[normhead]

That wouldn't surprise me at all. If you think o fate two extremes, Steve Jobs dropping hardware manufacturers for upstaging his release, and Windows constantly promising hardware and software they never produced and never had any intention of producing, just to keep people waiting on the imaginary Windows product instead of just buying from a competitor that already had what they wanted, I think Ricoh has found a happy medium. They let you know what they want you to know, when they want you to know it. But do it in a way they can never be accused of creating vapourware, just to keep epode from buying competitors product.

[ElJamoquio]

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]

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

[Rorschach]

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]

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]

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 !

[dcshooter]

And make sure it fits in my hip pocket!

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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]

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]

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?