[sifun]

another perspective from another PMA attendee...

i remember hearing that too.. i'm wondering if you're the guy who was waiting with me when someone took out their (pink) canon P&S to take a shot of it..

High 13K - low 14K, but for the KIT!!!

Ah not me, I didn't bring my camera

I probably heard incorrectly about body only.
Wouldn't suprise me for that price though

[nakey]

Yeah, well, at least they won't be able to flog Hassy lenses with the 645D, like they did with the other Pentaxes and Sigma (really, really damaged the brand's rep down here.)

Whilst i don't mind some sigma lenses, i do agree. pairing the 18-125, 18-50DC and 55-200DC wasn't a bright decision.. if only i knew back in 05 when i got my *ist DS

(in retrospec, the 18-125 isn't bad, if only the barrel distortions wern't so pronounced on it at wide as my Tammy 18-200)

Still funny that one of the CRK reps go "it's good value compared to the Hassy", then i turn the corner and they're trying to flog the hassy as good value

Oh man, is the 645D sexy or what... and they had the Kore Ja Nai Roboto K-X there too...

[Philippos]

Right. Because my only complaint with the K20d was that it needed 6 more megapixels. I hope this isn't true, aps-c or FF. If Nikon is still putting out 12mp FF's, that smoke the competition in hish ISO IQ, then why doesn't everyone feel the need to keep pushing the bar?

Actually, they have a different target markets. Nikon made the D3, but they also made the D3x. As Pentax is non existant in sport photography, it does not need a super fast sensor (it doesn't have the lenses or the AF system to support it). A high resolution FF however, is much closer to Pentax's fanbase desires. Personally, I wouldn't mind a weather sealed equivalent to a Sony a900 (or a850), or a Canon 5D with all those video features and Pentax glass (at Pentax prices).

The bad stuff is that if this rumour turns to be truth, all second hand FF lenses wil sell for double the price than they currently do.

Generally however, what really annoys me about Pentax, is their hesitation to present a solid roadmap. I mean, take a look at Leica. They made the S2, and at the day they announced it they presented the lens line as well. Not all of them were ready, but a possible buyer knew what was ahead. Pentax on the other hand with the 645D, presented a single lens and a possible second some days later (but it has so many old lenses...makes me wonder if Pentax have bought too many ebay shares).

The same will probably happen now with the rumoured FF. IF they make it and IF they sell it, it's quite possible that by they time they have a complete lens line, we will be talking about the FF mkII.

[thibs]

As for AF, they may upgrade it (a real upgrade I mean), who knows?

As for the roadmap, it was problematic because:
* some lenses were so much delayed (read: 60-250)
* it gives every other camera companies all they need to know to counter Pentax.

Canon/Nikon could do roadmap if they wanted, for Pentax it is a lot more tricky so I understand why they didn't update it anymore although I'd prefer to have one.

[CyberSammy]

Most likely it will be a APS-H sensor because of current lens lineup. In my opinion the current DA/DA* can cover the APS-H sensor, but only some of them can cover FF. So there's logical point that new body will utilize the 21MPx APS-H sensor featuring the gapless design.

[thibs]

Once and for all, there'll be never an APS-H camera.
Lenses are not compatible (yep some are not even for APS-H), it would introduce yet another cropped format, would mean new lense because standard/wides are not anymore and there's no sensor for it.

No, no and no. FF is A LOT more likely (and not likely that much so APS-H is fantasy).

[eurostar]

Pentax on the other hand with the 645D, presented a single lens and a possible second some days later (but it has so many old lenses...makes me wonder if Pentax have bought too many ebay shares).

Most if not any of the A and FA 645 lenses are IN PRODUCTION. They are not just old used lenses on eBay. You can buy them for new (at least in Japan).

[Kunzite]

Generally however, what really annoys me about Pentax, is their hesitation to present a solid roadmap. I mean, take a look at Leica. They made the S2, and at the day they announced it they presented the lens line as well. Not all of them were ready, but a possible buyer knew what was ahead. Pentax on the other hand with the 645D, presented a single lens and a possible second some days later (but it has so many old lenses...makes me wonder if Pentax have bought too many ebay shares).

Pentax on the other hand presented a full lens line-up - readily available, not just items on a roadmap. Ah, and a wide angle mock-up.
Is that really worse than the 4 Leica-S lenses?

[lithos]

Whilst i don't mind some sigma lenses, i do agree. pairing the 18-125, 18-50DC and 55-200DC wasn't a bright decision.. if only i knew back in 05 when i got my *ist DS

A few "professional" customer service people in camera stores I've been to have told me they thought Pentax didn't make their own lenses, on the basis of CRK's behaviour.

Still funny that one of the CRK reps go "it's good value compared to the Hassy", then i turn the corner and they're trying to flog the hassy as good value

That's why I really wish we had Pentax Australia instead of CRK. Can't serve two masters. Frankly, I think the Pentax 645D would probably be just as good, if not better, for 90% of the current Aussie Hasselblad users, unless you really, really need 60MP.

Actually, they have a different target markets. Nikon made the D3, but they also made the D3x. As Pentax is non existant in sport photography, it does not need a super fast sensor (it doesn't have the lenses or the AF system to support it). A high resolution FF however, is much closer to Pentax's fanbase desires. Personally, I wouldn't mind a weather sealed equivalent to a Sony a900 (or a850), or a Canon 5D with all those video features and Pentax glass (at Pentax prices).

Why shouldn't Pentax have fast AF? Why shouldn't they have long, fast lenses and high ISO sensitivity? Why not? Are these bad things?

Probably the reason Pentax isn't used by sports photogs isn't because Pentax users don't want to shoot sport - it's because a lot of them found the AF speed, FPS and noise levels not conducive to sports photography.

In 1992, Nikon released the F90. It was regarded as a stop-gap measure, to create an AF system that could compete with Canons, since a lot of journalists were abandoning the traditional Nikon camera for Canons with faster AF (that, and Canon was playing the loss-leading game Nikon played forty years earlier.)

There's no reason why a 35mm-styled camera from Pentax should just have higher res and that's it. If you want a high res Pentax, there's a new 40MP camera out that got low FPS, low native sensitivity, and can be had for the same or less than the Canon 1D MKIII or Nikon D3S.

Once and for all, there'll be never an APS-H camera.
Lenses are not compatible (yep some are not even for APS-H), it would introduce yet another cropped format, would mean new lense because standard/wides are not anymore and there's no sensor for it.

Exactly. Some of the APS-C wide angles barely cover the sensor - such is the nature of wide angles. Canon's the only one who dicks around with APS-H - that's because they've got their own foundry, have a shedload of money (from printers and photocopiers and letter sorters and whatknot,) and seem to like splitting as many hairs as possible with their camera lineup ("...a new upper-lower-middle-lower advanced prosumer camera from Canon!") in order to make the competition's range seem full of gaps ("None of the other manufacturers have an upper-lower-middle-lower advanced prosumer camera...")

Oh, and they've already got a lineup of FF lenses. Which is what you end up using on the APS-H cameras. Not their EF-S lenses, which cannot physically mount on, say, the 1D MkIV.

So you end up using FF lenses on a cropped camera, which is just...pointless for someone like Pentax, who doesn't seem keen on having a body count like an 80's action flick.

If you're going to go large, may as well go all the way. Pentax still has everything it needs for a FF camera. No one complains about their 35mm-era lenses on their digitals. Just dust off a few old designs - D-FA* 200mm f4 Macro SDM, anyone? - et voila!

Whatever the case, the next camera better have a sweet-shaped pentaprism housing.

[Ash]

In what way has Ned Bunnel justified the view of 15MP being a "sweet spot" for APS-C?

His take on the FF issue, posted on his blog from April 2009:

It's clear that there is a place for full frame cameras, but it currently is a small part of the overall SLR market. Due to the total cost of ownership and increased demands shooting with full frame images, the majority of cameras sold will still use APS-C, 4/3rds type sensors.

Despite some of our desires to always want newer, faster, better technology, I'm not sure that many of us would see a dramatic improvement in our photography if we were given a full frame sensor camera. Personally, I think we've hit the sweet spot with APS-C sensor cameras today. 12-15 megapixels is more than adequate for even your most demanding assignments, we've got far better control of noise, frame rates and processing speeds are sufficient for the majority of work advanced or serious photographers need and all of this is available at very reasonable price points, regardless of your choice of brand.

In closing this train of thought, the whole full frame debate reminds me of the sometimes wine-induced arguments I have with a buddy of mine over the performance of our 5 series BMW's. I always end these discussions by saying if he really, really demands/needs/desires higher performance then shut up and buy an M5 or 7 series.

We'll soon see where Pentax is heading and how Ned's opinions stack up...

[Class A]

Just as long as the sensor is not CCD!

I for one wouldn't mind CCD if it helped IQ. Yes, video is a nice side effect but I wouldn't won't it (neither a high fps-rate) if it degraded IQ (as it happened to some extent with the K-7).

[Class A]

His take on the FF issue, posted on his blog from April 2009:

Thanks, Ash, I've read this blog entry before. He is just blogging away, isn't he? Personally (he even uses that word) he might be happy with 12-15 MP for APS-C but that doesn't mean that there is a particular reason not go higher. In your original post you used the term "sweet-spot" and that implies that things would get worse beyond 15MP. But they don't.

I'd be surprised if Pentax came out with a 21MP APS-C camera, sounds more like an FF MP count to me, but I don't see what would be wrong with it.

[asw66]

So you end up using FF lenses on a cropped camera, which is just...pointless for someone like Pentax, who doesn't seem keen on having a body count like an 80's action flick.

If you're going to go large, may as well go all the way. Pentax still has everything it needs for a FF camera. No one complains about their 35mm-era lenses on their digitals.

So ... as you point out yourself, there's plenty of reason to use FF lenses on a crop camera. If you have the lens, and it does the job, why not use it? Sure, it might be a little larger than a dedicated APS-C design, but sometimes the overall bulk of the package is not the only consideration. And as for "if you're going to go large, may as well go all the way", shouldn't we skip those namby-pamby FF designs, and go straight to medium format?

Here's the thing. It would make a lot of sense for Pentax to produce a high-end APS-H body as a transitional standard on the road to affordable FF. There's no need to produce specialised APS-H lenses: such a body would happily accept both FF lenses and the longer APS-C designs.

Canon have explained in a whitepaper that FF sensors require more steps to be manufactured, which drives costs up, whereas APS-H sensors can be manufactured using similar processes to those used to create APS-C sensors.

I fully expect that FF bodies will eventually become affordable to the majority of enthusiast shooters, but that time has not arrived yet. But it is entirely conceivable that Pentax could produce an APS-H body with superior IQ to any APS-C design at a reasonable price point. Such a body would be a very attractive proposition for the enthusiast market, who could gradually expand their collection of FF lenses in anticipation of migrating to FF when such a body becomes affordable to produce.

[kevinschoenmakers]

From the same guy "justin23" at dpreview:

Normally, I don't partake in rumour spreading. But I was standing next to the two guys, who seemed to know each other in advance. The only hard evidence, although it requires only half a brain to have worked it out is that a new camera is coming at Photokina. I'm more than happy to be proved wrong about the 21MP count. I actually commented to the CRK rep and the other guy, that it was ridiculous to go to 21MP, but the CRK rep said MP's still sell cameras.

I was also told that CRK may do special imports of the 645D before Pentax in Japan officially releases to other regions.

Oh I can also see why people have gone to the D700. I tried one out and now understand why you'd buy one. I sort of wish I had one, but can't justify it.


"that it was ridiculous to go to 21MP" - they were talking about an aps-c cam

You make it look like that last line was part of the quote. It isn't, so it could still mean FF. (just for clarity's sake)

[thibs]

I disagree, yet another standard is crap (APS-H).
Seeing how APS-C can get better (compare Sony 10Mpix CCD from K10 to Sony 12Mpix CMOS from K-x), there's no need to transition anything.

Doing so would necessitate new lenses: new standards, new wides, new DA* zooms... No way !!!