Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-07-2009, 02:42 AM   #556
Inactive Account




Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 83
I've let this sit for 5 days without comment...

And the big question on my mind about just how viable any Pentax FF camera will/could be, is based on economics. I've yet to hear the majority of you stated what your real daily needs are for a FF camera. It's one thing to sit around fantasizing about what if. But how many of you are actually financially committed to getting a FF camera from Pentax, given the prices they will have to sell one at? Because I think something should really be taken into account here.

1.) Pentax can't survive on simply providing a FF camera to existing customers.
2.) The features of any new FF camera will have to be competitive with CaNikon and crowd.
3.) The feature sets of the competition is such that Pentax can't simply match what what's existing. They will have to build something that will inspire new blood to invigorate their financial status. Doing that means raising the price significantly beyond anything most Pentax customers have been accustomed to. At least for those professional customers for whom FF matters. Just how many nonprofessional consumers are buying FF cameras these days?

What type of work are any of you doing daily now that is hampered by not having a FF camera? How are you losing money by not having one?

So if Pentax raises the ante in features to attract new customers, they simultaneously risk losing many of their existing users. At least that's my thinking here. Because I don't think Pentax users represent the top of the food chain when it comes to keeping current with technologically advanced equipment. What I do hear is what sounds like excuses for how satisfied many or most of you are with being the fringe of the photographic landscape. But I'm sure many of you can defend why this simply isn't so. But the fact remains, Pentax cannot distribute a mediocre camera in FF and expect success in this economy. Just ain't going to happen!

Xavian-Anderson Macpherson
ShingoshiDao


Last edited by Shingoshi; 12-07-2009 at 02:49 AM.
12-07-2009, 04:01 AM   #557
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Bridgetown West Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 862
Original Poster
QuoteQuote:
What type of work are any of you doing daily now that is hampered by not having a FF camera? How are you losing money by not having one?
All of the professional photographers where I am use FF, usually Canon 5D mk2 and print BIG, usually on canvas. I can't compete with them with a cropped sensor (as good as the K20 is) with those print sizes. Yes I know quality is better than quantity (at least when it comes to art), but these guys produce some great work. They can print bigger, have better IQ, better low light performance, and heaps more cropping and PP top end. That is why I have to have a FF.
Now why does Pentax have to have a FF? Because it will create interest in the Pentax brand name. Becuase all current Pentax users will be tempted (yes even the ones who said they don't want/need a FF!) and so will an increasing number of new users. It will create an upgrade path. We all want the best don't we? When the cost is right (at the moment I can get a Sony A850 for just over $2000 AUD, soon it will be under $2000!) most will go for it. A few years ago we all were using CRT monitors, what are you looking at right now?
12-07-2009, 04:25 AM   #558
Inactive Account




Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 83
Parity or Parody?

QuoteOriginally posted by ozlizard Quote
All of the professional photographers where I am use FF, usually Canon 5D mk2 and print BIG, usually on canvas. I can't compete with them with a cropped sensor (as good as the K20 is) with those print sizes. Yes I know quality is better than quantity (at least when it comes to art), but these guys produce some great work. They can print bigger, have better IQ, better low light performance, and heaps more cropping and PP top end. That is why I have to have a FF.
What kind of photographs are you creating to compete with those other photographers? Do you do most of your work handheld? If not, why aren't you opting for a larger like medium-format DSLR? Are you shooting such a volume of work that requires you to work with digital instead of film? I ask that because film has had a long history of making VERY large prints like the ones you've mentioned.

Xavian-Anderson Macpherson
ShingoshiDao
12-07-2009, 06:43 AM   #559
Pentaxian
gazonk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oslo area, Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,511
QuoteOriginally posted by Shingoshi Quote
What kind of photographs are you creating to compete with those other photographers? Do you do most of your work handheld? If not, why aren't you opting for a larger like medium-format DSLR?
I was just going to ask about MF too...
QuoteQuote:
Are you shooting such a volume of work that requires you to work with digital instead of film? I ask that because film has had a long history of making VERY large prints like the ones you've mentioned.
Even 4x5 film was matched by digital backs already 3 years ago:
Art of RAW Conversion #028@Digital Outback Photo

The best 35 mm films may still have a slight edge on APS-C cameras, but not really much. Yes, very large prints were made, but NO, people hadn't come up with the idea yet that wall-sized photos should be viewed at 10 cm distance. In the office building I work, there are wonderful huge prints which I assume come from 35 mm film. If you stand too close, you see a lot of CA, grains, OOF areas, lack of detail... The photos are landscape and nature shots, probably all shot in conditions which require portable equipment. The highly portable 645D will be a godsend to this type of photographer.

12-07-2009, 07:32 AM   #560
Inactive Account




Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 83
It makes me wonder what I could do with a 6x6cm sensor!

QuoteOriginally posted by gazonk Quote
I was just going to ask about MF too...


Even 4x5 film was matched by digital backs already 3 years ago:
Art of RAW Conversion #028@Digital Outback Photo

The best 35 mm films may still have a slight edge on APS-C cameras, but not really much. Yes, very large prints were made, but NO, people hadn't come up with the idea yet that wall-sized photos should be viewed at 10 cm distance. In the office building I work, there are wonderful huge prints which I assume come from 35 mm film. If you stand too close, you see a lot of CA, grains, OOF areas, lack of detail... The photos are landscape and nature shots, probably all shot in conditions which require portable equipment. The highly portable 645D will be a godsend to this type of photographer.
And no, didn't misstate what I intended to say here. Yes, I meant 6x6cm. Because I've done a lot of research and have found that square format sensors are very common in use for scientific environments. And 6x6cm is about the second largest size available for digital sensors. So why most of the digital back makers are settling on the smaller 6x45cm makes no sense to me. Except maybe they figure they can sell more backs to customers by including the number of 6x45cm (IMHO: a bastard's format) clients in their pockets.

The images from the link that you gave above for Outback Photo really makes me want a digital back for my Hasselblad even sooner than later. And I think that with me shooting Black & White exclusively, a monochrome sensor (which is again more common in the scientific community) would serve me very well. Given the abilities of monochrome sensors, I may be more than surprised by the results.

Xavian-Anderson Macpherson
ShingoshiDao
12-07-2009, 07:33 AM   #561
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,563
QuoteOriginally posted by Shingoshi Quote
And the big question on my mind about just how viable any Pentax FF camera will/could be, is based on economics. I've yet to hear the majority of you stated what your real daily needs are for a FF camera. It's one thing to sit around fantasizing about what if. But how many of you are actually financially committed to getting a FF camera from Pentax, given the prices they will have to sell one at? Because I think something should really be taken into account here.

1.) Pentax can't survive on simply providing a FF camera to existing customers.
2.) The features of any new FF camera will have to be competitive with CaNikon and crowd.
3.) The feature sets of the competition is such that Pentax can't simply match what what's existing. They will have to build something that will inspire new blood to invigorate their financial status. Doing that means raising the price significantly beyond anything most Pentax customers have been accustomed to. At least for those professional customers for whom FF matters. Just how many nonprofessional consumers are buying FF cameras these days?

What type of work are any of you doing daily now that is hampered by not having a FF camera? How are you losing money by not having one?

So if Pentax raises the ante in features to attract new customers, they simultaneously risk losing many of their existing users. At least that's my thinking here. Because I don't think Pentax users represent the top of the food chain when it comes to keeping current with technologically advanced equipment. What I do hear is what sounds like excuses for how satisfied many or most of you are with being the fringe of the photographic landscape. But I'm sure many of you can defend why this simply isn't so. But the fact remains, Pentax cannot distribute a mediocre camera in FF and expect success in this economy. Just ain't going to happen!

Xavian-Anderson Macpherson
ShingoshiDao
I think your reasoning is the right one. This IS and should be an economics based decision!
Questions to answer:
- How big is the FF market?
- What percentage of market share can Pentax obtain?
- At what cost and even more important the margins?
- What will it do to your existing business? (If it limits resources the abiltity to deliver a new K-z or K-8, it may not be a good plan)

We have no access here to the Pentax cost & revenue results, so we can only guess.
Normally high volume products, like the K-x, have less margins per item than low volume expensive FF camera's, however the succes of the K-x will generate lens revenue by itself as well.
So, Pentax must have asked itself: where to put the R&D investment yens?
1. FF + new FF SDM lens line, or:
2. a new K-z, or:
3. large sensor sized camera's (645D)?? [prototype already available!]

I guess Pentax cannot afford to let go the current market and Pentax is gambling for choice #3, the 645D market. With its smaller competition and higher per item margin and less marketing costs.
12-07-2009, 07:52 AM   #562
Inactive Account




Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 83
I'm glad someone finally thought I said something right!!

QuoteOriginally posted by bymy141 Quote
I think your reasoning is the right one. This IS and should be an economics based decision!
Questions to answer:
- How big is the FF market?
- What percentage of market share can Pentax obtain?
- At what cost and even more important the margins?
- What will it do to your existing business? (If it limits resources the abiltity to deliver a new K-z or K-8, it may not be a good plan)

We have no access here to the Pentax cost & revenue results, so we can only guess.
Normally high volume products, like the K-x, have less margins per item than low volume expensive FF camera's, however the succes of the K-x will generate lens revenue by itself as well.
So, Pentax must have asked itself: where to put the R&D investment yens?
1. FF + new FF SDM lens line, or:
2. a new K-z, or:
3. large sensor sized camera's (645D)?? [prototype already available!]

I guess Pentax cannot afford to let go the current market and Pentax is gambling for choice #3, the 645D market. With its smaller competition and higher per item margin and less marketing costs.
Because for me, it was on the basis of comprehensive longterm economics that I purchased my Hasselblad. And ironically, I've found another user on this forum who started raising the same issues. Except for me, I stopped talking about it, and did it. I will never again in my life as a photographer have to be concerned about obsolescence. The digital technology can change as much as anyone could hope, and I will still be able to get the latest greatest whizbang anyone else will have to sell out of their old equipment to get. For me, it will be a simple matter of switching backs. Now that's voodoo economics!

Xavian-Anderson Macpherson
ShingoshiDao
12-07-2009, 07:56 AM   #563
Forum Member




Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 88
gaining new customers is 1 point..
keeping them is another point..

what i think is that pentax managed to attract new customers.
but customers who have the spending power starts to go elsewhere later on after they have outgrown..

i feel that a normal customer will prob buy 1 or 2 lens
but a higher spender will prob buy more lens.. and of course all are the more expensive lenses

just look at the rate the canikon people change lenses and cameras
they prob have to fill in the gaps between aps-c and MF

just what i think.. dun flame me

12-07-2009, 08:30 AM   #564
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,211
QuoteOriginally posted by Shingoshi Quote
And no, didn't misstate what I intended to say here. Yes, I meant 6x6cm. Because I've done a lot of research and have found that square format sensors are very common in use for scientific environments. And 6x6cm is about the second largest size available for digital sensors. So why most of the digital back makers are settling on the smaller 6x45cm makes no sense to me. Except maybe they figure they can sell more backs to customers by including the number of 6x45cm (IMHO: a bastard's format) clients in their pockets.

Xavian-Anderson Macpherson
ShingoshiDao
It makes perfect sense to stay at 6x45 for now, it is called economics.
The first 'MF' sensors were 1.3x crop (based on 6x45) and are now 1.1X.
They will grow larger with time and technology (mainly, costs of production).

Now, you 'bastard' format as you name it is so bastard it became the de facto standard as MF format? Please start to think a little bit more.
12-07-2009, 08:37 AM   #565
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
6x6 is unlikely to be seen in a sensor since it'd increase the cost a fair bit and hardly anyone uses square format so would crop it down anyway.
12-08-2009, 09:08 AM   #566
Pentaxian
gazonk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oslo area, Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,511
QuoteOriginally posted by thibs Quote
It makes perfect sense to stay at 6x45 for now, it is called economics.
The first 'MF' sensors were 1.3x crop (based on 6x45) and are now 1.1X.
They will grow larger with time and technology (mainly, costs of production).
The three year old Phase One P45 (which was found to be able to match 4x5 large-format film in the article I linked above) has a 49.1 x 36.8 mm sensor, that should amount to 1.14x crop.

Do you think the 645D will have a similar sensor to the P45 sensor?
12-08-2009, 09:36 AM   #567
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Charlotte, NC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 886
QuoteOriginally posted by gazonk Quote
The best 35 mm films may still have a slight edge on APS-C cameras, but not really much.
I recently bought an Epson V500 flatbed scanner. I wasn't expecting much from it to be honest. Then I made my first scans and I was blown away. Shooting cheap films like you can buy and process at drugstores doesn't yield much resolution, maybe 6-10mp depending on the photo and light conditions. However, after a lot of testing I've now settled on Fuji Velvia 100F and the scans I can get out of it from a $150 scanner are incredible. I'd love to see what a high end drum scanner could do. Just for the hell of it I scanned this image in at 28 megapixels and it's held up surprisingly well. I down sampled it for Flickr, but I wouldn't doubt for a second that I could get a 20x30" print from that scan.

Long story short, I'm so happy with film (and the wonderful tones it creates) I sold off all my expensive digital gear. I picked up a used Canon G10 just to use as a "digital polaroid" for setting up lights, and also to use as a snapshot camera. I have a Pentax LX with a 50mm/1.4. Now I'm looking for a Nikon F100 and AF-S 24-85mm lens (I don't care for any of Pentax's 35mm AF SLR's). I'll have less than $1200 tied up in all three cameras and between them they will fill all my needs until 35mm digital drops down to a reasonable price of $1500 or so.

Given, development costs add up, but to be honest I really enjoy the physical process of it all. I like dropping them off at the local lab, talking to the guy, sorting my slides after I get them back. My photos feel real again for the first time in a decade.
12-08-2009, 11:23 AM   #568
Inactive Account




Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 83
6x6cm: Oh the wonders of what could be!!

QuoteOriginally posted by thibs Quote
It makes perfect sense to stay at 6x45 for now, it is called economics.
The first 'MF' sensors were 1.3x crop (based on 6x45) and are now 1.1X.
They will grow larger with time and technology (mainly, costs of production).

Now, you 'bastard' format as you name it is so bastard it became the de facto standard as MF format? Please start to think a little bit more.
I'm sorry! I'm just showing my puritanical roots! I started out shooting on a 6x6cm frame And as with every camera I've had since then, I always compose for the available area of the full-frame. So I'd always prefer to have the full size of the image allowed.

QuoteOriginally posted by pingflood Quote
6x6 is unlikely to be seen in a sensor since it'd increase the cost a fair bit and hardly anyone uses square format so would crop it down anyway.
That is only true for photographic systems. As I said, they're already in use by the scientific community. Just look up Dalsa or Fairchild, two of the chip makers that offer that size. And I do mean a full 6x6cm image area on the sensor.

QuoteOriginally posted by Art Vandelay II Quote
I recently bought an Epson V500 flatbed scanner. I wasn't expecting much from it to be honest. Then I made my first scans and I was blown away. Shooting cheap films like you can buy and process at drugstores doesn't yield much resolution, maybe 6-10mp depending on the photo and light conditions. However, after a lot of testing I've now settled on Fuji Velvia 100F and the scans I can get out of it from a $150 scanner are incredible. I'd love to see what a high end drum scanner could do. Just for the hell of it I scanned this image in at 28 megapixels and it's held up surprisingly well. I down sampled it for Flickr, but I wouldn't doubt for a second that I could get a 20x30" print from that scan.

Long story short, I'm so happy with film (and the wonderful tones it creates) I sold off all my expensive digital gear. I picked up a used Canon G10 just to use as a "digital polaroid" for setting up lights, and also to use as a snapshot camera. I have a Pentax LX with a 50mm/1.4. Now I'm looking for a Nikon F100 and AF-S 24-85mm lens (I don't care for any of Pentax's 35mm AF SLR's). I'll have less than $1200 tied up in all three cameras and between them they will fill all my needs until 35mm digital drops down to a reasonable price of $1500 or so.

Given, development costs add up, but to be honest I really enjoy the physical process of it all. I like dropping them off at the local lab, talking to the guy, sorting my slides after I get them back. My photos feel real again for the first time in a decade.
Art, my man!
I love what you're doing and am so encouraged by it! I finally ordered my Hasselblad 500EL/M along with an included A12 back. Then just last night, I ordered a matching set of A70 70mm backs as well. The camera should be here on Wednesday, and the A70 backs on Thursday. I've found out from someone in Europe that 70mm is still in production there. So one way or another, I'll get some and start shooting it. For processing, I think I've found a lab which processes film for the aviation industry. So I should be in luck here. And it means I can shoot for extended periods of time without having to reload. That's about as close as I'm going to get to digital in terms of volume. It'll be almost like having one of those 250exp backs from CaNikon!

But most importantly, I really like what you're getting in terms of your images from the digital transfer from film. If the lab which processes the film could also make the transfer for me at the same time, that would be perfect! That way, instead of getting prints, I would get a DVD from my work and start being productive immediately. So thanks for the encouragement, I really needed it!

Xavian-Anderson Macpherson
ShingoshiDao
[IMG=http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/4840/70filmbackmagazinetwomao.th.jpg] [IMG=http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/2566/70filmbackmagazinetwomav.th.jpg] [IMG=http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/9900/70filmbackmagazinetwomab.th.jpg]
12-08-2009, 11:33 AM   #569
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Charlotte, NC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 886
QuoteOriginally posted by Shingoshi Quote
If the lab which processes the film could also make the transfer for me at the same time, that would be perfect! That way, instead of getting prints, I would get a DVD from my work and start being productive immediately. So thanks for the encouragement, I really needed it!
I have no idea where in the world you live, but in the US every lab I've been to offers scanning onto CD's. My local photo store scans at 6mp's, which is ok for most of my needs, but I thought they applied way too much unsharp masking. I've been getting better results by just doing it myself. With that Epson it takes me about an hour to scan a 36 exposure roll. Drug stores, Target, Walmart, etc.all scan at a much lower resolution and only do C41 processing (so no transparencies there).

Anyways...back on topic, if you want more info browse on down to the Pentax film camera section. There's some really good info and IMO the best "show of your images" thread in this entire forum there.
12-08-2009, 11:45 AM   #570
Inactive Account




Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 83
Not for the hands of the inexperienced!!

QuoteOriginally posted by Art Vandelay II Quote
I have no idea where in the world you live, but in the US every lab I've been to offers scanning onto CD's. My local photo store scans at 6mp's, which is ok for most of my needs, but I thought they applied way too much unsharp masking. I've been getting better results by just doing it myself. With that Epson it takes me about an hour to scan a 36 exposure roll. Drug stores, Target, Walmart, etc.all scan at a much lower resolution and only do C41 processing (so no transparencies there).

Anyways...back on topic, if you want more info browse on down to the Pentax film camera section. There's some really good info and IMO the best "show of your images" thread in this entire forum there.
That may be true if you're shooting standard-sized film that everyone expects to see. But 70mm is in a class all to it's own. Just finding someone to process it is an adventure. Now maybe once the film is processed, others can easily digitize the film. But it's not something I would entrust to anyone other than a professional lab. For one thing, someone doesn't invest this much into the production of film like this, only to have it handled by someone who's never even seen it before. This is for professionals ONLY!!

Xavian-Anderson Macpherson
ShingoshiDao
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!
pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Its 2010 now. Reportage General Talk 4 11-02-2010 10:18 AM
Picture of the Week 103: February 21, 2010 to March 7, 2010 Tamia Weekly Photo Challenges 55 03-07-2010 05:50 AM
Picture of the Week 102: February 14, 2010 to February 28, 2010 photolady95 Weekly Photo Challenges 57 02-27-2010 08:28 PM
Picture of the Week 101: February 7, 2010 to February 21, 2010 netuser Weekly Photo Challenges 63 02-24-2010 08:15 AM
Picture of the Week 100: January 31, 2010 to February 14, 2010 Peter Zack Weekly Photo Challenges 93 02-14-2010 12:43 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:10 PM. | 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