K-3 speculation

**Pål Jensen** · 03-20-2013, 04:17 PM

Originally posted by Adam

Thus I'd say that their best bet would be to just suck it up and go full-frame, with an emphasis on image quality. At least then, their DSLRs will get a bit more media attention!

Like the Sony FF perhaps?
I think they will get more attention with a new 645 and more sales with the coming K-3....

RonHendriks1966 · 03-20-2013, 04:52 PM

Originally posted by tram57

Still think a 20-24MP APS-H sensor with the same pixel density and low/high ISO performance of the k-5 sensor we all enjoy, plus the associated smaller size and cost savings relative to FF, plus the intermediate crop factor of 1.3 allowing continued use of DA limited and DA* lenses but with improved DOF and DNR relative to APS-C of same pixel density plus pro level buffer, max frame rate, bracketing, etc. would be an ideal 'new' solution for the 'game changing' camera we all hope the K-3 will be.

Originally posted by Adam

Going with APS-H over full-frame is only a valid excuse if the camera will offer exceptional speed, and considering the fact that Pentax APS-C cameras are still rather slow (performance wise), it's hard to expect better results from a camera that has a larger sensor in it. Thus I'd say that their best bet would be to just suck it up and go full-frame, with an emphasis on image quality. At least then, their DSLRs will get a bit more media attention!

Well I even think that a 16 mp APS-H (that means the pixels off the D600/A99 in smaller sensor) would give all you need. Make it fast and snappy and you do have a killer camera.

The one thing I don't agree Adam is that you get more media attention with an aps-H sensor since that is the only offering in the camerabussiness with this sensor!

ozlizard · 03-20-2013, 05:11 PM

Image quality will always win over speed in my book.

What do most photographer shoot? Landscapes, sports, studio, family snaps?

**Digitalis** · 03-20-2013, 06:47 PM

Originally posted by RonHendriks1966

I don't agree Adam is that you get more media attention with an aps-H sensor since that is the only offering in the camerabussiness with this sensor!

The last camera to use APS-H sensor was the Canon 1D Mk IV. Canon abandoned APS-H in favour of FX format in order to compete with the Nikon D4.

Originally posted by Adam

Going with APS-H over full-frame is only a valid excuse if the camera will offer exceptional speed,

I agree, it will take some serious improvements before pentax comes out with a camera that is even close to being able to perform as quickly as the Canon 1D Mk IV. My old 1D MKIIn is quicker than my K5IIs in certain areas.

ogl · 03-20-2013, 10:14 PM

Who is APS-H? APS-H is dead, baby, APS-H is dead...

RonHendriks1966 · 03-21-2013, 03:08 AM

Originally posted by ozlizard

Image quality will always win over speed in my book.

What do most photographer shoot? Landscapes, sports, studio, family snaps?

Well with Pentax it surely isn't sports as a main goal for their camera. When image quality is your goal then the APS-H camera will beat the APS-C camera!

Originally posted by Digitalis

The last camera to use APS-H sensor was the Canon 1D Mk IV. Canon abandoned APS-H in favour of FX format in order to compete with the Nikon D4.

I agree, it will take some serious improvements before pentax comes out with a camera that is even close to being able to perform as quickly as the Canon 1D Mk IV. My old 1D MKIIn is quicker than my K5IIs in certain areas.

Well I guess that both 1Dx and D4 are not the camera's to compete with for Pentax. A new camera with APS-H sensor should compete with Canon 7D (Mark II maybe) and the new D400 (if that ever comes) alongside with the entry level FF camera's D600 and 6D. So it should bring top quality in image and be equiped to take on to the options that toptier APS-C camera's offer.

Originally posted by ogl

Who is APS-H? APS-H is dead, baby, APS-H is dead...

It's only dead if want it. There are now plenty off sensors in different sizes in the market to make it an option to use a large APS-H sized sensor:

Sensorsize comparison:
http://j.mp/WFPAVy

I'm very satisfied with the pixelamount in the K-5 II(s) so that would be enough pixels. Cut the sensor from the same wafer as the D600 and you get a large APS-H sized sensor (4928x3264 pixels) 29,57mm x 19,58mm and that is a crop of 1,218! So a bit larger then the APS-H sensor in the Canon's.

- Less stressing on cornerperformance for old lenses.
- More usable DA-lenses (maybe some still need the DX-format).
- The cropping giving nature- and birdingphotographers some advantage.
- smaller DNG-files, since there are 16mp instead off 24/36 wich give huge files.
- smaller camerabody (just a little, but it does count).
- No problems to put SR in the body.

Uluru · 03-21-2013, 03:25 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by RonHendriks1966

..
- Less stressing on cornerperformance for old lenses.
- More usable DA-lenses (maybe some still need the DX-format).
- The cropping giving nature- and birdingphotographers some advantage.
- smaller DNG-files, since there are 16mp instead off 24/36 wich give huge files.
- smaller camerabody (just a little, but it does count).
- No problems to put SR in the body.

Let's rather think like this: if Pentax can make a great APS-C DSLR with a 24MP sensor in it, why would they pursue some APS-H format instead of a 24MP FF?

People say problem with Pentax is the perception of the brand. For that same reason, if they want to improve on perception, a 24 MP FF sounds far better than the same pixel count APS-C, and even APS-H. And all things equal, same technology / engine, etc. can be used for both.

Once Pentax is ready for a 24MP APS-C, they can release a 24MP FF camera too.

Caat · 03-21-2013, 05:25 AM

The only place I could see an APS-H camera making sense would be in a compact as you don't have to worry about an interchangeable lens causing naming and focal length problems for people. But even then it only makes sense if the cost is that much lower than a FF based compact but the IQ is that much better than an APS-C based one without costing the Earth.

Kunzite · 03-21-2013, 05:46 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by RonHendriks1966

Well with Pentax it surely isn't sports as a main goal for their camera. When image quality is your goal then the APS-H camera will beat the APS-C camera!

Will beat it? Which APS-H sensor are you talking about? Do not make performance assumptions in nonexistent products.
How much it would cost, given that the sensor will have to be custom-made?
Will it be seen as a superior alternative to the APS-C, or as a failed attempt at making a FF?

There are just too many issues with this APS-H. I would not say no to a high-end APS-H instead of a high-end APS-C, but I don't see it happening.

gazonk · 03-21-2013, 06:09 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

Will beat it? Which APS-H sensor are you talking about? Do not make performance assumptions in nonexistent products.
How much it would cost, given that the sensor will have to be custom-made?

I think custom-made sensor(s) for the 645DII is much more likely. But a custom made APS-H sensor would be more expensive than an FF sensor, wouldn't it? So it would actually make more sense to use a standard FF sensor and just crop off the borders

RonHendriks1966 · 03-21-2013, 08:19 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

Will beat it? Which APS-H sensor are you talking about? Do not make performance assumptions in nonexistent products.
How much it would cost, given that the sensor will have to be custom-made?
Will it be seen as a superior alternative to the APS-C, or as a failed attempt at making a FF?

There are just too many issues with this APS-H. I would not say no to a high-end APS-H instead of a high-end APS-C, but I don't see it happening.

My startpoint would be the wafer that delivers the sensor for the D600 and that performce better then the sensor in the K-5.

Maybe it wouldn't be cheaper then a FF sensor, but maybe that isn't what makes the FF camera's so expensive. It's also about building a system and when more current lenses can perform to their quality on a smaller sensor then a FF then that is where you win the most. I'm thinking off DA40mm, DA70mm, DA*60-250mm. Maybe even the FA series 31mm/43mm/77mm can perform better on a smaller sensor then FF and would make a lot off users very happy.

What about the new DA560mm/f5.6? Would that lens gain IQ from an APS-H over a FF sensor?

thibs · 03-21-2013, 08:22 AM

Originally posted by RonHendriks1966

My startpoint would be the wafer that delivers the sensor for the D600 and that performce better then the sensor in the K-5.

Maybe it wouldn't be cheaper then a FF sensor, but maybe that isn't what makes the FF camera's so expensive. It's also about building a system and when more current lenses can perform to their quality on a smaller sensor then a FF then that is where you win the most. I'm thinking off DA40mm, DA70mm, DA*60-250mm. Maybe even the FA series 31mm/43mm/77mm can perform better on a smaller sensor then FF and would make a lot off users very happy.

What about the new DA560mm/f5.6? Would that lens gain IQ from an APS-H over a FF sensor?

No. Crop is already a PITA, you wanna introduce yet another one ?
This is confusing enough, don't you think?

IchabodCrane · 03-21-2013, 08:31 AM

Originally posted by RonHendriks1966

My startpoint would be the wafer that delivers the sensor for the D600 and that performce better then the sensor in the K-5.

Maybe it wouldn't be cheaper then a FF sensor, but maybe that isn't what makes the FF camera's so expensive. It's also about building a system and when more current lenses can perform to their quality on a smaller sensor then a FF then that is where you win the most. I'm thinking off DA40mm, DA70mm, DA*60-250mm. Maybe even the FA series 31mm/43mm/77mm can perform better on a smaller sensor then FF and would make a lot off users very happy.

What about the new DA560mm/f5.6? Would that lens gain IQ from an APS-H over a FF sensor?

Can you please identify who sells such a sensor?

Sinister · 03-21-2013, 08:32 AM

I don't see the benefit of APS-H. Having 24x36 and APS-C in one system is a great benefit: a small aps-c for travelling and a larger FF for serious, planned shots. Currently I have to systems, Pentax and Canon, which really troubles me.

ogl · 03-21-2013, 08:42 AM

Originally posted by RonHendriks1966

It's only dead if want it. There are now plenty off sensors in different sizes in the market to make it an option to use a large APS-H sized sensor:
.

Canonists called APS-H - no wide-angle, no tele.

As for DA lenses - some of DA lenses can't cover APS-H at all.

And...I'm sorry - nobody will produce APS-H sensor for Pentax...

03-21-2013, 03:08 AM	#1281
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Originally posted by ozlizard Image quality will always win over speed in my book. What do most photographer shoot? Landscapes, sports, studio, family snaps? Well with Pentax it surely isn't sports as a main goal for their camera. When image quality is your goal then the APS-H camera will beat the APS-C camera! Originally posted by Digitalis The last camera to use APS-H sensor was the Canon 1D Mk IV. Canon abandoned APS-H in favour of FX format in order to compete with the Nikon D4. I agree, it will take some serious improvements before pentax comes out with a camera that is even close to being able to perform as quickly as the Canon 1D Mk IV. My old 1D MKIIn is quicker than my K5IIs in certain areas. Well I guess that both 1Dx and D4 are not the camera's to compete with for Pentax. A new camera with APS-H sensor should compete with Canon 7D (Mark II maybe) and the new D400 (if that ever comes) alongside with the entry level FF camera's D600 and 6D. So it should bring top quality in image and be equiped to take on to the options that toptier APS-C camera's offer. Originally posted by ogl Who is APS-H? APS-H is dead, baby, APS-H is dead... It's only dead if want it. There are now plenty off sensors in different sizes in the market to make it an option to use a large APS-H sized sensor: Sensorsize comparison: http://j.mp/WFPAVy I'm very satisfied with the pixelamount in the K-5 II(s) so that would be enough pixels. Cut the sensor from the same wafer as the D600 and you get a large APS-H sized sensor (4928x3264 pixels) 29,57mm x 19,58mm and that is a crop of 1,218! So a bit larger then the APS-H sensor in the Canon's. - Less stressing on cornerperformance for old lenses. - More usable DA-lenses (maybe some still need the DX-format). - The cropping giving nature- and birdingphotographers some advantage. - smaller DNG-files, since there are 16mp instead off 24/36 wich give huge files. - smaller camerabody (just a little, but it does count). - No problems to put SR in the body. Last edited by RonHendriks1966; 03-21-2013 at 03:14 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Speculation: What if Pentax did not go FF but rather a 1.3x?	brecklundin	Pentax DSLR Discussion	36	08-13-2013 10:36 PM
Any speculation on how long...	Tom S.	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	10	12-16-2010 09:19 PM
K-x price speculation	SylBer	Pentax DSLR Discussion	18	10-13-2010 12:29 PM
Small rant + speculation	ilya80	Pentax News and Rumors	35	04-20-2010 11:42 PM
speculation about FA lenses on FF DSLR	lpfonseca	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	19	11-05-2009 10:34 AM

03-20-2013, 04:17 PM	#1276
Pål Jensen Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 4,371	Originally posted by Adam Thus I'd say that their best bet would be to just suck it up and go full-frame, with an emphasis on image quality. At least then, their DSLRs will get a bit more media attention! Like the Sony FF perhaps? I think they will get more attention with a new 645 and more sales with the coming K-3....

03-20-2013, 04:52 PM	#1277
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Originally posted by tram57 Still think a 20-24MP APS-H sensor with the same pixel density and low/high ISO performance of the k-5 sensor we all enjoy, plus the associated smaller size and cost savings relative to FF, plus the intermediate crop factor of 1.3 allowing continued use of DA limited and DA* lenses but with improved DOF and DNR relative to APS-C of same pixel density plus pro level buffer, max frame rate, bracketing, etc. would be an ideal 'new' solution for the 'game changing' camera we all hope the K-3 will be. Originally posted by Adam Going with APS-H over full-frame is only a valid excuse if the camera will offer exceptional speed, and considering the fact that Pentax APS-C cameras are still rather slow (performance wise), it's hard to expect better results from a camera that has a larger sensor in it. Thus I'd say that their best bet would be to just suck it up and go full-frame, with an emphasis on image quality. At least then, their DSLRs will get a bit more media attention! Well I even think that a 16 mp APS-H (that means the pixels off the D600/A99 in smaller sensor) would give all you need. Make it fast and snappy and you do have a killer camera. The one thing I don't agree Adam is that you get more media attention with an aps-H sensor since that is the only offering in the camerabussiness with this sensor!

03-20-2013, 05:11 PM	#1278
ozlizard Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Bridgetown West Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 903	Image quality will always win over speed in my book. What do most photographer shoot? Landscapes, sports, studio, family snaps?

03-20-2013, 06:47 PM	#1279
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 I don't agree Adam is that you get more media attention with an aps-H sensor since that is the only offering in the camerabussiness with this sensor! The last camera to use APS-H sensor was the Canon 1D Mk IV. Canon abandoned APS-H in favour of FX format in order to compete with the Nikon D4. Originally posted by Adam Going with APS-H over full-frame is only a valid excuse if the camera will offer exceptional speed, I agree, it will take some serious improvements before pentax comes out with a camera that is even close to being able to perform as quickly as the Canon 1D Mk IV. My old 1D MKIIn is quicker than my K5IIs in certain areas.

03-20-2013, 10:14 PM	#1280
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Who is APS-H? APS-H is dead, baby, APS-H is dead...

03-21-2013, 03:25 AM - 1 Like	#1282
Uluru Banned Join Date: May 2010 Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,535	Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 .. - Less stressing on cornerperformance for old lenses. - More usable DA-lenses (maybe some still need the DX-format). - The cropping giving nature- and birdingphotographers some advantage. - smaller DNG-files, since there are 16mp instead off 24/36 wich give huge files. - smaller camerabody (just a little, but it does count). - No problems to put SR in the body. Let's rather think like this: if Pentax can make a great APS-C DSLR with a 24MP sensor in it, why would they pursue some APS-H format instead of a 24MP FF? People say problem with Pentax is the perception of the brand. For that same reason, if they want to improve on perception, a 24 MP FF sounds far better than the same pixel count APS-C, and even APS-H. And all things equal, same technology / engine, etc. can be used for both. Once Pentax is ready for a 24MP APS-C, they can release a 24MP FF camera too.

03-21-2013, 05:25 AM	#1283
Caat Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: United Kingdom Photos: Albums Posts: 927	The only place I could see an APS-H camera making sense would be in a compact as you don't have to worry about an interchangeable lens causing naming and focal length problems for people. But even then it only makes sense if the cost is that much lower than a FF based compact but the IQ is that much better than an APS-C based one without costing the Earth.

03-21-2013, 05:46 AM - 1 Like	#1284
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 Well with Pentax it surely isn't sports as a main goal for their camera. When image quality is your goal then the APS-H camera will beat the APS-C camera! Will beat it? Which APS-H sensor are you talking about? Do not make performance assumptions in nonexistent products. How much it would cost, given that the sensor will have to be custom-made? Will it be seen as a superior alternative to the APS-C, or as a failed attempt at making a FF? There are just too many issues with this APS-H. I would not say no to a high-end APS-H instead of a high-end APS-C, but I don't see it happening.

03-21-2013, 06:09 AM	#1285
gazonk Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Oslo area, Norway Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,746	Originally posted by Kunzite Will beat it? Which APS-H sensor are you talking about? Do not make performance assumptions in nonexistent products. How much it would cost, given that the sensor will have to be custom-made? I think custom-made sensor(s) for the 645DII is much more likely. But a custom made APS-H sensor would be more expensive than an FF sensor, wouldn't it? So it would actually make more sense to use a standard FF sensor and just crop off the borders

03-21-2013, 08:19 AM	#1286
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Originally posted by Kunzite Will beat it? Which APS-H sensor are you talking about? Do not make performance assumptions in nonexistent products. How much it would cost, given that the sensor will have to be custom-made? Will it be seen as a superior alternative to the APS-C, or as a failed attempt at making a FF? There are just too many issues with this APS-H. I would not say no to a high-end APS-H instead of a high-end APS-C, but I don't see it happening. My startpoint would be the wafer that delivers the sensor for the D600 and that performce better then the sensor in the K-5. Maybe it wouldn't be cheaper then a FF sensor, but maybe that isn't what makes the FF camera's so expensive. It's also about building a system and when more current lenses can perform to their quality on a smaller sensor then a FF then that is where you win the most. I'm thinking off DA40mm, DA70mm, DA*60-250mm. Maybe even the FA series 31mm/43mm/77mm can perform better on a smaller sensor then FF and would make a lot off users very happy. What about the new DA560mm/f5.6? Would that lens gain IQ from an APS-H over a FF sensor?

03-21-2013, 08:22 AM	#1287
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 My startpoint would be the wafer that delivers the sensor for the D600 and that performce better then the sensor in the K-5. Maybe it wouldn't be cheaper then a FF sensor, but maybe that isn't what makes the FF camera's so expensive. It's also about building a system and when more current lenses can perform to their quality on a smaller sensor then a FF then that is where you win the most. I'm thinking off DA40mm, DA70mm, DA*60-250mm. Maybe even the FA series 31mm/43mm/77mm can perform better on a smaller sensor then FF and would make a lot off users very happy. What about the new DA560mm/f5.6? Would that lens gain IQ from an APS-H over a FF sensor? No. Crop is already a PITA, you wanna introduce yet another one ? This is confusing enough, don't you think?

03-21-2013, 08:31 AM	#1288
IchabodCrane Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,728	Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 My startpoint would be the wafer that delivers the sensor for the D600 and that performce better then the sensor in the K-5. Maybe it wouldn't be cheaper then a FF sensor, but maybe that isn't what makes the FF camera's so expensive. It's also about building a system and when more current lenses can perform to their quality on a smaller sensor then a FF then that is where you win the most. I'm thinking off DA40mm, DA70mm, DA*60-250mm. Maybe even the FA series 31mm/43mm/77mm can perform better on a smaller sensor then FF and would make a lot off users very happy. What about the new DA560mm/f5.6? Would that lens gain IQ from an APS-H over a FF sensor? Can you please identify who sells such a sensor?

03-21-2013, 08:32 AM	#1289
Sinister Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: Berlin Posts: 1,045	I don't see the benefit of APS-H. Having 24x36 and APS-C in one system is a great benefit: a small aps-c for travelling and a larger FF for serious, planned shots. Currently I have to systems, Pentax and Canon, which really troubles me.

03-21-2013, 08:42 AM	#1290
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 It's only dead if want it. There are now plenty off sensors in different sizes in the market to make it an option to use a large APS-H sized sensor: . Canonists called APS-H - no wide-angle, no tele. As for DA lenses - some of DA lenses can't cover APS-H at all. And...I'm sorry - nobody will produce APS-H sensor for Pentax...