[Aristophanes]

It must be a fun time to be a camera designer/engineer at Sony right now. All blue ocean stuff right now . For every new idea that comes to market there are probably five that didn't. I suspect that their strategy is to bring as many horses as they can to the Kentucky Derby.

Other than the infinite sadness of dripping the Minolta name, a lot of what is going on at Sony camera HQ is a lot like the approach of the old Minolta. DNA and all that. Smart acquisition by Sony. They got some good people.

[pz1fan]

Again, ahem.

AVI is a "proprietary" container originally designed by Microsoft (Windows media player).

MOV is a "proprietary" container originally designed by Apple (Quicktime).

Neither of these two formats have anything to do with HTML5, and both pre-date HTML5 by a good few years.

AVCHD on the other hand uses M2TS is which an "open" container.

I'm not sure why you think M2TS will make "integrated H.264 encode/decode designs inapplicable" - MPEG Transport Stream is just about one of the most widely supported distribution containers out there - used in DVB broadcasts all over the world. It is supported on just about anything I know, and inbuilt into most GPUs and video processors.

Well said. Exactly right. M2TS predates AVCHD.

(As for full frame: Not a fanboy, but would like to see a full frame DSLR).

[falconeye]

Blesator = stop-down coupler (aka aperture coupler)
That's as good an English name as you'll get.

Well, Blesator is short for Blendensimulator. Which means Aperture simulator (Blendenübertragung / aperture coupler is another term for the same thing).

So, the closest translation to English would be Apesator

Pentax K mount lenses work great on the Gh2.

No adapter which requires manual focus works "great".

This is why I think a Sony LA-KE2 could be earth shaking for the Pentax community.

[thibs]

Well said. Exactly right. M2TS predates AVCHD. There is also the standards based MP4 file format container. The other file formats are proprietary.

(As for full frame: Not a fanboy, but would like to see a full frame DSLR).

MKV is open too AFAIK

[Oog]

As I said, in the Dear Pentax thread, I would like Pentax to bring out something that can do the same as a N----n D700 has been doing for the past 3 years now:

- FF (don't care about megapixels, just low natural noise)
- open-aperture metering with K and M lenses (de-cripple the KAF2 mount)
- full manual setting

It would mean either ditching Pentax and forking over $4000+ to N---n for a body with 3 prime autofocus Nikkors or keep my A28, A35-70, A70-200, M50f1.4, M50f4 macro, K35f2, and K55f1.8 and spend $2500+/- towards a Pentax FF body!

[Class A]

So, the closest translation to English would be Apesator

Yes, but the English don't do compound names and this is an artificial one on top of matters.

The real issue is the cost of implementing it, of course. In a $10,000 camera like 645D it is feasible to do this. In a $1,500 camera it will never be, AFAIC. I don't see Pentax offering the Apecler (APErture CoupLER) in a $2,300 FF camera either.

[Jan67]

It's not just market share. It's margins. as well.
Any Pentax FF will clearly not be able to increase market share because the demand is simply not there. What can Pentax offer in a FF DSLR that is better than a Nikon D800?

As somebody mentioned already, FF market depends very much on the price. The trend of increasing number of photo enthusiasts is, I guess, clear. Many of them come soon or later to conclusion, that they would like to have a FF camera (IQ reasons). But just part of them can invest in FF body and lenses.
So the point is to find the sweet point= intersection of the price, development and production costs and set of functionality. I am sure, that certain price of FF camera (probably between $1500 and 2000) would attract demand from both Pentax and non Pentax community. Maybe, the right moment is still not there. Many people in this thread would wish a FF camera focused just on basic features and size small as possible. It would be interesting to prepare a poll, focused on these basic features and maximum expected price.

[falconeye]

the English don't do compound names and this is an artificial one on top of matters.

They do, cf. "transputer"

[Class A]

They do, cf. "transputer"

Once every decade, if that...

[uccemebug]

So, the closest translation to English would be Apesator

Sounds like an animal from the pleistocene.

I am sure, that certain price of FF camera (probably between $1500 and 2000) would attract demand from both Pentax and non Pentax community. Maybe, the right moment is still not there. Many people in this thread would wish a FF camera focused just on basic features and size small as possible. It would be interesting to prepare a poll, focused on these basic features and maximum expected price.

We've done it. It went exactly as you guess, coming to an average price of $1750 IIRC.

[Christine Tham]

We've done it. It went exactly as you guess, coming to an average price of $1750 IIRC.

It's on pre-order now for $1749.99.

[Brangdon]

It would be interesting to prepare a poll, focused on these basic features and maximum expected price.

Agreed. There's not much point in people saying they'd pay for FF unless they qualify it by also saying how much they'd pay. I'd considered a poll along those lines myself (but hadn't wanted yet another FF thread).

When Ricoh bought Pentax, they said they wanted the Pentax brand name and its fans. It does seem to me that an old-fashioned full-frame DSLR would please that crowd and maybe attract back some of those who have left the fold. A mirrorless just doesn't have the same appeal right now. I envisage a camera that would mark the end of an era, a last great beautiful optical viewfinder: bright, high resolution, lag-free, fast auto-focus and easy manual focus, no battery drain. After that it will be mirrorless all the way. There should be a perfect example of what that gives up.

[ManuH]

source: Flickr: Camera Finder: Canon

What's interesting is that the graph is showing the 5D Mk II on the rising, the same curve as the 7D. But the 5D Mk II is almost a 3 years old model! (Actually that also helps a lot for cumulative statistics like the Flickr, but its growing rate is as fast as the 7D). It means that advanced amateurs choose as much the 5D as the 7D. Which could be interpreted as "if I'm going to pay 1600$ for a top APS-C I could as well stretch my budget by a few hundreds and get the real thing". Which is a sound decision considering that anyway the cost of a photographic system is mostly in the lenses most of the time.

[jsherman999]

source: Flickr: Camera Finder: Canon
...
Which could be interpreted as "if I'm going to pay 1600$ for a top APS-C I could as well stretch my budget by a few hundreds and get the real thing". Which is a sound decision considering that anyway the cost of a photographic system is mostly in the lenses most of the time.

That's exactly the reasoning that struck me when I wanted to upgrade my D90. I was looking at the D300s for better tracking, AF adjust and better support of AI-S lenses, but I just didn't feel like aps-c-->aps-c within Nikon was going to really feel like an upgrade. I decided to bite the bullet, spend a bit more and get the D700.

My first choice would have been to keep the D90 and upgrade the K20D to a Pentax FF body. Alas.

...What's interesting is that the graph is showing the 5D Mk II on the rising, the same curve as the 7D. But the 5D Mk II is almost a 3 years old model! (Actually that also helps a lot for cumulative statistics like the Flickr, but its growing rate is as fast as the 7D). It means that advanced amateurs choose as much the 5D as the 7D.

I wonder if flickr may not really be a flat representation of buyers. D700 also has stronger numbers than I would have expected, the flickr ratio just doesn't represent what I see in the field.

My theory: 5D/D700 users tend to have a more developed workflow than the average T3i and D3000 user, and have integrated image upload into it as basically another step. Thus, they can get a lot of images up there with minimal effort, skewing the numbers, and are more likely to upload at least something with every shoot. A big chunk of entry-level shooters have almost no real 'workflow', and regard getting images up to flickr or somepace as a dedicated effort - one they skip more often than not.


.

[falconeye]

My theory: 5D/D700 users tend to have a more developed workflow than the average T3i and D3000 user, and have integrated image upload into it as basically another step. Thus, they can get a lot of images up there with minimal effort, skewing the numbers, and are more likely to upload at least something with every shoot.

I would agree if ...

... photographers with a more developed workflow wouldn't avoid Flickr at all. After all, Flickr has an unclear copyright policy and ugly representation, compared to some alternatives.