[mecrox]

The assertion that Ricoh plans to drop APSC format was never made by AsahiMan, contrary to the post which you quoted. The mis-attribution was already pointed out a few posts back.

When you read something which doesn't make a lick of sense, it's prudent to verify the source before blindly repeating it as fact.

It's a reasonable position to take, even if he didn't say it. Not hard to envisage a future in which cameras with 1" or M43 sensors have got more than good enough to replace most of what APS-C currently does while still being clearly superior to smartphones. A smaller format also appeals to people, probably an awful lot of people, who prefer a fixed zoom lens and fairly simple controls to ILCs. That leaves FF for the heavy lifting, the bigger spenders and the button-fanciers - and by then FF would likely be less expensive than it is today, too. This would be a simpler and thus less costly world for the camera companies - fewer formats to support, etc. Of course, APS-C would not be killed off, i.e. abruptly discontinued, but it might just fade away in most cases, a no-man's-land between small 'n' simple but still very good and the mighty-barrelled pro-camera deal.

[biz-engineer]

Please do.

Yes, why not. What Pentaxian should answer when being pointed at Canon or Nikon: "Pentax camera cover my needs, so, I'm satisfied."

[Parallax]

Yes, why not.

Well, that's what I'm wondering. Canon and Nikon are perfect, Pentax is junk so it seems like the obvious solution.
Get one of each. Then besides constantly telling us how superior Canon and Nikon are, you can post on the Canon forum about how superior Nikon and Pentax are, and post on the Nikon forum about how much better Canon and Pentax are.

[D1N0]

O djeez Pentax is building in all kinds of features the competition don't even have in their top models, matches features with them en prices it competitive with mid level Full frames (I mean the D750) and cheaper than the aging 5d MkIII. I really need to complain about that!

[reh321]

Pentax is a special case. You could also ask why Pentax does IBIS, pixel shift, telescope lens design and 36Mp FF camera at $1800, while Canon and Nikon aren't doing this.
Personally, I know that is I want classic all purpose camera system, I have to go Canon or Nikon, and if I want original and not always effective features I stay Pentax.

The "classic all purpose camera system" has not existed since the classic film camera, which allowed you to change the character of the camera by changing its sensor. Canikon try to meet all needs, but they do not do that with one camera; they do do that by providing a whole collection of cameras, one of which should meet every person's wants. Pentax cannot shower us with different models right now, but what the features they do provide seem quite effective at meeting their goals. That is OK. If someone absolutely needs a feature that Pentax does not provide, I guess they will have to find a Canikon model that does provide it, but I hope Pentax can provide what most of us need {even if the need is to have something to complain about}

---------- Post added 03-02-16 at 12:28 PM ----------

Yes, why not. What Pentaxian should answer when being pointed at Canon or Nikon: "Pentax camera cover my needs, so, I'm satisfied."

That's me!!! {I switched from Canon Rebel to K-30 last summer, and I have zero regrets}

[Parallax]

If someone absolutely needs a feature that Pentax does not provide, I guess they will have to find a Canikon model that does provide

Where would the fun be in that? It's much more fun to whine about McDonald's Quarter Pounders not being flame broiled than it is to just go buy a Whopper from Burger King.

[luftfluss]

It's a reasonable position to take, even if he didn't say it. Not hard to envisage a future in which cameras with 1" or M43 sensors have got more than good enough to replace most of what APS-C currently does while still being clearly superior to smartphones. A smaller format also appeals to people, probably an awful lot of people, who prefer a fixed zoom lens and fairly simple controls to ILCs. That leaves FF for the heavy lifting, the bigger spenders and the button-fanciers - and by then FF would likely be less expensive than it is today, too. This would be a simpler and thus less costly world for the camera companies - fewer formats to support, etc. Of course, APS-C would not be killed off, i.e. abruptly discontinued, but it might just fade away in most cases, a no-man's-land between small 'n' simple but still very good and the mighty-barrelled pro-camera deal.

What's funny is I have encountered m4/3 users who believe that m4/3 is a "temporary" format, and it will be squeezed by 1" compacts and APS-C for tele enthusiasts and FF for generalists.

From my own perspective, I find my Oly m4/3 stuff produces IQ that is pretty close to my 16MP Pentax stuff in low-to-mid ISO's... but I'm more interested in the pleasure I derive in using the equipment and my satisfaction in the resultant images, not in the technical aspects of the gear.

---------- Post added 03-02-16 at 12:33 PM ----------

Where would the fun be in that? It's much more fun to whine about McDonald's Quarter Pounders not being flame broiled than it is to just go buy a Whopper from Burger King.

It's even more fun to whine about 1/3 lb burgers costing as much as Quarter Pounders.

[reh321]

If someone absolutely needs a feature that Pentax does not provide, I guess they will have to find a Canikon model that does provide it

Where would the fun be in that? It's much more fun to whine about McDonald's Quarter Pounders not being flame broiled than it is to just go buy a Whopper from Burger King.

I thought I covered that when I said

I hope Pentax can provide what most of us need {even if the need is to have something to complain about}

[monochrome]

Pentax is a special case. You could also ask why Pentax does IBIS, pixel shift, telescope lens design and 36Mp FF camera at $1800, while Canon and Nikon aren't doing this.
Personally, I know that is I want classic all purpose camera system, I have to go Canon or Nikon, and if I want original and not always effective features I stay Pentax.

I think maybe you should just go Nikon. You seem so unhappy with Pentax all the time.

[jatrax]

Brand loyalty is all well and good, just like rooting for a particular football team. I guess it makes you feel good, so great. But if getting the job done, or getting the image you want is the goal then perhaps it makes more sense to worry about the image first and the gear needed to make it second.

I use Pentax DSLRs because they suit my needs. If I was shooting long range wildlife I probably would use something else. If I was mostly shooting BIF, I would probably use something else. If I was shooting a lot of pro level video, I would probably use something else. Why waste time and electrons whining about what someone (or something) could do when there is not even enough time to get done what you actually can do?

I wanted a small, large sensor camera to carry in my pocket. Did my research, read the reviews, checked out look and feel at the shops. Bought what I thought was the best camera to fit my needs, today. Not tomorrow, or next year, today. Not going to whine about what it should do, or doesn't do, or why "my" brand doesn't have that feature. Is it a Pentax? Nope. Does it take great pictures and do what I want? Yep. Is buying the little camera for one purpose going to stop me from buying the K-1 for a completely different purpose? Nope.

[biz-engineer]

Well, that's what I'm wondering. Canon and Nikon are perfect, Pentax is junk so it seems like the obvious solution. Get one of each. Then besides constantly telling us how superior Canon and Nikon are, you can post on the Canon forum about how superior Nikon and Pentax are, and post on the Nikon forum about how much better Canon and Pentax are.

I'm not paid by Pentax or any other brand, or any commercial venture. I'm a customer and I'm not at all interested in brand protection. I'm interested in photo technique and results I can get. So, as a user, I try things, I observe and I make my mind. If this is not welcome, that's ok, that only keeps away from being a better photographer. Please, tell me how to work around AFC issues , I'd be genuinely happy. I look forward to an article that explain how to make Pentax AFC work like it is explained in the K-3 users manual. I guess what I have to do is to send back the camera with a letter explaining that their camera does not work as specified. Why Pentax forum don't send a constructive group complain about this. You all paid for a camera, you are entitled to have something that works according the promised performance. Not only you accept something that does not work, but on top of it, you ban people complaining because they are having issues.

[Kunzite]

What's funny is I have encountered m4/3 users who believe that m4/3 is a "temporary" format, and it will be squeezed by 1" compacts and APS-C for tele enthusiasts and FF for generalists.

Indeed. If one of the similarly sized formats would cease to exist, why does it have to be APS-C? What incentive is there, for the Canon/Nikon/Pentax/Fuji/Sony customers to switch to a format used by Olympus and Panasonic, and what incentive is there, for Canon/Nikon/Pentax/Fuji/Sony to give up on APS-C just to use slightly smaller sensors? Is there anything to make it happen?
Nope; that's just another "XYZ is doomed!" nonsense.

---------- Post added 02-03-16 at 08:08 PM ----------

Please, tell me how to work around AFC issues , I'd be genuinely happy.

You were already presented a solution: if Pentax doesn't work for you, find another brand which does. Sitting here and attempting to make us equally unhappy and bitter about Pentax is counter-productive, and it won't solve your problem.

[Parallax]

you ban people complaining because they are having issues.

We have never banned anyone for complaining.
We have, on rare occasions, banned people for repeated violations of forum rules; such as this one:

............... trolling is not allowed in any part of our site; this includes the forum, user profiles, private message system, photo comments, and lens reviews.

and this one:

While we are quite happy to have constructive comparative conversations about competing camera brands, please do not lead 'brand wars' or bash a particular camera manufacturer.

[reh321]

I'm not paid by Pentax or any other brand, or any commercial venture. I'm a customer and I'm not at all interested in brand protection. I'm interested in photo technique and results I can get. So, as a user, I try things, I observe and I make my mind. If this is not welcome, that's ok, that only keeps away from being a better photographer. Please, tell me how to work around AFC issues , I'd be genuinely happy. I look forward to an article that explain how to make Pentax AFC work like it is explained in the K-3 users manual. I guess what I have to do is to send back the camera with a letter explaining that their camera does not work as specified. Why Pentax forum don't send a constructive group complain about this. You all paid for a camera, you are entitled to have something that works according the promised performance. Not only you accept something that does not work, but on top of it, you ban people complaining because they are having issues.

Every camera has issues. I left Canon because their bodies were relatively unreliable and not WR. Perhaps Nikon is perfect - I don't have any personal experience with them - but that might be the best place for you to find perfection. Pentax systems {I'm not sure whether this is body or lens or their interaction} are not quite as good at AF. Hopefully Pentax is aware of that and is working on it. You have said it. And said it. And said it. Saying it a few more times won't change anything. I'm tired of this chorus; could we move on to some other song? Please?

[luftfluss]

I'm tired of this chorus; could we move on to some other song? Please?

You Tube

You Tube