FF out in 4 months

RockvilleBob · 10-13-2015, 06:15 AM

Just think of all the money I saved as a Pentax shooter. Canon and Nikon shooters face a monthly barrage of lens and body announcements. As a Pentax shooter I just deal with maybe one announcement a year relative to my interests. Added to the infrequent announcements are the "pre-announcements" and delays which dampen my impulse purchases. The Pentax cameras and lenses I have exceed my capabilities, with the only possible exception being continuous auto-focus. I do not regret a purchase of a Pentax camera body or lens. I have been given enough time to weigh if I really need the new body or new lens and when I finally get to purchase the product I have not been disappointed. Instead of spending time learning a new body or lens, I can go out and shoot with what I have. Isn't that what led us to Pentax in the first place: more bang for the buck? That is why I initially picked Pentax when I switched camera bodies.

This holds true even with the Pentax added premium price because I buy less and also buy less frequently. A win-win.

patarok · 10-13-2015, 06:38 AM

Originally posted by RockvilleBob

Just think of all the money I saved as a Pentax shooter. Canon and Nikon shooters face a monthly barrage of lens and body announcements. As a Pentax shooter I just deal with maybe one announcement a year relative to my interests. Added to the infrequent announcements are the "pre-announcements" and delays which dampen my impulse purchases. The Pentax cameras and lenses I have exceed my capabilities, with the only possible exception being continuous auto-focus. I do not regret a purchase of a Pentax camera body or lens. I have been given enough time to weigh if I really need the new body or new lens and when I finally get to purchase the product I have not been disappointed. Instead of spending time learning a new body or lens, I can go out and shoot with what I have. Isn't that what led us to Pentax in the first place: more bang for the buck? That is why I initially picked Pentax when I switched camera bodies.

This holds true even with the Pentax added premium price because I buy less and also buy less frequently. A win-win.

hm? sure...

tuco · 10-13-2015, 07:26 AM

Originally posted by kenspo

Hehe..i still want a couple of the new FF

But shoot went well anyway.

Really, that model's facial expression was your final choice?

RonHendriks1966 · 10-13-2015, 08:06 AM

Originally posted by tuco

Really, that model's facial expression was your final choice?

The duckface is out of fashion.

JibbaJab · 10-13-2015, 08:11 AM

Originally posted by RonHendriks1966

The duckface is out of fashion.

Yup, now the "fish gape" is in vogue.

Wired · 10-13-2015, 08:51 AM

Originally posted by Matthew Saville

Firstly: I guess I'm just that impressed with what APS-C is doing at 24 MP, that I feel full-frame 24 MP would be a bit less exciting for most folks. Especially from a landscape photographer's perspective: if I were spending all my time at ISO 100, and my only choices were two 24 MP sensors, I'd be happy with the APS-C option. In other words, if I'm going to spend $2-3K more, (in total for a whole system) ...then it had better offer more than just an extra stop of high ISO performance and slightly higher dynamic range. It needs to throw in some extra resolution on top of that.

Your correct here. I felt the same way. When the Nikon D600 came out I went ahead and spoiled myself for Christmas with a kit and a pair of primes. I shot it for 7 months, but favored my K5 consistently and wasn't overly impressed. It was more than image quality, but the IQ of the D600 wasn't my only problem... it just didn't feel like a Pentax and had a very poor button layout. I ended up getting the D800 and the K3 later that year and I gotta say I'm very happy with my decisions. I would argue that the dynamic range is probably just as good. Comparing the K5/D600 side by side I was able to pull more out of the K5 RAW's. I wish I could go back and put the K3 and D600 side by side...but I don't got a D600 anymore :P

Between the D610, Sony A7, and K3 I would choose the K3 every time. I haven't used the D750 or any Canon so I can't give an opinion there.

kenspo · 10-13-2015, 09:03 AM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by tuco

Really, that model's facial expression was your final choice?

When I'm paid to do a shoot, i deliver what the customer wants, not what i find the best after my own taste. Its called business and happy customers.

cali92rs · 10-13-2015, 09:10 AM

Originally posted by Wired

Your correct here. I felt the same way. When the Nikon D600 came out I went ahead and spoiled myself for Christmas with a kit and a pair of primes. I shot it for 7 months, but favored my K5 consistently and wasn't overly impressed. It was more than image quality, but the IQ of the D600 wasn't my only problem... it just didn't feel like a Pentax and had a very poor button layout. I ended up getting the D800 and the K3 later that year and I gotta say I'm very happy with my decisions. I would argue that the dynamic range is probably just as good. Comparing the K5/D600 side by side I was able to pull more out of the K5 RAW's. I wish I could go back and put the K3 and D600 side by side...but I don't got a D600 anymore :P

Between the D610, Sony A7, and K3 I would choose the K3 every time. I haven't used the D750 or any Canon so I can't give an opinion there.

I have a kinda similar story regarding the Canon 6D.
The IQ difference is real and noticeable at ISO 1600 and above. But the K-3 is close enough that the other things (ergonomics and size) make shooting the K-3II more enjoyable for me.
The K-3II + FA31mm + FA77mm holds it's own with the 6D + 50mmL + 135mmL in 90% of the situations and is waaaaaay more discreet

**Kerrowdown** · 10-13-2015, 02:15 PM - **4 Likes**

Originally posted by Shanti

FF out in 4 months

Has anyone else noticed it's like a rolling four months, it never seems to get any closer...

Poit · 10-13-2015, 02:42 PM

Originally posted by Kerrowdown

Has anyone else noticed it's like a rolling four months, it never seems to get any closer...

LOL....yeah it's been 'out in four months' for two years now (and counting)

**Kerrowdown** · 10-13-2015, 02:44 PM

Originally posted by Poit

LOL....yeah it's been 'out in four months' for two years now (and counting)

Not just me then... that's good to hear.

Kunzite · 10-13-2015, 04:00 PM

Originally posted by Kerrowdown

Has anyone else noticed it's like a rolling four months, it never seems to get any closer...

I did. In fact I think that's the reason the FF is keeping its distance from us.

Shanti · 10-13-2015, 07:02 PM

Originally posted by kenspo

Had a shoot today. Tried to tell her we dont need FF. She didn't take it well!

Just wonder how she would react if you pulled your 'Q' out

**sholtzma** · 10-13-2015, 09:04 PM

The reassurance that the FF (or one of the FF's if there's more than one, as I think there will be) will be great for wedding photographers gives us plenty to think about. What do wedding photographers need? AF speed and accuracy, especially in low light and in artificial light. High ISO image quality. Reliable and accurate flash capability. Excellent resolution. Long-lasting shutter. High dynamic range. What else am I missing? Video?

I'm more optimistic than before. And of course, any wedding photographer needs the right lenses to pair with that body: sharp, fast, portable/handholdable.

Dan Rentea · 10-13-2015, 11:36 PM

Originally posted by cali92rs

I have a kinda similar story regarding the Canon 6D.
The IQ difference is real and noticeable at ISO 1600 and above. But the K-3 is close enough that the other things (ergonomics and size) make shooting the K-3II more enjoyable for me.
The K-3II + FA31mm + FA77mm holds it's own with the 6D + 50mmL + 135mmL in 90% of the situations and is waaaaaay more discreet

Really? I sold my K-3 II because I didn't like it as much as I liked K-5 II and because I will not have at least two Pentax full frames to choose from. I really don't need 36mp sensor.

I bought Canon 6D and I think that the image quality is a little better than K-3 II's at low ISO and way better at higher ISO. Skin tones are so accurate on Canon...with Pentax the skin tones are more like Nikon's (a little yellow).

I agree with you that K-3 II is more discreet because of those small primes, but it is not a big difference in body size.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Crazy way-out theory on the FF (just for fun).	pathdoc	Pentax Full Frame	17	05-13-2015 05:30 PM
Pets Ricoh Pup 4 months	sherrvonne	Post Your Photos!	5	05-08-2015 04:03 PM
Any Pentax FF camera field testers out there?	rawr	Pentax Full Frame	46	05-03-2015 04:37 PM
People 4 months in the world	derelict	Post Your Photos!	3	04-11-2015 06:39 AM
Online Photographer: FF will die out, except...	philbaum	Pentax Full Frame	401	07-11-2014 05:13 AM

10-13-2015, 06:15 AM	#1036
RockvilleBob Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Lewes DE USA Photos: Albums Posts: 1,780	Just think of all the money I saved as a Pentax shooter. Canon and Nikon shooters face a monthly barrage of lens and body announcements. As a Pentax shooter I just deal with maybe one announcement a year relative to my interests. Added to the infrequent announcements are the "pre-announcements" and delays which dampen my impulse purchases. The Pentax cameras and lenses I have exceed my capabilities, with the only possible exception being continuous auto-focus. I do not regret a purchase of a Pentax camera body or lens. I have been given enough time to weigh if I really need the new body or new lens and when I finally get to purchase the product I have not been disappointed. Instead of spending time learning a new body or lens, I can go out and shoot with what I have. Isn't that what led us to Pentax in the first place: more bang for the buck? That is why I initially picked Pentax when I switched camera bodies. This holds true even with the Pentax added premium price because I buy less and also buy less frequently. A win-win.

10-13-2015, 06:38 AM	#1037
patarok Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2013 Photos: Gallery Posts: 389	Originally posted by RockvilleBob Just think of all the money I saved as a Pentax shooter. Canon and Nikon shooters face a monthly barrage of lens and body announcements. As a Pentax shooter I just deal with maybe one announcement a year relative to my interests. Added to the infrequent announcements are the "pre-announcements" and delays which dampen my impulse purchases. The Pentax cameras and lenses I have exceed my capabilities, with the only possible exception being continuous auto-focus. I do not regret a purchase of a Pentax camera body or lens. I have been given enough time to weigh if I really need the new body or new lens and when I finally get to purchase the product I have not been disappointed. Instead of spending time learning a new body or lens, I can go out and shoot with what I have. Isn't that what led us to Pentax in the first place: more bang for the buck? That is why I initially picked Pentax when I switched camera bodies. This holds true even with the Pentax added premium price because I buy less and also buy less frequently. A win-win. hm? sure...

10-13-2015, 07:26 AM	#1038
tuco Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Pugetopolis Posts: 11,027	Originally posted by kenspo Hehe..i still want a couple of the new FF But shoot went well anyway. Really, that model's facial expression was your final choice?

10-13-2015, 08:06 AM	#1039
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Originally posted by tuco Really, that model's facial expression was your final choice? The duckface is out of fashion.

10-13-2015, 08:11 AM	#1040
JibbaJab Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2013 Location: Southern California Posts: 362	Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 The duckface is out of fashion. Yup, now the "fish gape" is in vogue.

10-13-2015, 08:51 AM	#1041
Wired Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Edmonton, AB Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,519	Originally posted by Matthew Saville Firstly: I guess I'm just that impressed with what APS-C is doing at 24 MP, that I feel full-frame 24 MP would be a bit less exciting for most folks. Especially from a landscape photographer's perspective: if I were spending all my time at ISO 100, and my only choices were two 24 MP sensors, I'd be happy with the APS-C option. In other words, if I'm going to spend $2-3K more, (in total for a whole system) ...then it had better offer more than just an extra stop of high ISO performance and slightly higher dynamic range. It needs to throw in some extra resolution on top of that. Your correct here. I felt the same way. When the Nikon D600 came out I went ahead and spoiled myself for Christmas with a kit and a pair of primes. I shot it for 7 months, but favored my K5 consistently and wasn't overly impressed. It was more than image quality, but the IQ of the D600 wasn't my only problem... it just didn't feel like a Pentax and had a very poor button layout. I ended up getting the D800 and the K3 later that year and I gotta say I'm very happy with my decisions. I would argue that the dynamic range is probably just as good. Comparing the K5/D600 side by side I was able to pull more out of the K5 RAW's. I wish I could go back and put the K3 and D600 side by side...but I don't got a D600 anymore :P Between the D610, Sony A7, and K3 I would choose the K3 every time. I haven't used the D750 or any Canon so I can't give an opinion there.

10-13-2015, 09:03 AM - 2 Likes	#1042
kenspo Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2014 Location: Oslo Posts: 2,207	Originally posted by tuco Really, that model's facial expression was your final choice? When I'm paid to do a shoot, i deliver what the customer wants, not what i find the best after my own taste. Its called business and happy customers.

10-13-2015, 09:10 AM	#1043
cali92rs Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 3,354	Originally posted by Wired Your correct here. I felt the same way. When the Nikon D600 came out I went ahead and spoiled myself for Christmas with a kit and a pair of primes. I shot it for 7 months, but favored my K5 consistently and wasn't overly impressed. It was more than image quality, but the IQ of the D600 wasn't my only problem... it just didn't feel like a Pentax and had a very poor button layout. I ended up getting the D800 and the K3 later that year and I gotta say I'm very happy with my decisions. I would argue that the dynamic range is probably just as good. Comparing the K5/D600 side by side I was able to pull more out of the K5 RAW's. I wish I could go back and put the K3 and D600 side by side...but I don't got a D600 anymore :P Between the D610, Sony A7, and K3 I would choose the K3 every time. I haven't used the D750 or any Canon so I can't give an opinion there. I have a kinda similar story regarding the Canon 6D. The IQ difference is real and noticeable at ISO 1600 and above. But the K-3 is close enough that the other things (ergonomics and size) make shooting the K-3II more enjoyable for me. The K-3II + FA31mm + FA77mm holds it's own with the 6D + 50mmL + 135mmL in 90% of the situations and is waaaaaay more discreet

10-13-2015, 02:15 PM - 4 Likes	#1044
Kerrowdown PEG Moderator Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Highlands of Scotland... "Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand" - William Blake Photos: Gallery Posts: 57,819	Originally posted by Shanti FF out in 4 months Has anyone else noticed it's like a rolling four months, it never seems to get any closer...

10-13-2015, 02:42 PM	#1045
Poit Banned Join Date: Feb 2013 Location: Canberra, Australia Posts: 423	Originally posted by Kerrowdown Has anyone else noticed it's like a rolling four months, it never seems to get any closer... LOL....yeah it's been 'out in four months' for two years now (and counting)

10-13-2015, 02:44 PM	#1046
Kerrowdown PEG Moderator Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Highlands of Scotland... "Hold Infinity in the palm of your hand" - William Blake Photos: Gallery Posts: 57,819	Originally posted by Poit LOL....yeah it's been 'out in four months' for two years now (and counting) Not just me then... that's good to hear.

10-13-2015, 04:00 PM	#1047
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by Kerrowdown Has anyone else noticed it's like a rolling four months, it never seems to get any closer... I did. In fact I think that's the reason the FF is keeping its distance from us.

10-13-2015, 07:02 PM	#1048
Shanti Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Western Denmark Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 927 Original Poster	Originally posted by kenspo Had a shoot today. Tried to tell her we dont need FF. She didn't take it well! Just wonder how she would react if you pulled your 'Q' out

10-13-2015, 09:04 PM	#1049
sholtzma Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Salisbury, NC Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,043	The reassurance that the FF (or one of the FF's if there's more than one, as I think there will be) will be great for wedding photographers gives us plenty to think about. What do wedding photographers need? AF speed and accuracy, especially in low light and in artificial light. High ISO image quality. Reliable and accurate flash capability. Excellent resolution. Long-lasting shutter. High dynamic range. What else am I missing? Video? I'm more optimistic than before. And of course, any wedding photographer needs the right lenses to pair with that body: sharp, fast, portable/handholdable.

10-13-2015, 11:36 PM	#1050
Dan Rentea Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Location: Bucharest Posts: 1,716	Originally posted by cali92rs I have a kinda similar story regarding the Canon 6D. The IQ difference is real and noticeable at ISO 1600 and above. But the K-3 is close enough that the other things (ergonomics and size) make shooting the K-3II more enjoyable for me. The K-3II + FA31mm + FA77mm holds it's own with the 6D + 50mmL + 135mmL in 90% of the situations and is waaaaaay more discreet Really? I sold my K-3 II because I didn't like it as much as I liked K-5 II and because I will not have at least two Pentax full frames to choose from. I really don't need 36mp sensor. I bought Canon 6D and I think that the image quality is a little better than K-3 II's at low ISO and way better at higher ISO. Skin tones are so accurate on Canon...with Pentax the skin tones are more like Nikon's (a little yellow). I agree with you that K-3 II is more discreet because of those small primes, but it is not a big difference in body size.