Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-28-2009, 06:59 PM   #31
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,255
There is no doubt in my mind that eventually Pentax will release a full frame camera. From the company's perspective, however, they need to sell cameras and lenses. All of those old lenses that people want to use on a full frame camera do them no good and in fact, they possibly steal sales away from current lens sales.

That FA 50 has jumped in price as has the FA 35, perhaps indicating that these are on their way out (actually I think the FA 35 is discontinued). I think Pentax will launch a full frame camera in a year to a year and a half with a new full frame line of lenses and an automatic crop of the DA lenses that aren't full frame.

Unfortunately, Pentax can't telegraph any of that right now, or it would steal sales away from current DA lines. There are already plenty of photographers that are hoarding old FA lenses for the possibility of a full frame release.

08-28-2009, 07:12 PM   #32
Pentaxian
Clarkey's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Brampton, ON, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,767
QuoteOriginally posted by Ash Quote
I guess I don't quite understand why newer K-mount glass can't be made to work on FF cams. FA lenses have been made to support it, I don't see why D-FAs can't be made in the same vein - the formula's already there for those discontinued FA lenses like the 35 f/2 and 24 f/2.8...
This is the part I understand least of all. The D700 can use older glass and has an aperture sensing ring to detect what themanually set aperture is. Why important?

If we are talking full frame and Pentax in the same sentence, Pentax could continue to make and sell existing design primes with no R&D cost and concentrate on the bodies to support it, and move more slowly with lens design.
08-28-2009, 08:38 PM   #33
Veteran Member
GLXLR's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Sugar Land, TX
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 686
QuoteOriginally posted by ytterbium Quote
Im not saying Pentax is dead. Im confused about this full frame worship.
You have spectacular images in your gallery. Taken with an "inferior" APS-C camera that has no future and sooner or later must be replaced with some "REAL" format.

I dont think so.
There is not enough objective reasons for current APS-C level cameras to be replaced by FF unless APS-C gets used in compacts.

Or else you'd get a gap where FF's starting DSLRS at 1000$ and 4/3u, compacts, other weird concepts ending at 500$. Manufacturers want to a way leech the money in-between, by continuing endless upgrades and making as much segmentation as possible.

There are, for example already been serious discussions how much better the 40D IQ is vs 400D. Manufacturers don't like such talks. They want you to buy 400d, make you think its not enough and upgrade to 40d without a doubt it will be making better pictures.

It is more likely that they will get more merged with the upper levels of compact cameras than get replaced with FF. Something along the lines of disappearing OVF's, decreasing register distances and different body form factors, better universal/ultrazoom lenses. Making it more cluttered and possible to generate endless combinations of functionality and price.

And if more closer to reality. When they went digital they replaced ONE line of lenses, ONE system (btw after almost 10 years they are not quite over yet.. take the same normal fast prime for example). By making an FF it would not be a replacement. They would have to support TWO slightly overlapping (like one point five ) systems. This would make lens production and available range for each system even more limited. And take the price of 60-250, how much it would cost for FF?
A lot of people look at Canon and say ohh I want that 1Ds or w/e, but they will never get it. I think if Pentax makes a single FF it will make a lot more profit.
08-28-2009, 08:48 PM   #34
MSM
Veteran Member
MSM's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Alabama
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 994
QuoteOriginally posted by séamuis Quote
agreed. they would in no way need to drop the K mount to go FF.

I think a lot of you people are so wrong about the market. I cant say what 'sells' and what doesn't concerning image. but I do know for a fact that having a FF wont 'save' Pentax. APS-C generates more sales (volume wise) probably revenue as well, than FF does. and this goes for everyone (except those who are using sub APS-C of course.) yes FF is getting cheaper. (of course Sony and their cameras cant be reliable price point comparison as they are both a sensor and camera manufacturer) but that doesn't mean that FF will become the 'norm' or absolutely needed to stay afloat. you really think people getting into photography can afford even an entry level FF camera? no. the majority of current digital SLR buyers want a smaller lighter camera. the gap between the behemoths of the "pro" world and the rest is widening rapidly. just look at cameras like the G11 and the PEN. the entire camera world is shifting and customers are taking notice. there are way too many "pro" wannabees here and you don't represent what the majority of sales will be for a camera company. what Pentax is doing is unique. the problem isnt APS-C bodies, the problem isn't APS-C lenses. the problem is not having the funds to get themselves in the public's eye. if FF is the way to go then why the hell is Olympus not playing the game? is anyone yelling they need FF or they will die! no. and not to many people are complaining about 4/3 and micro 4/3 now are they?
Yes, Yes on all points. I don't usually post on the "Pentax needs a FF" threads but I really liked this post. My feeling is that if Pentax is headed to its own demise, a FF camera will only hasten the process. Many here speak of only their perspective of what they want or think they need. Market wise FF is Pentax's suicide. I was just thinking the other day about 4/3 and how Olympus seems to be doing well without a FF pathway that so many here keep saying is necessary.

QuoteOriginally posted by KungPOW Quote
I think Pentax is about to become a niche player providing small compact high quality DSLR's with small compact limited lenses. Only advanced amature stuff.
This is a good thing. I agree they seem to be headed that direction also with an outdoors advantage with WR.

QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
There is no doubt in my mind that eventually Pentax will release a full frame camera. From the company's perspective, however, they need to sell cameras and lenses. All of those old lenses that people want to use on a full frame camera do them no good and in fact, they possibly steal sales away from current lens sales.

That FA 50 has jumped in price as has the FA 35, perhaps indicating that these are on their way out (actually I think the FA 35 is discontinued). I think Pentax will launch a full frame camera in a year to a year and a half with a new full frame line of lenses and an automatic crop of the DA lenses that aren't full frame.

Unfortunately, Pentax can't telegraph any of that right now, or it would steal sales away from current DA lines. There are already plenty of photographers that are hoarding old FA lenses for the possibility of a full frame release.
You may be right on the FF. I won't argue that companies make bad decisions. 2 out of 3 major American motor companies have certainly provided ample support of that fact, recently.

Pentax has a real problem though. As you allude to in your post, there is all that old 35 mm Pentax glass. The legacy glass is at the same time the life line and the anchor sinking the ship. New body sales need to drive lens sales not the second hand market for used lenses. I love the old glass too, don't get me wrong. But, if one buys an older fast fifty then they may likely pass on the current FA 50 mm, for example. I think this is what the other poster was trying to say regarding dropping the K-mount. Thus one has to buy the new stuff. (Then they would really be like Canon.) But, if they get rid of the K-mount, Pentax might as well close up shop.

08-28-2009, 09:06 PM   #35
MSM
Veteran Member
MSM's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Alabama
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 994
The real question is who will buy a Pentax Full Frame?

This is the question that Pentax exec. have to answer. By sticking with APS-C, I think they have already answered this question.

Unfortunately, Pentax FF sales would come directly from current users thus cutting into the revenue of the APS-C sales. What Pentax needs is to broaden its user base and that occurs at the entry level not at the FF. As many have said, marketing is key and where Pentax is, up until recently, completely ignoring.

I am sorry the idea that a FF will somehow make the brand appealing and drive more sales is totally absurd and unfounded wishful thinking. New users have absolutely no clue what full frame means let alone use that criterion to make a buying decision.
08-28-2009, 10:03 PM   #36
Veteran Member
Venturi's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Tulsa, OK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,639
QuoteOriginally posted by MSM Quote
Pentax has a real problem though. As you allude to in your post, there is all that old 35 mm Pentax glass. The legacy glass is at the same time the life line and the anchor sinking the ship. New body sales need to drive lens sales not the second hand market for used lenses. I love the old glass too, don't get me wrong. But, if one buys an older fast fifty then they may likely pass on the current FA 50 mm, for example. I think this is what the other poster was trying to say regarding dropping the K-mount. Thus one has to buy the new stuff. (Then they would really be like Canon.) But, if they get rid of the K-mount, Pentax might as well close up shop.
Pentax' problem is multifaceted, and IMO the existence of legacy glass isn't it. If legacy glass were the issue then Canon and Nikon would be in the same "predicament"; they aren't.

The reason lens sales suck is (let's be honest now) the current lineup isn't complete. Sure, you can cover everything from 10mm to 300mm but not coherently, certainly not with primes and the only path for the cash cows - consumers - is a mishmash of utility zooms.

In 1984 you had the option of buying five different PENTAX 50mm primes. You had the A15/3.5, A24/2.8, two 28mm, three 35mm, the A85/1.8, A100/2.8, M120/2.8, four different 135mm, M150/3.5, another four 200mm, three 300mm, two 400mm, the 500/4.5, 600/5.6, 1000/8 and the 1000mm and 2000mm mirrors. That's just the primes and don't forget the three macros, a fisheye and a 28mm shift specialty lens! I count eleven zooms rounding things off. That was the "current roadmap" in October 1984, and that (combined with visible marketing) is how you sell 24million lenses and become a household name.

The only reason the A* and FA* 85/1.4 are so desirable and pull the money they do on the used market is because there is no modern equivalent. Pentax seems to have the mindset that there's no point in building a full lineup because everybody is buying legacy glass anyway. Well duh, if there's no new glass to buy and you use a Pentax camera then legacy (or 3rd party) is your only choice.

2009: 28 lenses (13 zooms)
1984: 50 lenses (11 zooms)
08-29-2009, 12:06 AM   #37
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Saint-Petersburg, Russia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 410
I have probably repeat myself here.

I`m holding off body purchases and wait for FF basically because of 3 lenses, 2 of which I have already:

FA31, FA77 and A50 1:1.2. I looked carefully, and there are no offerings from other brands with the same rendering around.

I could have switched to Canon 5D with 35/1.4L and 85/1.2L and also their AF ultra-fast fifty, but to me the rendering is *DULL* and i cant afford walking around with 2-system setup like Samsungian does

So thats the reason for my "moaning for FF" as OP put it.

Oh, here is the pic taken with FA31 on a FF body, I know its nothing much to talk about, its just i would like that FOV that DOF and that rendering on digital:
Attached Images
 
08-29-2009, 12:06 AM   #38
Loyal Site Supporter
SteveM's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Vancouver Island, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,295
QuoteOriginally posted by séamuis Quote
agreed. they would in no way need to drop the K mount to go FF.

I think a lot of you people are so wrong about the market. I cant say what 'sells' and what doesn't concerning image. but I do know for a fact that having a FF wont 'save' Pentax. APS-C generates more sales (volume wise) probably revenue as well, than FF does. and this goes for everyone (except those who are using sub APS-C of course.) yes FF is getting cheaper. (of course Sony and their cameras cant be reliable price point comparison as they are both a sensor and camera manufacturer) but that doesn't mean that FF will become the 'norm' or absolutely needed to stay afloat. you really think people getting into photography can afford even an entry level FF camera? no. the majority of current digital SLR buyers want a smaller lighter camera. the gap between the behemoths of the "pro" world and the rest is widening rapidly. just look at cameras like the G11 and the PEN. the entire camera world is shifting and customers are taking notice. there are way too many "pro" wannabees here and you don't represent what the majority of sales will be for a camera company. what Pentax is doing is unique. the problem isnt APS-C bodies, the problem isn't APS-C lenses. the problem is not having the funds to get themselves in the public's eye. if FF is the way to go then why the hell is Olympus not playing the game? is anyone yelling they need FF or they will die! no. and not to many people are complaining about 4/3 and micro 4/3 now are they?
It's fine to comment to ash's quote about my post...but at least read all of my post before commenting.

My point was..in the 80s...Pentax was household because you could buy a first rate 35mm...just like the pro 645 / 67 that they use a pro shop to take your family photos. How many 645/67 did they sell...well ends up they did quite well....with a lens lineup for both. My point was that the pro level legitimized Pentax....why wouldn't you buy a terrific camera....the same as the pro down the street.

Pentax won't sell a ton of high end FF and it will be at a loss...but they will sell more K-7s..a lot more in the long run.

I have been with Pentax since 1983....and have a hoard of great glass...and cameras..... It makes me sad to see the market kill Pentax and it will with no release of a FF

Let someone legitimate buy the company before it's too late!!


Last edited by SteveM; 08-29-2009 at 12:36 PM.
08-29-2009, 12:08 AM   #39
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Saint-Petersburg, Russia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 410
QuoteOriginally posted by Venturi Quote
That was the "current roadmap" in October 1984, and that (combined with visible marketing) is how you sell 24million lenses and become a household name.

2009: 28 lenses (13 zooms)
1984: 50 lenses (11 zooms)
Quoted For Truth.
08-29-2009, 12:20 AM   #40
Veteran Member
ytterbium's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,076
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Das Boot Quote
There would not be a question about lens support - there's tons of great glass out there for cheap. It would be an instant success and not a dollar going to Pentax....
There is not. Manual lenses are something like a gimmick. You can play with them or use in some specific ways. But not daily in a convenient way unless you do it for some fun and it is again a gimmick. Amateur toy.

Older FA lenses are out of production and are left too few in the second hand market to get exactly the lens you want for a true (matching the lens specifications) price. They are priced more than new, are used, have no warranty and many needed/standard lenses are available only few times a year.

There are too few lenses that entry level users would like. Affordable 18-135, currently produced 28mm, (21 is a LIMITED, not every one needs something LIMITED, those who like to pay for name are going Nikon anyway), sub 200$ 50/1.7 and similar. Those are lenses that would sell, sell a lot. Not some sort of 400mm super tele's many are expecting.
What's with the 17-70/4? Havn't heard of it since the release, priced inadequately?
Maybe they need something along 18-85/3.5-5.6 with screw drive soft corner and half the price of sigma 17-70.

This is not appealing to most new users, even if i have to admit that legacy lens support was one of the selling points of Pentax for me.
But unfortunately this is not a advantage. Why? Legacy lenses are no cheaper option, because there are no expensive current equivalents.
Most other manufacturers have almost as good legacy lens support, but it is not stated as such because most of their good glass is still in production (some has been refreshed of course).

Last edited by ytterbium; 08-29-2009 at 12:28 AM.
08-29-2009, 12:24 AM   #41
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Saint-Petersburg, Russia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 410
QuoteOriginally posted by ytterbium Quote
Manual lenses are something like a gimmick. You can play with them or use in some specific ways. But not daily in a convenient way unless you do it for some fun and it is again a gimmick.

Amateur toy.
Ok, now tell everyone you are kidding.... "Amateur toy"

F*k sake, Zeiss has a full line up of amateur toys. Thats my last post in this thread.
08-29-2009, 12:37 AM   #42
Loyal Site Supporter
SteveM's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Vancouver Island, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,295
QuoteOriginally posted by Venturi Quote
The only reason the A* and FA* 85/1.4 are so desirable and pull the money they do on the used market is because there is no modern equivalent. Pentax seems to have the mindset that there's no point in building a full lineup because everybody is buying legacy glass anyway. Well duh, if there's no new glass to buy and you use a Pentax camera then legacy (or 3rd party) is your only choice.

2009: 28 lenses (13 zooms)
1984: 50 lenses (11 zooms)
QuoteOriginally posted by ilya80 Quote
Quoted For Truth.
Pentax had the cash due to sales to have a first rate line.....now because of decades of stupidity..they do not. I love Pentax..but for god sake....don't ignore the market because you feel you have the power to announce "committed to APS-C". APS-C might be the right choice...but not if the market wants something different....don't try to ram it down a customers throat.

Last edited by SteveM; 08-29-2009 at 12:37 PM.
08-29-2009, 12:53 AM   #43
Veteran Member
ytterbium's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,076
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by ilya80 Quote
Ok, now tell everyone you are kidding.... "Amateur toy"

F*k sake, Zeiss has a full line up of amateur toys. Thats my last post in this thread.
I apologize. This was not meant as an offence. More like saying that manual lenses usually are used for special experience, control and quality, but its not what a general user needs.

You are comparing some M lens with improper metering, no camera communication and little better than average quality to Zeiss?
But still it is true. Only few purists that are after some special rendering and high image quality use them. Most likely in a very limited setting. This dosn't sell. It is like video, that is used by a bunch of artists to create something interesting, but it's of a very low value to average users.

People are using m42 lenses for their unique (weird) rendering, low enough price for such experimentation, fun user experience. Much less users are mastering manual lenses to use them on full extent. Many are just forced because there is no other option.

Anyway i doubt this is directly related to full frame...

Last edited by ytterbium; 08-29-2009 at 01:02 AM.
08-29-2009, 06:13 AM   #44
Banned




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H.
Posts: 5,979
I use manual lenses everyday. 'full time' I have even had photos published in local papers and magazines with such lenses. (I am a freelance photojournalist) basically I document the city of Savannah in my spare time. (for no other reason, than I enjoy it) they are a perfectly legitimate choice in lenses. its just about what you need them for and how you use them. obviously I don't represent the majority, but I think its a bit foolish to assume that using manual glass as opposed to modern AF glass equals amateur hour. I wouldnt get any more keepers or be any better of a photographer or get any more photos published if I used the DA* 55mm 1.4 instead of an SMC Takumar 55mm 1.8. if I could afford that lens id probably buy it. but if I were using a nikon body you can bet id likely be using a body that allows the use of manual glass and using old nikkors.
08-29-2009, 06:36 AM   #45
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Colorado USA
Posts: 1,337
Let it go, Pentax will not offer full frame

I found more enjoyment with Pentax once I let go of the idea Pentax will offer a full frame dslr.

I really like K20D and lenses I have onhand, mostly full frame I have for K20D. It used to drive me nuts wanting pentax to offer full frame in 2006, 2007 and early 2008. So instead I read up on other brands during those years of nutty~ness and I added full frame inspite of Pentax in 2008. Its what it is. Owning more than one brand is tough. But having full frame inhand pleases me so multibrand gear ownership is complicated for me, for now. If my K Mount glass sucked it would be easy to move~on.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
frame, lot, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, users
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
No Pentax Full Frame DSLR, What to Do Now Then? RiceHigh Pentax DSLR Discussion 95 07-19-2014 10:57 AM
Full frame pentax cem.kumuk Pentax DSLR Discussion 11 11-12-2010 03:13 PM
Pentax and Full Frame... Shutter-bug Photographic Technique 60 11-03-2010 10:03 AM
Pentax A 50/1.2 on Full Frame aegisphan Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 23 10-28-2010 04:16 PM
The almost full frame Pentax? denisv Photographic Technique 44 01-19-2009 04:01 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:37 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top