Pentax To Announce the K-3 Full Frame DSLR At Photokina

VladimirYo · 07-23-2012, 01:57 PM

I dont need 36 mp. 24 are enough.

normhead · 07-23-2012, 02:08 PM - **1 Like**

Quote:

I dont need 36 mp. 24 are enough

.

I don't either.... but is that going to get me excited about paying $2800 for 24 Mp when Nikon users are paying $2995 for 36 Mp? I don't think so. At that point, need has nothing to do with it.

Kunzite · 07-23-2012, 02:12 PM

Originally posted by Docrwm

Let's look at what the mid-June rumor site actually said:

Previous rumors have the K-3 sporting a 24MP sensor, 29-point SAFOX X/w light wavelength AF sensor, 6fps continuous shooting at highest resolution, 1080p and 720p video recording at 60/30/25 and 24 fps, Dual PRIME M processor and ISO range between 100 and 25,600 (expandable to 50-102,400).

In other words, they started with the Adam's April 1st "joke" and built from there?

**jpzk** · 07-23-2012, 02:13 PM

"Today we found out that the K-3 will likely be announced at Photokina in September and launch in early 2013 under the tagline: “the world’s most compact full frame.”

So, that K3 would be FF; and what would the K5 replacement be like? Will there be one?

We'll just have to wait and see what those rumours are all about when comes September.

JP

aurele · 07-23-2012, 02:23 PM

YEAH YEAH YEAH ! Another FF thread !

aurele · 07-23-2012, 02:23 PM

Originally posted by Kunzite

In other words, they started with the Adam's April 1st "joke" and built from there?

we can say so

boosted03gti · 07-23-2012, 02:24 PM

Dont forget the canon 5d mk3. 22 mp. its not always about the mega pixels folks. 24 is more then enough and i would rather have larger, more light absorbing pixels. the 5d mk3 has better high iso performance then the new d800. on the flip side, the d700 12mp had better low light performance then the 5d mk 2 21mp.

RonHendriks1966 · 07-23-2012, 02:25 PM

Originally posted by normhead

.

I don't either.... but is that going to get me excited about paying $2800 for 24 Mp when Nikon users are paying $2995 for 36 Mp? I don't think so. At that point, need has nothing to do with it.

Well Canon charges even more for less pixels. It's not the number of pixels that make the difference in price I guess.

normhead · 07-23-2012, 02:36 PM

Quote:

Well Canon charges even more for less pixels. It's not the number of pixels that make the difference in price I guess.

The problem with that is I have never been even remotely interested in buying any Canon product. Everyone says ,well it's not just about the megapixels, and in some situations that's true. But there are situations where it is about the megapixels. It's all about the mega pixels or it's not about the megapixels. Both statements are at times true.

Or to put it another way.. it's not about the megapixels... until it is. To me, to buy Canon, you need to have a lot of money to buy those patented ring motor lenses that make screw drives sound like something out of the last century... oops, they are something out of the last century. Canon has done a good job of carving out a niche. But they still don't seem to interest me.

that1guy · 07-23-2012, 03:07 PM

its not about the mega pixle until it is? Out of curiosity, are you taking photos and blowing them up to bigger than the size of a billboard?? If you are, then fair enough, I cant argue that. Cause I have used/seen the work from a few different cameras, ranging from Nikon to sony, and now Pentax, and frankly, Megapixle doesnt play a part about 10. im loving the K-5 at 16, and wouldnt want to deal to much over 22-24 (for financial reasons primarily, to get the bang out of the D800 you better have top notch near medium format type lenses, and I know I cant afford that...)

At the end of the day, I guess we will all see what happens....it could get released at 18megapixle for 2100, or 24megapixle for 1999.....or go the other way, or not get released at all......who knows.....

bxf · 07-23-2012, 03:10 PM

Too many comments here are implying that the only thing that makes a given camera "better" is the number of megapixels. By this measure, the top professional models from C&K of recent years are not as good as more recent entry/mid-level offerings. Why do these pro models manage to produce such high IQ, in more situations, in spite of a lower MP count? Is it not possible for Pentax to produce a 24MP camera with top grade electronics, etc, that would match the IQ of the C&K pro models?

Anyway, if nothing else, I have faith in Pentax being able to produce a more compact camera. It's quite easy, actually. You can reduce the size of anything by simply making it smaller

mecrox · 07-23-2012, 03:14 PM

While an FF from Pentax may be announced or at least inch out of the closet later this year, it's a bit hard to believe that Pentax will leave a gap in their range between an APS-C K30 at around 900 bucks and an FF K3 at 2800 bucks. That's one heck of a gap. I mean, do they think all those K5 owners are going to pony up double for a new camera and even more for FF lenses come the time, or trade down to a cheaper but less capable camera which may also mean less profits for manufacturer and retailer. This risk with that is too many of them (those not heavily invested in lenses) may instead decide to trade sideways into Canonikon. This new rumour sounds as if it's a rumour of a rumour about the APS-C replacement for the K5, unless an FF from Pentax without any replacement for the K5 comes in at a significantly lower price than 2800 - but then that might be darn hard for Pentax to manage given that they don't enjoy the economies of scale of the big boys. Strange days ahead. I hope we are all confounded and thoroughly dumbfounded in the outcome. That at least would be interesting.

normhead · 07-23-2012, 03:21 PM

Hey, I'm on record as saying I want a 20 MP FF camera for K-5 money. That would work for me. But if I'm going to pay D800 money...

Quote:

its not about the mega pixle until it is?

I've had a guy come into my booth and look at an 11x14 print and say " I want that as a 20x30 canvas." My dream is someone will come in and look at a 20x30 canvas and say "hey.. I want that as a 40x60 print." We're talking dreams here, not any kind of reality. The day that happens will be the day I say "Darn, I should have been shooting 36 Mp FF."

.

elpolodiablo · 07-23-2012, 03:32 PM

Everytime such 'news' pops up here I have to when it was dated, when I see the news was dated June 15th I just close the page and moved on....

fuent104 · 07-23-2012, 03:47 PM

Originally posted by normhead

I've had a guy come into my booth and look at an 11x14 print and say " I want that as a 20x30 canvas." My dream is someone will come in and look at a 20x30 canvas and say "hey.. I want that as a 40x60 print." We're talking dreams here, not any kind of reality. The day that happens will be the day I say "Darn, I should have been shooting 36 Mp FF."

I used to work for a brilliant photographer who had 40x60 prints ordered pretty regularly. Maybe it was because he actually had some samples on his walls. He shot with a Canon 1DS Mark II, which I believe was a 21 or 22 MP camera.

07-23-2012, 02:12 PM	#18
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by Docrwm Let's look at what the mid-June rumor site actually said: Previous rumors have the K-3 sporting a 24MP sensor, 29-point SAFOX X/w light wavelength AF sensor, 6fps continuous shooting at highest resolution, 1080p and 720p video recording at 60/30/25 and 24 fps, Dual PRIME M processor and ISO range between 100 and 25,600 (expandable to 50-102,400). In other words, they started with the Adam's April 1st "joke" and built from there?

07-23-2012, 03:14 PM	#27
mecrox Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Oxford, UK Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,375	While an FF from Pentax may be announced or at least inch out of the closet later this year, it's a bit hard to believe that Pentax will leave a gap in their range between an APS-C K30 at around 900 bucks and an FF K3 at 2800 bucks. That's one heck of a gap. I mean, do they think all those K5 owners are going to pony up double for a new camera and even more for FF lenses come the time, or trade down to a cheaper but less capable camera which may also mean less profits for manufacturer and retailer. This risk with that is too many of them (those not heavily invested in lenses) may instead decide to trade sideways into Canonikon. This new rumour sounds as if it's a rumour of a rumour about the APS-C replacement for the K5, unless an FF from Pentax without any replacement for the K5 comes in at a significantly lower price than 2800 - but then that might be darn hard for Pentax to manage given that they don't enjoy the economies of scale of the big boys. Strange days ahead. I hope we are all confounded and thoroughly dumbfounded in the outcome. That at least would be interesting. Last edited by mecrox; 07-23-2012 at 03:21 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax Full Frame DSLR (Well, sort of...)	721	Pentax Full Frame	83	08-18-2014 01:44 AM
Pentax...make a bare bones full frame high mp dslr.	slackercruster	Photographic Industry and Professionals	12	09-26-2012 04:20 PM
K30, K5n, K3 and maybe full-frame at Photokina...	frankfanrui	Pentax News and Rumors	638	09-06-2012 07:08 AM
Full Frame DSLR	Spacebandit	Welcomes and Introductions	12	09-20-2011 04:34 AM
Photokina 2010, Pentax and the full frame mystery	falconeye	Pentax News and Rumors	727	09-03-2010 11:11 AM

07-23-2012, 01:57 PM	#16
VladimirYo Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Posts: 290	I dont need 36 mp. 24 are enough.

07-23-2012, 02:08 PM - 1 Like	#17
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Quote: I dont need 36 mp. 24 are enough . I don't either.... but is that going to get me excited about paying $2800 for 24 Mp when Nikon users are paying $2995 for 36 Mp? I don't think so. At that point, need has nothing to do with it.

07-23-2012, 02:13 PM	#19
jpzk Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Québec Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,251	*"Today we found out that the K-3 will likely be announced at Photokina in September and launch in early 2013 under the tagline: “the world’s most compact full frame.”* So, that K3 would be FF; and what would the K5 replacement be like? Will there be one? We'll just have to wait and see what those rumours are all about when comes September. JP

07-23-2012, 02:23 PM	#20
aurele Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Paris, France Photos: Albums Posts: 3,217	YEAH YEAH YEAH ! Another FF thread !

07-23-2012, 02:23 PM	#21
aurele Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Paris, France Photos: Albums Posts: 3,217	Originally posted by Kunzite In other words, they started with the Adam's April 1st "joke" and built from there? we can say so

07-23-2012, 02:24 PM	#22
boosted03gti Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: tampa, fl Photos: Gallery Posts: 237	Dont forget the canon 5d mk3. 22 mp. its not always about the mega pixels folks. 24 is more then enough and i would rather have larger, more light absorbing pixels. the 5d mk3 has better high iso performance then the new d800. on the flip side, the d700 12mp had better low light performance then the 5d mk 2 21mp.

07-23-2012, 02:25 PM	#23
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Originally posted by normhead . I don't either.... but is that going to get me excited about paying $2800 for 24 Mp when Nikon users are paying $2995 for 36 Mp? I don't think so. At that point, need has nothing to do with it. Well Canon charges even more for less pixels. It's not the number of pixels that make the difference in price I guess.

07-23-2012, 02:36 PM	#24
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Quote: Well Canon charges even more for less pixels. It's not the number of pixels that make the difference in price I guess. The problem with that is I have never been even remotely interested in buying any Canon product. Everyone says ,well it's not just about the megapixels, and in some situations that's true. But there are situations where it is about the megapixels. It's all about the mega pixels or it's not about the megapixels. Both statements are at times true. Or to put it another way.. it's not about the megapixels... until it is. To me, to buy Canon, you need to have a lot of money to buy those patented ring motor lenses that make screw drives sound like something out of the last century... oops, they are something out of the last century. Canon has done a good job of carving out a niche. But they still don't seem to interest me.

07-23-2012, 03:07 PM	#25
that1guy Inactive Account Join Date: Jul 2012 Posts: 18	its not about the mega pixle until it is? Out of curiosity, are you taking photos and blowing them up to bigger than the size of a billboard?? If you are, then fair enough, I cant argue that. Cause I have used/seen the work from a few different cameras, ranging from Nikon to sony, and now Pentax, and frankly, Megapixle doesnt play a part about 10. im loving the K-5 at 16, and wouldnt want to deal to much over 22-24 (for financial reasons primarily, to get the bang out of the D800 you better have top notch near medium format type lenses, and I know I cant afford that...) At the end of the day, I guess we will all see what happens....it could get released at 18megapixle for 2100, or 24megapixle for 1999.....or go the other way, or not get released at all......who knows.....

07-23-2012, 03:10 PM	#26
bxf Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Lisbon area Posts: 1,660	Too many comments here are implying that the only thing that makes a given camera "better" is the number of megapixels. By this measure, the top professional models from C&K of recent years are not as good as more recent entry/mid-level offerings. Why do these pro models manage to produce such high IQ, in more situations, in spite of a lower MP count? Is it not possible for Pentax to produce a 24MP camera with top grade electronics, etc, that would match the IQ of the C&K pro models? Anyway, if nothing else, I have faith in Pentax being able to produce a more compact camera. It's quite easy, actually. You can reduce the size of anything by simply making it smaller

07-23-2012, 03:21 PM	#28
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Hey, I'm on record as saying I want a 20 MP FF camera for K-5 money. That would work for me. But if I'm going to pay D800 money... Quote: its not about the mega pixle until it is? I've had a guy come into my booth and look at an 11x14 print and say " I want that as a 20x30 canvas." My dream is someone will come in and look at a 20x30 canvas and say "hey.. I want that as a 40x60 print." We're talking dreams here, not any kind of reality. The day that happens will be the day I say "Darn, I should have been shooting 36 Mp FF." .

07-23-2012, 03:32 PM	#29
elpolodiablo Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Sydney, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,637	Everytime such 'news' pops up here I have to when it was dated, when I see the news was dated June 15th I just close the page and moved on....

07-23-2012, 03:47 PM	#30
fuent104 Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: California Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,356	Originally posted by normhead I've had a guy come into my booth and look at an 11x14 print and say " I want that as a 20x30 canvas." My dream is someone will come in and look at a 20x30 canvas and say "hey.. I want that as a 40x60 print." We're talking dreams here, not any kind of reality. The day that happens will be the day I say "Darn, I should have been shooting 36 Mp FF." I used to work for a brilliant photographer who had 40x60 prints ordered pretty regularly. Maybe it was because he actually had some samples on his walls. He shot with a Canon 1DS Mark II, which I believe was a 21 or 22 MP camera.