[WillWeaverRVA]

The FF will go after cameras like D810..Not D4S etc.

I was going to say, I'll gladly take something similar to, say, the D750 with good AF coverage and a decent burst rate.

[Rondec]

My guess would be D810 with a faster frame rate and deeper buffer. I would love to see Ricoh invest in making it a really capable video machine (4K?), but somehow it seems unlikely based on past cameras.

[gorme]

My guess would be D810 with a faster frame rate and deeper buffer. I would love to see Ricoh invest in making it a really capable video machine (4K?), but somehow it seems unlikely based on past cameras.

I agree with you on a video machine, but I believe they improved a lot recently : the K3 is really able to deliver high quality video (but in mp4 only, no RAW).
For instance K3 has better video than Nikon D7000 and D7100. AF in video is still laging behind, but for 'art' works nobody use AF ..

[Zygonyx]

For instance K3 has better video than Nikon D7000 and D7100. AF in video is still laging behind, but for 'art' works nobody use AF ..

In what respect please ?

[normhead]

I guess at this point, with the K-3II coming really close to D-810 resolution, if it's not 36 MP with pixel shifting, I'm not going to be interested.

[ogl]

From what Sony has been saying about the 42mp sensor in interviews, it should perform better than the 36mp in every way, so I see little reason for Ricoh to go with the old one. It would hardly be an aggressive move to come out with something that Nikon has been using for several years and that Sony has just discontinued use of.

One of the few bits of definitive information that Ricoh actually shared about the Pentax FF of that it would have an APS-C crop mode. That would seem to rule out a 20mp sensor.

So, I'm guessing it will have a 42mp sensor. But I also think a second cheaper model with a more modest mp count will be available soon.

If they offer me to shoot in lower resolution RAW, it's not a problem. I have no any necessity to use 42.4 MP photos.

[normhead]

Do you know if another FF is planned later to go on the D4S market ?

You're asking a Pentax shooter if he knows what Nikon is doing? I'm guessing any Nikon information available to him is available to you. Just because he gets the scoop from Pentax on what's coming, and gets to beta-test some of it, doesn't mean every camera company talks to him.

[gorme]

In what respect please ?

For instance Anti-flickering is a lot better, which is very convenient for LED light sources....

[normhead]

If they offer me to shoot in lower resolution RAW, it's not a problem. I have no any necessity to use 42.4 MP photos.

Imagine if the took a 42 MP image and used it to create a combined 14 Mp image like a pixel shifted image. A pixel shift without the need for long exposures. Now there's a concept.

[gorme]

You're asking a Pentax shooter if he knows what Nikon is doing? I'm guessing any Nikon information available to him is available to you. Just because he gets the scoop from Pentax on what's coming, and gets to beta-test some of it, doesn't mean every camera company talks to him.

No I was just wondering if a second Pentax FF will hit the market of Sport photography

[kenspo]

You're asking a Pentax shooter if he knows what Nikon is doing? I'm guessing any Nikon information available to him is available to you. Just because he gets the scoop from Pentax on what's coming, and gets to beta-test some of it, doesn't mean every camera company talks to him.

I used to be at Nikon, and still have good contacts on the inside there too. But i just dont care what they or other brands do atm

But i think you misunderstood the question he had!

---------- Post added 06-24-15 at 05:05 PM ----------

No I was just wondering if a second Pentax FF will hit the market of Sport photography

I did understand

[gorme]

I used to be at Nikon, and still have good contacts on the inside there too. But i just dont care what they or other brands do atm

But i think you misunderstood the question he had!

---------- Post added 06-24-15 at 05:05 PM ----------



I did understand

Yeah, I apologize for my 'frenchy' English. I do my best to be understandable, but sometimes I may miss the point. Sorry !

[kenspo]

Yeah, I apologize for my 'frenchy' English. I do my best to be understandable, but sometimes I may miss the point. Sorry !

Dont say sorry to me..i did understand My norwegian english aint much better

[zzeitg]

Should there be 36MPx or less, I see no reason to upgrade from K-3 or K-3II. (If I don't count the simple fact that my FF lenses would finally bring light to FF body instead of APS-C as a crucial point.)

[normhead]

Should there be 36MPx or less, I see no reason to upgrade from K-3 or K-3II. (If I don't count the simple fact that my FF lenses would finally bring light to FF body instead of APS-C as a crucial point.)

And I'm sure that we are going to hear lot less of the "I want to use my lenses they way they were intended to be used" arguments once the Pentax FF is out, and people see the cost, in price, body size and subject IQ. Once the Pentax FF is out the answer for most of us to that line of discussion will be, "put your money where your mouth is and just buy it for grief's sake." There is a group of people who want FF for "the look" not for resolution and they will want a 6D type of camera. Low cost, poor performance but FF. For "the look" myself, I would prefer to buy 1.4 lenses rather than whole new body, but hey, that's just me.