[Rondec]

You may speculate so.
But people now shooting FF have no intention to go APSC ever again in their life. Nobody of those *I* know, at least.

If anything, they add smaller than APSC gear to their arsenal, like L/RX100.

BTW, a pro-level 24-70/2.8 may be heavy and expensive. But I found it worth every penny. Between an RX100 24-70 and FF 24-70, there is no room for APSC. The RX100 is (in equivalent terms) an F/4.9-7.6 lens, the FF F/2.8 of course. An APSC kit zoom is worse, a DA* 16-50/2.8 is an F/4, just a bit better than the RX100.

So, the advantage of an APSC dSLR with zoom is that it is cheaper. Otherwise, it hase been eaten up from below and above. Already.

The only room for APSC I can see in the foreseeable future are pro-level APSC mirrorless cameras like NX1 or A7000. When they beat SLRs in something. But here again, cameras like the A7 may eat that cake too.

People who have full frame often shoot with other formats as well.

It isn't unusual for a pro to have full frame camera and lenses that he/she uses for professional situations and then to have a micro four thirds set up for situations where ultimate image quality isn't needed and smaller size is desired.

[rawr]

People who have full frame often shoot with other formats as well.

Indeed. The classic is keep an APS-C body around for telephoto, use FF for wide (maybe even just less than 85mm), plus for low-light and bokeh/subject isolation.

I believe there may even be several FF shooters on Pentaxforums who shoot a mix of APS-C and FF for exactly those reasons.

[mee]

Indeed. The classic is keep an APS-C body around for telephoto, use FF for wide (maybe even just less than 85mm), plus for low-light and bokeh/subject isolation.

I believe there may even be several FF shooters on Pentaxforums who shoot a mix of APS-C and FF for exactly those reasons.

The only aside to this I want to add is I suspect this new FF body will do both APS-C and FF modes.. And I hope we can switch this mode at will (since I'd still shoot APS-C mode for certain situations).

[Ex Finn.]

But people now shooting FF have no intention to go APSC ever again in their life. Nobody of those *I* know, at least.

I was at the Luray caverns and had a conversation with a person who had switched to FF, make the same statement...

[Fontan]

You know I am still having a blast with my 645D. It just doesn't get old for me. You guys go right ahead with the new stuff!

[Cynog Ap Brychan]

Indeed. The classic is keep an APS-C body around for telephoto, use FF for wide (maybe even just less than 85mm), plus for low-light and bokeh/subject isolation.

I believe there may even be several FF shooters on Pentaxforums who shoot a mix of APS-C and FF for exactly those reasons.

Yup!!

[philbaum]

You may speculate so.
But people now shooting FF have no intention to go APSC ever again in their life. Nobody of those *I* know, at least.

If anything, they add smaller than APSC gear to their arsenal, like L/RX100.

BTW, a pro-level 24-70/2.8 may be heavy and expensive. But I found it worth every penny. Between an RX100 24-70 and FF 24-70, there is no room for APSC. The RX100 is (in equivalent terms) an F/4.9-7.6 lens, the FF F/2.8 of course. An APSC kit zoom is worse, a DA* 16-50/2.8 is an F/4, just a bit better than the RX100.

So, the advantage of an APSC dSLR with zoom is that it is cheaper. Otherwise, it hase been eaten up from below and above. Already.

The only room for APSC I can see in the foreseeable future are pro-level APSC mirrorless cameras like NX1 or A7000. When they beat SLRs in something. But here again, cameras like the A7 may eat that cake too.

You're probably right, but so far there hasn't been even one camera mfr thats been 100% right with their market predictions :-) The marketplace has been well and truly disrupted.

[fsge]

The only aside to this I want to add is I suspect this new FF body will do both APS-C and FF modes.. And I hope we can switch this mode at will (since I'd still shoot APS-C mode for certain situations).

That is exactly what I am expecting as well, part of my gear being APS-C dependant

[Rondec]

The problem with all these predictions is that they are based on consumers wanting ultimate image quality, when what consumers want is cheap cameras. It is still awhile before we see a sub-500 dollar full frame camera and until that happens, I don't expect it to take over the market.

It must be understood that most of the cameras sold aren't top end APS-C either. The K30/50 probably out sold the K3 5 or 6 to 1. Maybe more. This is all based on price. And for many people the difference in sensor size isn't nearly as important as the difference of an extra 750 in their pocket.

[RockvilleBob]

That is exactly what I am expecting as well, part of my gear being APS-C dependant

This echos how I feel and APS-C modes will be mandatory to be competitive. Beyond mandatory since APS-C lenses dominate the current product line.

[monochrome]

The problem with all these predictions is that they are based on consumers wanting ultimate image quality, when what consumers want is cheap cameras. It is still awhile before we see a sub-500 dollar full frame camera and until that happens, I don't expect it to take over the market.

It must be understood that most of the cameras sold aren't top end APS-C either. The K30/50 probably out sold the K3 5 or 6 to 1. Maybe more. This is all based on price. And for many people the difference in sensor size isn't nearly as important as the difference of an extra 750 in their pocket.

The problem for Ricoh / Pentax in North America (selling lower-priced, higher-volume dSLR's) seems to be distribution in the BigBox Channel. They can't seem to get anything into Best Buy, K-Mart, Sears, Wal-Mart or even a real, all-stores distribution in Target.

Pentax seems destined to be a 'more-features-for-the-dollar' word-of-mouth brand that those in the know seek out on the internet. That's fine, of course, but at the smaller volume there has to be a higher per-unit margin or there just isn't enough profit to keep a product going in the West. Ergo, no marketing and thin support.

People have heard of Canon and Nikon. When they spend $600 for a dSLR kit they feel they're buying a 'good camera' and they're willing to spend the money. When comparing Pentax to CaNikon they're subconsciously afraid it is an off-brand and they'll buy a lesser camera for the same (or sometimes more) money.

[mee]

The problem with all these predictions is that they are based on consumers wanting ultimate image quality, when what consumers want is cheap cameras. It is still awhile before we see a sub-500 dollar full frame camera and until that happens, I don't expect it to take over the market.

It must be understood that most of the cameras sold aren't top end APS-C either. The K30/50 probably out sold the K3 5 or 6 to 1. Maybe more. This is all based on price. And for many people the difference in sensor size isn't nearly as important as the difference of an extra 750 in their pocket.

Yes, obviously cost matter more to the budget consumer than the (often retired) enthusiasts or commercial shooter.

However, I've yet to see a single person request a sub 500 dollar FF camera! I think we all know it isn't going to be below 1500 USD retail for many, many years. That said, I can see a time in the future when the body will be closer to ~1k (and less on used market).. something closer to A7 cost..

[rvannatta]

The only aside to this I want to add is I suspect this new FF body will do both APS-C and FF modes.. And I hope we can switch this mode at will (since I'd still shoot APS-C mode for certain situations).

agreed. as much as a really like photos with lots of detail, when you do a lot of bird photography as I have been doing lately, FF just doesn't help.
When the object of your photography is too far away to start with 40mp isn't more than 24mp, and piling on the Tel-extenders really doesn't
make that fact of live go away. as the sensors reach or exceed the optical limits of the glass (as they have)----it's a zero sum game, and time
to spend your $$$ on exotic optics, not exotic sensors.

[Rondec]

agreed. as much as a really like photos with lots of detail, when you do a lot of bird photography as I have been doing lately, FF just doesn't help.
When the object of your photography is too far away to start with 40mp isn't more than 24mp, and piling on the Tel-extenders really doesn't
make that fact of live go away. as the sensors reach or exceed the optical limits of the glass (as they have)----it's a zero sum game, and time
to spend your $$$ on exotic optics, not exotic sensors.

Certainly few people will purchase a full frame camera with the intention of mounting APS-C glass on it. I think the whole question here is whether a full frame camera will be larger than a K3. The assumption by full frame proponents is that the camera will be the same size and that glass will be similarly sized. I have a feeling, though, that Pentax is going to release a bunch of lenses with fast apertures (and large sizes) to go with the camera and that this will be anything but tiny.

---------- Post added 07-12-15 at 02:38 PM ----------

Yes, obviously cost matter more to the budget consumer than the (often retired) enthusiasts or commercial shooter.

However, I've yet to see a single person request a sub 500 dollar FF camera! I think we all know it isn't going to be below 1500 USD retail for many, many years. That said, I can see a time in the future when the body will be closer to ~1k (and less on used market).. something closer to A7 cost..

I guess I would just say that few request a sub-500 dollar full frame because they don't expect to see it (sub 2000 seems a stretch right now) and because people who have budget contraints are not really asking for full frame. Although there are plenty of folks who do believe that if Pentax just left video off, it would drop the price of the camera enough to get it into their budget.

[Pål Jensen]

I was at the Luray caverns and had a conversation with a person who had switched to FF, make the same statement...

Well, there are plenty of people on this forum who has switched from FF to APS. It all shows that it is just a question of preferences...

My problem is whether I shuold add an FF to my APS body or a 645D, as I already own FF lenses from 18 to 600mm and 645 lenses from 33 to 300mm. Or maybe add both.....