[derekkite]

we were talking about this at our recent afternoon models and photographers meet up locally, and it became a pretty passionate conversation because the bulk of us are currently shooting Nikon.

There are a few different shooters, and what it comes down to is who is Pentax targeting. You look at the crew of us out there and you can kind of see what's going on.


The people just getting started or doing this straight up for fun were carrying kids of high end APSC gear. A few guys who do great images but never want to do it for money are shooting with D7100, 70D, Sony A7.
The people who do a lot of weddings and are 100% working photographers are running either Canon 5D mk3 or Nikon D600/D750. Not wanting 36 or 50mp because of speed of the camera and size of the files
The people doing fashion or landscape are mostly using D810's with the odd 5DMk3, but two of the Canon users specifically looking at upgrading to Hassleblad or the 5DS. (Pentax 645Z they omit due to the flash system and general mantra of the brand. I fought for us)

Then the circle kind of started. The people doing composite work or landscape running D810/D800 high res stuff originally came from Canon and the 5DMk2. Landscape guys changed for the 800/810 because of Resolution. The Canon/Nikon guys who got mad with lack of innovation and same old same old went to the A7 series. The guys who got tired of carrying around extra weight went to m4/3 or Fuji because they don't see a need for more than 16mp in their work and they can get just as good results from those system that they got from their FF systems.

It is these guys that Pentax is going after. The professionals. Look at the announced lenses and road mapped lenses so far. I truly believe that Pentax is not making this camera for the Pentax fans. They are making this camera to get the Canon and Nikon professionals who are mad at their brands for whatever reason to give them another choice.



But look at all the hypotheticals going around here and yes, it's rude... but wake up!

We have our poll up for what someone will pay for this camera. 1800-2399 is leading with 1800 or in second and the 2400-3000 range in third.
Most of the people have deiced 24mp is not good enough, needs to be 36/42/50mp.
Rumor is new advanced AF system and flash system
the usual Pentax out fitment of high end build quality and full weather sealing.

This is what I'm expecting, have been expecting since announcement, and wish that people would come to grips with as being the most logical camera based on the very little information we have:


36mp sensor with a crop mode
new AF matrix
no pop up flash (maybe radio)
tilty screen
increased flash sync with high speed sync
pixel shift
insert K3 II spec sheet here

launch lenses of:

16-24mm f2.8
24-70mm f2.8
70-200mm f2.8
24-105mm f4

This camera will be priced... $2999
16-24 $2200
24-70 $1500
70-200 $2400

expect at least one new flash gun

Do not expect a second body to be released at the same time, maybe a few months down the road. Expect it to be a D610/D750 equivalent camera priced in the $2000 range.


Just like the 645D/z were not targeted at the Pentax loyalists but the medium format professionals, expect the same from the upcoming Full Frame... it will be priced and spec'd to entice the professionals to switch.


if 24mp is good enough for wedding, sports, and journalism pros... why is it not good enough for the majority of users on this board? The majority of those shooters are avoiding the D810 and 5Dr because of the resolution.

This is great analysis. Pentax wants people willing to spend money, and will target their offerings to get some of it.

I wouldn't discount wildlife shooters. It may be the circles that I encounter, but the money I see is long lenses and bodies to suit. The 150-450 is a really good middle of the road offering for someone who wants to get bears or birds. There are longer and more expensive, and we may see some of them, but first things first. I wouldn't be surprised if the DA*300 is one of the early primes to be reworked for full frame and fast focus motor.

Full frame for this crowd is not as urgent compared to fashion, wedding or other segments that almost demand full frame now. APSC works very well, but the Pentax characteristics of tough outdoors body, compact and very well appointed, with a high resolution on a very nice sensor may be the attraction. In this segment sensors make a very big difference; the difference between the D7100 and D7200 gets a friend of mine shots that otherwise went into the garbage bin. A stop or two better noise characteristics can make up for the slight decrease in resolution. Autofocus is another one, as well as a reasonable movie mode. I'm surprised how much I use the K-3 movie mode and how nice the results are for my purposes. I know it gets panned, but I'm on a tripod anyways, and it works very nicely for me.

I would love to have a new full frame for early october grizzly bear shooting, but I doubt that it will be that early. I see a bunch of tempting fruit in their offerings; the 150-450 is very attractive but not for winter, I need the light from my f4.5 500 sigma, but for next summer when things are closer in and a flexible close focus lens a definite maybe. The K3II is tempting, but only if one of my K-3's bites it. The full frame high resolution would be a real treat, and I would expect a similarly appointed and fast APSC next year. They will get a substantial chunk of money from me one way or another, it just depends what everything actually looks like before I spend.

What I expect is a solid body with outstanding ergonomics, very nice files, and a conservative but nicely working set of extras. I was pleased with them pulling back on the 70-200, they realized that they needed to meet a higher standard than initially thought. Fast and accurate AF and very sharp on a body that matches would be a sign that they are serious about the professional market.

---

Last edited by derekkite; 08-19-2015 at 09:15 PM.

[Rondec]

My guess is that it matters enormously. Ricoh are launching a whole platform that should last for years if got right. If got wrong then either it won't sell all that well or all the profit they could have made will end up being spent on repurposing everything later. Not good news, so they have to be really shrewd about which way they jump. And none of us is in possession of the research data on which to base that decision, of course. But, no need to think it has to mean clone of A7 and a new mount. Think more of what could be done with K mount plus what is inside an A7, or the Canon mount on the same basis. My impression is that the key is combining high power electronics with newer generations of sensor which can read off the information on it incredibly quickly. That's what drives really good EVFs and all the AF stuff on show in the A7R II.

But I am sure that Pentax has a lot of different things that they are working on behind the scenes. If the upper end market for SLRs went away tomorrow, they would go to plan B which would involve (probably) a k mount mirrorless with EVF (I'd be fine with that).

But the SLR market isn't going away in the upper end of things any time soon and I don't think most folks (other than a few rabid ones on the internet) are driven to have an EVF in their camera that much. They just don't care, as long as there isn't too much battery life penalty and the lag is low enough. Sports shooters definitely don't like EVFs, for what it's worth. Anyway, if Ricoh is releasing cameras that have Sony sensors in them, the switch to having an EVF would be a pretty simple one. Maybe they'd have to license tech from somewhere else, but they've done EVFs before and it isn't rocket science. They just think a lot of pros like the up sides of OVFs more than they like EVFs.

[mecrox]

But I am sure that Pentax has a lot of different things that they are working on behind the scenes. If the upper end market for SLRs went away tomorrow, they would go to plan B which would involve (probably) a k mount mirrorless with EVF (I'd be fine with that).

But the SLR market isn't going away in the upper end of things any time soon and I don't think most folks (other than a few rabid ones on the internet) are driven to have an EVF in their camera that much. They just don't care, as long as there isn't too much battery life penalty and the lag is low enough. Sports shooters definitely don't like EVFs, for what it's worth. Anyway, if Ricoh is releasing cameras that have Sony sensors in them, the switch to having an EVF would be a pretty simple one. Maybe they'd have to license tech from somewhere else, but they've done EVFs before and it isn't rocket science. They just think a lot of pros like the up sides of OVFs more than they like EVFs.

I don't see this as EVF vs OVF or MILC vs DSLR. Ricoh would have research data on that which would indicate a path for them, I would guess. We certainly don't have the data. But new technology enables new capabilities and if those turn out to be even slightly "must-have" then money flows one way and companies cannot afford to pass it all up by allowing something to roadblock any change. The idea that companies have a choice is a bit of an illusion, I think. They're businesses, they have to be pragmatic and they have to go where the money is. The challenge is to bring the customers along with the ride.

[zmohie]

Market is being differentiate it self. Sony is the leader of ff milc. Nikon and canon are the leader of dslr ff cameras. Fuji is the leader of aps /c milc. Panasonic and Olympus are leaders of 43 so pentax have to determine what they are standing.

[WPRESTO]

The trick for Ricoh is to introduce something that is more than "me too" playing "catch up." If they go FF or mirrorless or both, the camera should have something that is "never before, and revolutionary, and amazingly useful." Pixel-shift is innovative but short of revolutionary (it would be if you could easily hand-hold at all shutter speeds that you hand-hold without pixel-shift). I'm doubtful that a revolutionary sensor is coming, so any revolutionary features would have to be in the body design, but what options are available? Extend the astro-tracking to a user operated tiltable, shiftable sensor that allows a significant amount of tilt-shift perspective and DOF control with any attached lens? That would be a surprise.

[GlassJunkie]

This is great analysis. Pentax wants people willing to spend money, and will target their offerings to get some of it.

I wouldn't discount wildlife shooters. It may be the circles that I encounter, but the money I see is long lenses and bodies to suit. The 150-450 is a really good middle of the road offering for someone who wants to get bears or birds. There are longer and more expensive, and we may see some of them, but first things first. I wouldn't be surprised if the DA*300 is one of the early primes to be reworked for full frame and fast focus motor.

Full frame for this crowd is not as urgent compared to fashion, wedding or other segments that almost demand full frame now. APSC works very well, but the Pentax characteristics of tough outdoors body, compact and very well appointed, with a high resolution on a very nice sensor may be the attraction. In this segment sensors make a very big difference; the difference between the D7100 and D7200 gets a friend of mine shots that otherwise went into the garbage bin. A stop or two better noise characteristics can make up for the slight decrease in resolution. Autofocus is another one, as well as a reasonable movie mode. I'm surprised how much I use the K-3 movie mode and how nice the results are for my purposes. I know it gets panned, but I'm on a tripod anyways, and it works very nicely for me.

I would love to have a new full frame for early october grizzly bear shooting, but I doubt that it will be that early. I see a bunch of tempting fruit in their offerings; the 150-450 is very attractive but not for winter, I need the light from my f4.5 500 sigma, but for next summer when things are closer in and a flexible close focus lens a definite maybe. The K3II is tempting, but only if one of my K-3's bites it. The full frame high resolution would be a real treat, and I would expect a similarly appointed and fast APSC next year. They will get a substantial chunk of money from me one way or another, it just depends what everything actually looks like before I spend.

What I expect is a solid body with outstanding ergonomics, very nice files, and a conservative but nicely working set of extras. I was pleased with them pulling back on the 70-200, they realized that they needed to meet a higher standard than initially thought. Fast and accurate AF and very sharp on a body that matches would be a sign that they are serious about the professional market.

Man, sounds like you were having dinner at our house last night (minus Grizzly shoot). Same discussion..

[WPRESTO]

Here's a minor feature that would be useful: the VR sensor-shift is automatically turned off when a cable release is inserted. It would need a menu on/off option for those who use a gun stock for tele or macro shooting.

[filmamigo]

But it does beg the question for all the FF wannabes... if the FF comes out and all you have are the lenses available now, are you going for it?

Yep. I would probably add the FA 31 and re-buy the FA 43 (in black.) I love to shoot primes, and that is what the FF is all about to me -- correct field of view for classic lenses, maximum image quality and control of DOF.

I'm crossing my fingers for a mirrorless version of the FF. The results from my K-01 were astounding, with a weak AA filter and NO front-or-back focus issues on any lens. Mirrorless is also perfect for manual focus.

[sunny16]

I would definitely love for it to be mirrorless though I would be surprised if it is. I used manual focus m42, M, and A lenses on Pentax film cameras with split-screen focusing up until I bought my first DSLR (K10D.) The manual focus experience was disappointing and I invested in AF lenses but had a lot of back/front focus issues even up through the K-5 (last standard Pentax DSLR I bought.) The K-01 was the first digital Pentax camera that, even with its slow AF on many lenses, worked how I always wanted a digital camera to work. The contrast AF was almost always accurate and I could finally use my old lenses using the punch-in focus magnification. At the time I thought "if they could make this full frame and with an EVF, people would love it." A year and half later Sony released that very camera and called it the A7. And (for me) that series of cameras works mostly how I would like it to with my Pentax glass.

That said, I would happily buy a Pentax full frame if I could get it to work with my current needs. I know I would love to have the options/support back with my "native" lenses attached back to a K mount body. We'll see what happens but I hope we hear something one way or the other soon.

[jsherman999]

??

Effectively, you've called Kenspo a liar.

He's not really calling kenspro a liar - Pentax could have changed direction at the whim of Ricoh upper management. Maybe an executive sponsor left or changed his mind, everything was de-funded in preparation for a project write-off. (in other words, kenspro among others was led on.)

But let's not go there yet.

[reh321]

I would definitely love for it to be mirrorless though I would be surprised if it is. I used manual focus m42, M, and A lenses on Pentax film cameras with split-screen focusing up until I bought my first DSLR (K10D.) The manual focus experience was disappointing and I invested in AF lenses but had a lot of back/front focus issues even up through the K-5 (last standard Pentax DSLR I bought.) The K-01 was the first digital Pentax camera that, even with its slow AF on many lenses, worked how I always wanted a digital camera to work. The contrast AF was almost always accurate and I could finally use my old lenses using the punch-in focus magnification. At the time I thought "if they could make this full frame and with an EVF, people would love it." A year and half later Sony released that very camera and called it the A7. And (for me) that series of cameras works mostly how I would like it to with my Pentax glass.

That said, I would happily buy a Pentax full frame if I could get it to work with my current needs. I know I would love to have the options/support back with my "native" lenses attached back to a K mount body. We'll see what happens but I hope we hear something one way or the other soon.

Interesting.

My K-30 seems to focus exactly on the thing I choose. Is it only the more expensive cameras that have front/back focus issues? I have asked this question several times, but never gotten an explanation: I can see when the target is in focus; why can't an expensive camera see that?

[sunny16]

Interesting.

My K-30 seems to focus exactly on the thing I choose. Is it only the more expensive cameras that have front/back focus issues? I have asked this question several times, but never gotten an explanation: I can see when the target is in focus; why can't an expensive camera see that?

Yeah... and in all fairness, for all I know maybe I just had back luck with my copy of the K10D and so on. It seems that Pentax has been a little behind the others in the auto focus department and front/back focus issues seem to have more to do with phase detect AF than specifically anything Pentax. I did have a chance to try someones K3 II about a month ago and from that brief experience, the camera seemed to focus much more confidently than my experiences from just a few years ago.

[normhead]

Sometimes it works in your favour... in the focussing for this image the camera slightly back focussed. I was focusing on the tip of the cone. The images focussed where I was aiming to focus, were too soft on the petals. Full size you can see the image is a little soft on the tip of the cone, but the 3mm difference in focus point kept the petals, which are un-acceptably soft on the properly focussed images, in acceptable focus.

You can complain about un-reliable focus, but if you take 5 or six images, it can work out better than you deserve.

[clackers]

But let's not go there yet.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/16-pentax-news-rumors/298256-ff-out-4-months-post3347117.html

[reh321]

Sometimes it works in your favour... in the focussing for this image the camera slightly back focussed. I was focusing on the tip of the cone. The images focussed where I was aiming to focus, were too soft on the petals. Full size you can see the image is a little soft on the tip of the cone, but the 3mm difference in focus point kept the petals, which are un-acceptably soft on the properly focussed images, in acceptable focus.

You can complain about un-reliable focus, but if you take 5 or six images, it can work out better than you deserve.

That's a neat picture!

The EXIF data shows an aperture of f/5.6.

I'm a little surprised that the DOF is so shallow at that aperture.
I would have expected more depth, but I have to admit that I don't take very many pictures like that, so the difference in my experience may partly reflect a difference in style and partly a difference in standards.