[Aristophanes]

Torpedo your existing market, your loyal base, make people fuming mad. It'll be great press. People will do some research and love the idea that Pentax stands nowhere near behind the equipment they've made in the past.

Ironically, doing that saved Olympus, maybe twice.

They dumped SLR's when the OM-4 was not followed up with an AF SLR system. They completely exited the SLR market for almost 20 years and became a major player in P&S cameras.

And the move from 43 to m43 is akin to that effort.

Frankly this is why my first camera wasn't a Cannon. FD to EF nonsense. It's also why I didn't buy a Nikon, their entry level bodies don't do AF with older lenses.

Canon and Minolta both abandon their legacy mounts from MF days when F become the only SLR game in town. Canon handled it better than Minolta because they basically paid their pros to male the transition, whereas Minolta simply expected their user base to stay loyal just because. It became a problem for Minolta because, despite having the best AF cameras and flash system on the market for awhile, they lost too much market share and high-end profits (that and a lawsuit that went strongly against them).

End of story is that companies do what's best for their shareholders, and that sometimes is walking away from some customers for were ones with different interests.

Nikon's entry-level series doesn't do AF with older lenses, but nevertheless the D40, D40x, and D60 literally made the low-end market what it is today. The D60 only stopped production last year and was selling new in Japan for US$199 with it lens at one point. To get to that price point (and take #1 in DSLR sales from Canon) required economizing to get those unit sales. The vast majority of customers did not mind as DSLR sales took off with these models and the Canon Rebels right behind. Pentax struggled to gain any traction against that dynamic, perhaps because Pentax tries to be all things to all last generation of users. What you see as support, can also be a deadly anchor weighing down innovation.

[Aristophanes]

The image in OVF doesn't look natural as well, the focusing screen prevents this. You only can see things natural without any VF

That's it. I'm kicking all the glass windows in my house out.

Middle of winter? Who cares. I want natural, the way God wanted us to see through a VF.

[johnmflores]

Huh?

There's so many assumptions in there I don't know where to start.

Is the price the same as the Canon/Nikon? Is the size the same? Does it have the same lenses? Does it have equivalent ISO noise? Equivalent AF? Equivalent dynamic range?

Do you really think that Pentax will be able to execute any of the above in a big enough way to draw people away from Canon and Nikon with their vastly larger installed base, vastly larger lens lineup, and vastly larger third-party/dealer support?

Price? They've always been in the same ballpark and sometimes higher (think K-5 vs. D7000) because at the end of the day a camera is made up of commodity parts.

Size? Pentax is typically smaller, but has that really helped them do anything more than maintain a single-digit market share?

Sensor/ISO/DR? Funny that you might claim this as an advantage when Pentax doesn't even make their own sensors. And these days, ISO advantages are fleeting and rarely more than a stop between competing products. DR? Could you really, in a blind test, tell a K-5 photo from a 7D from a D7000? If you can't, then the difference isn't enough.

Lenses? Pentax is going to match Nikon and Canon's FF lens lineups at launch? Ever? And so convincingly that people will switch brands? Really?

AF? So Pentax will somehow magically jump way ahead of Nikon and Canon in this area after lagging for the entire AF era? Are they smoking unicorns over there?

I agree, if absolutely everything is the same - if Pentax buys a camera from Canon, and buys lenses from Canon, and puts the Pentax name on them - then you're correct, the Pentax camera won't be interesting to very many people.

Put all the marketing and specs aside for a moment, and you'll realize that at every pricepoint, competing products are pretty darn close to one another. So close that you can't tell the difference between them in a blind test. There are small differences and advances here and there, at each pricepoint they produce very similar results.

Put it another way - put a K-r in the hands of one photographer and a D3/1D/M9 in the hands of another photographer. In most cases, there will be a greater difference in the skill of the photographers than in the capabilities of the cameras they are holding.

[johnmflores]

That's it. I'm kicking all the glass windows in my house out.

Middle of winter? Who cares. I want natural, the way God wanted us to see through a VF.

That's funny, esp. from a guy in Canada!

[ElJamoquio]

Do you really think that Pentax will be able to execute any of the above in a big enough way to draw people away from Canon and Nikon with their vastly larger installed base, vastly larger lens lineup, and vastly larger third-party/dealer support?

I don't think the lens lineups are 'vastly' larger. There are some holes in Pentax's lens lineup, but it isn't the end of the world different. Pentax would have to launch a few lenses at the start of FF, though, sure.

Does larger installed base matter for you? It doesn't for me. I'm not trading lenses with anyone else out in the field, and I wouldn't rely on someone else's equipment even if I used Canon/Nikon.

Sigma makes almost everything in Pentax. So does Tamron. I wouldn't call it vastly larger third party support, or else I'm misinterpreting what you're saying.

Does 'larger dealer support' matter for you? For me it's the same support. I don't know what dealer you go to. And hell, I don't go to a dealer very often anyway.

Price? They've always been in the same ballpark and sometimes higher (think K-5 vs. D7000)

And sometimes lower, think K-x against whatever.

Size? Pentax is typically smaller, but has that really helped them do anything more than maintain a single-digit market share?

MUCH smaller for semipro. If they can carry that through to pro gear then that's a big advantage, to me. I don't think I'm the only one. And having an upgrade path to 'pro' gear is in itself an advantage.

Sensor/ISO/DR? Funny that you might claim this as an advantage when Pentax doesn't even make their own sensors.

Of course they don't make their own sensors. #1, I said ISO, not sensor, and look at the performance of the K5 vs the 7D.

And these days, ISO advantages are fleeting

Sure

and rarely more than a stop between competing products.

I would LOVE to use ISO 6400 like I do ISO 3200 right now. That would be AWESOME. I would buy a new camera just for that. Alternatively I would love to have an iso 10-20 or so, too, that would really help out sometimes.

DR? Could you really, in a blind test, tell a K-5 photo from a 7D from a D7000?

I'm not sure what you mean by blind. If you mean using fill light in lightroom in a challenging environment, then yes, I can tell the difference, I've done this test with a friend of mine who has a 7D.

Lenses? Pentax is going to match Nikon and Canon's FF lens lineups at launch? Ever?

I don't want them to match Nikon and Canon. Like we've both said, if the systems are the same then there's not much reason for Pentax. I want small, light, with excellent IQ. I just want my Pentax with a bigger sensor.

AF? So Pentax will somehow magically jump way ahead of Nikon and Canon in this area after lagging for the entire AF era? Are they smoking unicorns over there?

I sure hope not, unicorns are expensive.

So close that you can't tell the difference between them in a blind test.

Huh? My friend with the 7D carries a big bag with him for all his huge-ass zooms, and I put a prime or two in my pocket. It's a different strategy, sure, but I know I can tell the difference out in the field and I know I can tell the difference when I start using the fill light.

So close that you can't tell the difference between them in a blind test. Put it another way - put a K-r in the hands of one photographer and a D3/1D/M9 in the hands of another photographer. In most cases, there will be a greater difference in the skill of the photographers than in the capabilities of the cameras they are holding.

A more flexible tool opens up possibilities. I agree with you that the photographer is 95% of 90% of the shots I take, but I value the other 10% high enough that I'm willing to purchase a new camera to take the pictures...

...and I can DEFINITELY tell the difference when I'm lugging the camera on some 20 mile hike somewhere.

[Clinton]

If I was in marketing (and I am ), I wouldn't be wasting my time infiltrating a website that attracts a single-digit percentage of customers of a brand with single-digit percentage market share. Unless, of course, I was a bad marketer.

If you like. Keep in mind that Pentax/Ricoh are the size of Canon now, and that Nikon is the small player.

[johnmflores]

I don't think the lens lineups are 'vastly' larger. There are some holes in Pentax's lens lineup, but it isn't the end of the world different. Pentax would have to launch a few lenses at the start of FF, though, sure.

Does larger installed base matter for you? It doesn't for me. I'm not trading lenses with anyone else out in the field, and I wouldn't rely on someone else's equipment even if I used Canon/Nikon.

Sigma makes almost everything in Pentax. So does Tamron. I wouldn't call it vastly larger third party support, or else I'm misinterpreting what you're saying.

Does 'larger dealer support' matter for you? For me it's the same support. I don't know what dealer you go to. And hell, I don't go to a dealer very often anyway.



And sometimes lower, think K-x against whatever.



MUCH smaller for semipro. If they can carry that through to pro gear then that's a big advantage, to me. I don't think I'm the only one. And having an upgrade path to 'pro' gear is in itself an advantage.


Of course they don't make their own sensors. #1, I said ISO, not sensor, and look at the performance of the K5 vs the 7D.


Sure



I would LOVE to use ISO 6400 like I do ISO 3200 right now. That would be AWESOME. I would buy a new camera just for that. Alternatively I would love to have an iso 10-20 or so, too, that would really help out sometimes.



I'm not sure what you mean by blind. If you mean using fill light in lightroom in a challenging environment, then yes, I can tell the difference, I've done this test with a friend of mine who has a 7D.



I don't want them to match Nikon and Canon. Like we've both said, if the systems are the same then there's not much reason for Pentax. I want small, light, with excellent IQ. I just want my Pentax with a bigger sensor.



I sure hope not, unicorns are expensive.





Huh? My friend with the 7D carries a big bag with him for all his huge-ass zooms, and I put a prime or two in my pocket. It's a different strategy, sure, but I know I can tell the difference out in the field and I know I can tell the difference when I start using the fill light.





A more flexible tool opens up possibilities. I agree with you that the photographer is 95% of 90% of the shots I take, but I value the other 10% high enough that I'm willing to purchase a new camera to take the pictures...

...and I can DEFINITELY tell the difference when I'm lugging the camera on some 20 mile hike somewhere.

We're talking about two related but separate things here. You're talking about the next Pentax you want. I'm talking about what I think Pentax should or should not make next..

Ironically, what you are looking for is very similar to what I am looking for - compact, quality. I just don't think that a Pentax FF dSLR will appeal to many folks outside of those already in the cult, and that they need to change technology, I.e., mirrorless FF, to grow significantly.

[ogl]

Happy new year!!! Best wishes!!!

[Rondec]

my 2 penny to discussion:
i think Sony FF SLR failed because they didn't give anything, absolutely anything distinctive: average AF speed and accuracy, down the standard iso capabilities, average body with no modern function like decent live view... the only factor that was supposed to give them advantage was Zeiss glass. Lets assume that Pentax will release FF DSLR... will have decent very decent body well sealed with uncompromised ergonomic, LEGENDARY Pentax limiteds (3 for beginning but i thing 135f1.8 is on its way), Iso and DR will be top notch (better than nikon equivalent) with 20bit converter similar to k10D.... lets not hope to high: average AF speed and accuracy, smallest ruggest body in the history of FF DSLR - i know lots of professionals who started scratch heads to the blood seeing something like this.... at least for spare body with couple of lenses..... for beginning at least studio shutters and landschafters will be amazed..... Pentax FF DSLR is just condemned to success....

Sony had hoped that their success would come from releasing cheap full frame -- undercutting others in the market and bringing full frame down below 2000 dollars.

If Pentax releases full frame, at a minimum it will need to have D700 performance (probably better since D800 is around the corner) with regard to fps, auto focus speed. It also needs to have a few basic zooms available (not been Pentax's strong point over the years) 24-70 f2.8 and 70-200 f2.8 minimum. They can do this, but it won't be cheap.

I would be very surprised of professionals who are heavily invested in Canon or Nikon lenses would jump to Pentax if the only difference is that they made their camera smaller.

[jsherman999]

I would be very surprised of professionals who are heavily invested in Canon or Nikon lenses would jump to Pentax if the only difference is that they made their camera smaller.

There would probably be almost no invested professionals who would jump From CaNikon to Pentax (unless they were offered sponsorship.)

But that makes little difference, because 'professionals' make up a relatively small part of the FF DSLR market - it's almost all enthusiasts. Getting a portion of existing K-mount base, getting enthusiast switchers from Sony, Canon, Nikon, and mostly getting a noticeable chunk of the current annual 'upgrade' market and the expanding asian markets of ILC upgraders we'll be seeing in the next 10 years is what Ricoh is probably looking at.

The FF camera that hits a size, performance and look/feel sweet spot would be a big seller for Pentax, as long as Ricoh commits to an exciting lens roadmap to go along with it.


.

[Aristophanes]

I sure hope not, unicorns are expensive.

Unicorn Spam

[deejjjaaaa]

And if you think 0% is daunting, I refer you to Panasonic, Sony NEX, et. al.

m43 is not exactly a clean 0%... people who invested in 43 system were able to fully use their system flashes and have their lenses working (mostly w/ MF, in few cases w/ AF - but in all cases w/ full autoaperture, etc support)... NEX is a similar in terms of flashes (adapter to mount A lenses was released only recenly)... so if Pentax will release mirrorless you also can hope that flashes can be used at least.

[Winder]

There would probably be almost no invested professionals who would jump From CaNikon to Pentax (unless they were offered sponsorship.)

But that makes little difference, because 'professionals' make up a relatively small part of the FF DSLR market - it's almost all enthusiasts. Getting a portion of existing K-mount base, getting enthusiast switchers from Sony, Canon, Nikon, and mostly getting a noticeable chunk of the current annual 'upgrade' market and the expanding asian markets of ILC upgraders we'll be seeing in the next 10 years is what Ricoh is probably looking at.

The FF camera that hits a size, performance and look/feel sweet spot would be a big seller for Pentax, as long as Ricoh commits to an exciting lens roadmap to go along with it.
.

I almost made the jump to Sony for the Zeiss glass and the A900. I have $8,000 in L glass and a 5D original. If Sony was going to stay with the OVF for the A900 replacement I would have already made the switch.

If Pentax puts a solid camera on the market and glass that is every bit as good as the top glass from Canon, Nikon, Zeiss then it will attracted working pros. The next most important thing (or maybe more important) is the support and availability of products. I don't use the 200L or 400L often enough, but I can rent one quickly if needed. The service and rental support is pretty important.

I am hoping that the 645D support network will grow and be the seed for a Pentax professional network. A FF system will accelerate that growth.

[Aristophanes]

m43 is not exactly a clean 0%... people who invested in 43 system were able to fully use their system flashes and have their lenses working (mostly w/ MF, in few cases w/ AF - but in all cases w/ full autoaperture, etc support)... NEX is a similar in terms of flashes (adapter to mount A lenses was released only recenly)... so if Pentax will release mirrorless you also can hope that flashes can be used at least.

With all due respect, Pentax also needs to revamp its flash system. This is another critical area where Pentax has lagged, especially given the popularity of strobist pro and amateur lighting fun.

[mattdm]

With all due respect, Pentax also needs to revamp its flash system. This is another critical area where Pentax has lagged, especially given the popularity of strobist pro and amateur lighting fun.

*cough*, *cough*