FF in 2010? - Page 17

Samsungian · 11-03-2009, 08:29 PM

$680 to $800 in completed usa auctions, thats crazy money for any used kodak. I really thought these old digital dinosaurs would be free to like $100 max. Then again I am biased. $800 is just about half what my full frame Canon 5D cost me brand new last year. Of course it doesn't use nikon glass, so it doesn't count.

Why not buy a D700? It uses a sony sensor already, or is it renesas made? Who ever makes it, it is a great way to drive nikon made glass.

Enjoy your Kodak...

http://completed.shop.ebay.com/Camer...c0.m283&_rdc=1

Shingoshi · 11-03-2009, 09:30 PM

Originally Posted by Samsungian

$680 to $800 in completed usa auctions, thats crazy money for any used kodak. I really thought these old digital dinosaurs would be free to like $100 max. Then again I am biased. $800 is just about half what my full frame Canon 5D cost me brand new last year. Of course it doesn't use nikon glass, so it doesn't count.

Why not buy a D700? It uses a sony sensor already, or is it renesas made? Who ever makes it, it is a great way to drive nikon made glass.

Enjoy your Kodak...

http://completed.shop.ebay.com/Camer...c0.m283&_rdc=1

The reference to the Nikon D700 keeps coming up with regards to the Kodak ProSLR/n. What I'm not sure about is which one came first. But they allegedly share a lot in common. So why are you suggesting that a Nikon D700 camera is a necessarily better buy than the Kodak? This prices given for used Nikon models are at least about twice the Kodak. And the Kodak has a higher resolution at that lower price.
d700, great deals on Digital Cameras, Neck Strap on eBay!

And yes, it was and is the glass that's motivating me. After being royally screwed by Canon on my T90 system shortly after getting it, I decided never to trust Canon again for any reason. Of all the manufacturers, Nikon (or maybe actually Leica) has the greatest longevity in the life-cycle of their lenses. I just wish I had brought a Nikon F-series all these many years ago. I would still have viable lenses 20 years later. But life teaches hard and expensive lessons.

A brief look at the new Kodak Professional SLR/n
I'm not interested in convincing anyone to buy one of these. I just have to make the most of the money I have available considering how I intend to shoot. I don't shoot action. I will be shooting from a tripod most of the time. So speed isn't a concern for me either. The very nature of my work is slow and tedious. So having a camera that just gives me the pictures I want at full-frame is all that matters. I really don't have any other considerations. I just want true wide-angle coverage from a wide-angle lens. And it doesn't even matter if I have to shoot in manual mode either.

Xavian-Anderson Macpherson
ShingoshiDao

ozlizard · 11-04-2009, 05:21 AM

So now there is a thread about Hoya selling Pentax. How will this affect these predictions of a brave new FF world? As the sand through the hour glass so are the days of our lives.... I think I need a compy chair and a stiff drink...or two...forget the popcorn.

Rondec · 11-04-2009, 05:38 AM

...And Hoya is no longer selling Pentax. The dream of full frame lives on!

Shingoshi · 11-04-2009, 11:11 AM

Originally Posted by Rondec

...And Hoya is no longer selling Pentax. The dream of full frame lives on!

Is Pentax a subsidiary of Hoya? Or is this a case where Pentax exists in name only? Being nothing more than a registered trademark used by another company for marketing purposes? Kind of like Cosina marketing products under the Voightlaender name. If this is the case, how long has it been this way? That would definitely answer a previous question about why Kodak never built cameras for Pentax. And Minolta had been in flux for a very long time until being acquired by Sony. And has anyone noticed that Sony owns Tamron?

Xavian-Anderson Macpherson
ShingoshiDao

Rondec · 11-04-2009, 07:33 PM

You are right that Pentax is part of Hoya. I don't think it would be very easy at all to untangle things, even if Hoya wanted to sell Pentax. The second part is that Hoya seems to be very attached to the medical part of Pentax -- endoscopes, etc. I don't see how they could sell Pentax and yet, keep the medical portion of Pentax and keep selling items under the Pentax name, while someone else sold cameras under the Pentax name as well. When Minolta sold their camera business to Sony, the cameras sold bore the Sony name, not the Minolta name.

Shingoshi · 11-04-2009, 08:17 PM

That with Pentax being under the control of another company, we are likely to never see truly professional-grade photographic products from Pentax again. There simply isn't enough profit margin to invest in a market group that would be deemed insignificant by percentage of total sales. I just don't see Hoya ever having the incentive to change the situation.

It might even be argued that the 645 was nothing more than a high-end consumer product when compared to the likes of Mamiya or Bronica. They just did too little too late. So photographers were left with not being able to take the company or it's products as a commitment to their needs.

Maybe when aliens come to earth, we might see a Pentax 67 Digital. Yeah, right!

Xavian-Anderson Macpherson
ShingoshiDao

philippe · 11-05-2009, 01:02 AM

So, let's resume, are we ore are we not going to see a FF in 2010?

Philippe

thibs · 11-05-2009, 04:05 AM

IMO they will make a partnership like the Samsung partnership but more effective, the Samsung deal really didn't bring anything for either company but sensors.

henrx · 11-05-2009, 04:09 AM

should be easy to resume:

ogl says were going to see FF in 2010 - everyone else is doubting that...

Well, i know another person who ist talking about FF from Pentax including some lenses,
but i would expect nothing and would not hold my breath for it.
Nevertheless, he was right about the K-7, and that was why i preordered it already in April, this year!

Next big step from Pentax will be the 645D.

Rondec · 11-05-2009, 05:05 AM

Originally Posted by Shingoshi

That with Pentax being under the control of another company, we are likely to never see truly professional-grade photographic products from Pentax again. There simply isn't enough profit margin to invest in a market group that would be deemed insignificant by percentage of total sales. I just don't see Hoya ever having the incentive to change the situation.

It might even be argued that the 645 was nothing more than a high-end consumer product when compared to the likes of Mamiya or Bronica. They just did too little too late. So photographers were left with not being able to take the company or it's products as a commitment to their needs.

Maybe when aliens come to earth, we might see a Pentax 67 Digital. Yeah, right!

Xavian-Anderson Macpherson
ShingoshiDao

I think that Pentax is currently building a base with strong entry-level and prosumer models. If that base increases sufficiently, then it would make sense to venture into professional level cameras, but not before. For some reason, a lot of people think you start with the professional level and move down, but that doesn't work very well. I think the 67 Digital is real and not vaporware. The R and D is done and it only makes sense to launch it, even if it is made in tiny numbers overall (how many digital medium format cameras are sold each year?).

Jimfear · 11-05-2009, 05:32 AM

67D?? Have I missed something?

ozlizard · 11-05-2009, 06:22 AM

I think that Pentax is currently building a base with strong entry-level and prosumer models

Pentax already has that, the Kx is certainly the best entry level DSLR in the market, and the K7/K20 up with the best midrange. Bring on the top of the range. MF will be overrun by FF except for studio work. Before the recent rapid avancement of DSLR's MF was seen to be the pinnacle of the digital revolution. But that technology is and will be overtaken. FF is the next logical step, the only logical step at this point in time. What comes after who knows? (apart from Ogl of course!).

Aristophanes · 11-05-2009, 06:47 AM

Originally Posted by ozlizard

Pentax already has that, the Kx is certainly the best entry level DSLR in the market, and the K7/K20 up with the best midrange. Bring on the top of the range. MF will be overrun by FF except for studio work. Before the recent rapid advancement of DSLR's MF was seen to be the pinnacle of the digital revolution. But that technology is and will be overtaken. FF is the next logical step, the only logical step at this point in time. What comes after who knows? (apart from Ogl of course!).

You see the MF before the FF. Pentax already put its chips on the table. The debate about MF vs. FF is ages old and unlikely to be resolved with any Pentax FF system. The real impact FF is having is on the video side of things.

Pentax could quite handily design and manufacture an FF body (probably already have it mostly done). What they likely cannot do is put together a comprehensive lens system to take advantage of the FF capabilities. There is a net ROI loss on DSLR bodies, and a net gain on lenses. This is because the development cycle of bodies is short and competitive; less so for lenses. Why do you think lenses rocketed up in price and bodies trawled downwards?

They would need a full range of FF zooms matching the DA* SDM series for FF at launch. There is no money in making a body for legacy glass, so to make a profitable FF they need lens development to by in sync. Discussing an FF system based on just sensors in bodies is silly.

LensScribe · 11-05-2009, 07:07 AM

Originally Posted by Aristophanes

There is no money in making a body for legacy glass.

Really? Isn't support for legacy glass a Pentax selling point? It's certainly what excites me most about a potential Pentax FF. I'd love to be able to use my 17mm Takumar Fish Eye on a FF digital, even if the quality isn't quite what it would be were it a dedicated digital FF lens, I can't imagine it would be unusably appalling.