Pentax-Ricoh Russia Answers: FF and Ricoh future

ElJamoquio · 11-30-2013, 05:35 PM

Originally posted by JimmyDranox

From a commercial perspective, it would be a mistake as a new flagship camera will be launched earlier than six months after launching another flagship camera. And more, a year would be the optimal time.

But Pentax is in a special position because Canon, Nikon and Sony already has FF cameras, and if they wants to become a big player on the market, and K-3 seems to say that, Ricoh have to release a FF as soon as possible.

Moreover, rumors are one way to increase market interest, and Ricoh has shown us that knows how to handle these rumors before the launch of K-3. So, as I think these rumors are controlled and released intentionally.

One of Pentax's stated goals is to compete as a full line manufacturer. You're calling the K-3 a flagship but Canon has 3 FF cameras positioned above the K-3, Nikon has 4, Sony has 2 or 3, and Pentax itself has the 645D.

I don't think the FF Pentax is coming within the next month or two but Pentax should bring it out as soon as is practicable. A $3k FF camera doesn't seem to impact other manufacturers timelines of introducing $1k amateur-level cameras.

JimmyDranox · 11-30-2013, 10:10 PM

I consider K-3 a flagship for Pentax, because 645D is another system, with different lenses, and different level of prices.

**Rorschach** · 12-01-2013, 05:21 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

One of Pentax's stated goals is to compete as a full line manufacturer. You're calling the K-3 a flagship but Canon has 3 FF cameras positioned above the K-3, Nikon has 4, Sony has 2 or 3, and Pentax itself has the 645D.

I don't think the FF Pentax is coming within the next month or two but Pentax should bring it out as soon as is practicable. A $3k FF camera doesn't seem to impact other manufacturers timelines of introducing $1k amateur-level cameras.

I think you will find a lot of people who will not agree with that, instead putting the lower tier FF models below the K3. You know, the people who don't care that much about bragging rights.

**Eric Auer** · 12-01-2013, 09:37 AM

Originally posted by Rorschach

I think you will find a lot of people who will not agree with that, instead putting the lower tier FF models below the K3. You know, the people who don't care that much about bragging rights.

And a lot of people disagree with you too, And don't care about bragging rights either.

To hint that somehow FF shooters only care about bragging rights is pretty dumb.

thibs · 12-01-2013, 09:49 AM

Originally posted by Corto-PA

To hint that somehow FF shooters only care about bragging rights is pretty dumb.

Indeed. And all that for fairly small sensor after all.
What's the difference between a very very small sensor (APS) and a very small sensor (FF) ?

Bring us 4"x5" sensor right away !

normhead · 12-01-2013, 10:17 AM

Originally posted by thibs

Indeed. And all that for fairly small sensor after all.
What's the difference between a very very small sensor (APS) and a very small sensor (FF) ?

About one stop… but people go crazy for that one stop. The fact that a K-5 covers 13 EV, that's 13 stops, making the difference about 7% doesn't matter. It's huge. And apparently people buy the cameras, just for that 7% increase, or 20-30% increase in resolution if you buy a 36 Mp FF. Everyone of those FF owners has to have that.

Mistral75 · 12-01-2013, 01:26 PM

Originally posted by normhead

About one stop… but people go crazy for that one stop. The fact that a K-5 covers 13 EV, that's 13 stops, making the difference about 7% doesn't matter. It's huge. And apparently people buy the cameras, just for that 7% increase, or 20-30% increase in resolution if you buy a 36 Mp FF. Everyone of those FF owners has to have that.

Never thought about the difference in viewfinder?

ElJamoquio · 12-01-2013, 01:50 PM

Originally posted by Rorschach

I think you will find a lot of people who will not agree with that, instead putting the lower tier FF models below the K3. You know, the people who don't care that much about bragging rights.

It is incredibly clear in the marketplace that Nikon + Canon have positioned all of their FF cameras more expensive than their most-expensive APS-C. It might not be that way for eternity but it's that way now.

I don't know anybody who brags about their sensor size. Maybe we hang out with different people.

ElJamoquio · 12-01-2013, 01:52 PM

Originally posted by Mistral75

Never thought about the difference in viewfinder?

Or less expensive, smaller lenses, or better color, or less noise, etc., etc., etc. For me, FF is better in almost every way. I do have 1/8000 with the K-5 and a much, much better UI.

normhead · 12-01-2013, 02:54 PM

I've never understood the viewfinder thing, I look though a film Pentax every now and then, just to see, and it's nice. There are so many other nice features on APs-c, personally I think you have to be a little crazy for that to be deciding factor.

Quote:

Or less expensive, smaller lenses, or better color, or less noise, etc., etc., etc. For me, FF is better in almost every way. I do have 1/8000 with the K-5 and a much, much better UI.

ANy lens you can put on an FF you can put on an APS-c. You don't get a discount for buying them for an FF. I guess you have a smaller cheaper lens than my DA 35, 21 ltd and 50 XS… well no you don't. But we've been through this a bazillion times. You choose not to see it my way, I choose not to see it your way, let's call the whole thing off. You're talking about a 7% difference, quit trying to make it sound like more.

ElJamoquio · 12-01-2013, 04:20 PM

Originally posted by normhead

You're talking about a 7% difference, quit trying to make it sound like more.

That's just funny. 7%.

http://drcameraphd.blogspot.com/2013/04/aps-c-lenses-arent-smaller-arent.html

Pick any number you'd like.

Apapukas · 12-01-2013, 04:26 PM

Originally posted by normhead

I've never understood the viewfinder thing, I look though a film Pentax every now and then, just to see, and it's nice. There are so many other nice features on APs-c, personally I think you have to be a little crazy for that to be deciding factor.

ANy lens you can put on an FF you can put on an APS-c. You don't get a discount for buying them for an FF. I guess you have a smaller cheaper lens than my DA 35, 21 ltd and 50 XS… well no you don't. But we've been through this a bazillion times. You choose not to see it my way, I choose not to see it your way, let's call the whole thing off. You're talking about a 7% difference, quit trying to make it sound like more.

I agree.

What I have noticed, that a great amount of people a going for FF just for better bokeh, because, in their opinion, photography market demands BOKEH and you really don't have a choice, how to just shoot FF + very fast lens.

Cannikin · 12-01-2013, 04:27 PM

Originally posted by normhead

About one stop… but people go crazy for that one stop. The fact that a K-5 covers 13 EV, that's 13 stops, making the difference about 7% doesn't matter. It's huge. And apparently people buy the cameras, just for that 7% increase, or 20-30% increase in resolution if you buy a 36 Mp FF. Everyone of those FF owners has to have that.

Do you even understand what an "EV" is? Or how a logarithmic scale works? Do you also think a magnitude 9 earthquake is only 12.5% bigger than a magnitude 8?

**monochrome** · 12-01-2013, 04:46 PM

Originally posted by Apapukas

I agree.

What I have noticed, that a great amount of people a going for FF just for better bokeh, because, in their opinion, photography market demands BOKEH and you really don't have a choice, how to just shoot FF + very fast lens.

Just move back a few steps - and you have bokeh - at f/5.6 even.

Apapukas · 12-01-2013, 04:53 PM

Originally posted by monochrome

Just move back a few steps - and you have bokeh - at f/5.6 even.

Yes, but you can never have a FF+ f/1.4 kind of bokeh on an APS-C.

But don't get me wrong, I am no bokeh fanboy, I usually shoot at f/5.6, that is just what I often hear.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Ricoh announces company name change - no more Pentax Ricoh Imaging, just Ricoh.	rawr	Pentax News and Rumors	528	10-28-2013 04:39 PM
Hoodie Pentax from Russia	ogl	General Talk	20	06-02-2012 06:31 AM
RICOH Establishes PENTAX RICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD.	Adam	Homepage & Official Pentax News	20	10-13-2011 03:31 AM
Need Answers Quick! Good price for Pentax-M 50mm f1.7?	LadyRo	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	5	06-03-2010 04:25 AM
Pentax France answers 3 important questions	Gus	Pentax News and Rumors	46	03-18-2010 10:26 AM

11-30-2013, 05:35 PM	#256
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Originally posted by JimmyDranox From a commercial perspective, it would be a mistake as a new flagship camera will be launched earlier than six months after launching another flagship camera. And more, a year would be the optimal time. But Pentax is in a special position because Canon, Nikon and Sony already has FF cameras, and if they wants to become a big player on the market, and K-3 seems to say that, Ricoh have to release a FF as soon as possible. Moreover, rumors are one way to increase market interest, and Ricoh has shown us that knows how to handle these rumors before the launch of K-3. So, as I think these rumors are controlled and released intentionally. One of Pentax's stated goals is to compete as a full line manufacturer. You're calling the K-3 a flagship but Canon has 3 FF cameras positioned above the K-3, Nikon has 4, Sony has 2 or 3, and Pentax itself has the 645D. I don't think the FF Pentax is coming within the next month or two but Pentax should bring it out as soon as is practicable. A $3k FF camera doesn't seem to impact other manufacturers timelines of introducing $1k amateur-level cameras.

11-30-2013, 10:10 PM	#257
JimmyDranox Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Ploiesti, Romania Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,630	I consider K-3 a flagship for Pentax, because 645D is another system, with different lenses, and different level of prices.

12-01-2013, 05:21 AM - 1 Like	#258
Rorschach Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Kuusamo, Finland Photos: Gallery Posts: 645	Originally posted by ElJamoquio One of Pentax's stated goals is to compete as a full line manufacturer. You're calling the K-3 a flagship but Canon has 3 FF cameras positioned above the K-3, Nikon has 4, Sony has 2 or 3, and Pentax itself has the 645D. I don't think the FF Pentax is coming within the next month or two but Pentax should bring it out as soon as is practicable. A $3k FF camera doesn't seem to impact other manufacturers timelines of introducing $1k amateur-level cameras. I think you will find a lot of people who will not agree with that, instead putting the lower tier FF models below the K3. You know, the people who don't care that much about bragging rights.

12-01-2013, 09:37 AM	#259
Eric Auer Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2012 Photos: Albums Posts: 862	Originally posted by Rorschach I think you will find a lot of people who will not agree with that, instead putting the lower tier FF models below the K3. You know, the people who don't care that much about bragging rights. And a lot of people disagree with you too, And don't care about bragging rights either. To hint that somehow FF shooters only care about bragging rights is pretty dumb.

12-01-2013, 09:49 AM	#260
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 5,811	Originally posted by Corto-PA To hint that somehow FF shooters only care about bragging rights is pretty dumb. Indeed. And all that for fairly small sensor after all. What's the difference between a very very small sensor (APS) and a very small sensor (FF) ? Bring us 4"x5" sensor right away !

12-01-2013, 10:17 AM	#261
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 33,664	Originally posted by thibs Indeed. And all that for fairly small sensor after all. What's the difference between a very very small sensor (APS) and a very small sensor (FF) ? About one stop… but people go crazy for that one stop. The fact that a K-5 covers 13 EV, that's 13 stops, making the difference about 7% doesn't matter. It's huge. And apparently people buy the cameras, just for that 7% increase, or 20-30% increase in resolution if you buy a 36 Mp FF. Everyone of those FF owners has to have that.

12-01-2013, 01:26 PM	#262
Mistral75 Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Paris, France Posts: 5,441	Originally posted by normhead About one stop… but people go crazy for that one stop. The fact that a K-5 covers 13 EV, that's 13 stops, making the difference about 7% doesn't matter. It's huge. And apparently people buy the cameras, just for that 7% increase, or 20-30% increase in resolution if you buy a 36 Mp FF. Everyone of those FF owners has to have that. Never thought about the difference in viewfinder?

12-01-2013, 01:50 PM	#263
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Originally posted by Rorschach I think you will find a lot of people who will not agree with that, instead putting the lower tier FF models below the K3. You know, the people who don't care that much about bragging rights. It is incredibly clear in the marketplace that Nikon + Canon have positioned all of their FF cameras more expensive than their most-expensive APS-C. It might not be that way for eternity but it's that way now. I don't know anybody who brags about their sensor size. Maybe we hang out with different people.

12-01-2013, 01:52 PM	#264
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Originally posted by Mistral75 Never thought about the difference in viewfinder? Or less expensive, smaller lenses, or better color, or less noise, etc., etc., etc. For me, FF is better in almost every way. I do have 1/8000 with the K-5 and a much, much better UI.

12-01-2013, 02:54 PM	#265
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 33,664	I've never understood the viewfinder thing, I look though a film Pentax every now and then, just to see, and it's nice. There are so many other nice features on APs-c, personally I think you have to be a little crazy for that to be deciding factor. Quote: Or less expensive, smaller lenses, or better color, or less noise, etc., etc., etc. For me, FF is better in almost every way. I do have 1/8000 with the K-5 and a much, much better UI. ANy lens you can put on an FF you can put on an APS-c. You don't get a discount for buying them for an FF. I guess you have a smaller cheaper lens than my DA 35, 21 ltd and 50 XS… well no you don't. But we've been through this a bazillion times. You choose not to see it my way, I choose not to see it your way, let's call the whole thing off. You're talking about a 7% difference, quit trying to make it sound like more.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

12-01-2013, 04:20 PM	#266
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Originally posted by normhead You're talking about a 7% difference, quit trying to make it sound like more. That's just funny. 7%. http://drcameraphd.blogspot.com/2013/04/aps-c-lenses-arent-smaller-arent.html Pick any number you'd like.

12-01-2013, 04:26 PM	#267
Apapukas Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Lietuva, Vilnius Posts: 627	Originally posted by normhead I've never understood the viewfinder thing, I look though a film Pentax every now and then, just to see, and it's nice. There are so many other nice features on APs-c, personally I think you have to be a little crazy for that to be deciding factor. ANy lens you can put on an FF you can put on an APS-c. You don't get a discount for buying them for an FF. I guess you have a smaller cheaper lens than my DA 35, 21 ltd and 50 XS… well no you don't. But we've been through this a bazillion times. You choose not to see it my way, I choose not to see it your way, let's call the whole thing off. You're talking about a 7% difference, quit trying to make it sound like more. I agree. What I have noticed, that a great amount of people a going for FF just for better bokeh, because, in their opinion, photography market demands BOKEH and you really don't have a choice, how to just shoot FF + very fast lens.

12-01-2013, 04:27 PM	#268
Cannikin Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: SW Washington Posts: 833	Originally posted by normhead About one stop… but people go crazy for that one stop. The fact that a K-5 covers 13 EV, that's 13 stops, making the difference about 7% doesn't matter. It's huge. And apparently people buy the cameras, just for that 7% increase, or 20-30% increase in resolution if you buy a 36 Mp FF. Everyone of those FF owners has to have that. Do you even understand what an "EV" is? Or how a logarithmic scale works? Do you also think a magnitude 9 earthquake is only 12.5% bigger than a magnitude 8?

12-01-2013, 04:46 PM	#269
monochrome Lens Hoarder Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: St. Louis, MO Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,351	Originally posted by Apapukas I agree. What I have noticed, that a great amount of people a going for FF just for better bokeh, because, in their opinion, photography market demands BOKEH and you really don't have a choice, how to just shoot FF + very fast lens. Just move back a few steps - and you have bokeh - at f/5.6 even.

12-01-2013, 04:53 PM	#270
Apapukas Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Lietuva, Vilnius Posts: 627	Originally posted by monochrome Just move back a few steps - and you have bokeh - at f/5.6 even. Yes, but you can never have a FF+ f/1.4 kind of bokeh on an APS-C. But don't get me wrong, I am no bokeh fanboy, I usually shoot at f/5.6, that is just what I often hear.