[andre-mz5]

Maybe by ordering both sensors from Dalsa the price could be just good.

This is funny:
Teledyne DALSA - Professional Imaging
Sales Department
High Tech Campus 27
5656 AE Eindhoven
The Netherlands
Tel: +31 40 2599009
Fax: +31 40 2599015
Teledyne DALSA Image Sensor Solutions
sales.sensors@teledynedalsa.com

.

Three years ago I worked at High Tech Campus bldg 52. I knew NXP, semiconductor company, was there, but never knew DALSA was there too.

[Clavius]

We're forgetting about some other groups. Like the people who would very much love to have a FF, but can't afford the likes of D800 and/or Canon equivalent.

I see some people are assuming that a Pentax FF would be very expensive, or even more expensive then the competition. But that still isn't a fact. And I don't think that would be a very wise strategy for Pentax. The market is saturated with fully featured pro level FF bodies. But if they would issue a FF body that's cheaper then CANISO's equivalent machines, then they would steal a lot of customers away from them. APS-C CANISO users that do no not have a upgrade-path, because of to the high costs. They would jump to the cheaper Pentax, with it's loads of FF MF glass on ebay.

That's how I (and many others) started out using Pentax. I couldn't afford a complete set with brand new lenses. So, I bought a K20D, and started collecting old glass. Of course, all that old glass has been supplemented by brand new over the years. (So don't say pulling in legacy-glass collectors doesn't earn Pentax any money on lenses. That's what LBA is for.)

[falconeye]

But if they would issue a FF body that's cheaper then CANISO's equivalent machines, then they would steal a lot of customers away from them.

This is covered by Nikon's sub $2000 D700 which stays in production for this very reason.

[Asahiflex]

This is covered by Nikon's sub $2000 D700 which stays in production for this very reason.

And which will be hypothetically outperformed by the hypothetical Pentax FF camera.

(Yes, I'm price conscious but I don't want to buy old tech).

[Clavius]

This is covered by Nikon's sub $2000 D700 which stays in production for this very reason.

Can it mount old manual glass and use them with SR? And who says Pentax can't do it even cheaper?

A K5, with all it's flaws like slow AF, slow processing and what not, but with with a FF sensor would be very competitive.

[Asahiflex]

Question: would the 645D trick work on the FF market? I.e. Pentax bringing out a FF DSLR with a CCD (Teledyne Dalsa?), no AA filter, no video, no LV, only pure, superb IQ and color fidelity at base ISO in a relatively affordable body. A real photo tool so to speak, not a video machine.

I agree with Falk Lumo that the APS-C DSLR market will be dead soon, leaving only FF and mirrorless APS-C. It's completely logical if you think of it.

[falconeye]

a CCD (Teledyne Dalsa?)

I expect CCD on FF would be fail.
Not because of video or fps. But because of column-parallel A/D converters which can't be embedded. This leads to relatively high readout noise and lower DR at low ISO. Already today, a K-5 beats all MF incl. the 645D in DR (although only by a small margin). But with the D800, the DR with CMOS will increase.

Result: low ISO image quality with CCD soon will not be considered excellent anymore.

[Rondec]

The problem with pentax is: you never know.... you can keep your precious set of FF lenses worth couple of thousand for years and suddenly pentax can vanish, k-mount disappears from the market leving you with bunch of not so precious gear that you will sell for a value of scrap weight.... so one way or another you are uncertain....

Well, that is true for any system, isn't it? What if Sony abandons the alpha mount and goes with the E mount? The reality is that even if the K mount went away, there will still be plenty of mirrorless options out there (as well as Canon bodies) that you could adapt your lenses to. Certainly would be worth more than scrap, I think.

[Asahiflex]

I expect CCD on FF would be fail.
Not because of video or fps. But because of column-parallel A/D converters which can't be embedded. This leads to relatively high readout noise and lower DR at low ISO. Already today, a K-5 beats all MF incl. the 645D in DR (although only by a small margin). But with the D800, the DR with CMOS will increase.

Result: low ISO image quality with CCD soon will not be considered excellent anymore.

So CCD is probably out of question now. However, with the current low number of CMOS sensor manufacturers it's still hard to compete on price. Consider the D7000 and the K-5 which are usually virtually identical in price. Besides the excellent pancakes and user interface, what can Pentax offer that Canon and Nikon don 't already have?

My K-5 already makes things very difficult. AF is not important for me, and I really don't want more pixels (and larger RAW files). So there's no need at all to upgrade. I guess the same goes for all current K-5 owners.

[falconeye]

what can Pentax offer that Canon and Nikon don 't already have?

Non-ugly bodies?

I never understood why design plays no rôle at Canikon. Photographers are artists (well, some of them) and therefore, aesthetical pleasure matters.

[Asahiflex]

Non-ugly bodies?

I never understood why design plays no rôle at Canikon. Photographers are artists (well, some of them) and therefore, aesthetical pleasure matters.

The name on top of the prism hump makes all the difference. A Pentax K-5 with "Canon" on it, called "8D" and featuring an EF mount would sell shitloads...

[Clavius]

Question: would the 645D trick work on the FF market? I.e. Pentax bringing out a FF DSLR with a CCD (Teledyne Dalsa?), no AA filter, no video, no LV, only pure, superb IQ and color fidelity at base ISO in a relatively affordable body. A real photo tool so to speak, not a video machine.

That would be so cool!! I would buy that emmediately. LV and video on DSLRS suck anyway, and so do high iso images. No matter how good the DR is, or how good the high ISO images are, the ones taken at lower ISO are always better. Using fast glass is better.

I agree with Falk Lumo that the APS-C DSLR market will be dead soon, leaving only FF and mirrorless APS-C. It's completely logical if you think of it.

Logical?
Suddenly everyone will stop wanting OVF's?
Suddenly nobody shoots moving things anymore?
Suddenly everybody starts shooting at arms lenght?
And agree with staring down a tiny little laggy pixelized screen wich doesn't look anything like the real image in front of the lens?

If most camerabrands stop making APSC DSLRS, then the only brand left who DOES make them will be earning lots of money.

[Asahiflex]

Logical?
Suddenly everyone will stop wanting OVF's?
Suddenly nobody shoots moving things anymore?
Suddenly everybody starts shooting at arms lenght?
And agree with staring down a tiny little laggy pixelized screen wich doesn't look anything like the real image in front of the lens?

If most camerabrands stop making APSC DSLRS, then the only brand left who DOES make them will be earning lots of money.

The truth is that the DSLR market is shrinking year by year. Of course, one can make a profit out of it, but that market is still shrinking and shrinking... Pentax really needs to think about their future and act, or die trying.

(But I'm still a Pentax fanboy).

[eddie1960]

The name on top of the prism hump makes all the difference. A Pentax K-5 with "Canon" on it, called "8D" and featuring an EF mount would sell shitloads...

That is a marketing Issue. For at least a decade there has been almost no serious marketing from Pentax (Reality is the last truly serious marketing was done in the 70's)
of all the things Ricoh needs to invest in Marketing needs the biggest investment. Brand awareness is horrible. For anyone under 40 or so it is almost non existent (People under 40 who are with Pentax had to find it for the most part) For people over 40 even a large number are surprised to find out they are still in business. This is why you don't see entry level Pentax bulked at Costco and the big boxes they all want the easy sale. Pile a Canon or Nikon up at 499 and it sells itself even if it is pretty much a plastic POS. Even the Oly can compete here they have done a lot more to build their brand awareness since the advent of m4/3 (before that they were even worse than Pentax) and it's paid off.
I'm not saying Pentax needs to try and compete in the cutthroat cheap ass entry market, they do however need to make their presence known enough that people will look at them and consider them as an option. Reality is the k1000 marketing ploy of being the cheap decent camera may have sold a lot of cameras, but there was no accompanying strategy to keep that client as they grew and time went on. digital was a huge opportunity to change the market and the only one who did it well was canon and they just walked away with most of it. Nikon has had to battle back and they have done so but they lost a lot to Canon in the first 5-6 years of digital.
Pentax just no longer had the money to make the move at the time.
Now Ricoh is the boss and they have the money, it's more a matter of will they spend it

[Pål Jensen]

I agree with Falk Lumo that the APS-C DSLR market will be dead soon, leaving only FF and mirrorless APS-C. It's completely logical if you think of it.

It totally and completely defies all logic!
Mirrorless or not has nothing to do with sensor size. APS is the sweetspot (from a performance/cost perspective) for sensor size whether the camera is mirrorless or not...