[Pål Jensen]

The reason I provoked above more FF cameras were sold than Pentax APS-C DSLRs is because we lack any meaningful data, from the beginning of 2013 until today. And that is, my fair ladies and sirs, 9 long months. 2012 results don't cut it, same as yesteryear's snow. And that is precisely the time when price cuts on entry level DSLRs were introduced, and the tide has turned.

The fact that Nikon had to drop the price of the D600 and the recent significant decrease of Nikon DSLR sales and that Nikons reply to this is to make more APS cameras give all the data you need for the current situation (rumors has it that Canon sat (sit?) on large overstocks of the various editions of the 5D's).
Theres simply a very small market for cameras costing $2000+ (+ the lenses) and it will probably only be getting smaller now that cheaper cameras can deliver results good enough for large fine art prints. Cheap large sensors won't happen as sensors cost is defined by size (Moores law is about more processing power in smaller chips; FF chips are constant sizewise). Sensor manufacturers may want you to buy larger sensors but that is because smaller sensors litterally sells in the millions for each customers. Such customers has immense buying power making small sensor manufacturing less profitable.

---

Last edited by Pål Jensen; 08-21-2013 at 06:30 PM.

[Uluru]

The fact that Nikon had to drop the price of the D600 and the recent significant decrease of Nikon DSLR sales and that Nikons reply to this is to make more APS cameras give all the data you need for the current situation (rumors has it that Canon sat (sit?) on large overstocks of the various editions of the 5D's).

I appreciate this, but is the assertion necessarily correct? Lowering the price of FF may have been an altogether different strategy, i.e. lower it to the level of current top APS-C to make jump from APS-C to FF easier for future cameras. It may mean both C and N want to switch to FF entirely for their entire DSLR range.

Theres simply a very small market for cameras costing $2000+ (+ the lenses) and it will probably only be getting smaller now that cheaper cameras can deliver results good enough for large fine art prints.

Market may be smaller, but healthier overall. As much as we know, APS-C DSLRs and the availability of APS-C sensors for every manufacturing fool in town have helped saturated the digital camera market considerably. Camera market is saturated both from the top (DSLR sales fell off the cliff in 2013) and from the bottom (P&S).

If the DSLR concept is to provide future value, maybe FF is the only way to go for those who can. I personally expect a rather profuse roll out of FF cameras of all kinds, by Nikon, and Canon, in very near future. 2014 will be the year of FF ... which is somewhat amusing, because only then Pentax will surprise its customers with a pro-level APS-C body — God bless their sense for ingenuity.

[Paul Ewins]

I was listening to it since 2003 .. especially with "FF" letters in between "new" and "camera"

I'm not expecting FF. I'm expecting 20 - 24MP APS-C and possibly built-in wi-fi although that may have been speculation more than anything. It is hard to tell when you are having a non-conversation about a non-product. Maybe a 645D2 (645Dn?) although I have no idea what sensor that might use. I'm not sure what else you could do to meaningfully upgrade the 645D without a new sensor. It is too soon for another Q update. The K-01 is probably too tarnished to upgrade, but a K-02 with a built in Metabones Speed Booster (or Pentax version thereof) would be an interesting move. I also wish that Ricoh would produce one hi-res EVF that could connect across the range (i.e. future Q, GX, GR, K-0x) and maybe even as a remote LV screen for the SLRs.

[Pål Jensen]

If the DSLR concept is to provide future value, maybe FF is the only way to go for those who can. .

I have a problem with equallig sensor size with value. It is only value for those who want that sensor size. Having bigger cameras and longer lenses for the same angle of view and a higher cost is not value for those who find the output quality of APS is good enough.
Sensor are only getting better making smaller sensors more viable.

...and it is not only Pentax thats rumored to release a high-end APS camera in september. Nikon too with the D400 - it might even use the same sensor as the Pentax. Canon too is rumored working on the 7D replacement.
But for all I know Pentax may be planning a FF DSLR for September

[Pål Jensen]

I'm not expecting FF. I'm expecting 20 - 24MP APS-C and possibly built-in wi-fi although that may have been speculation more than anything. It is hard to tell when you are having a non-conversation about a non-product. Maybe a 645D2 (645Dn?) although I have no idea what sensor that might use. I'm not sure what else you could do to meaningfully upgrade the 645D without a new sensor. It is too soon for another Q update. The K-01 is probably too tarnished to upgrade, but a K-02 with a built in Metabones Speed Booster (or Pentax version thereof) would be an interesting move. I also wish that Ricoh would produce one hi-res EVF that could connect across the range (i.e. future Q, GX, GR, K-0x) and maybe even as a remote LV screen for the SLRs.

I've heard a 24mp(?) APS DSLR, an updated 645D that might be FF (645 that is) or close or it might be that the FF is not the 645!

[Uluru]

I have a problem with equallig sensor size with value.

I don't.

The image quality is a matter of perception, and many can perceive a fairly considerable quality step up from the compact camera to APS-C DSLR, from APS-C DSLR to FF camera, from FF do MF. When we say "a sensor", we also mean, yet not pronounce — the optics — that is suitably designed to exploit the capabilities of the sensor. Frankly, when I see the output of the 645D, and compare it to the output from K5II, K5II fades away.

My point is, yes we need FF and MF cameras, and they do represent a considerable value no other sensor size and optics combination can approach to. Without them, and touting aloud the m4/3 or APS-C is all we need, we also say we can live on bread, water and butter. Well yes, we can, but it's not living — it's surviving and a waste of life.

...and it is not only Pentax thats rumored to release a high-end APS camera in september. Nikon too with the D400 - it might even use the same sensor as the Pentax. Canon too is rumored working on the 7D replacement. But for all I know Pentax may be planning a FF DSLR for September

Well, so far Pentax does not even have an answer for the D7100 and 70D, and we expect them to come to the party exclusively appointed for the best of the best in APS-C, D-400 and 7DII? Gosh, how foolish and full of themselves Pentaxians are — they have two ponies, and believe they can challenge a stable full of thoroughbreds ...

[StigVidar]

I don't.

The image quality is a matter of perception, and many can perceive a fairly considerable quality step up from APS-C DSLR to FF camera

They are? When I look on high quality photos in magazines or on print, I am not at all able to say anything about which camera it was taken with. The difference between aps-c and 24x36mm is to small for that.

[Uluru]

They are? When I look on high quality photos in magazines or on print, I am not at all able to say anything about which camera it was taken with.

Because by that same token there is very little difference between the FF and MF cameras, so why we'd have them either?
Thus we should all stay at m4/3 and APS-C and Bob is your uncle?
If the only purpose of digital cameras is to provide food for print in magazines or for everyday print in general, then we can't go on forward and have a fertile discussion.

[Pål Jensen]

They are? When I look on high quality photos in magazines or on print, I am not at all able to say anything about which camera it was taken with. The difference between aps-c and 24x36mm is to small for that.

Not only that but you'll have a problem spotting the difference in metersized prints in a fine art gallery (at least as long as we are not talking about the D800). Heres a link to someone saying the same:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-k-5/219502-full-confidence-k5iis-i...gear-home.html

[Pål Jensen]

My point is, yes we need FF and MF cameras, and they do represent a considerable value no other sensor size and optics combination can approach to.

Of course we need FF and MF but sensor size is not the only value. The concept that value in DSLR is dependent on sensor size is a mistaken one. Smaller size is also a value. So is everything else that goes into a camera.
As long as the camera output meets the users demand and he or she is otherwise happy with the formats properties, larger format provide no value but is a waste. In the link above the Canon system cost $5000 more than the Pentax. Now we are talking value!

[mecrox]

FF is not nearly so important as some folks here seem to think.

So far, Ricoh have been tackling things methodically from the ground up. Earlier this year, they refreshed the compacts, the Q and Ricoh's own line, then more recently they refreshed the Pentax lower- and mid-range DSLRs. It would hardly be a surprise, therefore, if next Ricoh tackled the higher-end Pentax cameras by refreshing the K5 level and, if they are going to continue with it, the 645D - plus the lenses and accessories catalogue. If they manage this before the end of the year, they will have refashioned the entire line-up of their camera division in 2013. For all we know, they might even throw something unexpected into the mix such as a "K-02" (i.e. APS-C K-mount mirrorless) or some kind of very clearly professional new Pentax APS-C DSLR.

Together with overhauling their sales and marketing networks and launching in India, that's a lot of things Ricoh will very likely have done in just one year. There's an argument for saying that FF is a complete distraction from the basic and very important work sorting out the whole Ricoh/Pentax camera business and placing it on firm foundations. Committing the huge investment FF would demand before you've dealt with everything else is crazy, imho.

Bear in mind, too, that we don't know how Ricoh plan to position themselves overall. They might plan to produce cameras of appeal across the whole world or they might have decided to go more for the kind of cameras which will well sell in Asia because it is easier to make profitable progress against their competitors in Asia than it is in the USA and Europe. In the second case, FF is even more exotic and unnecessary. We just don't enough to be sure.

If someone wants FF there have been plenty of choices out there for years now. And I'll bet that the vast majority who've bought Pentax equipment over the past 5-7 years have not done so because they want FF. They wanted what they bought.

[RockvilleBob]

FF is not nearly so important as some folks here seem to think.

............

If someone wants FF there have been plenty of choices out there for years now. And I'll bet that the vast majority who've bought Pentax equipment over the past 5-7 years have not done so because they want FF. They wanted what they bought.

My sentiments exactly.

[RobA_Oz]

...It would hardly be a surprise, therefore, it next Ricoh tackled the higher-end Pentax cameras by refreshing the K5 level and, if they are going to continue with it, the 645D - plus the lenses and accessories catalogue. If they manage this before the end of the year, they will have refashioned the entire line-up of their camera division in 2013.

If the rumoured Canon digital MF camera does appear next year, Pentax will need to lift their game with the 645D. A small refresh, perhaps, with a further price reduction plus a larger sensor model might be the way to put pressure on Canon and the existing other makers. I don't expect Leica will be worried by anyone else, though.

[Pål Jensen]

If someone wants FF there have been plenty of choices out there for years now. And I'll bet that the vast majority who've bought Pentax equipment over the past 5-7 years have not done so because they want FF. They wanted what they bought.

A year ago I had conversation with a former Pentax rep. He said that some prominent professional nature photographers had switched to Pentax because they did NOT offer FF. Pentax is commited to APS with the best APS lens line-up out there. Value is different things to different folks...

[gazonk]

Smaller size is also a value. So is everything else that goes into a camera.

So true! I think the DA15 that I recently bought is a very good example of values of equipment that are often forgotten these days: If you check many of the traditional check boxes, it may look like an extraordinarily bad deal: It's APS-C only, slow for a prime and not very sharp wide open. And still the lens is simply a gem! It has such a wonderful flare resistance, color and contrast. And then there's the small size that you already mentioned and the minimum focusing distance...