate sizes. Both Pentax and Olympus give features that the FF cameras don't, for much, much less money. At this point, ergonomics is the big factor, and not sensor size or megapixels.

Brand recognition is very important to many a photog wannabe. Pentax and Olympus are names that people can identify with. Who hasn't owned are at least lusted over some Pentax model from yesteryear? Canon is trying hard to push Nikon out of the number one stop for good. There is a real danger in that strategy as it uses up resources and can divert attention from real improvemnets and future breakthroughs that some third party might sneak into the marketplace. Peter Drucker once said that the most dangers place to be is the number one spot in your market in the world. Why? Becasue somewhere there are four or five guys/gals sitting in a grungie, cluttered office studying you and your methods and eventually, one to them will jump to their feet and say, "we can beat these guys at there own game and here's how we are going ti do it!" When giants fall it is seldom pretty and too often permanent. 🙁

The pixel race has done little to bring the consumer a better camera. In another post, a member states that he is still using a 10 year old Kodak Pro model (I think a 5 meg version) to his customers satisfaction. Film might not have the following it once enjoyed, but Kodak, Fuji, and others are still bringing us better film, better chemicals to process the film all as ongoing research. I for one applaud the end of the pixel race. We have not seen its final death throes yet, but how much farther can the minaturisation process go and will it result in better images?

 

[charjohncarter]

Brand recognition is very important to many a photog wannabe. Pentax and Olympus are names that people can identify with. Who hasn't owned are at least lusted over some Pentax model from yesteryear? Canon is trying hard to push Nikon out of the number one stop for good. There is a real danger in that strategy as it uses up resources and can divert attention from real improvemnets and future breakthroughs that some third party might sneak into the marketplace. Peter Drucker once said that the most dangers place to be is the number one spot in your market in the world. Why? Becasue somewhere there are four or five guys/gals sitting in a grungie, cluttered office studying you and your methods and eventually, one to them will jump to their feet and say, "we can beat these guys at there own game and here's how we are going ti do it!" When giants fall it is seldom pretty and too often permanent. 🙁

The pixel race has done little to bring the consumer a better camera. In another post, a member states that he is still using a 10 year old Kodak Pro model (I think a 5 meg version) to his customers satisfaction. Film might not have the following it once enjoyed, but Kodak, Fuji, and others are still bringing us better film, better chemicals to process the film all as ongoing research. I for one applaud the end of the pixel race. We have not seen its final death throes yet, but how much farther can the minaturisation process go and will it result in better images?

I don't know how to cut down a quote, but the part I wanted to quote is the sentence that starts "There is a real danger in that.........." I think somebody already has: the Panasonic Lumix G-1.

 

[emraphoto]

"They just don't know how to make that kind of stuff anymore...and its a real shame. How many people here would salivate over a Hexar RF with a large digital sensor in it and that was not a small camera to start with!"

first let me say that a digital hexar af and i would be doing cartwheels!!! that being said i think the cost of filling a hexar af build quality camera with the needed digital gobby gook would be the problem. folks would have an issue with the price... guaranteed!

 

[colker]

new digital cameras are significantly better than older ones.
compare a D200 file w/ a D100 file.. to me the difference is outstanding: better color, range, contrast and more ways to blow big prints.
if you don't "need" 10mp it's because your prints are small. print big and you need the pixels.
i have shot w/ the hasselblad 23mp. the sharpness and detail blow a D200 away. not to mention the large sensor: using an 80mm as a normal lens instead of a 35 makes a tremendous difference in how your eye relates to the image.

Professional photograhy needs big sensors and large quantites of pixels. that's why some cameras are pro and some are consummer.

 

[wblanchard]

Just give me a Bronica S2 with Ilford Panf Plus 50 please 🙂