[Blue]

Having seen that the K5 does not break new ground and is really only an updated K7 (or probably what the K7 SHOULD have been to start with) there seems to be a gaping hole between the K5 and the 645D.
Therefore if there is to a brand new model coming up in the not too distant future surely it will be some sort of full frame.
I mean where do they go from here, the K4 or the K8 with slightly more megapixels and slightly faster AF?
There would be no valid reason for me to upgrade from a K20 to a K whatever.

I guess the term "updated" is relative with wide latitude in meaning. However, with a completely different sensor, and AF system, I don't see how people keep saying its just an updated K-7. The 2 only sharing the magnesium shell and some switches and prime engine. However, even the circuits and firmware have been updated. Plus, that new sensor and AF system makes it a completely different animal.

[ozlizard]

I guess the term "updated" is relative with wide latitude in meaning. However, with a completely different sensor, and AF system, I don't see how people keep saying its just an updated K-7. The 2 only sharing the magnesium shell and some switches and prime engine. However, even the circuits and firmware have been updated. Plus, that new sensor and AF system makes it a completely different animal.

I disagree. For the average user the "updated" aspects of this camera are not particulaly significant. For my personal use high ISO and fast frame rates have little impact as does the AF, which is fine on my K20 for landscape work. A different sensor with only 2 more megapixels is not enough of an upgrade incentive for me, and I suggest, many others in a similar situation. the cost of the K5 also seems too high for what you are getting, especially when you compare it the the opposition.
I am not knocking Pentax, but I did expect a lot more than this and I am hoping that I am right and there is more to come. Pentax can't afford to get left behind and undo all the great work they did with the Kx and the 645D.

[Blue]

I disagree. For the average user the "updated" aspects of this camera are not particulaly significant. For my personal use high ISO and fast frame rates have little impact as does the AF, which is fine on my K20 for landscape work. A different sensor with only 2 more megapixels is not enough of an upgrade incentive for me, and I suggest, many others in a similar situation. the cost of the K5 also seems too high for what you are getting, especially when you compare it the the opposition.
I am not knocking Pentax, but I did expect a lot more than this and I am hoping that I am right and there is more to come. Pentax can't afford to get left behind and undo all the great work they did with the Kx and the 645D.

Basically, what you just said is that the only thing that constitute a major update would be a full frame sensor.

"Only 2 more MP"

"Fast frame rates are of no use"

"Fast AF is of no concern"

And the funniest of all:

"Pentax can't afford to get left behind after all the good work they did with the K-x and 645D."

The 645D is just now making its way into markets other than Japan and is still a major part of the focus at Photokina. As far as the K-x goes, the K-r is the next level and the K-5 has a completely different sensor and af system. However, if you don't need a newer faster camera, what's the beef? Apparently you think they need to still be cranking out the K20d.

[stanleyk]

The weird thing is everyone is going on and on about Nikon's new ASPC camera and then the Full Frame thing "crops" up yet again. I see no mass movement towards Full Frame as an industry standard. Are there any new Full Frame bodies this year? And the camera that's getting all the buzz is Fuji, which is an ASPC and fixed lens to boot. Of course there are Full Frame cameras you can buy which would beg the question............

I sure wouldn't hold my breath waiting for a Pentax Full Frame. I hope they make one, but if I was betting I would bet not anytime soon.

I would bet the next thing is going to be mirrorless and smaller sensors not larger ones.

I think the K5 looks like a great camera. I'm just more interested in the Fuji because it matches what I'm looking for. That said, I will probably consider buying the K5 but not this year. I want to take a look at that Fuji first.

[noblepa]

I see no mass movement towards Full Frame as an industry standard.

I agree. At least since the Hoya takeover, Pentax has said only one thing about FF: "NO!". Yet, everytime a new annoucement is anticipated, some here insist that it will be a FF. When the announcement materializes and it isn't a FF, they are dissappointed and immediately begin speculating that the next camera MUST be a FF, or Pentax is doomed.

I think that Pentax can thrive as an apsc-only camera maker. They aren't going to erode C & N's markets significantly, any time soon. A FF camera would be a very expensive development project and, seriously, how big of a market is there for FF and how much of it could Pentax expect to capture?

I strongly suspect that the only reason that Hoya brought the 645D to market is that it fits into a market that Pentax traditionally had a place in, C & N are not in that market, and, probably most importantly, its development had already been paid for. It probably took very little development money to put the finishing touches on it.

Paul Noble

[jogiba]

The market for a FF Pentax is at least 10x larger than the 645D. How many of the 24 million FF K mount lenses out there work with the 645D. If Pentax came out today with a FF DSLR with the same specs as the Canon 5D MKII at the same price I would buy it.

[Boris]

I agree. At least since the Hoya takeover, Pentax has said only one thing about FF: "NO!". Yet, everytime a new annoucement is anticipated, some here insist that it will be a FF. When the announcement materializes and it isn't a FF, they are dissappointed and immediately begin speculating that the next camera MUST be a FF, or Pentax is doomed.

Valid and logical analysis, no matter how (un)pleasant it may sound to some of the people here, including myself.

[northcoastgreg]

I agree. At least since the Hoya takeover, Pentax has said only one thing about FF: "NO!".

Absolutely correct. And actions always speak louder than words. Pentax has now released two new lenses, the DA 18-135 and the DA L 35. The 18-135 is obviously an APS-C lens. Some under the illusion that the DA L 35 might be FF compatible because it, allegedly, is the same design as the FA 35. However, the fact that the new 35 is f2.4 is a clear giveaway: it's likely an APS-C lens as well. So Pentax has released two more APS-C lenses, reconfirming their commitment to that sensor size. I believe we can safely assume there will be no Pentax FF in 2011, nor (unless, per impossible, the K-5 is a huge hit) will we see such a camera in 2012.

[TaoMaas]

I believe we can safely assume there will be no Pentax FF in 2011, nor (unless, per impossible, the K-5 is a huge hit) will we see such a camera in 2012.

We'll see no FF Pentax until FF proves itself to be more of a market force than APS-C. So far...that's not happening. Meanwhile, mirrorless cameras emerge over the hilltop, indicating far greater appeal to the masses than FF. As I've said all along...the research money will follow the market. If the market demands FF, the money will follow. If the market wants EVIL, the money will go there...not to FF.

[Blue]

The market for a FF Pentax is at least 10x larger than the 645D. How many of the 24 million FF K mount lenses out there work with the 645D. If Pentax came out today with a FF DSLR with the same specs as the Canon 5D MKII at the same price I would buy it.

How many 645 film lenses are already out there? That's the real question. Plus, they would have to sell about 4.5 ff bodies for every 645D.

[Blue]

I agree. At least since the Hoya takeover, Pentax has said only one thing about FF: "NO!". Yet, everytime a new annoucement is anticipated, some here insist that it will be a FF. When the announcement materializes and it isn't a FF, they are dissappointed and immediately begin speculating that the next camera MUST be a FF, or Pentax is doomed.

I think that Pentax can thrive as an apsc-only camera maker. They aren't going to erode C & N's markets significantly, any time soon. A FF camera would be a very expensive development project and, seriously, how big of a market is there for FF and how much of it could Pentax expect to capture?

I strongly suspect that the only reason that Hoya brought the 645D to market is that it fits into a market that Pentax traditionally had a place in, C & N are not in that market, and, probably most importantly, its development had already been paid for. It probably took very little development money to put the finishing touches on it.

Paul Noble

I think the same thing regarding the 645D. I believe they realized after they "tabled" it that it was at a point that it made more economic since as well as P.R. to go ahead and finish it.

[gazonk]

The market for a FF Pentax is at least 10x larger than the 645D.

I seriously doubt this. As I pointed out in a different thread: In the bcnranking.jp statistics for August the 645D is ranked higher than the D3x and the a900. I'm not sure how reliable the statistics is for cameras that far down the list, or if it is representative of the sales channels for these cameras, but still, the 645D seems to sell quite well.

So at least in the Japanese market, IMHO Pentax would have a really hard time coming up with FF sales numbers that match the 645D's, even if they tried to make a "consumer FF" like the 5d.

[jogiba]

I seriously doubt this. As I pointed out in a different thread: In the bcnranking.jp statistics for August the 645D is ranked higher than the D3x and the a900. I'm not sure how reliable the statistics is for cameras that far down the list, or if it is representative of the sales channels for these cameras, but still, the 645D seems to sell quite well.

So at least in the Japanese market, IMHO Pentax would have a really hard time coming up with FF sales numbers that match the 645D's, even if they tried to make a "consumer FF" like the 5d.

So you are saying all of this talk about wanting a FF Pentax to use with the 24 million K mount lenses out there is total BS and there are more that would pay 4x as much as a FF Pentax DSLR like the 5D MKII for a 645D ? I bet if we had a poll here you would be wrong.

[Big G]

I've said it already, I think FF would be a pointless move for Pentax - just take a look at Flickr's camera stats:

Flickr: Camera Finder: Canon

Flickr: Camera Finder: Nikon

The APS-C market is vast compared to the FF market; what benefit is there to Pentax to enter a market that is a) tiny b) absolutely dominated by Canon & Nikon? Seeeeeeeriously, it makes no sense! None!

The market for a FF Pentax is at least 10x larger than the 645D.

As I said, there may be more demand for FF than MF; but it's a market that's completely sewn up. Just look at Flickr's stats for the Sony A900, the cheapest and highest resolution FF available - under one million items on Flickr; absolute tear drops in the vast ocean of APS-C.

Yes, yes, yes; there are die hard Pentaxians that will go on ad nauseum about the lack of FF body, but the sooner you get over it the more you'll be at peace .

[Blue]

So you are saying all of this talk about wanting a FF Pentax to use with the 24 million K mount lenses out there is total BS and there are more that would pay 4x as much as a FF Pentax DSLR like the 5D MKII for a 645D ? I bet if we had a poll here you would be wrong.

I don't think that is what is being said. The 645D is likely to be a different market segment all together. I.E the mf market plus people that would be interesting in the 1DS MK III and D3X. The development of the 645D was started when the film 645 was still in production. Since the R&D was done, this was a follow through on that. I don't have a grasp how far along Pentax was on a ff digital 135 other than the MZ-D and information on that is rather limited.