[Winder]

What did Pentax answer from question about Full Frame????

Same thing they have said for the last 12 years...... Something about market research and looking at options..... They have the entire R&D department (both of them) looking into it......

[twitch]

They are looking at it even more now than before, but it is "in the air at the moment" (exact words used).

[D0n]

the three biggest technical issues to a Pentax ff would be :
1) data throughput vs heat and battery life.... bigger files need faster cpu's...period.... a duo core prime II engine could suck a lot of battery power..
2) af accuracy with faster lenses.... maybe..just maybe... they can't get it accurate at f1.4.....
3) SR might have problems with inertia.... shaking a bigger sensor just might be more than they can solve with the current equipment/suppliers they have....

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

No, that's not a reason; that's a death wish.

This is not an argument, it is just rhetoric.

It's not like I don't understand your argument,<snip> but I'm afraid you don't understand mine

You are not putting forward any argument - you are just assuming that moving away from the K mount or introducing a competing mount would be damaging to Ricoh. But you have no argument for that. The fact that you and a few other users wouldn't buy a Pentax product if it did not come in K mount pales next to the fact that most of the market doesn't buy Pentax K mount products already and lens manufacturer support has only deteriorated in recent years. What better sign for the irrelevance of a mount than the lack of customers that leads to the lack of third party support (which was already dwarfing first party support to begin with).

and making sure that the new mount could be fitted with a K-mount adapter that allowed full operation of K-mount lenses

unless there was an adapter that came along with the new bodies (as mentioned earlier here) that gave full functionality for K-mount lenses.

I am amused by the exigence you have for a new mount when the current K mount implementation doesn't provide the same level of functionality today.

[junyo]

@Winder: Market share when they weren't even trying is irrelevant, sorry. Let's see them first trying, then decide that's all that can be done, with the K-mount.
The main issue here is: they lose the user base, they must replace it before calling it even, let alone gaining anything. Can you prove there are enough people who would buy a new mount Pentax, to cover their actual sales and then some? Those 19 are using their own systems, they won't switch that easily; in fact who would, to a brand which screws his customers? Trust is hard gained, easily lost. Yet you're making it sounds like they would gladly jump over Pentax, if only they had a new mount and basically no lenses (but a stinking adapter).
This being "held hostage" is nonsense, I'm afraid. There is nothing that prevents them to significantly improve the K-mount system, making it much more desirable than until now - and this is exactly what they're planing to.

We're having this conversation because you couldn't care less about the K-mount. By the way, what's your most recent Pentax camera&lenses? And non-Pentax?

Now we're supposed to care about a camera company? Is this a club, some non-profit that exists for photographic philanthropy? Is it a religion, where we're supposed to be guided by faith in the supernatural? Or is it a consumer electronics company, that's supposed to maintain the value of investment buy producing products that people want, and buy in large quantities?

And I can't speak for anyone else, but if you want to make it a personal, emotional argument, and try to play the "you're not invested in K mount" card, you best pack a lunch. My last camera was a Fuji XPro, because I'd waited 3 years for a Pentax MILC, and what I got was the K01, which is a photographic abortion. I've got the better part of two decades of buying Pentax gear, film and digital. My last lens was an 8mm Rokinon in K mount. I currently own/use 4 Pentax SLR/DSLR bodies, and yeah, a mountain of new and old glass. And what you don't seem to grasp is, for the cost of a simple adapter, my manual Pentax glass actually works better on the Fuji than it does the DSLRs. I'm actually getting more utility out of Pentax lenses on a non-Pentax body. And the same applies to any lens mount. Fuji (and Canon, and Sony, and Olympus, and Panasonic) can sell MILC bodies to anyone. Pentax can't. I'm sorry you can't see past the cost of an adapter to grasp the economics of that.

[illdefined]

@Winder, I only wanted to show you that one can make money on DSLRs. By the way, how's Olympus doing?

sales-wise? much better since they abandoned the SLR.

Olympus had a deep range of small and weathersealed DSLRs, with some of the best glass in the industry, envy of many. what happened? they couldn't measure up with the SLR competition due to sensor size.

sound familiar?

[Wired]

They also show a new DA* mid zoom. I would not be surprised if this is not a replacement for the DA* 16-50mm. It is probably the worst of the DA* lenses and ready for an update.

That roadmap also shows that lens to be 28-70mm aprox. That is what the 16-50 translates to (roughly) on FF. So, and I'm playing devils advocate here, it could be the first of a revamped DA* line that is FF compatible.


disclaimer: I don't want a FF. I like my extended reach an APS-C sensor gives me, as well as the processing speeds. I like the lighter smaller system the K5 and DA*16-50/50-135 gives me compared to a Canon 5DMKiii and 28-70/70-200 for similar IQ.

[twitch]

The 70-200/4 isn't too big really, same as 50-135/2.8 I think. The bonus is getting lightning fast AF.

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

And what you don't seem to grasp is, for the cost of a simple adapter, my manual Pentax glass actually works better on the Fuji than it does the DSLRs. I'm actually getting more utility out of Pentax lenses on a non-Pentax body.

That is the most ironic (and sad) aspect I discovered since I started using Olympus. A lot of the issues I had with lenses on Pentax bodies have suddenly disappeared:

- manual focusing is made easy with a great LiveView implementation
- I no longer have WB issues with old lenses
- I no longer have to adjust metering as I am changing the aperture
- I don't have to use a green button to meter with K/M lenses
- I no longer have to unscrew M42 lenses to remove them from the camera - I can just unlock the adapter
- and no more dust on the sensor either - I don't know what these guys are doing to prevent it but it works

Pentax is clearly doing something wrong when I can get a better use of their legacy products by switching brands.

[netrex]

I said they are budget lenses for Nikon and Canon, and they were. They cost a lot less than the Canon or Nikon equivalents. Of course Pentax user paid hundreds more for the Pentax version. Pentax designed the optics, but the rest of the lens (construction and AF) were Tokina designs. The Pentax DA 12-24mm is a Tokina lens and now that the partnership has been dissolved it appears it will be discontinued. It has always been very hard to find, with Pentax sending small quantities here to the USA. Maybe in other parts of the world there is better availability.

Notice that the new Lens Road Map shows a new wide angle zoom in this range (12-24) for 2013? They probably no longer have access to the Tokina.

They also show a new DA* mid zoom. I would not be surprised if this is not a replacement for the DA* 16-50mm. It is probably the worst of the DA* lenses and ready for an update.

So Pentax designed the optics, and Tokina the rest? I find that strangs as the optics are the similar parts in those lenses and the mechanicals are different. Am I missing something here?

What's wrong with the 16-50 DA*? It's sharp, wide, has nice colors and draws very beautiful diffraction stars (important to me, as the 50-135mm does as well).

I also had another question. Are there other lenses dedicated to APS-C sensor from other brands that are of a higher quality?

...
I am amused by the exigence you have for a new mount when the current K mount implementation doesn't provide the same level of functionality today.

I should have written new K-mount lenses. What functionality is missing from the mount as it is today? I can use old K, M and A lenses without problems, but I can't meter like on DSLRs as I can on my Z-1p though, no idea why. I'm guessing this is part of what's missing?

[Fontan]

Now we're supposed to care about a camera company? Is this a club, some non-profit that exists for photographic philanthropy? Is it a religion, where we're supposed to be guided by faith in the supernatural?

This is called fanatical fanboy-ism.

According to a Pentax engineer and I believe it when he says that people who buy more than a kit lens is a smaller minority amongst the user base. Their contribution to the market share of Pentax is forever minuscule. If a company like Pentax listens to so-called voices of reason put forward by people who have nothing better to do than to sit in front f a computer screen to type pages and pages of what they think Pentax ought to do, they really will go bankrupt. They are almost better off doing exact opposite of what fanatics around here say they should.

[Laurentiu Cristofor]

What functionality is missing from the mount as it is today? I can use old K, M and A lenses without problems, but I can't meter like on DSLRs as I can on my Z-1p though, no idea why. I'm guessing this is part of what's missing?

Yes, that is the reason the current mount is known as a "crippled" KAF2 mount. It lacks a mechanism for sensing the lens aperture on K/M lenses. A list of Pentax cameras with crippled mounts can be found here.

[Sol Invictus]

This is called fanatical fanboy-ism.

According to a Pentax engineer and I believe it when he says that people who buy more than a kit lens is a smaller minority amongst the user base. Their contribution to the market share of Pentax is forever minuscule. If a company like Pentax listens to so-called voices of reason put forward by people who have nothing better to do than to sit in front f a computer screen to type pages and pages of what they think Pentax ought to do, they really will go bankrupt. They are almost better off doing exact opposite of what fanatics around here say they should.

See everyone, if you buy more than the kit 18-55 you are now a fanboy suffering from the dreaded fanboy-ism disease! Who needs any other lenses when you have the mighty 18-55?

Pentax should totally ignore those who've invested thousands into the the system. What do they know about what they want to see next from Pentax?

[Kunzite]

Now we're supposed to care about a camera company? Is this a club, some non-profit that exists for photographic philanthropy? Is it a religion, where we're supposed to be guided by faith in the supernatural? Or is it a consumer electronics company, that's supposed to maintain the value of investment buy producing products that people want, and buy in large quantities?

And I can't speak for anyone else, but if you want to make it a personal, emotional argument, and try to play the "you're not invested in K mount" card, you best pack a lunch. My last camera was a Fuji XPro, because I'd waited 3 years for a Pentax MILC, and what I got was the K01, which is a photographic abortion. I've got the better part of two decades of buying Pentax gear, film and digital. My last lens was an 8mm Rokinon in K mount. I currently own/use 4 Pentax SLR/DSLR bodies, and yeah, a mountain of new and old glass. And what you don't seem to grasp is, for the cost of a simple adapter, my manual Pentax glass actually works better on the Fuji than it does the DSLRs. I'm actually getting more utility out of Pentax lenses on a non-Pentax body. And the same applies to any lens mount. Fuji (and Canon, and Sony, and Olympus, and Panasonic) can sell MILC bodies to anyone. Pentax can't. I'm sorry you can't see past the cost of an adapter to grasp the economics of that.

I care about a camera company, in the sense in which I want them to continue to provide the equipment I want. But I'm afraid I don't see the relation with what I wrote... are you trying to ridicule my position this way?
The issue with the stinking adapter, my dear Watson, is that:
1. I will gain nothing by using it. I can only hope for the same level of compatibility, but even that's not granted.
2. I will have to pay for it. Why, since I will gain nothing?
3. I will have two different, incompatible lens lines. The old ones will work on the new body with the stinking adapter, but the new ones won't work at all on an old body - which makes keeping a it as a backup difficult.
But if you prefer to think I'm just emotional, and there's no reason to not throw away compatibility and embrace the stinking adapters...
P.S. So I was right, you already departed from the K-mount, and want everyone to do the same. Guess what...

sales-wise? much better since they abandoned the SLR.

Olympus had a deep range of small and weathersealed DSLRs, with some of the best glass in the industry, envy of many. what happened? they couldn't measure up with the SLR competition due to sensor size.

sound familiar?

Financial wise.
Reality check: their DSLR failed (yes, due to sensor size - I always thought that going 4/3 instead of APS-C was a mistake, and they tried to compensate through marketing) but Pentax did not. I'll reformulate this: Pentax did not, while going through one hostile takeover, drastic cost cutting and R&D downsizing, a global economic crisis, the Japan disaster, and then, being sold. Unlike Olympus 4/3 they managed to survive and keep some market share in such hostile conditions.

[Kunzite]

See everyone, if you buy more than the kit 18-55 you are now a fanboy suffering from the dreaded fanboy-ism disease! Who needs any other lenses when you have the mighty 18-55?

Pentax should totally ignore those who've invested thousands into the the system. What do they know about what they want to see next from Pentax?

Well said. Actually, they should listen for those who jumped ship and won't ever buy a Pentax camera or lens again - those knows the best

By the way, I am putting my money where my mouth is. YMMV.