Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: pentax  (Read 57975 times)
pss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 960


WWW
« Reply #20 on: February 22, 2007, 03:53:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I expect this to cost several thousand less than the Mamiya ZD, wich costs less than that, because
1) The sensor is smaller. (Hasselblad charges several thousand less for the H3D-31 with the same chip as this Pentax than it does for the H3D-22 with the same chip as the Mamiya ZD: sensor size trumps pixel count for cost, it seems.)
2) It's a Pentax, and Pentax has always been the "low price leader" in medium format.

My guess: $9,999.99.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102449\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


it depends on the pixel depth...with canon's announcement of the 1DmkIII with 14bit, i don't see how this camera could be anything less then 16bit, which would put it squarely at the phase P30 and the hass31...both f which are more in the 25000 (back, lens, body) range...so if pentax can do this at 15000, it would really shake things up...but of course only if they can control what comes out of the camera...software, conversion....all of which is not that easy and this is the first pentax.....we will see...
Logged

david o
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 310



WWW
« Reply #21 on: February 22, 2007, 04:07:28 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
maybe we should all go the hasselblad way and call this one FF 44......just like their H3D39 is FF48....makes things sooooo much easier:)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102451\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


exactly the FF44  
Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5129


« Reply #22 on: February 22, 2007, 04:19:27 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
it depends on the pixel depth...with canon's announcement of the 1DmkIII with 14bit, i don't see how this camera could be anything less then 16bit ...
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102453\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
In creasing bit depth is a matter of spending a few dollars more on the A/D convertor and should have no significant effect on retail price. (A new Sony 1/1.8" CMOS sensor has several thousand 12-bit A/D converters on chip, just to show you how cheap A/D is.) A/D cost is totally overwhelmed by sensor cost, and Hasselblad has already shown up that this sensor is "cheap" as MF sensors go.

Also, with no sensor having a dynamic range of more than about 12 stops, I am already dubious about the IQ advantages of 14 bits over 12, and anything beyond 14 bits adds absolutely nothing useful. At best, 16-bit D/A is used because the output will occupy two bytes anyway.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2007, 04:23:59 PM by BJL » Logged
BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5129


« Reply #23 on: February 22, 2007, 04:23:14 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
maybe we should all go the hasselblad way and call this one FF 44......just like their H3D39 is FF48....makes things sooooo much easier:)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102451\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
In medium format, 66 and 67 refer to roughly 6x6cm and 6x7cm, so how about rounding 44mm to 4cm and 33mm to 3cm, giving ...

Pentax 43 format.


Oh, that might be confusing.
Logged
John_Black
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 263


WWW
« Reply #24 on: February 22, 2007, 09:36:21 PM »
ReplyReply

It's easy to think it's just a matter of bits, but what if I put the fastest Intel Dual Core Duo in your PC but bottleneck it with a minimal cache, slow the cache MHz, slower memory (or just too little), weak video card, 5400 RPM HD's, etc.

Adding bit depth goes a bit further than just an A/D component.  There has to be a pipe that can move that data quickly enough off the sensor (in this case the Canon has 8 channels), the sensor reset and prepared for the next image capture.  As the data comes off the sensor is has to be prepped for conversion (various stages of amplificaion and filtering).  Once converted, the data has to be processed (in camera tone curve, noise reduction, WB, etc) and converted into the RAW file (larger files means more CPU power).  Finally, the image is moved to the bufffer and then stored to CF.  

The CPUs have to run cool (heat is a bad thing), nor can the CPUs drain too much battery power.  The quality of the A/D is very important too.  More data means higher grade components too because the CPUs & VLSI engines have to run at higher MHz.  

I doubt 14-bits will hurt Canon's image quality   The improvement may not be radical, but it should help.  I looked at the 1D3 samples and they look so-so; I really think my 1Ds2 matches or exceeds the image quality.  The 1Ds2 has far greater resolution - those 10 MP files felt downright puny!
Logged

DavidLondon
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 7


WWW
« Reply #25 on: February 23, 2007, 04:14:44 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
In medium format, 66 and 67 refer to roughly 6x6cm and 6x7cm, so how about rounding 44mm to 4cm and 33mm to 3cm, giving ...

Pentax 43 format.
Oh, that might be confusing.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102461\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

The following  is worth remembering for all of those trying to get their heads around the definition of FF. 6x6 film cameras often only used a 5.65 x 5.65 frame, and yes 6 x 7 was 5.65 x 6.9 ish.....
So FF has always been a bit iffy. I wish they would just always refer to the real chip size in mm as the frame size. FF is meaningless in this "new" world and we are all bright enough to know how to translate this chip size.
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7969



WWW
« Reply #26 on: February 23, 2007, 04:22:00 AM »
ReplyReply

Last time I spoke with Pentax reps in Tokyo, they were targetting roughly the same price point as the ZD.

There is no way they can charge more than 10.000 US$ for this camera considering the target crowd. It would be a commercial suicide.

I don't see Pentax trying to move to a different market segment, their strategy is IMHO to migrate all the landscape shooters in Japan who are still with film. The 645 has a cult following over here, much more so than in the EU/US from what I could see.

Regards,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
Graham Mitchell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2282



WWW
« Reply #27 on: February 23, 2007, 04:44:51 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
ok, so just large for MF. No extra at all. Marketing....
doesn't really matter, if it's a FF   
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102411\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Well it's not large for MF, and it's not FF
Logged

Graham Mitchell - www.graham-mitchell.com
david o
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 310



WWW
« Reply #28 on: February 23, 2007, 06:33:48 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Well it's not large for MF, and it's not FF
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102555\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I thought   meant "joke"

my bad.
Logged
John_Black
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 263


WWW
« Reply #29 on: February 23, 2007, 11:47:58 AM »
ReplyReply

Bernard - at $9k-$10k, that would be excellent.  I spoke with the Mamiya US Service Manager earlier this morning (sent the AFD2 in to have its prism clean and the firmware updated) and he confirmed the ZD back for the US too.  He said the announcement should be in March; I'm guessing PMA or the Tokyo show you mentioned earlier.

Assuming the back would be at $8000-$9000 (as PSS - Paul - said) and the Pentax 645D at $9,999 USD, then we'd have excellent options under $10k.  Another MAC representative said a new ZD for the US too - he said $10-$13k.  And a new 1Ds3 this fall at 22 MP & 14 bits for under $8k (seems likely after the 1D3 announcement).  Fall 2007 could be very interesting with all these choices.

At 1/2 the price I can accept some of the limitations, and there are other advantages such as smaller size, integrated batteries, etc.  Pro's & con's on both sides.  I think the most interesting part will be the sales volume.  If Pentax & Mamiya solutions sell as well as I think they will, this may entice Phase One and others to come up with some new mid-level backs aimed at enthusiasts, semi-pro's, etc.
Logged

paul_jones
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 565


WWW
« Reply #30 on: February 23, 2007, 12:24:11 PM »
ReplyReply

i wonder if the new pentax will work properly with the old lenses? this leaf shutter one is interesting-
http://tinyurl.com/2x2kxg


paul
Logged

check my new website
http://www.paulrossjones.com
KAP
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 168


WWW
« Reply #31 on: February 23, 2007, 12:33:44 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
i guess there is a new/old player...this looks more serious then the ZD....has the sensor of the P30/hassD31....interesting..
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102219\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I was sort of hopeing for a Pentax MF as I have a few lenses, then when I think what a basket case my 67II has been and how difficult it has been getting simple spare parts, I'm not shure about spending money on more Pentax gear.
I'm hopeing I don't do something sillly at Focus next week regarding the Hasselblad H3 deal they have on offer! It's mighty tempting.

Kevin.
Logged
paul_jones
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 565


WWW
« Reply #32 on: February 23, 2007, 01:00:00 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I'm 99.95% sure that 35/2.8 is for the k10D, not the 645D.  The "DA" lenses are akin to Nikon's DX and Canon's EF-S lenses.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102294\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

sorry, you are right, its for the small pentax.

paul
Logged

check my new website
http://www.paulrossjones.com
pss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 960


WWW
« Reply #33 on: February 23, 2007, 01:08:54 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Last time I spoke with Pentax reps in Tokyo, they were targetting roughly the same price point as the ZD.

There is no way they can charge more than 10.000 US$ for this camera considering the target crowd. It would be a commercial suicide.

I don't see Pentax trying to move to a different market segment, their strategy is IMHO to migrate all the landscape shooters in Japan who are still with film. The 645 has a cult following over here, much more so than in the EU/US from what I could see.

Regards,
Bernard
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102549\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

was that when this camera was supposed to have the 18mpix chip? 10000 would be less then half of what everyone else charges for this chip....if it is 16bit....
either way it is great to see more movement in the digital"MF" market..the more the better...

about the whole FF thing...when MF was still all film, there was no discussion about it...nobody called 645 less FF or 6x8 more FF....this really only came up when cameras/lenses built for one film size where used with Dbacks that did not cover the whole area....so in that regard: call is what it is 44 or 48....but i guess phase names their backs by the pixel amount, leaf by the diagonal....makes sense....the top leaf "only" has 33 mpix which would put it square against the P30 (which really has 32mpix) but then again the P45 only has 39....confusing....
Logged

brycv
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 21


WWW
« Reply #34 on: February 25, 2007, 02:29:45 AM »
ReplyReply

As far as pricing goes, I either read or was told by the Pentax rep that the 645 Digital was targeted to be less than the Canon 1Ds Mk II but I think that may have been with the original 18 megapixel chip and not the new 31.6 megapixel design. I would be thrilled with $7,000 but I think around $10,000 is much more likely as has already been said.

Bryan
« Last Edit: February 25, 2007, 09:53:13 AM by brycv » Logged

2 x Pentax K10D w/D-BG2, K100D and lots of lenses (always looking for exotics)
2 x Canon EOS 20D and some heavy L glass
Check out The Digital Hub.
jorgedelfino
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 90


WWW
« Reply #35 on: February 25, 2007, 07:13:50 AM »
ReplyReply

Any camera that claims to be FF 645 will need a sensor size of 56 x 41.5mm, I can't see how a 48 x 36mm can be call FF. That camera will have a "crop factor" of 1,34
Logged
jorgedelfino
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 90


WWW
« Reply #36 on: February 25, 2007, 07:31:08 AM »
ReplyReply

And if you go with a sensor of "only" 44 x 33 mm, then you a have a crop factor of 1,6
Logged
BernardLanguillier
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 7969



WWW
« Reply #37 on: February 25, 2007, 08:17:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
was that when this camera was supposed to have the 18mpix chip? 10000 would be less then half of what everyone else charges for this chip....if it is 16bit....
either way it is great to see more movement in the digital"MF" market..the more the better...

[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102652\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Yep, at the time they were shooting for a 18 MP offering indeed.

It is true that many people would probably be willing to pay more for 31 MP, but then again the 645 digital will probably be released after the Canon/Nikon 22/24MP rumoured bodies, it will have to offer more to even have a chance to compete.

I keep thinking that 10,000 US$ is probably still the target price, and my guess is that they are already very uncomfortable with it.
Regards,
Bernard
Logged

A few images online here!
pss
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 960


WWW
« Reply #38 on: February 25, 2007, 09:56:43 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
As far as pricing goes, I either read or was told by the Pentax rep that the 645 Digital was targeted to be less than the Canon 1Ds Mk II but I think that may have been with the original 18 megapixel chip and not the new 31.6 megapixel design. I would be thrilled with $7,000 but I think around $10,000 is much more likely as has already been said.

Bryan
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102918\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

i think you guys are dreaming....the ZD (body) is around 12000 with a 22mpix 12bit (if larger) chip....anything under 15000 would be very good for the pentax....
we will see...
Logged

BJL
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5129


« Reply #39 on: February 25, 2007, 12:12:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
And if you go with a sensor of "only" 44 x 33 mm, then you a have a crop factor of 1,6
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=102950\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Compared to 56x41.5mm, 44x33mm is smaller by a factor of 56/44 = 1.27 (the factors are always ratios of lengths, not areas). So a bit less that the crop factor of the 1DMkIII, except that Pentax is making lenses specifically for this new format startig with a 55mm standard lens, avoiding the crop with those lenses at least.

And 49x37mm as in the H3D-39 is a factor of 1.14x smaller than 645 film format.
Logged
Pages: « 1 [2] 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad