Full frame K20D in 2009? Vote now! Yes or No.

lol101 · 02-10-2009, 11:33 PM

Originally posted by ewalk

This was over at DPReview regarding the new Nikon 35mm f/1.8.

I'd rather Pentax keep to APS-C...and they've already had DX primes for ages now - where's the marketing? Where's the press? Bundle the K2000 with the DA 40!!

Pretty much like everyone else, if Pentax ever decided to get a FF out, they still would keep with APS-C for 95% of their sales. No one is dropping APS-C anytime soon.

It is only an option for an eventual top-end body with low sales volumes and hence, the only question is if Pentax can get high return on it... which apparently is not the case right now.

AFAIK there are no technical reasons why Pentax could not get a FF out. The lack of FF lens is not really a problem: get the K1D out with a 24-90f4 and a 70-200f4 and you're done since we already have a few FF primes + some macro lenses. From there get the lenses out gradually.

But the problem is not there, it's 100% economics.

jeff1101 · 02-11-2009, 02:05 AM

I voted full frame. If Pentax wants to survive they have to take the bitter pill now. APS-C development has plateud. Even Nikon knows this, you can only cram so many pixels in APS-C, and since people think megapixels is important (and in some ways it is) then APS-C is , in development terms a dead end.

For people siting Pentax should go from MF bypassing FF, Why? Would that step help Pentax any better than going to FF first? Both approach would result in a camera 98% of Pentaxians would not be able to afford anyway.

For FF, the technology is not too distant from their current APS-C cameras. (Mount is the same, auto focus need not change etc.) Pentax gave up their 645s and 6x6s a long time ago (in relative terms) In such cases tooling for these cameras simply do not exist any more. It would I think be a lesser stretch to manufacture a FF camera based on their existing tooling than to manufacture a MF camera.

Would people buy these cameras? Who knows but saying Pentax shouldnt make FF cameras because there'd be no market for it is illogical as saying would a tree falling in a forest make any sound? When the first car was invented did the inventor envision people buying the stuff? Was there even a need for it? I say markets can be "created". Make something truly appealing enough and people will buy it.

And their lies Pentax's appeal. Can you imagine holding a FF frame Pentax digital camera? It would be like going back to the glory days that was Pentax in the 1960s. Heck they can ressurect the "Takumar" brand for their FF lens line and it would give immediate clout and credibility. (At least for the knowledgeable).

Going APS-C now and not developing FF is short-sighted to say the least. They can probably ekke sales for 5 years (even that is a stretch) but then what? Either way it would be a slow lingering death to the inevitable. Develop FF and you still wont know what would happen in the future but at least your planning for the future.

Caat · 02-11-2009, 02:41 AM

I would buy a 35mm DSLR only if it was at near price parity with APS-C, perhaps 10-15% more and I might realistically consider it.

The supposed advantages of a 35mm sized sensor are largely user based:

1) Shallower DoF: I struggle to get decent DoF at times on my DS. If it were much shallower then I would struggle for the type of photography I generally do. I find it hard to understand why some people (specifically JensR over at dpreview who seems obsessed with this 'advantage') need shallower DoF than APS-C can provide. It can be advantageous in some situations for creative effect but more often than not I find that it gets in the way.

2) Better noise performance is dependent on pixel density and I know that for a given number of pixels a 35mm sensor will always perform better than APS-C all other things being equal, but I struggle to see why a roughly 1 stop noise advantage is worth the price premium. APS-C will improve as will 35mm - there will be a point where APS-C can shoot noiselessly at 1600 to 3200, 35mm maybe 6400 to 12800. Sure 35mm is still better but how useful is this 'betterness'? For some very, for many (most?) not at all.

3). No crop factor and therefore lenses designed for 35mm operate at their native field of view - thus more wideangles fewer telephotos. Given that 12-24mm lenses exist for APS-C I fail to see why anyone needs to go much wider. APS-C has the advantage of going longer - OK you can crop a 35mm image but you sacrifice either resolution or noise performance to match the APS-C surely? Plus who wants to crop all their photographs? This assumes your lens on APS-C can provide the resolution you need of course etc etc.

35mm sensors are great for some people but not for me I don't think.

NickC · 02-18-2009, 06:22 AM

No, I'll wait for the 645D, and in the meantime take some pictures using my K20D.

Nick

tazmaster1 · 02-18-2009, 04:26 PM

I'd love to see a FF dslr body as well as a 645FF dslr ....
I seem to have collected (and use ) the majority of the PENTAX camera models, everything from an ES to a 6x7

ogl · 02-21-2009, 07:07 AM

Samsung (or Pentax) will offer FF camera (21 MP) next year.

emr · 02-21-2009, 07:51 AM

I didn't vote as I don't think either option applies very well to my situation.

However, I seriously think it's a FF or Dodo scenario for Pentax. Release or perish. I'm not saying it's a must technology or image quality wise, but that's where the customers and money are heading.

ogl · 02-21-2009, 08:58 AM

Samsung plan to show FF DSLR this year and launch it in 2010. No any square sensor.
Pentax plan to launch 645D this year.

emr · 02-21-2009, 09:06 AM

Originally posted by ogl

Samsung plan to show FF DSLR this year and launch it in 2010. No any square sensor. Pentax plan to launch 645D this year.

ogl, as you have posted comments like this in several threads, could you please tell use a bit more. Is there a press release somewhere? Or is it inside information? Hopeful thinking? Guesstimate?

ogl · 02-21-2009, 09:12 AM

It's this day's insider information with 90% probability.

ogl · 02-21-2009, 09:15 AM

Maybe PMA will clear the situation.

ewalk · 02-21-2009, 10:04 AM

Originally posted by ogl

Samsung plan to show FF DSLR this year and launch it in 2010. No any square sensor.
Pentax plan to launch 645D this year.

Now that's an interesting situation. I'm not quite sure in which direction I'd want to go...why not both.

I'm assuming the Samsung dSLR would keep the K-mount?

lol101 · 02-21-2009, 11:43 AM

Originally posted by ogl

It's this day's insider information with 90% probability.
I got this information from the man who worked in the team which had developed Samsung CMOS 14.6 MP.

Were you having a few vodka's with the guy ??

Good!! Keep them drunk and tell us everything!!

regken · 02-21-2009, 11:53 AM

Originally posted by ogl

It's this day's insider information with 90% probability.
I got this information from the man who worked in the team which had developed Samsung CMOS 14.6 MP.

I don't believe a word of it. If any of it is true I'm afraid my hopes for Pentax surviving will be shattered.

whatever7 · 02-21-2009, 03:44 PM

Originally posted by ogl

Maybe PMA will clear the situation.

Yeah, keep making that shit up. See how many people in this forum will believe you. Maybe you can con Gizmodo into blogging it.

View Poll Results: Would you buy K20D Super if it had FF sensor instead of current cropped one?
No, I think I'll never go Full Frame.	252	44.06%
Yes, where can I pre-order?	320	55.94%
Voters: 572. You may not vote on this poll

02-11-2009, 02:05 AM	#122
jeff1101 Forum Member Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Manila, Philippines Photos: Gallery Posts: 86	RE: I voted full frame. If Pentax wants to survive they have to take the bitter pill now. APS-C development has plateud. Even Nikon knows this, you can only cram so many pixels in APS-C, and since people think megapixels is important (and in some ways it is) then APS-C is , in development terms a dead end. For people siting Pentax should go from MF bypassing FF, Why? Would that step help Pentax any better than going to FF first? Both approach would result in a camera 98% of Pentaxians would not be able to afford anyway. For FF, the technology is not too distant from their current APS-C cameras. (Mount is the same, auto focus need not change etc.) Pentax gave up their 645s and 6x6s a long time ago (in relative terms) In such cases tooling for these cameras simply do not exist any more. It would I think be a lesser stretch to manufacture a FF camera based on their existing tooling than to manufacture a MF camera. Would people buy these cameras? Who knows but saying Pentax shouldnt make FF cameras because there'd be no market for it is illogical as saying would a tree falling in a forest make any sound? When the first car was invented did the inventor envision people buying the stuff? Was there even a need for it? I say markets can be "created". Make something truly appealing enough and people will buy it. And their lies Pentax's appeal. Can you imagine holding a FF frame Pentax digital camera? It would be like going back to the glory days that was Pentax in the 1960s. Heck they can ressurect the "Takumar" brand for their FF lens line and it would give immediate clout and credibility. (At least for the knowledgeable). Going APS-C now and not developing FF is short-sighted to say the least. They can probably ekke sales for 5 years (even that is a stretch) but then what? Either way it would be a slow lingering death to the inevitable. Develop FF and you still wont know what would happen in the future but at least your planning for the future.

02-21-2009, 09:12 AM	#130
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	It's this day's insider information with 90% probability. Last edited by ogl; 02-21-2009 at 09:55 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Best DSLR 2009 Vote	VHDEL	General Talk	3	01-02-2010 07:17 PM
Full Frame	chilihead	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	22	12-12-2009 08:01 AM
Contest #29, January, 2009 (Frame within a Frame)	Joshua Hakin	Monthly Photo Contests	0	01-07-2009 09:39 AM
Full Frame Full Frame	vanchaz2002	Pentax DSLR Discussion	30	12-11-2008 07:09 AM
DA 10-17 on full frame?	nixcamic	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	6	09-23-2008 07:12 PM

02-10-2009, 11:33 PM	#121
lol101 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Garennes sur Eure France Photos: Gallery Posts: 899	Originally posted by ewalk This was over at DPReview regarding the new Nikon 35mm f/1.8. I'd rather Pentax keep to APS-C...and they've already had DX primes for ages now - where's the marketing? Where's the press? Bundle the K2000 with the DA 40!! Pretty much like everyone else, if Pentax ever decided to get a FF out, they still would keep with APS-C for 95% of their sales. No one is dropping APS-C anytime soon. It is only an option for an eventual top-end body with low sales volumes and hence, the only question is if Pentax can get high return on it... which apparently is not the case right now. AFAIK there are no technical reasons why Pentax could not get a FF out. The lack of FF lens is not really a problem: get the K1D out with a 24-90f4 and a 70-200f4 and you're done since we already have a few FF primes + some macro lenses. From there get the lenses out gradually. But the problem is not there, it's 100% economics.

02-11-2009, 02:41 AM	#123
Caat Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: United Kingdom Photos: Albums Posts: 927	I would buy a 35mm DSLR only if it was at near price parity with APS-C, perhaps 10-15% more and I might realistically consider it. The supposed advantages of a 35mm sized sensor are largely user based: 1) Shallower DoF: I struggle to get decent DoF at times on my DS. If it were much shallower then I would struggle for the type of photography I generally do. I find it hard to understand why some people (specifically JensR over at dpreview who seems obsessed with this 'advantage') need shallower DoF than APS-C can provide. It can be advantageous in some situations for creative effect but more often than not I find that it gets in the way. 2) Better noise performance is dependent on pixel density and I know that for a given number of pixels a 35mm sensor will always perform better than APS-C all other things being equal, but I struggle to see why a roughly 1 stop noise advantage is worth the price premium. APS-C will improve as will 35mm - there will be a point where APS-C can shoot noiselessly at 1600 to 3200, 35mm maybe 6400 to 12800. Sure 35mm is still better but how useful is this 'betterness'? For some very, for many (most?) not at all. 3). No crop factor and therefore lenses designed for 35mm operate at their native field of view - thus more wideangles fewer telephotos. Given that 12-24mm lenses exist for APS-C I fail to see why anyone needs to go much wider. APS-C has the advantage of going longer - OK you can crop a 35mm image but you sacrifice either resolution or noise performance to match the APS-C surely? Plus who wants to crop all their photographs? This assumes your lens on APS-C can provide the resolution you need of course etc etc. 35mm sensors are great for some people but not for me I don't think.

02-18-2009, 06:22 AM	#124
NickC Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 53	No, I'll wait for the 645D, and in the meantime take some pictures using my K20D. Nick

02-18-2009, 04:26 PM	#125
tazmaster1 Inactive Account Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Michigan Posts: 2	I'd love to see a FF dslr body as well as a 645FF dslr .... I seem to have collected (and use ) the majority of the PENTAX camera models, everything from an ES to a 6x7

02-21-2009, 07:07 AM	#126
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Samsung (or Pentax) will offer FF camera (21 MP) next year.

02-21-2009, 07:51 AM	#127
emr Guest	I didn't vote as I don't think either option applies very well to my situation. However, I seriously think it's a FF or Dodo scenario for Pentax. Release or perish. I'm not saying it's a must technology or image quality wise, but that's where the customers and money are heading.

02-21-2009, 08:58 AM	#128
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Samsung plan to show FF DSLR this year and launch it in 2010. No any square sensor. Pentax plan to launch 645D this year.

02-21-2009, 09:06 AM	#129
emr Guest	Originally posted by ogl Samsung plan to show FF DSLR this year and launch it in 2010. No any square sensor. Pentax plan to launch 645D this year. ogl, as you have posted comments like this in several threads, could you please tell use a bit more. Is there a press release somewhere? Or is it inside information? Hopeful thinking? Guesstimate?

02-21-2009, 09:15 AM	#131
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Maybe PMA will clear the situation.

02-21-2009, 10:04 AM	#132
ewalk Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Texas Posts: 316	Originally posted by ogl Samsung plan to show FF DSLR this year and launch it in 2010. No any square sensor. Pentax plan to launch 645D this year. Now that's an interesting situation. I'm not quite sure in which direction I'd want to go...why not both. I'm assuming the Samsung dSLR would keep the K-mount?

02-21-2009, 11:43 AM	#133
lol101 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Garennes sur Eure France Photos: Gallery Posts: 899	Originally posted by ogl It's this day's insider information with 90% probability. I got this information from the man who worked in the team which had developed Samsung CMOS 14.6 MP. Were you having a few vodka's with the guy ?? Good!! Keep them drunk and tell us everything!!

02-21-2009, 11:53 AM	#134
regken Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Bangor, Maine Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,377	Originally posted by ogl It's this day's insider information with 90% probability. I got this information from the man who worked in the team which had developed Samsung CMOS 14.6 MP. I don't believe a word of it. If any of it is true I'm afraid my hopes for Pentax surviving will be shattered.

02-21-2009, 03:44 PM	#135
whatever7 Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 278	Originally posted by ogl Maybe PMA will clear the situation. Yeah, keep making that shit up. See how many people in this forum will believe you. Maybe you can con Gizmodo into blogging it.