Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down

Author Topic: Is K-M 7D a dead end?  (Read 11266 times)

Anon E. Mouse

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 197
    • http://
Is K-M 7D a dead end?
« Reply #20 on: December 03, 2005, 12:29:56 am »

Quote
I'm starting to think that BJL is correct.

Why? He does not know any of the technical specifications for the AS system. He is simply speculating with a few narrow assumptions.
Logged

Julius

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 34
    • http://www.photo.net/shared/community-member?user_id=615322
Is K-M 7D a dead end?
« Reply #21 on: December 03, 2005, 01:42:36 am »

My pure speculation is that Nikon would go into partnership with a sensor manufacturer such as Foveon. It would provide stiff competition to Canon and Sony K-M and benefit us consumers at large  .
Logged

rokkitan

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 14
Is K-M 7D a dead end?
« Reply #22 on: December 06, 2005, 11:05:28 am »

Another Sigma lens in K/M (and Pentax) mount:
http://www.dpreview.com/news/0512/05120601sigma_10-20mm.asp

Mvh. RKS
Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Is K-M 7D a dead end?
« Reply #23 on: December 06, 2005, 05:38:10 pm »

Quote
Why? He does not know any of the technical specifications for the AS system. He is simply speculating with a few narrow assumptions.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=52726\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
Actually, "speculating with a few narrow assumptions" is a good description of the frequent but never fulfilled rumors about camera makers other than Canon introducing a DSLR in the old 35mm film format. The "narrow assumption" being that the format that people are most familiar with from film is also the best choice for the very different properties of electronic sensors. How many times do Nikon, Olympus, Fujifilm, Pentax and Konica-Minolta (and soon Panasonic, Sony and Samsung) have to say that they are staying with the current "digital specific" SLR formats before some people will start believing them, instead of believing the contrary speculations and rumors?
Logged

LesGirrior

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 26
Is K-M 7D a dead end?
« Reply #24 on: December 06, 2005, 08:06:47 pm »

Quote
Why? He does not know any of the technical specifications for the AS system. He is simply speculating with a few narrow assumptions.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=52726\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

This is some of what BJL has said so far.

Quote
Some issues are not speculation, they are basic physics.

Quote
I already said that it is not impossible, but unlikely on the bases of the clear facts are that it would be significantly more difficult.

And Steve West posted:

Quote
Of course, it's speculation, but it is rooted in the proper technical details that KM have to face with FF AS.

Doesn't seem like "narrow assumptions" to me
Logged

LeifG

  • Guest
Is K-M 7D a dead end?
« Reply #25 on: December 07, 2005, 02:58:35 am »

Quote
This is some of what BJL has said so far.
And Steve West posted:
Doesn't seem like "narrow assumptions" to me
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=52954\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

BJL put forward a few facts (scaling up of speeds, size, weight, forces etc) and then made numerous assumptions taken out of the air without (I presume) any knowledge of the engineering. It might be practical, it might not. In any case, these things tend to get easier to do with time as manufacturers become more confident and experienced.

Zeiss moved the whole film carrier in a 35mm film camera in order to achieve auto-focus. The result was large, heavy and expensive. KM don't have to do so much work, as the sensor is much smaller than a film carrier, but we will see.

Leif
Logged

Kenneth Sky

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 463
    • http://
Is K-M 7D a dead end?
« Reply #26 on: December 07, 2005, 08:04:00 am »

With the announcement of Sigma that they are producing a 10-20mm lens in K-M (and Pentax) mount, I have hope that this platform will survive. That they made this lens in their DC range suggests they have knowledge that K-M will keep producing cameras with the APS-C sized sensors.
Logged

Kenneth Sky

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 463
    • http://
Is K-M 7D a dead end?
« Reply #27 on: December 07, 2005, 08:13:28 am »

The above post is a bit ironic as last week I picked up a Sigma 14mm on eBay at a good price. It preserves my options should K-M go to FF.
Logged

Julius

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 34
    • http://www.photo.net/shared/community-member?user_id=615322
Is K-M 7D a dead end?
« Reply #28 on: December 07, 2005, 08:27:14 am »

It doesn't take much for a lens manufacturer to modify an existing lens to fit a different camera mount. Sigma is simply trying to broaden their lens' marketability now that they've got the major mounts (Canon and Nikon) covered   .
Logged

DiaAzul

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 777
    • http://photo.tanzo.org/
Is K-M 7D a dead end?
« Reply #29 on: December 07, 2005, 08:52:18 am »

I would question the effectiveness of moving the sensor, rather than a lens element, to provide image stabilisation. For a cropped sensor I do not beleive that there is too much of a problem in moving the sensor to stabilise the image, provided the sensor remains within the image circle of the lens. There is some risk that image quality will be degraded if the lens has signficant distortion across the image field - i.e. I am not sure how effective this type of stabilisation would be with a fisheye lens for instance, or a cheap lens that exhibits strong barrel/pincushion distortion - the image changes geometry as the lens is rotated effectively blurring the image. However, if the sensor is full frame and image stabilisation takes the edges of the sensor outside of the image circle then there is a strong risk that vignetting and edge distortions will become a greater issue. For this reason I do not envisage that KM will introduce a sensor stabilised full frame camera, and also, that this technology will not necessarily be a long term viable technology in the market place.
Logged
David Plummer    http://photo.tanzo.org/

Kenneth Sky

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 463
    • http://
Is K-M 7D a dead end?
« Reply #30 on: December 07, 2005, 04:32:21 pm »

The last post begs the question: What if K-M came out with a FF sensor that cropped to APS-C size if AS was implemented? How would the viewfinder system deal with that?  
Logged

Slough

  • Guest
Is K-M 7D a dead end?
« Reply #31 on: December 08, 2005, 01:34:23 pm »

Quote
I would question the effectiveness of moving the sensor, rather than a lens element, to provide image stabilisation. ...

Good points though in-lens IS involves moving one lens group, and a consequent degradation of the image quality. Few people seem to complain about that thoug it is sometimes mentioned. I doubt that a few mm displacement of the sensor would be any worse.

It might also be the case that KM are clever and make sure that the sensor is centrally aligned at the exact moment that the exposure is taken. (Using the short interval between the shutter trigger being pressed, and the system firing the shutter.) Obviously for a slow exposure travel would be greater, so they would start off-centre, and try and make sure that the offsets at the start and end of the exposure were equal and opposite. Thinking about this, it seems to me that during the exposure a given part of the object passes in front of the lens, and the distortion and aberrations will change depending on the part of the lens being used. So although large motions might seem feasible with an APS sensor and a FF lens, in practice large motions will lead to image degradation due to using different parts of the lens.

It also seems to me that if you implement AS on an APS DSLR with an APS only lens, you have little room to move the sensor due to the reduced image circle. So, FF will bring no new challenges, apart from the greater mass, and associated costs, as mentioned above by someone else.

Leif
Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Is K-M 7D a dead end?
« Reply #32 on: December 08, 2005, 04:03:04 pm »

Apart from speculation about what K.-M. will do, I have to repeat my reasons for preferring in-lens stabilization on cameras with TTL optical viewfinders as opposed to EVF's:

The in-lens approach stabilizes the viewfinder image, while the K.-M sensor jiggling approach still gives you a shaky image to look at when hand-holding long telephoto lenses.

On the other hand, in the K.-M. EVF camera, you get the stabilized image from the sensor in the viewfinder, so sensor stabilization makes more sense there.

But since K.-M. has no stabilized lenses, they probably want to stay with AS for now.
Logged

macgyver

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 510
Is K-M 7D a dead end?
« Reply #33 on: December 09, 2005, 01:07:16 am »

Speaking from a purely business minded Point of View, it would make the most sense for KM to stick with the AS,  no matter what the costs.

Thinks about it, aside from AS in the body KM isn't pushing all that much in the way of atractive features.  (and before anyone yells at me, I love, and own, minolta film cams, im just stating the facts)  If they produce a camera without AS then their principle selling point disapears.

Do you see what I'm getting at?
Logged

LeifG

  • Guest
Is K-M 7D a dead end?
« Reply #34 on: December 09, 2005, 02:55:25 am »

Quote
Speaking from a purely business minded Point of View, it would make the most sense for KM to stick with the AS,  no matter what the costs.

Thinks about it, aside from AS in the body KM isn't pushing all that much in the way of atractive features.  (and before anyone yells at me, I love, and own, minolta film cams, im just stating the facts)  If they produce a camera without AS then their principle selling point disapears.

Do you see what I'm getting at?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=53109\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

I agree 100%. A unique sellig point is the reason why KM and Olympus might survive whereas Pentax seem to be doing worse. Otherwise why else would a new customer choose KM over the big two?

Leif
Logged

BJL

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6600
Is K-M 7D a dead end?
« Reply #35 on: December 09, 2005, 12:47:55 pm »

Quote
I agree 100%. A unique selling point is the reason why KM and Olympus might survive whereas Pentax seem to be doing worse.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=53114\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
I agree 99%. It seems common that a particular market niche will only support a couple of long term profitable companies, and Canon and Nikon are likely to dominate certain niches against "me too" competitors, unless a vigorous, heavily funded challenge comes from electronics giants like Samsung, Matsushita/Panasonic, or Sony.

I am a bit more optimistic about Pentax (or is it just the loyalty of a K-1000 owner?); models like the *-ist DL are still catering to the "smaller, lighter, cheaper, simpler" niche that has worked for them in the past. But Pentax has another possible business weakness; they are a smaller and more purely a camera company than even Olympus, for whom profits on microscopes and medical equipment can help them to ride out bad periods with camera sales.
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up