Pentax and Full Frame

Very rational arguments IMO. I'm not wishing for a full frame camera, but I'd feel obliged to buy it if it were a Pentax. Most of my lenses would handle it.

FF is nice yes... but I wonder, is it that relevant anymore? at the time of the 5D things were a bit different technologically. Now the technology is at such a point that an APS-C produces better pictures that a 5D (I'm thinking s/n here). To me the question is: where are we on the DoF front? If Pentax wants to satisfy Pro, why don't they come with really fast lenses for their APS-C. Yes a K-5 is not close to a 1D Mark IV but frankly it's not so much the sensor size...

Well, I abondoned the ship. No FF with Pentax and a nice 5D Mark III. I love my k7
but heck... when you go pro, it is simply not enough for some jobs.
Guess I'll start a poll in the forum ^^

Pentax is already gone for pro users. Last June I got a project to shoot interior and guess what I could not find even a single place here in new York where i could to rent wide engle lens for the job.

My post may be late to the show here, but I concur with many of the sentiments about Pentax needing a Full Frame camera in it's lineup. I still shoot film because I have had a love for it since my high school photography classes using a K1000, a fantastic camera.I moved for years to Olympus and thought that was home but they have drifted away from serious cameras in favor of consumer fancey 4/3 and 4/3 micro dribble and to add insult completely abandoned their legacy line of lenses that they were famous for. I had switched to Pentax, ZX-L, because of the backward compatability that is built into the system. This said to me 'we are looking to the future by preserving our past' and that is of paramount importance to users. SO, my belief is that Pentax needs a full frame platform to help lead their loyal customers into the future. My thoughts are Pentax should start with the K.I.S.S. Monicker, Keep It Simple Stupid, and build an FF camera on the lines of, say, the MZ-3 or MZ-5N. Manual controls with the smallest amount of buttons as possible, on the same line as the Sigma DSLR cameras. This should keep the price down and make it a hit with the Pentax faithful.

Personally, I would love for Pentax to bring out a Full Frame DSLR. It is with this hope that I have been buying FA* and FA ltd lenses instead of the smaller cheaper and more available DA ones. But now I am on the verge of selling it all and buying Nikon as I am breaking into professional photography. I love the "unmeasureables" that the limited and FA* lenses bring to pictures - the buttons and numbers thing doesn't really interest me, but it interests clients, and if someone asks me why I'm the only photographer at an event with a Pentax it is hard to explain that it is because I love using the discontinued kit while waiting for the unannounced kit. I just get wierd looks... So Pantax, or Pentax Ricoh Imaging, please help me justify using your products and bring out a serious pro body. And no I can't afford to keep the pentax for hoby work and buy Nikon for work, as I live in the real world.

and not a movie making device ( and you already have both SR and video in K-5 if you want it ) my point being that they are not absolutely neccesary in a "basic" K1000 type digital camera . How often do you take 10fps sequences , and if you do , you don't usually use RAW ( maximum image quality ) , do you ? MX is smaller than K20D yet it is a 24x36mm camera , so in my opinion it can be done ( Yes we can ! ) if Pentax Ricoh chooses not to directly compete with Canon , Nikon & Sony in this 5% market segment but redefines the concept instead ; simple , robust , no gadgets , high image quality 16-24MP sensor already available . Without a digital 24x36mm which is a symbolic benchmark I am afraid Pentax can in no more than a few years perspective start preparing for ending their presence in the photographic field because mass-psychology always prevails against rationality ... Is a digital Pentax FF necessary ? Frankly , I think not . Can Pentax survive without one ? Sadly , I think not .

Pentax Forums : "chaza01" asks why not a digital Pentax LX ?
I think you are right "chaza01" , but in my opinion a "digital Pentax K1000" would be preferable to a "digital Pentax LX" . It is my impression that "photopeople" have in recent years become much more interested in gadgets attached to their camera instead of what the camera is supposed to do ( the advertisment business has a lot to do with it ...) . In most situations you could have the same result on film with K1000 as with LX for a fraction of the camera cost , why would not this be true for digital ? There are two conflicting vectors in the 24x36mm sensor format , it represents only 5% of the digital market ( and well furbished by 3 competing companies ) but on the other hand it impacts on how these producers are perceived by the photographic community ( no FF ? buuuuh , they aren't a serious company ...) The reason for the first is that digital FF cameras are very sophisticated , very large , very intimidating ( just count the number of buttons , switches and dials on one of these monsters ) and , of course , very expensive . The reason for the latter is mass-psychology , a factor that Pentax seems to have underestimated in their digital approach ; if you are a professional photographer 645D is just great for you ( correct ...) and if you are a hobbyist K-5 is just great for you ( correct again ...) . BUT , psychology and rationality are not always a perfect match so people wish for a cheap , solid , versatile , and providing excellent image quality 24x36mm FF digital camera no matter what ... Is it feasible ? Yes it is ! ( my appologies to the President of the U.S.A.) Pentax did it with the K1000 and they could do it again if they decided to get ridd of all the gagedtry in a ultra-sophisticated FF . Clear pictures were taken for many decades before Shake Reduction was marketed as something else ( it makes a FF camera very large , that's for sure ) a photographic camera is a photographic camera and

I have been steady with Pentax...my bodies include the K10, K20, K7 and K5. These bodies and my Pentax lenses support my commercial photography business. While I feel an appreciation and a loyalty to Pentax, I will confess that I have been watching the price of the Canon 5d Mark 2 for 18 months...I am so close to a purchase of that full frame system that I can almost smell the UPS truck in the neighborhood.

I am only one consumer; however, I believe there are many consumers who have or are currently experiencing the same situation. I've decided that a full frame sensor will be included in my working tools. What I've not yet decided is whether I will jump ship and swim to another company.

One thing holding me back a tad right now is that I may regret later that I didn't wait for Pentax. I have huge respect for Pentax and, in 2011, while shopping for a powerful, RAW-shooting, compact point-and-shoot, I invested in the Ricoh GX 100...any company that can build the GX 100 has my respect. So I certainly support the marriage of these two companies.

I trust that the Canon will support my work well...but I can't stop thinking that a Pentax full frame camera will shine and make us proud...look at the evidence: K10, K20, K7 and K5...My gosh the K5 is an amazing camera.

Thanks for listening.

What I find most striking difference between current D-SLR's and the film-exposing camera's of the past (especially the pre-AF-models) is that even though the frame-sizes are much smaller the camera's are way much bigger, even μ-Four-Thirds-camera's are bigger than Olympus OM-series and famous Pentax LX and K-, M-, A and P-series camera's. Also the Q is bigger than the Auto 110-SLR and in the review of the Q we can se one of the major reasons for this is the enormous battery/accu compared to the button-cell's of those camera's. These enormous batteries are needed because of the high energy-consumption of modern camera's. The other reason is the size of the electromotors and other energy-consuming electronic parts. Smaller camera's should be pursued by miniaturisation of these componants, not by reducing the image size. Even though the size of K-5 and K-R is just right for many people, others prefer a smaller camera. This used to be the distinctive difference between Pentax and other brands but Pentax lost this USP when they issued their first AF-SLR and have been in decline since. Olympus, whose OM-series were also small tried to keep this by choosing a smaller frameformat; Four-Thirds but that does also have its disadvantages.

This difference in size is less in comparison for a camera with a bigger exposure-frame, e.g. a full-frame (24×36mm) or a 3:4-equivalent (24×32 or 24×30 like the famous Nikon rangefinders)which would be even more usefull.

As for Pentax current APS-C-sized D-SLR's, recently there have been issue's probably releated to tolerances in fine mechanics and quality-control. Ricoh-Pentax should improve here by appling more strict tolerances and stricter quality-standards, even though this comes at a price. People should feel they have a quality-product in their hands. This also applies to SDM-lenses. Personally I wil stick to DA-limited and FA-limited if I buy new lenses. For me this is a bigger issue as full-frame and I think a full-frame came

In my opinion Pentax only has 2 playable cards: the K5 and K-r, which are going to be renewed. However there is a big lack of lenses: please Pentax, release all your old FA and STAR lensen, including the 200mm macro!!! And what is more, soon a FullFrame camera. The quest of tinier cameras is not so interesting to me. The K-5 has a nice format. Should not be smaller. What is a real problem with Pentax is their after sales service/repair. It has been committed to third parties, which often do a mediocre and ex^pensive job, with very long delays (up to a month and more). For the 645D this is catastrophic. Pentax should create a real professional after sales network.
The rest of the bunch, Q and compact cameras is not up to what we might wish. The Q is a sad mistake. In the hybried 3/4 (I do not like this format) Pentax had to better Nexus 7, and not launch an expensive fun camera (too small) like the Q.
With the compacts, better look at Fuji X10, and make a better one. Pentax could abandon all the rest, including the entire line of Ricoh cameras. Please Ricoh save your money on Ricoh cameras and make of Pentax a real player in the photo (video?) market!!!
JERP

I'm still hoping that a major player will come out with a FF mirrorless system camera. Why not Pentax? They'd be the only ones besides Leica, and the Leica isn't really designed to be used as a mirrorless camera anyway.

Still, if Pentax does come out with a FF DLSR, this will be good news for the millions of folks who have held onto all those great manual focus K-mount lenses over the past several decades. Not all of us have drunk the AF Koolaid. :)

Why not an APS-H senzor 18-20MP , wouldn't it be sufficient for professional image quality ? I bet it would , then there will be full compatibility with all K lenses , Limited and especially DA* lenses , the camera could be made more compact and cheaper and there is a gap in the market there , lots of advantages ...
And a second shutter trigger connected to the viewfinder so you could take the picture by blinking ( has to be activated by a dedicated button of course ) would help taking photos at incredible low shutter speeds , no other competitor offers that .

You are right on the mark! I am tired of just seeing higher pixel counts without real improvements. It is ironic that 14MP full-frame camera from a few years ago can still outshoot the 18MP APS-Cs of now, without the useless bells and whistles. I am no pro, but I'd still rather spend my money AND my computer storage and file-transfer time on a full-frame image than on what is beginning to become glorified point-and-shoots with tiny-pixel high-count APS-C's.

As much as I'd like to see a Pentax 35mm digital (I hate to call those full-frame), it would be stupid for Pentax as a company at this point to invest in a distinct market segment that has dominance of professional camera users. And Pentax don't have any new lenses either for 35mm format.

Playing the "devils advocate" could it be that many K and KA mount lenses would be out-resolved by a modern Pentax full frame DSLR? I have recently bought a K5 to replace mt K20D. Going through and testing my old lens collection (K and M42 mount) I can detect differences in sharpness and tonal quality in my lenses on the K5 that I could not see with my K20d. From this it may well be that with a big step-up Pentax would have to design a complete new range of lenses.

Also in Germany many many Pentax Users hope, that there will be a Pentax full frame camera with K-Mount. The letter to Pentax was a very good idea!nnBest regardsnPeter