[ytterbium]

Hmm. It seems that i've lost my plot in this topic. I will have to look back and see what was my actual point .

Ah, lenses as a factor to FF release it was .
From most of you i get the feeling that there is already enough lenses fully and qualitatively supporting FF body and gaps can be easily filled. Am i correct?

I wonder how fast can you get a lens in production if it has been designed. I'm thinking of this in relation to discontinued FA lenses and the possibility that new D-FA lenses may have been designed.
It could actually be very fast. How long did it take to move 31Ltd production from Japan to that other factory. If they still have technological "parts" for FA lenses previously in production, i assume it could take just a little longer than that (like retrieving them from storage). A little longer for new designs, to adapt older or make new production line. (In reality i have no idea how this is done, do they make some masks/shapes, reprogram machines or it is like building a whole new factory).

[séamuis]

if they wanted to have a lens lineup as extensive as canon it would only be a matter of designing new lens bodies. Pentax has so many optical formulas for lenses that they could use, that it wouldn't be an issue. if that was a priority, I believe Hoya could get a mass of lenses out rather quick. but QC could likely be an issue.

[Votesh]

I don't know whether or not Pentax will ever release a FF body(just like the rest of the people in this thread that act like they do know), but the fact that they have stated that they won't means very little.

They didn't say that they would never release a FF, just that they would continue down the APS-C path for the time being, if I recall correctly. This makes sense, whether they don't ever plan on producing a FF, or if one is right around the corner. If they didn't keep it under wraps, an impending release of a FF body would cannibalize sales of APS-C bodies. Announcing it out of nowhere would create a ton of buzz, especially if it had interesting or unique features.

Of course, I don't think the lack of FF news, and official statements from Pentax saying that FF isn't in the near future for them means that it actually is. However, if they were working on FF as we speak I guarantee we wouldn't know abou it, and they sure wouldn't make an announcement saying, "A full frame camera is on the horizon for Pentax".
I would love to see a FF camera from Pentax, and I would definitely buy one on the day of release if it came out, but I'm not betting on it happening within the next year or so. I will happily shoot with my K-7 and K10D until a FF body is released, or until the next step up from Pentax in APS-C format is released.

[Samsungian]

Hmmm, All the 645D BUZZ,

zzzzzzzz... :


645D is "roadmapped." Until they offer 645D as a buyable product with its newly designed vast array of lenses they'll be no full frame K Mount. Its not Pentax decision, its Hoya's.

Last thing I heard is Hoya wants an investor to share in a money spending spree at Pentax. And thats with no Full Frame K-Mount on the horizon.

If one must own full frame dslr there are alternatives in 2009.

[KungPOW]

I think there was a time that Pentax really was planning to release a FF camera. There was the Samsung FF sensor rumor, there were hints from people close to Pentax marketing, The 645D project had been put on hold. There was still plenty of Samsung/Pentax press news.

Then something happened. My thought is that Samsung realised Hoya was not going to sell Pentax. The assets of Pentax would not become the property of Samsung.

Then the press got cold with the allies of Samsung and Pentax. Pentax made comments like "we will buy sensors from the best we can find" and the "we are working with Samsung to provide the best sensors" went away.

Samsung then brought out their NX line. And it looks like they rushed it to the show. They still do not have a working camera to buy. When did they anounce it? PMA March 2009? Almost six months ago. Since then Pentax has anounced and released the K-7. We don't yet see the Samsung version do we? I expect we never will.

I think the Samsung/Pentax partnership is over. I also think that for Pentax to have made a FF camera, they needed a partner with the processor making abilities like Samsung had.

So Pentax falls back, and anounces the 645D is back on. To the world, and to investors it now looks like Pentax is still an inovative, and progresive design company. "Hey look! a new product!" The time and resorces form the 645D that went to the FF camp, are now back on the 645D project.

And the latest from Pentax is that they need a partner to be able to go forward. I don't think this is a "we need cash" type of partnership. Pentax needs the "know how" they lost when Samsung stopped returning calls. I think Pentax needs to get stronger with image/data processing. I think this is the number one bottleneck that keeps a 3 frame/sec camera from being a 6 frame/sec camera. It is also the the big problem of going full frame. Not only do you need the FF sensor, but you have doubled your data throughput. The camera's memory, and processors need to deal with this. All of this needs to be small, very fast, and stay cool.

So until Pentax can find a new friend to play with, they will not be building a full frame camera.

In the near future Pentax will anounce who their new partner will be. I think it will be a company like SIS, or VIA. Basically computer hardware builders that might be looking to expand their portfolio. They are companies that are experts with data flow, processing, and temperature control.

So, pentax users need to wait, and see. And during our wait, we will watch companies like Sony release the FF cameras us Pentax users were expecting.

[séamuis]

Im still holding out hopes for Kodak. I think it would be more beneficial to have a partner that understands image quality the way a film manufacturer does. someone like kodak or fuji. yea I know its a pipe dream, but I think its (with a possible absence of samsung) a better choice than a company that knows nothing about the photographic side of things.

[ytterbium]

If thinking from economical perspective again. What would cost more, some agressive advertisement campaign or unprofitable body design and manufacture. I belive both would have the same yield.

I've Never seen a Pentax ad locally. TV, Street, press or photography related sites. There are too few Pentax users to meet incidentally unless you go to some photographers gatherings, so you never even hear the name, before you actually get a Pentax.

Once i curiously asked in big electronics store, where are their Pentax cameras. At first he was like Penta-what? Then he recalled that they had them some time ago but discontinued them because of unavailability (i was expecting something like no one bought them or canon is better anyway). Then he told me that Pentax are good only in manual mode anyway and i should look at the Canon instead, unless i already had Pentax glass - he added when i smirked.

I doubt such things will change with full frame introduction. So from economical standpoint it may have insignificant effect.

[séamuis]

Pentax is putting ads. they are in fact spending money to promote the K-7. they know they have a winner. (they alos promoted the K10 and to a larger extent the K20) there is an ad on the back cover of the current issue of 'American Photo' for the K-7.

[Timothy]

When the digital KxD series bodies first came out I started seeing Pentax ads on the street. Less now, but I think they still have a somewhat visible if miniscule slice of the market.

[K-9]

If someone takes over Pentax, I only hope they keep the brand name and not do what Sony did to Minolta. I think it definitely hurt Sony to take the Minolta name off the camera. Minolta was always a respected name in photography, and Sony a newcomer who has still yet to fit in, IMO. Maybe the A850 will change that. Minolta name on the A900 could have already had them higher.

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.

I wouldn't be surprised if you get more keepers using MF as opposed to AF. After all, you know what you are focusing on, the camera doesn't.

Pentax is putting ads. they are in fact spending money to promote the K-7. they know they have a winner. (they alos promoted the K10 and to a larger extent the K20) there is an ad on the back cover of the current issue of 'American Photo' for the K-7.

I am worried that the flurry of activity on the part of Pentax marketing surrounding the K-7 is a case of 'shit or bust'.

[KungPOW]

If someone takes over Pentax, I only hope they keep the brand name and not do what Sony did to Minolta. I think it definitely hurt Sony to take the Minolta name off the camera. Minolta was always a respected name in photography, and Sony a newcomer who has still yet to fit in, IMO. Maybe the A850 will change that. Minolta name on the A900 could have already had them higher.

I don't think the Minolta brand name was for sale. Minolta is still a company that makes and sells stuff. I expect they make a profit.

All Sony bought was the technology of the camera division. I am also sure Sony felt their brand name is stronger then Minolta.

[KungPOW]

I am worried that the flurry of activity on the part of Pentax marketing surrounding the K-7 is a case of 'shit or bust'.

I am also wondering this. How long before we know do you think?

I also do not understand why Pentax seems to let cameras become discontinued without a clear replacement.

Over a year ago Pentax had planned to have a four camera lineup. They did come close, they had the K2000, the K200D, and the K20D. But then the stopped production on the K200D early (my opinion), and released the K-7. The K-7 efectivly split sales between the K20D and the K-7. As much as Pentax wants us to believe that the K-7 is a new and unique camera, it really is the K30D.

Now the K20D is discounted so much, that for many people it looks like the better camera over the K-7. Pentax's own K20D is major competition for the K-7. The image quality is the same, the only plus the K-7 has is video.

So, Pentax has a K-M that is getting over shadowed by the other entry level cameras. Nothing in the middle market. A K20D that is eating K-7 sales, and a top of the line K-7 that really is starting to have a swan song feel about it.

Pentax keeps producing great individual cameras, but is incapable of producing a great line of cameras.

[Rondec]

I think that it is clear that Pentax wants a three camera line up -- K2000 (sequel coming up), mid level K200/K20 sequel (more like the K200 than the K20), and the K7. Right now they are letting stock run out on the K20 and K2000, before announcing the newer cameras in September.

Since the differences between the K20 and the K7 have to do with body, video, FPS, etc, many people who were already Pentaxians don't feel they are worth extra cost. On the other hand, maybe some folks from Canon/Nikon camps will decide to try it out and like it. Who knows, but Pentax needs to grow or it will dwindle away to nothing.

It is a little ironic to me that the biggest concerns about the K20 were auto focus and frames per second and they are addressed in the K7. Suddenly the K20 (which I believe is an awesome camera) is the most wonderful thing since sliced bread and the K7 is worthless. How can they win?