Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-27-2010, 01:22 AM   #16
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
Not yet. But the danger exists that eventually, the Pentax system arrives at the same sad point. A point where a sensor can be too small to keep up SLR sales and the vendor leaves the SLR camp.
No. This isn't the threat for Pentax. If that point is reached, it's not going to be because people will want FF DSLRs, but because they want smaller pocketable MILCs. That is why Olympus is moving out of DSLRs. That is why Sony is dropping FF and moving to MILCs as well. The market for smaller cameras with advanced features and "larger" APS or smaller (!) sensors is going to be bigger than the market for FF, if it's not already.

10-27-2010, 02:50 AM   #17
Veteran Member
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor Quote
No. This isn't the threat for Pentax. If that point is reached, it's not going to be because people will want FF DSLRs, but because they want smaller pocketable MILCs. That is why Olympus is moving out of DSLRs. That is why Sony is dropping FF and moving to MILCs as well. The market for smaller cameras with advanced features and "larger" APS or smaller (!) sensors is going to be bigger than the market for FF, if it's not already.
You are right but putting it this way is an oversimplification.

The SLR market will split into MILC at the low end and very capable SLRs at the higher end. With the MILC end being larger (no, it is still small ATM). But doesn't matter. P&S is larger too. What does matter though is what will happen with the K mount. And I've yet to see somebody with a MILC who doesn't have an SLR too...

The only thing I wanted to say is that I would be sorry to see the K mount die the way the FT mount died. Because it is not inevitable (for FT, it was because the mount left no other option). Also, I have problems to see how Pentax would be big enough to introduce yet another mount.

Last edited by falconeye; 10-27-2010 at 02:56 AM.
10-27-2010, 03:39 AM   #18
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 341
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
Also, I have problems to see how Pentax would be big enough to introduce yet another mount.
I'd like to see Pentax hop into bed with Sony for the MILC market, i.e. for the NEX system. Sure, Pentax has more to gain from this than Sony, but the NEX system would be the real winner.
10-28-2010, 12:05 AM   #19
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
It's going to be interesting to see how things play out. But I have a hard time seeing FF as guaranteeing the survival of the K-mount or of anything else. Because to do that, it would mean that APS has to die out - and there is no sign of that happening. On the contrary, I see both Nikon and Canon as stepping up and producing more competitive APS cameras than before. They have enough market share already to afford to produce FF cameras, but everyone else needs to gain share before they can venture into offering FF. Otherwise they just waste their budget.

Also, I don't care that much about the K-mount as long as there are mounts on which K-mount lenses can be adapted. Pentax could just move to a new mount and provide adapters for their K-mount lenses.

MILCs are still in their infancy at this point. Someone has to get their act together and come up with a really good camera system in this category. If Fuji would have come up with an X100 with interchangeable lenses, I think they could have blown out all micro 4/3s competition with that offering.

NEX would be an interesting system for me if they had image stabilization in the body. But its lack makes me prefer the Olympus offerings. And Olympus seems to be exiting the SLR arena for good. I don't expect them to come back. E-5 may be their last release, so it doesn't really matter even if it were amazing. I'm still waiting for them to release an E-P* camera at an affordable price - I think their current prices are ridiculous.

10-28-2010, 05:46 AM   #20
Veteran Member
Frogfish's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 4,490
I don't understand the logic of people who think that Pentax are losing a large share of the market / current or future / by not having a FF in the armoury.

The vast majority of DSLR owners don't WANT a FF camera. They want what Pentax are now delivering and what is making the Kx / Kr and K5 winners : smaller / tougher (well in the case of the K5 & K7 at least) / High ISO capability / and a faster AF system / as well as high quality affordable glass (legacy or otherwise).

They also want reach without the expense, and the APS-C sensor is a Godsend in that regard.

Pentax should continue to do what they are doing because Pros / serious Amateurs are not going to suddenly flock to Pentax if they introduce a FF. However the financial burden of developing it could have wide-reaching consequences for the company if it fails.
10-28-2010, 08:18 AM   #21
REM
Forum Member




Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 78
Agreed. Pentax probably has figured the DSLR market segments are:

(extreme) novice - folks getting their first dslr. The guys only use kit lens or maybe the kit and one or two other consumer lens (low tier; most likely zoom). Largest percentage of the dslr market.
.
enthusiast (prosumer) - folks with more cash for a better camera. May or may not have had DSLR before. These folks use a more varied lens selection with varying price points (consumer lenses to top tier glass; zooms and primes) .

professional/extreme enthusiast - folks with a lot of money for a camera (since work might pay for it if you're a pro photographer). Needs full frame camera and top tier glass. Smallest segment of dslr market.

Pentax probably thinks a ff camera is an extreme business risk for such a small segment. They rather focus on the other two segments which is the largest part of the market.
10-28-2010, 09:53 AM   #22
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Mexico
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,125
QuoteOriginally posted by Frogfish Quote
I don't understand the logic of people who think that Pentax are losing a large share of the market / current or future / by not having a FF in the armoury.

The vast majority of DSLR owners don't WANT a FF camera. They want what Pentax are now delivering and what is making the Kx / Kr and K5 winners : smaller / tougher (well in the case of the K5 & K7 at least) / High ISO capability / and a faster AF system / as well as high quality affordable glass (legacy or otherwise).

They also want reach without the expense, and the APS-C sensor is a Godsend in that regard.

Pentax should continue to do what they are doing because Pros / serious Amateurs are not going to suddenly flock to Pentax if they introduce a FF. However the financial burden of developing it could have wide-reaching consequences for the company if it fails.
Agreed. With the IQ from APS-C making such dramatic leaps (especially when combined with the latest NR software), the rationale for FF gets weaker, not stronger, even as FF IQ improves. Pentax is on the right track with compact, light, well-built DSLRs that can deliver IQ that is more than adequate for the vast majority of shooters. This is not to say that FF will not continue to have some advantages, but the attendant size/weight/expense trade-offs are becoming less appealing.

Rob
10-28-2010, 01:28 PM   #23
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Eureka, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,979
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
Not yet. But the danger exists that eventually, the Pentax system arrives at the same sad point. A point where a sensor can be too small to keep up SLR sales and the vendor leaves the SLR camp.
Unfortunately, that's a plausible scenario. But it's hardly inevitable. The APS-C sensor is already pretty well entrenched and it may stay that way for many years to come. Consumers may continue to regard FF as an expensive luxury (because of the price of FF glass) they can do without. Under that scenario, Pentax will have guessed right in not pursuing FF.

In any case, it's got to be a tough decision for a small company like Pentax with limited resources and a tiny market share, not knowing which way the FF winds are going to turn. If Pentax had a larger market share, FF would be no brainer. As it is, there are risks no matter what course Pentax decides to take.

10-28-2010, 03:07 PM   #24
Veteran Member
Kenn100D's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Paranaque City, Philippines
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 646
Maybe that's why Pentax moved to MF for the Higher End Pro and APS-C for the Mid and Lower segment. Pentax is in its crossroad but staying there for awhile and see what happens later (After effect of K-r & K-5).

Last edited by Kenn100D; 10-28-2010 at 03:08 PM. Reason: missed " in " in the sentence
10-28-2010, 03:41 PM   #25
Pentaxian
aleonx3's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Brampton, Ontario
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,888
QuoteOriginally posted by northcoastgreg Quote
Unfortunately, that's a plausible scenario. But it's hardly inevitable. The APS-C sensor is already pretty well entrenched and it may stay that way for many years to come. Consumers may continue to regard FF as an expensive luxury (because of the price of FF glass) they can do without. Under that scenario, Pentax will have guessed right in not pursuing FF.
I have different thoughts on this one... it's true that APS-C camera has reached the level where the "current" version of FF cameras are not "much" better. But that is likely not the case for long as the big twos will start squeezing out more from the FF sensor while lowering the FF camera price points to similar spots currently occupied by D300s and 7D to entice customers. That will force Pentax to take a serious look at offering FF (not without help from SONY though as they don't make sensors). The majority of the beginners are clueless any way.
10-28-2010, 04:19 PM   #26
Veteran Member
Steelski's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Varna
Posts: 468
The K-7 was seen as the E3 that should have been.

Now the E5 sits between the K-7 and K-5 IMO.
As well built as the K-5 (probably better actually)
With less performance.
The Oly massive glass is something to consider. If you already have a fast Oly glass investment then its a no brainer. But for a new system, I think the D7000 and K-5 will get the lions share.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, dslr, k-5, k-5 ii, k-5 iis, k5, pentax k-5
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax 645, Pentax 645N and Pentax 645NII Compared Ole Pentax DSLR and Camera Articles 4 11-13-2015 02:54 PM
Pentax K-5, K-7, and K20D Compared Adam Pentax DSLR and Camera Articles 15 06-14-2013 09:26 PM
Pentax K-x, K-m and K200D Compared Ole Pentax DSLR and Camera Articles 5 08-20-2010 03:19 AM
Pentax K-7, K20D, and K10D Compared Ole Pentax DSLR and Camera Articles 0 05-24-2009 09:13 AM
Pentax Fisheye Zooms Compared Ole Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 1 09-23-2006 08:11 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:46 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top