[Pål Jensen]

I know that Pentax is loosing a lot of money and influence in the serious photo amateur community because people see no way to upgrade beyond K-5. ...

Really? They have never sold more cameras in this price range ever in their entire history.....
They are also making money and it is hard to see how a Pentax FF camera could be profitable as opposed to desireable...

[falconeye]

Really? They have never sold more cameras in this price range ever in their entire history.....
They are also making money and it is hard to see how a Pentax FF camera could be profitable as opposed to desireable...

I agree, the K-5 has bought Pentax some time.
But not even the K-x comes close to the success of the K10D. Since then, Pentax has lost considerable market share. If they sell more (any proof?), then because the market saw a boost in 2007/2008. I agree, the downturn was stopped. And turned positive recently. And now the K-5 buys more time.

But the point is, at the time of K10D, the K10D was the perfect package at a very affordable price. It redefined the enthusiast segment.

Pentax can and actually need to do it again. But no APSC SLR will be able to do this trick now. Maybe EVIL with a killer K adapter and contrast AF, maybe a FF EVIL or affordable, uncrippled and compact FF SLR. Or an SLR with a hybrid viewfinder which can overlay optical and electronic. Who knows...

Don't get me wrong. The K-5 seems to be fantastic. Its just not a long-term solution for people who outgrew their K20D/K-7...

What really hurts Pentax business wise is that the classic buyers of pro grade glass (as far as it still exists), e.g. DA*s, either have bought everything already, or are in attention mode, or worse even, make fine glass available on the used market when adding a FF body to their gear. Because thid is where the margins are...

[knumbnutz]

I think the other area that is unanswered still for me, is how good is the flash ?

High iso is great, AF from what i hear is great, so it remains to be seen how good the flash works with the camera.

I have the D700 and K20D and will upgrade to K5 for the first two alone, but the flash would be a killer.

Cheers Neil

[Wheatfield]

Really? They have never sold more cameras in this price range ever in their entire history.....
They are also making money and it is hard to see how a Pentax FF camera could be profitable as opposed to desireable...

+1.
The other thing is that there is an upgrade path from the K5.
The only thing the FF moaners can bring to the table now is the DOF thing, and that is more of a canard than anything else.

If you want a larger sensor and less DOF, the 645 exists. I've used it.

People keep comparing the K-5 to FF cameras on the market now, the 5DmkII and the D700. This is great, it may grab a few peoples attention spans, but not for very long. You are boasting about how the K-5 can compete with 2 now almost two year old cameras. As soon as the 5D mark III comes out in the next 6 months or so, the K-5 will look like an average camera again. It's just a cycle. FF will always be ahead of APS-C. But hopefully Canon makes the mark III a full upgrade, not just a few minor updates.

[knumbnutz]

Hi Falconeye,

To the best of my experience, nikon glass is nothing to write home about.
If people want/need pro glass then DA* lenses have better IQ, limited are better as well.
I have some of nikons finest (so people tell me), which are better made than the DA* but I can't say the IQ is as good. The only let down is CA on the 16-50 and apart from that BOKEH is soo much better in pentax lenses.

DOF is not that much of deal on FF, Large VF on FF maybe better but not on a par with film VF IMO either.

Size and weight are a whole different issue depending on what you want.

....and then theres the expense !

So WHAT ARE the REAL advantages of FF......

Neil

[kittykat46]

I think the other area that is unanswered still for me, is how good is the flash ?

High iso is great, AF from what i hear is great, so it remains to be seen how good the flash works with the camera.

I have the D700 and K20D and will upgrade to K5 for the first two alone, but the flash would be a killer.

Cheers Neil

Pentax has seriously improved P-TTL accuracy for On-Board and On-Hotshoe flash from the K-7 onwards.
I have much less need to fiddle with the Flash Exposure compensation knob any more, especially when doing bounce flash, Slow-Synchro and High-Speed Synch.

However, if you need to do Studio-style work with wireless flash and multiple-flash control, Pentax is wayyy behind the other major brands.

[Kill-K]

3. FA43 will be 43 mm, FA31 will be outstanding wide-angle lens, not standart,
FA77 will be 77 mm. e.t.c.

Yes...this is from my heart as well...even thought I ordered my K5 and waiting for its arrival...but...still hope one day...I can use my lenses as they have been in film days

[Wheatfield]

People keep comparing the K-5 to FF cameras on the market now, the 5DmkII and the D700. This is great, it may grab a few peoples attention spans, but not for very long. You are boasting about how the K-5 can compete with 2 now almost two year old cameras. As soon as the 5D mark III comes out in the next 6 months or so, the K-5 will look like an average camera again. It's just a cycle. FF will always be ahead of APS-C. But hopefully Canon makes the mark III a full upgrade, not just a few minor updates.

At this point, perhaps for the measurebators, but these things have all gotten so good that the real world differences in picture quality are greatly diminished.
A couple of years ago, I would have agreed with you, today I don't.
And there is still that little matter of the 645D, which, if you need a big sensor, is a fair way ahead of anything a 135 format camera has.

This is your upgrade path with Pentax, learn to live with it.

[Pål Jensen]

People keep comparing the K-5 to FF cameras on the market now, the 5DmkII and the D700. This is great, it may grab a few peoples attention spans, but not for very long. You are boasting about how the K-5 can compete with 2 now almost two year old cameras. As soon as the 5D mark III comes out in the next 6 months or so, the K-5 will look like an average camera again. It's just a cycle. FF will always be ahead of APS-C. But hopefully Canon makes the mark III a full upgrade, not just a few minor updates.

..but the APS sensors are one or two generation ahead of FF sensors at least. This is telling to where the manufacturers think the action is...

[Winder]

People keep comparing the K-5 to FF cameras on the market now, the 5DmkII and the D700. This is great, it may grab a few peoples attention spans, but not for very long. You are boasting about how the K-5 can compete with 2 now almost two year old cameras. As soon as the 5D mark III comes out in the next 6 months or so, the K-5 will look like an average camera again. It's just a cycle. FF will always be ahead of APS-C. But hopefully Canon makes the mark III a full upgrade, not just a few minor updates.

I think you are missing the point. The D700 is more of a camera than most people - pros included - really need. Once an APS-C camera reaches a certain level of performance we will start to see diminishing returns. I am still using my much older 5D for my work because it meets 90% of my needs and I can not justify spending $2,000 to improve 10% of my work. My 5D has taken over 120K images and it is to the point I'm just waiting for the mirror to fall off, so I have the money set aside to not only replace it, but completely change systems.

APS-C does not need to ever "catch" 135mm. It only needs to provide a level of performance that meets the needs of the majority of the market. The "upgrade path" argument is pointless because 90% of the users will never upgrade in the first place. All the major companies do a significant amount of market research and if Pentax had evidence that the 135mm market was going to generate enough revenue to justify the cost of developing a 135mm line I'm pretty sure they would have shown signs of moving in that direction.

The only reason that I might not stay with Pentax is that I prefer long fast glass like the CZ 135mm f/1.8 on APS-C bodies and when it comes to long fast primes Pentax is not even in the game. The K-5 is more than capable of meeting the needs of the majority of professional photographers.

[cbaytan]

Ok, oddball is in, I am completely with Pentax on FF issue, forget the D700 and Canon 5DII and other FF's Pentax gave it's answer to them with 645D. D3x is 6500$, 645D is 10.000, a 30% discount and maybe a smaller&lighter version of 645D should swap the FF and MF market. 645D is not a lot bigger or heavier than D3x. Why insist on 24x36mm limitation, I just don't get it. There is also Pentax's current FF lens line issue. 645D has not.

[Rondec]

People keep comparing the K-5 to FF cameras on the market now, the 5DmkII and the D700. This is great, it may grab a few peoples attention spans, but not for very long. You are boasting about how the K-5 can compete with 2 now almost two year old cameras. As soon as the 5D mark III comes out in the next 6 months or so, the K-5 will look like an average camera again. It's just a cycle. FF will always be ahead of APS-C. But hopefully Canon makes the mark III a full upgrade, not just a few minor updates.

There are a couple of things here. a) Update cycles on full frame cameras are always slower than on APS-C. Roughly two to one ratio. APS-C cameras are updated every eighteen months versus every two and a half to three years for full frame. b) As others have said there is a point at which differences in high iso are insignificant. I don't see really wanting to be able to shoot at over iso 12000. Maybe if I could do it regularly my mind would change, but full frame having a couple of stops improvement in high iso would be unimportant to me.

The biggest things that full frame brings to the table are the ability to manipulate depth of field and bigger viewfinder. The biggest negatives (and these are really big to me) are cost and size. If you gave me the option of having a D700 and a 24-70 f2.8/70-200 f2.8 or, a K5 with a 16-50/50-135, I would likely choose the K5. For my kind of shooting -- family events, portraits, hiking, the D700 would never come along. The cost difference in just this camera lens combination is significant: the Pentax combo would cost 3200 versus 5700 for the Nikon combo. You could buy all of the limiteds for that difference.

There are people who need full frame, but for me, I don't think it fits me at all.

[Class A]

Why insist on 24x36mm limitation, I just don't get it.

The problem with the 645D upgrade path as I see it is twofold:

1. The 645D might be cheap compared to other MF offers but you could buy five (5) Sony A850 full frame cameras for the price of one Pentax 645D.
2. Typically people's investment in glass is much higher than in the body. An FF body allows you to reuse your glass (FF glass will not even require crop mode) while the 645D requires you to start from scratch regarding having an encompassing set of lenses.

Furthermore, although the 645D isn't a monster, with a lens attached it is quite a bit more bulky than a K-5 (an FF-variant need not be bigger) with an FA 77/1.8 attached.

In summary, I can perfectly see why not everyone is happy with the current gap in the upgrade path.

[falconeye]

This discussion reflects the current wave of new products, D7000, 7D, 60D, K-5. I understand and share the excitement.

But just because we're too excited or too small to see the next wave coming, doesn't mean it's not already rolling at us.