Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-11-2010, 02:21 PM   #226
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,104
QuoteOriginally posted by Angevinn Quote
The Pentax K-X cannot match the performance of the Nikon D700.
Did I ever said it can match the D700? No. In the part you're quoting I'm talking about a 1-stop advantage the "FF" has. Laugh as hard as you wish, but you're not laughing at my comments.

Then, you'll switch to Nikon; good, they make excellent cameras. No need to stay with the APS-C only Pentax. Me? I'll probably buy one of the cameras they'll launch at Photokina.

Pentax is increasing their market presence. They'll continue to do so, with the new products - I'm sure of it.

Peter Zack, could you point to some of his ISO102400 work?
I fail to see how only at noon on a sunny day could I use shutter speeds faster than 1 second@ISO100. Yes, you are exaggerating - and that's an understatement.

"But my point is, does Pentax want a K-x sale and a kit lens at $649 or a K-700 and 6 lenses at $12,000 ++." Do you really believe that for any potential entry level customer there is a pro waiting to spend tens of thousands $$$? Again, you're exaggerating; this will never be the case, and even between the potential "FF" customers, few would spend $12000++
I doubt Pentax would be persuaded by such arguments. You're asking too much from them, then when they'll "fail to deliver" you'll most likely switch brands.

nosnoop, excellent points; I agree with them completely.

08-11-2010, 02:30 PM   #227
Senior Member
Angevinn's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Chicago, Ill.
Posts: 205
Remote Luxury

QuoteOriginally posted by nosnoop Quote
The key difference is that Pentax is not Nikon! Nikon owns the market share, Pentax does not have the same luxury.
Pentax used to be a major brand, in the 1960's and even up into the 1970's. Pentax used to advertise and sell premium products. Not so much the case anymore. Look at Pentax users as a whole, I bet as a demographic we are mostly older (40+) year old, white guys with decent household incomes. I don't believe Pentax has captured much of the youth market or retained much of a presence among the really affluent consumers like doctors and lawyers like Canon and Nikon have. Pentax has a very small market share. I've read figures ranging from 3% - 7%. It's sad.


QuoteOriginally posted by nosnoop Quote
I don't care if Pentax put out a FF or not. What I disagree with is the thinking that Pentax would be doomed without one. Sure, if Pentax has the extra money and resources, by all means, have another camera model on sale. But if they don't, then Pentax would do just fine without a FF - as your said, "the world hasn't ended".
I don't believe Pentax is doomed, not with Hoya at the wheel. Pentax (before the Hoya take over) had literally worked itself into such a sorry state of affairs by becoming the cheapest tart on the block. Go to Costco, Best Buy, anywhere, practically no one carries Pentax. Not true of the competition. Hoya is turning this around through the revised pricing structure and bringing out the 645D. More products are needed. Good profits are in premium products. Other than the 645D what premium products does Pentax sell?

Competing on the cheap led Pentax into near insolvency. Even Sony passed on Pentax and bought the Minolta camera division that Minolta had already started shuttering. Where would Pentax be without Hoya? A brand name of a Korean or Chinese manufacturer that you get at the Walgreen's bargain bin?

Hoya/Pentax can offer a FullFrame DSLR and still support APS-C, this shouldn't be a problem. Hoya has a lot of business savvy and has some great management. Pentax has a lot of potential as a camera manufacturer and as a brand.

I'm not willing to buy another Pentax APS-C camera, no matter how good it is. It's my prerogative to choose a FullFrame DSLR. It's also a great sale that Nikon will get if Pentax doesn't release a FullFrame DSLR.
08-11-2010, 03:43 PM   #228
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,143
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
There is one overwhelmingly mistaken assumption made by the anti-FF crowd:

The FF market is "small".
Good thinking.

QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
For pure photographic IQ, they are very good value. The lens system...?
What is wrong with the lens system? Too few lenses? There are some very capable performers in it.

QuoteOriginally posted by Peter Zack Quote
I tried the 850. Sucks pure and simple.
Probably it isn't the camera for your low-light applications, although I'm not sure whether you've done everything to optimally process the images. Nikon may do more of this in camera already.

I'm a sucker for the IQ from the A850. I talked to a professional landscape photographer who said the A850 images were very usable right out of the camera (no high-ISO here, of course) whereas he often had to muck around a lot with Canon images.

I'm not convinced Sony were careless about their first FF effort (A900 + A850). Pentax has always been given credit for leaving the noise in; no one has given Sony credit for that. Maybe the Sony FF high-ISO images cannot be salvaged; maybe they are better than they are given credit for.

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Aristophanes, please don't misunderstand. I admit, I never played with a "FF" Sony; but everything tells me the A850 is an excellent photographic tools.
It's just not a speed demon - that's all.
+1
The viewfinder is awesome and as I said I love the images from it.
The A900 is remarkably fast for an FF camera. The way Sony justifies the lower price of the A850 is by a smidgen less viewfinder coverage and reduced speed.

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Peter Zack, could you point to some of his ISO102400 work?
I'd be interested in this too.
The last time I saw ISO102400 it looked like cr*p.
08-11-2010, 03:44 PM   #229
Veteran Member
Kenn100D's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Paranaque City, Philippines
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 646
FWIK FF doesn't hold enough share to the whole DSLR business. I think if Pentax can make a FF DSLR with a cost of 1200 Euro for the Non-PRO ala K200D and 1700 Euro for the PRO can make a difference. I believe some FF lenses of the Past is still mnufactured and being sold. For the meantime some FF lenses manufactured by 3rd Party Lens maker can fill the gap for early goers for Pentax FF while Pentax produce their FF line-up.

08-11-2010, 04:03 PM   #230
Veteran Member
ManuH's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Montreal
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,209
QuoteOriginally posted by Angevinn Quote
Competing on the cheap led Pentax into near insolvency.
I believe market more or less dictates prices. If the Pentax were cheap it was because they had to be cheap to be moved off the shelves. They usually don't start that cheap, the K-7 was 1299$ at launch. I paid 1499$ (canadian dollars) to be one of the first to have it. I believe the K10D and K20D were not that cheaper at launch (and the K-7 is probably more expensive to build). That's another thing to not like about Pentax, they don't hold their value well. It's better to buy them at the end of their life when they reach rock bottom prices.

After upgrading my K10D to K20D and then to K-7 (not to mention the backup bodies from K200D to K-m and now K-x). I'm not sure I still want to upgrade to another APS-C body unless its performance is really much better (mainly ISO and AF) and is not too expensive. This Photokina 2010 will be a turning point for me. An avalanche of new products is expected from all the manufacturers, all the cards will be on the table. It will be time to make decisions on whether to further invest in Pentax or not.
08-11-2010, 04:16 PM   #231
Pentaxian
TaoMaas's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Oklahoma City
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,195
QuoteOriginally posted by Angevinn Quote
Pentax used to be a major brand, in the 1960's and even up into the 1970's.

Competing on the cheap led Pentax into near insolvency.
Competing on the cheap is exactly why Pentax used to be a major brand. They've always sold a lot more entry level cameras than top-of-the-line.
08-11-2010, 04:27 PM   #232
Pentaxian
Moderator Emeritus




Join Date: May 2007
Location: Edmonton Alberta, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,648
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Peter Zack, could you point to some of his ISO102400 work?
I fail to see how only at noon on a sunny day could I use shutter speeds faster than 1 second@ISO100.
Since I don't have access to his photo library, I can't of course. But I read an interview some time ago that he was so happy with the high ISO abilities of the new Canon, that it had changed his shooting. Does he regularly shoot over 12,800. I bet not. Any smart shooter would still stay as low as possible whenever possible.

But I had the chance to shoot a wedding in a church I shot in last summer. it's dark and the only light is stained glass windows. Very dim indoor lights high in a vaulted ceiling. With the K20D, I had only one choice. Flash for everything. It meant timing each shot very carefully for a number of reasons. Worked but not the way I'd like to shoot.

Last weekend, I could do the same thing at 6400 and 12,800 without the flash and get what I wanted. A lot less disruption to the service and a lot more shots were keepers.

Your second statement has me totally baffeled.
I fail to see how only at noon on a sunny day could I use shutter speeds faster than 1 second@ISO100.


1 second in a sunny situation? what are you trying to say?

What I've tried to say several times is this. It's dawn, you are at the lake and see a deer walking along the edge of the misty water. At 6AM the light is beautiful but at ISO 1600 (that's about as high as the K20D or K-7D can do well), the shutter speed is 1/30th. Too slow to freeze the shot and with a long lens, far to slow for even SR to keep it steady. In fact even with a tripod, you are probably going to miss the shot or loose a lot of detail.

So if you could get a clean shot that is properly exposed at 6400, same aperture and 1/125th, then you might have a fighting chance. That's what I'm saying.

Lets take that another way. You are at the soccer pitch and the action is moving fast. You want f8 or f11 and a minimum of 1/2000. Unless it is really bright, this may not be possible. Crank up the ISO and you've got the shutter speed and depth to nail the shots.

You seem to think I'm dissing Pentax. That I've taken it upon myself to trash the brand. Far, far from it. I want the brand to be better in every way. To offer me and many others more than 2 cameras that have more than we've ever had before. In fact I'm in the middle of buying a K-7 for certain needs. I'll probably always have a Pentax for some things. At least I hope so.

Look at the competition. Sony has 6 cameras, Nikon and Canon have at least this many or more. Even Oly has around 5 or more. We have 2 and we're always playing catch up. I really do not understand this tendancy to defend a brand that once was a leader and ever since the world went digital has always been at least a year behind.

Yes I've gotten some Nikon gear. I have no choice. If I want to pay the rent, I need a camera that can pay the bills and Pentax isn't there. To be fair, they don't pretend to be either. I'm not their customer.

But if they would at least listen to the shooters like me who need gear like this to stay on top of the market, then we'd "come home" in a heartbeat.

I've shot Pentax for 30 years and been happy for the most part. I wanted the K-7 to be a whole lot more than it was in terms of the sensor. I can't wait any longer. We've lost some top notch shooters in the last 2 years and that sucks. I see zero effort from Pentax to even try to bring anyone back.

At ISO 400 and below, it's probably the best sensor available. But I don't make any money with flower shots.

So don't take me as trashing the line. Far from it. What I want is BETTER. MUCH BETTER cameras and lenses (optically they are fine, SDM is another issue).
08-11-2010, 04:50 PM - 1 Like   #233
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,130
QuoteOriginally posted by Peter Zack Quote
We've lost some top notch shooters in the last 2 years and that sucks. I see zero effort from Pentax to even try to bring anyone back.
.
The fact is that Pentax have increase their user base the last year to such an extent to rival the EOS-launch in 1987.

FF has a marketshare similar to MF in the film days. It is not clear that FF will be the future of the expense of APS. The latter is a defacto standard just like 35mm was for film. As long as FF sensors cost significantly more to manufacture and/or as long as sensors are a significant part of a DSLR's cost, smaller sensor will continue to reign.
The best argument for FF is a larger viewfinder. I can hardly spot the difference between FF and the best APS sensors in a finished print. The best of APS is overkill for most usages and, hence, theres very little pressure for larger senors from the masses; but they are very price sensitive. In addition the manufacturers are very reluctant to use more expensive components in cameras sold at a lower price.


Last edited by Pål Jensen; 08-11-2010 at 05:13 PM.
08-11-2010, 05:11 PM   #234
Veteran Member
stanic's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: PB
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 380
QuoteOriginally posted by Urkeldaedalus Quote
What I want is the fast wide angle options (true 24 mm) and narrow DOF that you can only get from a full frame camera at the moment.
depth of field is not a function of sensor size, it is a function of lens and subject-to-camera distance
DOF from the same lens at the same focus distance does not change at all, if you switch your sensor from aps-c to full frame
08-11-2010, 05:32 PM   #235
Site Supporter
jpzk's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Québec
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,200
I totally agree with Peter and his arguments regarding the need for higher ISO performance, the way he described the morning - low ligh - and a moving deer. If you are going to shoot at 1/30s, good luck!
Same here when I am out, or rather "in" deep woods and try to shoot some small kinglet hiding in the underwoods ... ISO 1600 just does not quite make it. Try at higher ISO and I have to do a lot of denoising in PP afterwards, and the resulting picture more often than not is not what I would call a "great shot".
Here, I am talking shots taken with the K20D; I seldom now use the K7 for this kind of photography, although I did "test" it a lot over the past few months. They both are great cameras, but sometimes one needs a little more to achieve a better picture.

I so wish that Pentax would come up with at least an APS-C based camera capable of doing that, but as I read through this thread it just might not happen unless it is in FF format?

Maybe, just maybe, I will soon need to test the "dark side" at Canikon? Gosh, I hope not!

JP

Last edited by jpzk; 08-11-2010 at 05:34 PM. Reason: added stuff
08-11-2010, 05:41 PM   #236
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,708
I think everyone needs to relax and wait to see how the new 16MP ExmorHD sensor works out. Sony fanboys seem very confident the new sensor will rival the FF Canon 5D for low-light. That may be an old camera, but it is still capable of great images and it outperforms all APS-C bodies to date when it comes to low-light.
08-11-2010, 06:02 PM   #237
Senior Member
Angevinn's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Chicago, Ill.
Posts: 205
Spotmatic vs. Ford

If you adjust for inflation, in today's value of the dollar, the Pentax Spotmatic of the 1960's with a 50mm 1.4 Takumar lens is about $2,200 - $2,400. What does Pentax sell today that is comparable?

Pentax started ceding market share after the K2, KM and KX cameras of the mid-1970's. The K1000 was a low cost stalwart that remained in production for almost 30 years.

I remember a business model that I studied way back in college. It dealt with Henry Ford and Ford Motor Company. Henry Ford sold the model T and it was a successful car, at first. Henry Ford believed the Model T was great the way it was. Ford was even widely quoted as saying that "You can get the Model T in whatever color you want, as long as it's black." A modern day equivalent would be "You can have any kind of Pentax DSLR you want as long as the AF isn't that great and it has an APS-C sensor."

The Model T might have been an early success for Henry Ford but the car was a double edged sword. Henry Ford clung to the Model T and produced it from 1908 until 1927 (19 years, almost as long as the Pentax K1000). Meanwhile, Louis Chevrolet and William C. Durant founded Chevrolet in 1911 and started producing cars and trucks. Walter Chrysler (a Ford stockholder) later launched his own motor company, Chrysler in 1925. Soon, Chevrolet and Chrysler were drinking Henry Ford's milkshake. Henry clung to the Model T that he thought was good enough for everyone and lost market share and sales. Why would anyone want an electric starter in a car?

Finally, after much corporate infighting Ford discontinued the Model T and brought out the Model A which was light years ahead of the Model T. The Model A had an electric starter, better engine and a lot of other refinements. The Ford Model A spawned a lot of other variations like Ford cabs and trucks. Ford was able to rebuild market share and profits.

What FullFrame detractors are forgetting when they chirp that APS-C is good enough and that FullFrame is just bad is that they are projecting their views on the entire market. If I was in the market for an entry level APS-C camera I might choose a Pentax K-X, it seems like a good camera. The K-7 has some nice features but doesn't suit me; I prefer the FullFrame (35MM format).

You can't look at the market completely through your own eyes. Some people have more money, some people have less. Some consumers may need a feature that means little to you but means the world to them. Consumers need to have choices. You need to address those needs to retain customers and grow sales. Henry Ford learned this lesson a little late, but he still learned it. APS-C might make be suitable for some, but not for everyone.

Give us a FullFrame DSLR Pentax!!!

QuoteOriginally posted by TaoMaas Quote
Competing on the cheap is exactly why Pentax used to be a major brand. They've always sold a lot more entry level cameras than top-of-the-line.

Last edited by Angevinn; 08-11-2010 at 08:22 PM.
08-11-2010, 07:29 PM   #238
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,210
I like Pentax being compared to Ford. Ford didn't have to be bailed out like Government Motors did and Crappler Corp is on its second bailout in less than 30 years. If they were to roll out a Deuce Coup tomorrow, I'd consider buying one.
08-11-2010, 08:09 PM   #239
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,210
QuoteOriginally posted by stanic Quote
depth of field is not a function of sensor size, it is a function of lens and subject-to-camera distance
DOF from the same lens at the same focus distance does not change at all, if you switch your sensor from aps-c to full frame

Go here and test your answer. Remember to keep every thing the same except the sensor size.

Online Depth of Field Calculator
08-11-2010, 08:13 PM   #240
Senior Member
dnaseigel's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Rockford, IL
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 179
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
The fact is that Pentax have increase their user base the last year to such an extent to rival the EOS-launch in 1987.

FF has a marketshare similar to MF in the film days. It is not clear that FF will be the future of the expense of APS. The latter is a defacto standard just like 35mm was for film. As long as FF sensors cost significantly more to manufacture and/or as long as sensors are a significant part of a DSLR's cost, smaller sensor will continue to reign.
The best argument for FF is a larger viewfinder. I can hardly spot the difference between FF and the best APS sensors in a finished print. The best of APS is overkill for most usages and, hence, theres very little pressure for larger senors from the masses; but they are very price sensitive. In addition the manufacturers are very reluctant to use more expensive components in cameras sold at a lower price.
When Canon launched their EOS line they were simply another camera company competing with other 35mm camera companies like Konica, Fujica, Yashica, Mamiya, Olympus, Nikon and Pentax as well as plenty of other names. Some time ago I spoke with my Canon rep from that era and he told me of how desperate he was going from dealer to dealer whose stores were filled with Minolta Maxxum products.

You might say that Pentax has some knowledge of how that feels, but there is a key difference that serves to further falconeye's point. At that time Canon had entry level products like the T50 and T60, and they also had pro cameras at a couple of levels like the New F1 and the T90. It was a pretty short leap from a full line of manual focus product to a complete auto focus line. There was no headache due to a new line of lenses for a new film format, etc.

Pentax unfortunately yielded whatever technological and marketing momentum with a slow transition to digital, a change in ownership and a trip through one of the truly zani management periods. Pentax has much bigger hurdles to overcome in becoming a more relevant name in the industry than Canon, but bringing a full-frame product to market would certainly change the present dynamic in camera purchasing. I see it almost every day. A customer who has (or had) a Pentax is in my store looking for accessories for their Canon or Nikon that they bought because they thought they might one day go full frame. While Pentax does get new customers all the time, a problem they addressed quite nicely, they also need to address the issue of maintaining their customers with the promise of technological growth with the brand.
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!
frame, k-5, lenses, mystery, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, photokina, release
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Full frame pentax cem.kumuk Pentax DSLR Discussion 11 11-12-2010 03:13 PM
I think the Pentax FF will be announced at Photokina 2010 whatever7 Pentax News and Rumors 106 02-04-2010 12:45 AM
Expired Theme Theme: Contest #41, January, 2010 (Frame within a Frame) Adam Monthly Photo Contests 11 01-21-2010 12:33 AM
The almost full frame Pentax? denisv Photographic Technique 44 01-19-2009 04:01 AM
New Pentax k18D - Full Frame ebooks4pentax Pentax DSLR Discussion 17 10-31-2007 05:46 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:40 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