[awo425]

Who will make lenses for FF Samsung camera?

Tamron, Sigma? I think they should get a license for K mount and start making bodies on there on.

[Caat]

Tamron, Sigma? I think they should get a license for K mount and start making bodies on there on.

There's also Cosina and Tokina.

Samsung could do straight rebadges of some 3rd party lenses - just like Pentax and others have done in the past to fill gaps in their line ups quickly.

Samsung's only problem is whether they can create their own optical designs in-house. Manufacturing capacity is probably easier to buy than this.

[falconeye]

What does LSI stand for in regard to Samsung ?

Samsung LSI is the group inside Samsung responsible for the System-on-a-Chip line like the s3c24xx, s3c64xx as used in Openmoko, TomTom and E-TEN glofiish devices.

I think that Samsung either must produce CMOS sensors of all sizes, or none at all. To arbitrarily ignore important market segments just makes no sense.

If they make an own camera using it is yet a completely different story. And they aren't forced to make it DSLR or K mount...

Personally, I believe that it doesn't make sense to create yet another line of DSLR now. They either must buy Pentax, or jump right into the still uncrowded full format EVIL camp. To buy Pentax or Olympus would make sense because there aren't any non-Japanese DSLR vendors now (with the exception of a forthcoming digital Leica R/S).

[Kunzite]

They can buy only what's for sale.

[GaryM]

I think Samsung is in 'wait-and-see' mode. They're going to watch how full-frame and micro 4/3rds each pan out, and then go after whatever market looks better. I wouldn't be suprised to see some sort of Samsung full-frame mock-up appear in some form, but I'm betting that the small camera, sub $1k market will turn out to be much more lucrative, and that's where they'll go. In the meantime, they will continue to work to improve their own sensor technology, and provide larger imaging sensors and electronics to whoever wants them, Pentax included.

[er1kksen]

Samsung LSI is the group inside Samsung responsible for the System-on-a-Chip line like the s3c24xx, s3c64xx as used in Openmoko, TomTom and E-TEN glofiish devices.

I think that Samsung either must produce CMOS sensors of all sizes, or none at all. To arbitrarily ignore important market segments just makes no sense.

If they make an own camera using it is yet a completely different story. And they aren't forced to make it DSLR or K mount...

Personally, I believe that it doesn't make sense to create yet another line of DSLR now. They either must buy Pentax, or jump right into the still uncrowded full format EVIL camp. To buy Pentax or Olympus would make sense because there aren't any non-Japanese DSLR vendors now (with the exception of a forthcoming digital Leica R/S).

They kind of can't buy Olympus, it's a privately owned company... buying Pentax while it's in the midst of a major reorganization following its purchase by Hoya also seems to not make much sense.

They don't really have to buy anyone. Sony pulled it on their own. Samsung is, overall, very size-competitive with Sony.

On the subject of lenses, hasn't Schneider done some kit lenses for Samsung? They produce some spectacular large-format lenses, so they're clearly no slouch for an optical company. I mean, Sony can boast the legacy of the famous Zeiss name, maybe Samsung could boast the brand name of the maker of some of the world's highest-resolution lenses.

Or maybe they could ressurect some of those beautiful discontinued pentax F and FA designs, with a modern digital treatment. Assuming the whole FF thing comes to pass.

Personally, I think Samsung APS-C EVF, Pentax K-mount APS-C, Samsung K-mount FF, and Pentax MF sounds like a great range of products which, given Pentax's experience/optics expertise and Samsung's sensors and financial heft, could establish itself as an appealing alternative to the big three.

[brucestrange]

The tele-factor of crop is more important to me.

If the FF's sensor has the same pixel density as the crop sensor, then that is a moot point. All you would have to do is crop the photo in Photoshop to the pixel dimensions of the APS-C sensor, and voilà, you have the same image (as long as the FF's sensor is equal in quality to the APS-C sensor). Crop means just that--it's cropped. The difference is, you would crop it in post, instead of the camera cropping it onto the sensor. That said, I like APS-C sensor size, as I've said before. Still a FF in the lineup would be a cool thing to think about. My main concern is the viability of the K-mount. I like to think Samsung will keep it alive forever. Or at least until the earth hits the sun. And Samsung has the clout if they think it's in their interest to flex it in the DSLR world. They are, after all, the biggest electronics company in the world (no joke)--bigger even than Sony. Go Samsung. Go K-mount. Go earth-hitting-the-sun.

[Bophoto]

If Samsung make it with a little help from Pentax, i don´t think they are in a hurry as the market is low now.
But if they do, it can bee a little smaller sensor like 21X31mm or so, then they can use most of Pentax DA lenses and named them "Samsung F". They can also use Pentax FA 50/1,4, FA600 and FA28-105, Tamron 70-200 and /or "beg" Tokina, Pentax, Carl Zeiss ... to make some new lenses and named them Samsung F!

[Jonson PL]

If the FF's sensor has the same pixel density as the crop sensor, then that is a moot point. All you would have to do is crop the photo in Photoshop to the pixel dimensions of the APS-C sensor, and voilà, you have the same image (as long as the FF's sensor is equal in quality to the APS-C sensor).

Exactly why I stated : “FF sensor…would only have interest for me, if they keep MP down, (like Nikon started out with)”
Else I might as well stay with APS-C sensor, for what I do.
Of cause it is also more refined than that, but these discussions we’ve had so many times. Didn’t want to change direction of the thread, from the interesting news.

[thePiRaTE!!]

They kind of can't buy Olympus, it's a privately owned company... buying Pentax while it's in the midst of a major reorganization following its purchase by Hoya also seems to not make much sense.

They don't really have to buy anyone. Sony pulled it on their own. Samsung is, overall, very size-competitive with Sony.

Well, Sony first partnered with Konica-Minolta, then bought them out. Thats how they got into the game. They were and still are a major sensor manufacturer however, very much like Samsung.

On the subject of lenses, hasn't Schneider done some kit lenses for Samsung? They produce some spectacular large-format lenses, so they're clearly no slouch for an optical company. I mean, Sony can boast the legacy of the famous Zeiss name, maybe Samsung could boast the brand name of the maker of some of the world's highest-resolution lenses.

I'm not learned on this, but I've read that all the Samsung lenses are rebadged Pentax. Perhaps Schneider is limited to assembly in these regards. For example, Voigtlander as a company still exists, but its Cosina that produce all the high quality reissues of vintage photography equipment these days.

It would nice to see Samsung add something to K-land somehow though, rather than just rebadge.

K.

[er1kksen]

Well, Sony first partnered with Konica-Minolta, then bought them out. Thats how they got into the game. They were and still are a major sensor manufacturer however, very much like Samsung.


K.

Ha! I completely forgot about that for some reason, even though I usually like to think of Sony DSLRs and Konica Minolta (which I liked) under a different name. Thanks for pointing that out, my mistake.

Still, they've done a couple generations of producing pentax clones, you'd think that'd start them off on the right foot of "how to make a DSLR" without necessarily needing to acquire a smaller company.

[kristoffon]

Ha! I completely forgot about that for some reason, even though I usually like to think of Sony DSLRs and Konica Minolta (which I liked) under a different name. Thanks for pointing that out, my mistake.

Still, they've done a couple generations of producing pentax clones, you'd think that'd start them off on the right foot of "how to make a DSLR" without necessarily needing to acquire a smaller company.

As long as Samsung sees themselves in the consumer electonics business, and not the optics business, and everyone and their dog knows they can use Pentax lenses, they should be happy selling bodies with a couple rebadged pentax/sigma/tamron/whatever kit lenses.

[falconeye]

They can buy only what's for sale.

Samsung aims for two-digit market shares in their key markets, like mobiles or photo (10%). With the declining sector of P&S, Samsung must succeed in the higher than P&S markets. In that respect, the cooperation with Pentax was nothing but a complete failure for Samsung (1% DSLR market share).

As much as I would like this cooperation to continue as is, I cannot imagine that Samsung management has any chance to do so. They would be fired.

So, what are your options (being in the Samsung board)?

1. Buy Pentax (if they pay the right price, Hoya does sell, of course!).
2. Use K mount but otherwise, develop and launch an independent and impressive DSLR product line up.
3. Launch an independent DSLR product series.
4. Buy somebody else (who?).
5. Develop a mirror-less interchangeable lens lineup, analog to m4/3, using APS-C or even FF (I don't think joining the m4/3 camp = Panasonic is an option).
6. Develop a high end compact series, like Panasonic LX3, maybe even including an FF option.
7. Keep the cooperation as is and wait to be fired.
8. Sign off right now and enjoy life. Buy a Pentax

Your decision?
And now you know future, w/o having to go to the rumors sections

[sluggo913]

Samsung should aquire Pentax from Hoya and put real money and effort into it or they could buy the rights to lets say Yashica/Contax which were well respected and grow them (the glass from them was Ziess designed). They should not market cameras under their own brand because that is not what they are known for and it will make it a much harder sell.

[brucestrange]

Exactly why I stated : “FF sensor…would only have interest for me, if they keep MP down, (like Nikon started out with)”
Else I might as well stay with APS-C sensor, for what I do.

That doesn't make any sense. You said the tele-factor advantage was what made you prefer APS-C. I said a FF sensor with the same pixel density as an APS-C sensor makes it possible to keep the tele-factor advantage that you like. Then you said that you only want a FF sensor that would make you lose the tele-factor advantage. Maybe something is getting lost in translation.