[clackers]

I hope that the Sony sensor in your K5 is still functioning as well as mine!

Immensely funny, Lytrytyr! :-D


Sony Trinitrons were the gods of CRTs, as another example.

Love fickle people who won't ever buy Brand X because of some past isolated personal experience.

[Uluru]

Monochrome:
Yes, indeed it's a decent solution and quite popular, too. I just don't want it, and neither does Cynog Ap Brychan

Popular among the FF-infatuated geeks perhaps. But I simply don't get the A7. What's the purpose of it? In what package it may be a breathtaking experience?
To me, the A7 smells like a cheap crack for FF-junkies, who'll take anything that smells like the FF.

On the other hand, cameras like RX100, maybe RX10, are perhaps the best Sony has made in a long while. RX-1 had a promise, but Sony never bothered to fix its quirks; it's quite up in their alley, such a disinterested attitude. Quite the opposite attitude from Fuji, who has overhauled buggy but promising X100 into an X100s and made a gorgeous camera experience. Or the attitude of Pentax, who took the best from all K5s and made a K-3.

[dosdan]

Sony Trinitrons were the gods of CRTs, as another example.

I had a Sony Profeel monitor, the best quality semi-pro Trinitron monitor available in the 80's. Unfortunately after about 8 years, a voltage trippler blew, Sony Australia no longer offered spare parts for it, and the TV repair tech said it was non-standard and he couldn't use a substitute from another model to fix it.

I have a Sony MZ-NH700 Hi-MD recorder which I used for audio location recording for video syncing. It has very restrictive copy-control. Sony has abandoned support for the SoundStage software which controls digitally accessing the data and selecting some of the recording formats. It won't run under Win 8. So all I do with it now is copy analogue data via the headphone output in real time.

[SyncGuy]

Hmm.... That second part of the interview has made me realize something... I've chosen a wrong brand for my style of photography; portraits and environmental portraiture..
From the interview, it seems that Pentax is solely more for landscape shooters, hence that's why there are many ardent supporters of "why do you need FF?"..
Now i finally see why... Stupid me....

[Uluru]

Hmm.... That second part of the interview has made me realize something... I've chosen a wrong brand for my style of photography; portraits and environmental portraiture..
From the interview, it seems that Pentax is solely more for landscape shooters, hence that's why there are many ardent supporters of "why do you need FF?"..
Now i finally see why... Stupid me....

These concepts are not photographical, but were present in art history long before photography. Landscape painting had started as a sub-genre of portrait painting, same as every other genre had started from portrait art as well.

[SyncGuy]

These concepts are not photographical, but were present in art history long before photography. Landscape painting had started as a sub-genre of portrait painting, same as every other genre had started from portrait art as well.

I believe so.. But with that as the company's philosophy, that's why i think they are not too keen:

1) on producing many lenses with wide apertures - this would help in subject : background separation, which is not important in landscape

2) FF - which brings about the benefit of background : subject separation and also minimizes distortion/compression due to using a wider FL to obtain a similar and wider view when compared with larger format. (think 50mm vs 85mm with exact same composition or 28mm vs 50mm)

PS: Please don't mistake my post/points as bashing Pentax.. I'm just listing my own opinion for objective discussions which leads to my own decision in my photographic journey and discovery.

[gazonk]

Yeah, and 3 revamped FA ltds is a much more complete lineup then the 5 currently existing Sony FE lenses. That is objective?

When I wrote that, I assumed that the current lineup consisted of the 35mm alone. I didn't know that the 55mm was available for sale yet, nor did I know that the cheap kit zoom could be bought without the A7 (I think the dpreview article says that it can only be bought in a kit). Still, even counting the 24-70 which is only available for pre-order, there are only 4 current lenses (24-70, 28-70, 35 and 55).

So Sony's FF lineup is still smaller than the current Pentax official FF lineup (the three amigos and the two macros).

[gazonk]

2) FF - which brings about the benefit of background : subject separation and also minimizes distortion/compression due to using a wider FL to obtain a similar and wider view when compared with larger format. (think 50mm vs 85mm with exact same composition or 28mm vs 50mm)

Pentax has a dedicated portrait lens, the da* 55/1.4, which is equivalent to an 85/2 lens on FF

[JPT]

Hmm.... That second part of the interview has made me realize something... I've chosen a wrong brand for my style of photography; portraits and environmental portraiture..
From the interview, it seems that Pentax is solely more for landscape shooters, hence that's why there are many ardent supporters of "why do you need FF?"..
Now i finally see why... Stupid me....

Both of these interviews were in Japanese for a Japanese audience. Since landscape photography is huge in Japan, I'm not surprised they want to emphasize that.

[Clavius]

When I wrote that, I assumed that the current lineup consisted of the 35mm alone. I didn't know that the 55mm was available for sale yet, nor did I know that the cheap kit zoom could be bought without the A7 (I think the dpreview article says that it can only be bought in a kit). Still, even counting the 24-70 which is only available for pre-order, there are only 4 current lenses (24-70, 28-70, 35 and 55).

So Sony's FF lineup* is still smaller than the current Pentax official FF lineup (the three amigos and the two macros).

FE-mount counts 5 currently available lenses. That the lenses aren't all shipping yet, almost 3 months since the system appeared is a bit unfair. (Understatement of the year 2014. LOL!) Sony has 15 lenses to be released before the end of 2015 on the roadmap. And at the rate Sony is going, they will surely easily reach that goal, no doubt about that. That's a score us Pentax users can only dream about, with our 5 film lenses, of which 3 may be revamped some time in the future, for a camera that will eventually come, but not soon.

But the Sony FF lineup* (as you say) doesn't only consist of the FE, but also of the A-mount. Which means 45 extra lenses and converters. I know I know, the A-mount adapter is ugly and expensive, but people forget that it's the first in its kind: A complete and working mirrorbox with mirror and all. And secondly: it's a solution for the users who are heavily invested in A-mount lenses. Something no other manufacturer has provided as yet. (Just hope Sony won't start marketing similar K-mount adapters, because they can.) Loyalty from manufacturer towards their customers, instead of the other way round! In my honest opinion, that earns them more points then any spectacular technological breakthrough they may reach.

They're already working on the next step, they're rumored to be working on a hybrid camera of which the A-mount part is detachable, creating an FE-mount camera. That means now Sony is also going to be marketing the LX-D. I whish Pentax would at least try something.

[gazonk]

FE-mount counts 5 currently available lenses.

Wrong. 3 currently available lenses, I don't think the release date for the 70-200 is even known yet.

I don't know what the point of your gloomy posts is, but my point simply was that if Pentax immediately released a full frame camera, they wouldn't have to release a single new lens and still have a larger system than the current A7 system available for purchase from day one, even if one doesn't count any of the DA lenses that work perfectly well on FF.

[SyncGuy]

Pentax has a dedicated portrait lens, the da* 55/1.4, which is equivalent to an 85/2 lens on FF

Hmm... Just a question regarding this point, full body portrait, will the background size (?perspective) be rendered the same as with an 85mm on a FF?
How about using a 28mm to get a ~50mm equivalent?
With the same composition, will a house in the background of a subject appear the same size as how it would appear using a larger format?
I think it's quite important for me that my subject don't look magically bigger than the surrounding context.. ;P

PS: Hey, nvm.. Pretty much that does answer my concerns.. LoL! Pentax has A dedicated portrait lens.. :/

[Zygonyx]

Well... FA 50/1.4 or DA50/1.8 are no doubt also good candidates for portrait...

By the way gazonk, you should not forget about the FA line still in production, that is not limited ... to the "Limiteds" :
- FA 20-35/4
- FA 35/2
- FA 50/1.4
Even if these lenses are not "optimised" for digital...

+ recent FF producted zooms like the FA 24-90/3.5-4.5 , to be found easily as second-hand kit-lens - and that for sure could be updated quickly and at marginal cost for Ricoh.

[Kunzite]

FE-mount counts 5 currently available lenses. That the lenses aren't all shipping yet, almost 3 months since the system appeared is a bit unfair. (Understatement of the year 2014. LOL!)

Sony. The only system where lenses are available even before the release date is known.
Indeed, Pentax can't compete with that

[falconeye]

Quite the opposite. Some theoretical benefits some people are arguing about are at odds with economic realities of the company and the market.
...
I don't see the problem in Pentax learning slowly, but in users refusing to see realities of different circumstances. Hoya could not do anything to help Pentax release a sub-$4,500 FF camera
...
For an FF to be developed, Pentax needed Ricoh, their dedication and steady investment, which happened right after the re-structure.

Thanks for your opinion, but I decided to apply a different perspective. I don't speculate about individual manager's options. Because as a customer, I really should NOT care.

I just analyze performance.

There was a time where many used Pentax as their only system. A time where Pentax, Oly and Minolta/Sony owned 5-6% of the market. A time where Pentax made big waves with the K10D and were gaining market share. A time where Pentax actually innovated and where it would have been logical and about right in timing to add an FF body. If only to keep K mount users happy.

Now, only few Pentaxians remain with Pentax as their only system. The majority left, many use it as a second system now because cameras like the K-5 are very nice. But market share dropped to 1.5% (my best estimate), almost extinct outside Japan.

For me, FF is just my reality check if anybody out there is actually investing what it needs to bring Pentax back. And the interview tells me: not yet. They still try to run Pentax in the blacks which is only possible in a way slowly loosing further market share.

To be clear here: FF is no holy grail. It will be a minor implementation detail used by ALL remaining SLR bodies very soon. Paired with f/4 zooms and f/2 primes, won't be more expensive or bulkier than APSC today and nobody will actually speak about sensor size then. APSC would be very similiar if it continued to exist which I doubt will (because of cameras like the RX100m2 when becoming cheap). My problem is the time Pentax goes FF everybody else will already be at the next party. And missing that next party is what Pentax will most likely not be able to absorb in loosing just another percent market share ...

So, in summary: the interview makes me worry because nobody currently seems to want to invest and there is a clear lack of vision what to do next.