[thibs]

Kunzite for C***t sakes I give up. You're right. I want Pentax to be better and appeal to a wider audience and you want it to stay put.

You're right, I haven't a clue what I'm talking about. Please send me your shipping address and your head size so I can deliver a bucket of sand to you.

You wouldn't do it or... Would you ?
I want pictures!

[Kunzite]

Peter Zack: Then, you haven't understood what I've said. Pentax must not and will not stay put. But, they have to evolve carefully - due to their limited resources. They have to build their system bottom-up, expanding their customers base every step.
Asking for improvement, is a thing I understand and I'm also guilty of. Better high-ISO on the K-7's replacement - that's a must. Other features, updated to remain competitive. Adding new features, to differentiate them from the competition. Always looking for the opportunity to expand their market. But you're talking about going after those customers that would spend MF money on the small format. Which, again, is unreasonable to ask.

At Photokina we'll have a nice surprise, Pentax is improving on things they were lagging behind and they'll certainly address complaints raised by us (yes, Pentax is listening!). However, I'm sure there will be some that won't be satisfied - be it the lack of a FF camera, or less than 51 AF points and so on.
Having reasonable expectations about what Pentax can and can't do would help us from being disappointed And I can tell already, you will be disappointed.

Have a nice day.

[Rondec]

A D700 with 14-24, 24-70, and a long lens with VR plus an SBxxx super-flash is a serious pro kit. Throw in a fast prime or 2, the necessary tripod, and an APS-C D300 you can now do wildlife with mor res. More reach? Get an excellent Nikon TC.

Nikon fully expects its top shooters to own more than one body.

The issue/decision about FF is not really up to Pentax. It will entirely be determined by Canikon and Sony's pricing for their FF systems relative to APS-C. It's possible that Nikon will do what it usually does with its models, and put out a successor to the D700 (D800 likely), but keep manufacturing the D700 selling it at a lower price point (see note about Nikon getting its crowd to buy multiple bodies).

If the D700 falls to a $1,700 street price, every APS-C/M43 flagship within $500 is going to have a serious problem competing. Canon might do the same with its line; use redundant legacy product sales to drive price points lower. Eventually by doing so Canikon will create a much more cost-effective FF ecosystem leading to the FF domination of the $1,500+ market. This will allow Canikon to scale back their APS-C production and lengthen the advances there, allowing them to put even more capital into FF, driving down the costs even further.

It is perfectly, even preferable, for Pentax to follow here. So long as they are ready. I suspect they are. This is a good time to be cautious, but Pentax's moneyed users and pros who stick it out will very soon need to know if they should stay loyal or jump to another brand.

Right, but Peter's comment seemed to indicate that he was going to take a D700 to go birding, so he could capture an eagle plunging from the sky in the early morning hours.

Hopefully Pentax can fill out their base sufficiently that they can feed higher end cameras, both in upper APS C and full frame ranges. There is no doubt, however that those low end cameras feed the upper end ones. Very few photographers start with a D700 14-24 and 24-70 and a high end flash. Those together would run about 6000 dollars new and as you say, it is a pretty serious kit.

[johnmflores]

For value the K-x is pretty close at 1/6 the price...with a lens!

The K-x cannot crank the ISO as high nor AF in the dark like the the D700, but it's pretty amazing what it can do from ISO 400-1600, which, even 3 years ago we'd have been sceptical.

Yes, the technological growth says that FF is coming down the pipe and Pentax had better be ready or the brand will lose customers, but many customers are not there yet. Canikon will educate them through marketing and competition to get there.

This brings to light an assumption that we are all making - "given equal price and features, a camera buyer will choose FF over APS-C overwhelmingly." Here are some things that suggest that this may not be a foregone conclusion:

- The Canon 5DII and 7D are priced one L lens apart from each other. For someone in the market building a kit, this is basically a choice of 7D+3 lenses vs. 5DII+2 lenses. In other words, not an insurmountable price difference IMO when you are thinking about getting serious with photography and will likely build out a kit over several years. With this in mind, the 7D outsells the 5DII quite handily.

- Same argument as above for Nikon and the D300 and D700. The D300 outsells the D700 month after month.

- What % of dSLR users come from the film era vs. the digital era? Users from the film era understand the benefits of FF firsthand. Serious users from the digital era understand as well, but will you average kit lens tourist understand or care?

- What financial benefits will FF bring to the manufacturers? Canon can make more profit selling a million $1500 APS-C vs. a million $1500 FF because of lower manufacturing costs. Can Canon increase their FF market share enough to offset the reduced unit margins? Can they successfully avoid cannibalization of their own APS-C line? The same question applies to Nikon. Considering this, who is more likely to bring FF down to the $1500 pricepoint? Canon, Nikon, or a less-established, more risk-tolerant company like Sony or Pentax?

- Others here have noted the departure of notable Pentax photographers to the FF Nikon and Canon camps. But there's also been an influx of new K-x users. Is this forum bigger or smaller than it was a year ago? Have the new K-x users offset the departures?

At the end of the day, selling a $1500FF may take more marketing than we all anticipate...

[ogl]

It is the myth about limited resources. Nikon is smaller than Canon, Sony and Olympus photo divisions. But....Nikon rules.^)

Hoya is one the biggest Japanese company. The problem is Hoya doesn't have any wish to develop Pentax division and invest more money in photo bussiness and marketing.

They want Pentax to make good cameras with minimum costs and efforts. It's rather hard task in modern conditions. Pentax is in financial limits of Hoya.

The marketing company of 645D is rather ridiculous IMO....
So big project and so good camera for such money, but nobody knows about 645D...
No any promotion, no any advertising world-wide...Small sales inside Japan by orders....

[TaoMaas]

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?

I don't know where you shopped, but the Spotmatic F that I used to lust for (and would go to the camera store several times each week just so I could feel one in my hands) was selling for about $250. A few years later, the K1000 (which is what the Spotmatic evolved into) could be bought online for around $100 (body only). Pentax's current entry level camera, the Kx, is selling for about $500 online. So I think you're fudging your figures a bit there. Regardless, the prices I'm giving you aren't theoretical...they're real world.

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....You can't look at the market completely through your own eyes.

You're doing exactly what you're accusing others of doing...looking at things from your viewpoint only. The truth is, not too many people are saying FF is "just bad", are they? No, we're simply saying that FF holds no fascination for us and that we could do quite well for a long, long time with APS-C cameras. But the FF endorsers are saying that FF will eliminate the APS-C market. Eh...I'm not so sure that's gonna happen unless FF can get their price down WELL below $1000. Frankly, I doubt that'll happen anytime soon. If it does...great! Every lens I own except my 18-55 kit lens is ready for FF today. But if FF doesn't happen...I'm okay with that, too. I can go either way on this deal. My only big complaint is that I don't want to see camera prices go any higher because I think they already represent a significant investment for those folks who might be considering getting into serious photography. And if we close out the new photographers, ALL the upper end cameras will die.
I DO recognize that FF is pretty much a "must" for some people. They've run into a wall and a FF camera would be a life-saver to them. I was talking to a guy in my camera club about this a while back. He'd been hired by some boxing promoters. He's having to stop action in very dim light, but without using flash. He was raving about how much better his shots were with his new FF camera because of it's performance at higher ISO's. So, yeah....some folks do need it. But I also recognize that there's many, many more people who only think it's a "must". We have those kinds of guys in my camera club, too. LOL
You know, even if Pentax were to come out with a FF by the end of the week, some folks would still gripe. Before this latest craze, they complained about autofocus speed, fps, and high ISO. There will ALWAYS be some reason why this person or that feels they have to sell all their gear and change systems. Most of them are equally convinced that Pentax can't possibly survive without them. lol But, if we step back and look at this thing realistically, who else but Pentax has battled Canon and Nikon for so long and so well and are still players in the game, even if on a more limited scale than in the past? We also need to keep in mind that this isn't Pentax's only battlefield, either. They're taking on another set of stalwarts in the MF field in the form of Mamiya and Hasselblad. So I've gotta believe that Pentax knows much better than we do how to run their company.

[Blue]

Didn't Hoya bailout Pentax? Pentax was in bad shape when Hoya took them over. Hoya's influence is responsible for the release of the 645D and can be seen in the K-7.

Ford was planning on bringing back a vintage coupe but really missed the mark with the revised T-Bird. That was a really strange vehicle. I believe Ford killed the vintage coupe project in 2002 or 2003 which was a shame. The vintage coupe was to be rear wheel drive and have a decent V8. The picture I saw of it looked cool, a lot more tastefully done than the last T-bird.

No, they bought Pentax. That was supposed to be the '56 T-Bird which was never a Deuce Coupe with a flat head Ford V8.

[ghelary]

A D700 with 14-24, 24-70, and a long lens with VR plus an SBxxx super-flash is a serious pro kit. Throw in a fast prime or 2, the necessary tripod, and an APS-C D300 you can now do wildlife with mor res. More reach? Get an excellent Nikon TC.

Nikon fully expects its top shooters to own more than one body.

The issue/decision about FF is not really up to Pentax. It will entirely be determined by Canikon and Sony's pricing for their FF systems relative to APS-C. It's possible that Nikon will do what it usually does with its models, and put out a successor to the D700 (D800 likely), but keep manufacturing the D700 selling it at a lower price point (see note about Nikon getting its crowd to buy multiple bodies).

If the D700 falls to a $1,700 street price, every APS-C/M43 flagship within $500 is going to have a serious problem competing. Canon might do the same with its line; use redundant legacy product sales to drive price points lower. Eventually by doing so Canikon will create a much more cost-effective FF ecosystem leading to the FF domination of the $1,500+ market. This will allow Canikon to scale back their APS-C production and lengthen the advances there, allowing them to put even more capital into FF, driving down the costs even further.

It is perfectly, even preferable, for Pentax to follow here. So long as they are ready. I suspect they are. This is a good time to be cautious, but Pentax's moneyed users and pros who stick it out will very soon need to know if they should stay loyal or jump to another brand.

A real pro sport photographer will buy a D3s, not a D700. And in that area, Canon's APSH system is stil widely popular, in part because of that "extra-reach".

I have met several pros in other domains for whom 12Mpx is not enough. If your business is selling prints, the trend is to larger print, where Canon's 5DmkII or Sony's A850/900 have the hedge (not speaking about MF systems)

When speaking about Art photography, you get the full spectrum of equipement used, but as a trend most are still using film. They use from Lomo to LF, using digital APSC is more popular than FF simply because Photography as art doesn't pay much and budgets are tight.

Pros are not an homogenus category and with the print crisis, photojournalism is certainly not a healthy profession. Apart from the very specific professional sport photography, I don't think major camera makers are developping specific products for this category of consumers. Even when releasing the "pro" 645D, Pentax said they were targeting wealthy amateurs. Fact is there are certainly more amateurs who have the money and buy D700 than pros.

I don't consider myself to be rich, but with an engineering degree and a matching job, I make more money than most anymous professional photographers (I'm not speaking about the top tier / celebrities here) Since I have no children, my buying power of equipment is much bigger, even if I don't make a living of it.

What I'm trying to say here, is that there are much more people like me who buy high end lens and DSLR than pros, and that it's that population that camera makers are looking at.

Pros are important yes, because most amateurs are looking at them when buying high end gear. But, the opinion of real pros about camera brands is much more nuanced than amateurs. At least with the ones I could speak to.

[GeneV]

I don't know where you shopped, but the Spotmatic F that I used to lust for (and would go to the camera store several times each week just so I could feel one in my hands) was selling for about $250. A few years later, the K1000 (which is what the Spotmatic evolved into) could be bought online for around $100 (body only). Pentax's current entry level camera, the Kx, is selling for about $500 online. So I think you're fudging your figures a bit there. Regardless, the prices I'm giving you aren't theoretical...they're real world.

.

There's a pretty easy site for calculating values in today's dollars. DollarTimes.com | Inflation Calculator

Basically, the most expensive Pentax SLR in today's dollars would be the LX, which might be closer to the $2,000 mark in today's dollars. I seem to recall paying about $800 in the early '80s.

[Peter Zack]

No I certainly don't think FF will replace APSc in the near future. In fact maybe never. Put a K-x in your hands and a FF Canon or Nikon. Which one would you want to travel with or go to a family reunion? Not the FF for me or anyone else I would assume.
I hope the prices don't drop on FF bodies much below $2000. Mostly because it puts a squeeze on what can be done with APSc and were it will go. Pentax has been stuck at intro prices of $1299 and if there were a $1699-$1799 FF body available next year it will hurt their margins. I think they would feel forced to drop the intro price on a new body.

Plus looking at Canon's 7D or Nikon's D300s, both are around $16-1700.00 and they are much bigger volume units than the next FF body in the line. Neither company wants to impact those sales with a lower margin FF body. So unless Sony or Pentax decide to release cheaper FF bodies at some point, you won't see FF prices dropping anytime soon. At least not in a substantive way.

New D700's are still selling for near the intro price 2 years ago and used ones are only $100-200 lower than that. The prices will remain steady IMO.

Johnmflores, you noted that K-x users have more than replaced the top end users that have left for other brands. That's true. The forum as a small sample of the market, has grown. But there are a lot of factors there as well. Those accounts here might show up in the total numbers but the member hasn't been here for a year. If those accounts were all closed, things would show a bit different.

Plus now we have former Pentax shooters posting to other boards about the past and the new systems they bought. If those comments are negative in any way, doesn't that hurt the possible chance for a convert to Pentax from time to time?

We should be going after all possible shooters IMO. No it would be nuts for Pentax to consider a D3X or whatever the latest top Canon model is (I get all the MKI,II,III,IV,IXVC whatever's mixed up). A camera in the $5-7000 price range is never going to be a Pentax seller. But a $2499 one would. Would it hurt APSc sales, nope not one bit. IMO it would help them.

Look at me as an example, I have always been a Pentaxian. It's not easy selling some favourite lenses that I saved long and hard for.
As much trouble as I've had with the K20D, I knew that camera inside and out. I've owned 4 of them.

It was time to have a camera that suited the challenges of my particular needs better. AF and low light were 2 big factors.

So instead of having the choice to get a Pentax FF to match my K20d's, I have to look outside and now have a D700 and a D300 with 8 Nikon lenses and a flash system. That's a huge chunk of $$$ just spent on another brand. I would have been much happier to have just added a FF body to the existing system.

I'm not a Nikonian, don't think I'll ever feel like one. There are things about the gear I don't like and I miss about Pentax designs. In fact I'm looking for a K-7 right now just because I want one, not because I need one. We have in many ways, the best cameras available on the market. WS, SR, backwards compatible, etc etc etc. Where we hit the glass wall is moving upwards. 645D although nice is not, I repeat not the working pro's camera. IMO a huge mistake. No promotion, not support, no marketing etc. Plus it's too slow and big for the shooter who does weddings, sports or wildlife. it's a portrait and landscape camera only.

I hope the thing sells faster than they can build it. I hope it makes money so they can break the glass wall. If they offer a good Ff body, I'll sell what I just bought and get a new system again and I suspect many others will also.

[TaoMaas]

Basically, the most expensive Pentax SLR in today's dollars would be the LX, which might be closer to the $2,000 mark in today's dollars. I seem to recall paying about $800 in the early '80s.

Right. That's about how I figure it, too. That's why I tried to talk real prices...not calculated ones.

[Blue]

this is common mistake just as the one with the magnification ratio being higher on aps-c
the site you linked sais also this (http://www.dofmaster.com/charts.html) roll down to the eqation and tell me please, where is the sensor size in that eqation?
DoF changes with various formats because it is not the format size that matters but the size of the circle of confusion, what I mean is if you print contacts from APS-C, full frame or 8x10, with the same lens and focus distance, there will be always the same DoF
the difference shows if we print (magnify) the APS-C and FF to 8x10, therefore the need to "stop down", because all of the circles of confusion get magnifyied as well and appear no more as spots but as circles to human eye (they are always circles)

The DOF I linked calculates the H (hyperfocal length) using c (C of C) using the formula c = d/1500 where d is the diagonal of the film or sensor, the lens focal length f, and the F number N.

I was just trying to rectify the statement: "narrow DOF that you can only get from a full frame camera at the moment" it is not right, what Urkeldaedalus needs is a field of view offered by full frame

The narrower DOF is with the 0.02 CoC rather than the 0.03 though.

edit: just check out some more on this than one website with some calculator first

You should take your own advice here.

[falconeye]

Please, no more DoF talk in this thread. Thank You everybody.

[legiman]

never mind bout full frame... just produce and distribute more lens for the existing camera!

[Blue]

Please, no more DoF talk in this thread. Thank You everybody.

It was in the context of ff and aps-c. Like it or not Falk, that along with the FOV is one of the many debates between people regarding the 2 formats. There are people that like one or the other formats or even both because of that.