Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-22-2011, 04:21 AM   #391
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,112
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Is worthless... just because you want them to make other products? You'll have to come with better reasons than that
ogl, I'm glad you are not a "financial director of Ricoh/Pentax".
It seems to me you understand my English very bad.
sorry for my English...my apologizes...

I think we will never see Pentax FF DSLR K-mount.


Last edited by ogl; 10-22-2011 at 07:17 AM.
10-22-2011, 04:39 AM - 1 Like   #392
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,112
QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
Last month, the owner of Pentaxeros.com (Spanish Pentax community/store) and I joined forces and wrote a letter to Pentax presenting a case for why Pentax needs to work on developing a full-frame DSLR.

The list of reasons what quite elaborate (here's a brief summary):


Update: here is the response from Pentax
As for me, it's nonsense list of reasons. It's reasons just for several stone age fans of Pentax.
10-22-2011, 05:33 AM   #393
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Taylor, Texas
Posts: 1,017
QuoteOriginally posted by sjwaldron Quote
Why put a limit on the camera body cost when you have so many different systems? That extra $500-1500 can buy things those systems can't achieve due to physical limitations. Why would you need, or rather want, a fuji-ILC or nex7 on top of the quality gear you already have? The only things I see you gaining are advancements from newer technology, differences in ergonomics, or in lens to a point. While this is all opinion and what people feel good with doing, I see having too many systems as diluting my tools. I would have a bunch of tools that can basically accomplish the same thing and miss out on stuff I can achieve with more specialized equipment.
They all do something a bit different. The X100 files look different than the GXR files which definitely look different than the Sigma files. Also I just like small cameras. What I really want is a Leica M9 but can't see where that kind of investment would make me a better photographer. I'm more into art photography than sports or wedding for example so it kind of makes sense for me in a weird way. If I had to pick out one or two or three photographers I really admire I'd go with William Eggleston, Robert Frank, and Edward Weston. As much as I think the K5 is a great camera, I find the files kind of sterile. Lately when I have used it I've been using a couple of old Sears M42 lenses on it to add some grit. I recently did some some portraits of these boxers in a gym I happened upon one day. The best ones were with the Sears lenses not the 31 or 77 and the GXR which makes beautiful B/W conversions at ISO 1600. But that's just me. For a DSLR I find lenses more interesting than the camera.

I sincerely hope Pentax will release a Full Frame but I just wouldn't be interested in another DSLR at present. At $1500 maybe I would go for it but I'd be more likely to go with the new Fuji. I'm a bit ambivalent about the NEX 7. I've used Panasonics and am probably odd man out, but prefer the Olympus for MFT. I kind of see Sony in the same way I see Panasonic. The X100 is my absolute favorite camera, but the GXR is really starting to grow on me. I'm getting the M mount module for my birthday in November.
10-22-2011, 06:02 AM   #394
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,409
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
It seems to me you understand my English very bad.
sorry for my English...my apologizes...

I think you will never see Pentax FF DSLR K-mount.
Yes, I understand your very bad English; in fact your English is not bad, it's just that you don't write your words in the proper order
I don't believe a decision has been made yet. Only 22 days passed since Ricoh took control...

10-22-2011, 06:02 AM   #395
New Member




Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: North of Chicago
Posts: 6
How long must my FA wait?

My first post at PentaxForums:

I have not read through all ~400 posts, but will comment anyway :

- It is good to hear from the executive over Europe and that he passed this on to the R&D/PD folks - however, there are no commitments, let alone mentions, of FF in his letter. The closest he came to addressing FF was commitment to the "Advanced Amateur and Professional photographers". In my opinion, any full dedication to the AA/P group requires a FF option (unless I am missing something - perhaps some advanced new, transformative sensor technology I am unaware of - anyone?).

- My follow-up question for the executive is, then: If you cannot commit to FF now, what is your current plan for addressing the Advanced Amateur/Professional market that does not include 645 or improving APS-C?

Soon, I will make the leap to digital FF and would like it to be Pentax - I can only hold out so much longer with my 35mm film Leica and trusty Pentax Super Program (and Epson scanner). My FA 31 awaits!! (but not for long)

Thank you for listening!
10-22-2011, 06:57 AM   #396
Forum Member




Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Brisbane
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 56
QuoteOriginally posted by Emacs Quote
Adaptor. It's just plain stupid to use K-mount on mirrorless.
why so?
10-22-2011, 07:11 AM - 1 Like   #397
Senior Member
Spare Tire's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montréal
Posts: 120
QuoteOriginally posted by BendingPhotography Quote
why so?
Because if you're gonna make a mirrorless then make it with as small a flange to focal plane distance as possible, then adapt the mounts you want, maybe even with electronic contacts like the alpha to E mount adaptor sony's putting out. K mount mirrorless is a stupid idea, a waste of space and potential of mirrorless, yet people keep putting it out there.

Even the GXR M-mount module is a stupid idea. They could have made an even thinner general purpose mount and then adapt the M, they could have even sold all the adapters for big money on top of that. With an M-mount, i still can't mount other rangefinder lenses like contax G or original contax/kiev/nikon rangefinder lenses.
10-22-2011, 07:29 AM   #398
Pentaxian
Raffwal's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: 64°57' North
Posts: 806
Make an EVIL camera with a new non-K mount and you're the umpteenth also-ran contender late to the race. Make an EVIL camera with proper K mount support and you have the possibility to attract at least some former Pentax users.

Besides, people go on and on and on about how the camera couldn't be smaller due to the registration length. That's just one of the dimensions! A camera in 2011 does not have to be shaped like the roll-film camera from 1969. Also, like some people have suggested, the registration distance could be at an angle with a mirror.

10-22-2011, 07:31 AM   #399
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Taylor, Texas
Posts: 1,017
QuoteOriginally posted by Spare Tire Quote
Because if you're gonna make a mirrorless then make it with as small a flange to focal plane distance as possible, then adapt the mounts you want, maybe even with electronic contacts like the alpha to E mount adaptor sony's putting out. K mount mirrorless is a stupid idea, a waste of space and potential of mirrorless, yet people keep putting it out there.

Even the GXR M-mount module is a stupid idea. They could have made an even thinner general purpose mount and then adapt the M, they could have even sold all the adapters for big money on top of that. With an M-mount, i still can't mount other rangefinder lenses like contax G or original contax/kiev/nikon rangefinder lenses.
Why is the M mount module a stupid idea? Admittedly the GXR isn't for everyone nor do I think it's intended to be, much like the X100. How many different lenses do you need? There are a lot of good M mount lenses that are really small. If I have a 28, 35, 50, and something around 85, I'm all set. In fact having used the M mount module recently, I would say it was the best idea for adapted lenses. Most other mounts would have made the camera/lens too large. M39 is perfect and for me is the best for MFT too. Really the difference between the M module and an adapter is the you are actually mounting the lens on the camera not mounting the lens to an adapter then to the module/camera. It was fun adapting lens for MFT at first but then it gets kind of old. Better to just stick with what actually mounts on the camera (and/or module). For size purposes the M module is perfect for the GXR. Plus there are some excellent M lenses by Leica and Canon.

I agree on the K mount module though. I have the Novoflex one for MFT, the lenses are really too big for the camera. I think a Pentax mirrorless would probably need a separate mount. If they released a mirrorless the size of a DSLR, I just don't think it would sell very well. It's why I keep holding off on the Nex. The lens to body ratio just seems out of proportion for me. I think they are really good cameras though. For me Ricoh has it about right. Olympus seems to have a better grasp on it too. The 12mm and 45mm are perfect for MFT. The Panasonic 25mm is just too big. I may be sending that one back to Adorama. It's a great lens but it's too big.
10-22-2011, 07:38 AM   #400
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,112
QuoteOriginally posted by stanleyk Quote
Why is the M mount module a stupid idea?.
More sense to make cheap EVIL camera with M-mount.
GXR M-mount module is just the attempt to put more life into GXR system.




Pentax FF DLSR K-mount is useless product for photo market. IMO. Pentax is ALMOST ZERO at the world DSLR/EVIL market.
Lower than any photo brand. Except, Leica, Sigma or Fuji, maybe...

It's suicide - to launch FF K-mount camera for company which not above 1% of market.

Last edited by ogl; 10-22-2011 at 07:44 AM.
10-22-2011, 07:39 AM   #401
Senior Member
Spare Tire's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montréal
Posts: 120
@stanleyk: My point is there are other excellent rangefinder lenses out there than just M glass. Tell my why i should buy the M module for the GXR when i can buy a NEX and mount M glass and also my contax G glass and other kind of short rangefinder glass besides M? I'd buy the NEX.
10-22-2011, 07:43 AM   #402
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,112
QuoteOriginally posted by Raffwal Quote
Make an EVIL camera with a new non-K mount and you're the umpteenth also-ran contender late to the race. Make an EVIL camera with proper K mount support and you have the possibility to attract at least some former Pentax users.
Former pentax users have BIG choice now...No need to come back.

EVIL with K-mount is wrong move. FFR is 45,5 mm!!!
It's really HUGE number.

Compare with
Sony E-mount 18 mm
micro 4/3 19,37 mm
Samsung NX 25,5 mm
Leica M 27,95 mm
10-22-2011, 07:44 AM - 1 Like   #403
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Taylor, Texas
Posts: 1,017
QuoteOriginally posted by Raffwal Quote
Make an EVIL camera with a new non-K mount and you're the umpteenth also-ran contender late to the race. Make an EVIL camera with proper K mount support and you have the possibility to attract at least some former Pentax users.

Besides, people go on and on and on about how the camera couldn't be smaller due to the registration length. That's just one of the dimensions! A camera in 2011 does not have to be shaped like the roll-film camera from 1969. Also, like some people have suggested, the registration distance could be at an angle with a mirror.
I also tend to agree that Pentax missed this boat and it's sailed. I still can't see them being able to compete with Nikon or Canon in the near term though with a $2500 body. Even Sony which has the resources to do so wasn't very successful. I wonder how many bodies they would have to sell at $2500 to make financial sense? I have no idea but it would be interesting to know.

It would seem they need a real show stopper like the X100. Even if it's not the camera some people want you have to admit it got a lot of press last year which undoubtedly turned into a lot of sales. I think they will do it again next year with their new camera. Pentax really needs something that will generate some excitement about the brand.
10-22-2011, 07:50 AM   #404
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Taylor, Texas
Posts: 1,017
QuoteOriginally posted by Spare Tire Quote
@stanleyk: My point is there are other excellent rangefinder lenses out there than just M glass. Tell my why i should buy the M module for the GXR when i can buy a NEX and mount M glass and also my contax G glass and other kind of short rangefinder glass besides M? I'd buy the NEX.
I'm considering the NEX 7. I don't want to use adapters though. I want the lens to mount to the camera. If it's something like the M42 adapter on the K5, then fine. But something like the Novoflex on the Olympus EP3, nope. But that's just me.

And you are correct, there are a lot of good rangefinder lenses. I suppose with the GXR you could make other modules. I do understand why they chose the M mount though. That said, I already had the GXR or I might have looked at the NEX a little more. I'm really intrigued by the 24mm, but it seems awful big for the body. I need to actually hold it before I can make that judgement.
10-22-2011, 07:51 AM   #405
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,112
QuoteOriginally posted by stanleyk Quote
I also tend to agree that Pentax missed this boat and it's sailed. I still can't see them being able to compete with Nikon or Canon in the near term though with a $2500 body. Even Sony which has the resources to do so wasn't very successful. I wonder how many bodies they would have to sell at $2500 to make financial sense? I have no idea but it would be interesting to know.

It would seem they need a real show stopper like the X100. Even if it's not the camera some people want you have to admit it got a lot of press last year which undoubtedly turned into a lot of sales. I think they will do it again next year with their new camera. Pentax really needs something that will generate some excitement about the brand.
Good post. My idea is that Ricoh/Pentax need only innovative, unusual and special solution for FF camera.

Mirrorless FF is just hypothetic idea.
Not my wish.
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!
aps-c, bodies, body, dslr, full-frame, lenses, lineup, pentax, system, users
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
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
News Regarding Advertising on PentaxForums.com: An Official Statement Adam Site Suggestions and Help 5 03-24-2010 07:37 PM
Official: New DSLR Body is Coming; Full Frame Model is Under Planning! RiceHigh Pentax News and Rumors 78 08-04-2008 06:18 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:15 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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