[repaap]

One question is also that how easy or difficult it would be to place brand new very resource demanding sensor in already engineered camera which has been designed for different and little older sensor already. That is not just a matter of paying higher price to get newest and propably the best. And now I'm talking about BSI 42 MP sensor versus most plausible 36 MP sensor which will be tuned in great Pentax way. As usual.

Maybe it will be in next camera if it will be as good as it is supposed to be.

[rawr]

And the question that follows is whether Pentaxians are willing to pay for the camera, the lenses required, and a more powerful computer to deal with the files.

Ask the 645Z people. Ricoh can barely meet demand for 645 body and lenses, it seems. If the FF product(s?) has some stand-out features, people will find the cash for camera, new computer, new lenses etc.

Anyway, pricing will follow a curve down eventually (slower than the K-3 curve, I expect). Not everyone will rush the doors on day one to get the FF body and pay the manufacturers recommended retail price.

[mecrox]

Reading some of this discussion, I wonder how many of you have read this interview with Sony about the new sensor. It seems to have several new technologies incorporated into it beside BSI - new materials, new read-out technology, processors integrated on the rear side and phase detection pixels.

Sony Q&A: The must-have sensor tech of the future?

Some of the key points are:
- 42mp was not chosen at random. It was chosen to make 4K video quality better after downsampling. So, the sensor should beat everything but the A7s for 4K video.
- The new sensor has better ISO performance than the 36mp sensor, which was great anyway, because it was a bigger version the K-5's 16mp sensor.

The question is whether Ricoh wants to pay for it. And the question that follows is whether Pentaxians are willing to pay for the camera, the lenses required, and a more powerful computer to deal with the files.

Key question is whether Ricoh can source a digital processor good enough to handle the new sensor without bottlenecking its performance. If they can't then they will be stuck with an older sensor anyway. But if they can then I think they'd be mad not to go for it. Otherwise Nikon will leapfrog them soon enough and the sticker price of the new Pentax will start to decline more steeply than it needs to. That is a trap well worth avoiding. Ricoh need to get clear of the Canonikon sensor/processor rat race.

[bladerunner6]

I am really dubious of Tamron adding more lenses because of the FF. here is some back of of an envelope math:

Full Frame sales for other companies are like 10-15% of their sales. Let's say because of backed up demand, Pentax reaches 25% for the first year. And let's say that DSLRs have a five year lifespan. That means the FF will increase the number of Pentax cameras by 5%. Now admittedly FF users my be bigger lens buyers, both in price and quantity, but still, not a tremendous gain.

[RonHendriks1966]

Key question is whether Ricoh can source a digital processor good enough to handle the new sensor without bottlenecking its performance. If they can't then they will be stuck with an older sensor anyway. But if they can then I think they'd be mad not to go for it. Otherwise Nikon will leapfrog them soon enough and the sticker price of the new Pentax will start to decline more steeply than it needs to. That is a trap well worth avoiding. Ricoh need to get clear of the Canonikon sensor/processor rat race.

I don't think That the next Pentax can be that fast as the Sony and have that sensor. Way to expensive for a small production run that Ricoh can expect to sell.

[Rondec]

Key question is whether Ricoh can source a digital processor good enough to handle the new sensor without bottlenecking its performance. If they can't then they will be stuck with an older sensor anyway. But if they can then I think they'd be mad not to go for it. Otherwise Nikon will leapfrog them soon enough and the sticker price of the new Pentax will start to decline more steeply than it needs to. That is a trap well worth avoiding. Ricoh need to get clear of the Canonikon sensor/processor rat race.

I don't really see how the decision between 36 and 42 megapixels makes a difference here. The difference in file size wouldn't be that much. The big question to me is whether or not Ricoh is planning to make this camera capable of really high quality video. If not, then there is no point to choosing the 42 megapixel sensor. It looks to me as though the things it benefits are faster read out speed and better video. I'm certainly not going to jump on the assumption that its noise levels will be significantly lower or dynamic range higher just because it has BSI. Maybe it will, but Samsung's 28 Megapixel APS-C sensor didn't perform any better than 24 megapixel Sony sensor, even though it had BSI, it just had faster frame rates and better video capability.

[Simen1]

Better S/N ratio and DOF (you know the usual stuff).
Steve

Where is all the f/1,4 primes and f/2,8 zooms for 645?

What 645 offers over FF is primarily higher real resolution (line pairs per picture height).

[VoiceOfReason]

We keep hearing that Ricoh is going to use the latest stuff, but then people here on the forum keep wanting Ricoh to use Sony and Nikon's castoffs, 3 year old tech. Why is that? So, is Ricoh going to use the latest tech, or will Ricoh use tech that has been out for a few years? Why would people here want a camera that will succeed and pull people from other brands, yet want that camera with old tech? I don't think you can get both at once.

[zmohie]

Regarding the pixel shift technology I think pentax will use the 36mp sensor not the new one.
this choice will give them the chance to sell the camera at affordable price as have mentioned before that the new camera will be at 2000$.
it can also use a new version of 24mp for an entry full frame.
all these make sens and a good way to put pentax name steady on this market.
next year pentax has time to develop and try another methods to differrentiat themself than others brands.
my thoughts

[Zygonyx]

We keep hearing that Ricoh is going to use the latest stuff, but then people here on the forum keep wanting Ricoh to use Sony and Nikon's castoffs, 3 year old tech. Why is that? So, is Ricoh going to use the latest tech, or will Ricoh use tech that has been out for a few years? Why would people here want a camera that will succeed and pull people from other brands, yet want that camera with old tech? I don't think you can get both at once.

I totally agree, for sure anyway the photog market has to push to high end if it is wanting to survive the «UBER-phone wave».
Too bad for the «loving gear» poor...

[GlassJunkie]

I totally agree, for sure anyway the photog market has to push to high end if it is wanting to survive the «UBER-phone wave».
Too bad for the «loving gear» poor...

Agreed....42 or 50 mp with PShift is the "cost of entry". Everything else is already obsolete....

[y0chang]

Where is all the f/1,4 primes and f/2,8 zooms for 645?

What 645 offers over FF is primarily higher real resolution (line pairs per picture height).

The reason why there are no 645 1.4 primes nor 2.8 zooms is that the cost and size would be enormous because the elements would have to be enormous to cover the image frame of MF. The whole point of 1.4 and 1.2 lenses was to imitate that medium format look with a 35mm camera...well you don't have to imitate when you are actually using MF...

[D1N0]

Well photorumors now picked up on it: Pentax rep: the new full frame Pentax DSLR camera will have a 42MP sensor from Sony | Photo Rumors

Which means it is als on digicame-info Google Translate

Well at least they can't blame Kenspo

[Simen1]

The reason why there are no 645 1.4 primes nor 2.8 zooms is that the cost and size would be enormous because the elements would have to be enormous to cover the image frame of MF. The whole point of 1.4 and 1.2 lenses was to imitate that medium format look with a 35mm camera...well you don't have to imitate when you are actually using MF...

I know. It was a rhetorical question to stevebrot that said the reason to buy 645 was "Better S/N ratio and DOF (you know the usual stuff)." Actually you don't get better DOF and S/N ratio on 645 because it doesn't have as large apertures available as FF will get. 645 also lacks shake reduction. So in my opinion the FF offering will have key advantages over 645. On the other side 645 will offer a different package with better resolution as the main selling point. Even f/1,4 lenses stopped down to f/2 cant resolve as much as the 645 on f/2,8. Or at resolution optimal apertures for that matter.

---------- Post added 06-27-2015 at 07:19 PM ----------

#1. Ricoh is going to open a factory service center in the US in 2016.

#2. The new full frame Pentax will have the Sony 42 MP sensor from the a7R II.

#3. Tamron will be adding new Pentax K mount lenses because of the above.

I seriously doubt a Tamron rep knows anything about a Pentax FF apart from what he reads on this forum...

I think #1 and #2 is good guesses, but #3 might hold some genuine Tamron knowledge.

[mee]

I am really dubious of Tamron adding more lenses because of the FF. here is some back of of an envelope math:

Full Frame sales for other companies are like 10-15% of their sales. Let's say because of backed up demand, Pentax reaches 25% for the first year. And let's say that DSLRs have a five year lifespan. That means the FF will increase the number of Pentax cameras by 5%. Now admittedly FF users my be bigger lens buyers, both in price and quantity, but still, not a tremendous gain.

It has been 10-15% in the past. If the move is towards lowering the cost of entry into a FF system, then the percentage of sales will move with it.

When I got into SLR style photography, just a short 5 years ago, an entry level camera for $500-600 was the norm. Today, one can get one (brand new) kit for $380-400. As our imagery technology increases, the cost of admission lowers. FF bodies have dropped tremendously more for entry level. The trend surely will only grow.