From: Rich on
On Mar 10, 12:56 pm, Alfred Molon <alfred_mo...(a)> wrote:
> In article <hn84hv$ki...(a)>, boat042-
> nos...(a) says...
> > 5 lbs is a lightweight. ;)
> Try carrying 2.5Kg around your neck the whole day...
> --

What if you carry it off your shoulder?
From: Rich on
On Mar 10, 6:30 am, Alfred Molon <alfred_mo...(a)> wrote:
> In article <hn7ckt$g4...(a)>, steph...(a) says...
> > But is a crop camera 44 x 33 mm vs 56 x 42 mm of full 645 format. Not a
> > huge increase over 36x24mm for the price and what you lose on wide angle
> > $$$ MF glass etc.
> 68% more area, that is a significant increase. It's also nice to have
> 40MP resolution - no DSLR comes close.

After what I saw a Hasselblad digital do to a Nikon D3x, I'd say if
this Pentax is even 75% of that, it will be WELL worth the $9400
asking price.
Forget FPS, live view, video and the rest of that stuff, if you want
the very best image quality (outside of high quality scans of 8x10
film) then a medium format simply has a really nice edge.
For those not interested, GRAB those old Pentax medium format lenses
now before the prices skyrocket then re-sell them.
From: David J. Littleboy on

<stephe_k(a)> wrote:
> You really can't understand even simple concepts can you. Let me make this
> a bit more simple for you Alan. The manufacturers raised the MP count on
> smaller sensor cameras higher and higher, past the point where it improved
> IQ purely for marketing reasons. And in your wisdom, you think this don't
> happen to Dslrs?

I can't speak for Alan's wisdom, but I can speak from my experience. Canon
has done exactly the right thing in the 5D2. (I'd guess Alan's experience
with prints from his 20+MP dSLR is similar to mine.)

I make 12x18 prints. On an Epson R2400. From 5D2 images, such prints are
breathtaking in their detail, color rendition, tonal range. From 5D images,
the detail rendition in landscape work leaves a bit to be desired. You
really can see that 300 ppi is better than 240 ppi.

It's a significant improvement for the work I'm doing.

So it really is exactly the right thing. Before the 5D2, I needed to shoot
my Mamiya 7 for that quality of print at that size: 645 and 6x6 are just
beginning to lose it if you want 18" in the long direction. Now I have a
much wider selection of lenses (macro, tilt/shift), all the flexibility that
an SLR brings. And the detail I want in my prints.

There is very little wrong with this picture. So your extrapolation from
your experience with 4/3 and smaller cameras is simply wrong. If I wanted to
make exhibition quality 20x30 prints, I'd be interested in 40+MP MF
digitial. But I don't, I've always been happy with MF quality images, and
the 5D2 is very much in that range (noticeably better than 645, close to

David J. Littleboy
Tokyo, Japan

From: Alfred Molon on
In article <4b983674$0$24251$afc38c87(a)>,
dj_nme(a) says...
> Even if it was a 60fps EVF, at this price-point I would be very
> surprised if a 640x480 EVF could "cut the mustard".
> If it were possible to stream an HD video signal from this sensor to an
> HD EVF, then it might (maybe) be worth it.

A zoomable 800x600x3 EVF or LCD screen would suffice for precise manual
focus. Zoom 10x and you will be beyond pixel level. This technology is
already in place today in consumer DSLRs.

Alfred Molon
Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at photo sharing site
From: Alfred Molon on
In article <hn93o5$v2c$2(a)>, stephe_k(a) says...
> B: Is the MF glass resolving enough to do anything if it does resolve as
> highly. i.e. are you actually gaining anything.

You mean MF glass is unable to resolve 40MP?

Alfred Molon
Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at photo sharing site