Pentax Full Frame - An official statement from Pentax (they listened!)

Kunzite · 10-25-2011, 06:02 AM

Originally posted by Jan67

We all just speculate.

Nobody can prove what is right, since there is no such camera on the market, except M9 (and that is different story). I don't think that missing video influences M9's sales.
So FF camera, going back to roots, is maybe big risk, maybe big opportunity.

Pentax can choose.

No, not really.
In fact is quite logical: if a feature you don't necessarily want is there, you can always opt not to use it (and still buy and enjoy the camera). But if something you want or believe you may want is missing - bye-bye! Why should they lose customers big time by playing this game?
By the way, since you were talking about video - what sensor should be used? Some old sensor (with bad high ISO and no Live View), or a modern sensor - but "cripple" the camera by not having a movie mode? Either way, people wouldn't like that

yusuf · 10-25-2011, 06:08 AM

appears to me as standard polite response - nothing much to read from nor I am expecting anything more on FF front in near future. At this moment, I would love to see k-3 or whatever next model it is as my upgrade path.

**Byrd-2020** · 10-25-2011, 06:25 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

... if a feature you don't necessarily want is there, you can always opt not to use it (and still buy and enjoy the camera). But if something you want or believe you may want is missing - bye-bye! Why should they lose customers big time by playing this game?
By the way, since you were talking about video - what sensor should be used? Some old sensor (with bad high ISO and no Live View), or a modern sensor - but "cripple" the camera by not having a movie mode? Either way, people wouldn't like that

Here's an idea. What if Pentax-Ricoh were to produce a stripped-down FF that would make folks like '007', 'Unfocused' and 'Byrd-2020' (me) happy, but included in a battery-pack style accessory all the 'bells-and-whistles' that others desire?

This would keep the basic camera as small as possible as the electronic components (most anyway) that are required to drive the non-essential features would reside in the bolt-on device.

Pentax could even offer different versions of such a device. For example, one might include GPS and one not (etc.).

I'm not sure if this would be feasible. (Who would have thought that the GXR concept would work?) However, such a camera might have very broad appeal.

Clavius · 10-25-2011, 06:26 AM

I think we cannot discuss which features are needed and which are ok to leave out. Because this is a matter of personal taste.

Some folks state we can lose the video function. But personally, I love being able to do a bit of video in between shots, without having to switch devices. Primarily, my hobby is fotography. But in some cases I love the fact that I can do the incidental video with the flick of a switch.

And - again - personally, I can do without liveview. That big screen on the back can be stolen for all I care. A FF camera, with a EVF and without a LCD screen (just to lower sales price) would suit my personal needs the best.

Lots of people think it's important that the camera is compact. I don't care about that either. It can weigh 10 kg and have the size of the 645D for all I care.

Bottom line is, there's not a single company that can build a camera to suit everybody's specific personal needs.

I myself would be quite happy if Pentax was to release a well functioning, fully beta-tested, FF camera. Which is capable of competing with the competitors at the smaller-then-canikon-price-range for which Pentax is renowed.

Last edited by Clavius; 10-25-2011 at 07:11 AM.

Kunzite · 10-25-2011, 06:42 AM

Originally posted by Clavius

I think we cannot discuss which features are needed and which are ok to leave out. Because this is a matter of personal taste.

My point exactly.

Byrd-2020, that would work only for some features - GPS, maybe (the antenna would be poorly positioned); Wi-Fi, certainly. Video? I doubt, because all the required components should be already on the camera.

cali92rs · 10-25-2011, 08:38 AM

Why is it that only the big 3 currently or in the case of Sony have cemented plans to produce Full Frame DSLRs? Is it because they have more capital and it costs more than any of us realize? This is not a rhetorical question, I don't know the answer, but I don't think its a coincedence that none of the smaller guys are taking the plunge.
Ricoh has the money to play with the big boys, the question is will they. There has been no indications one way or another.

rawr · 10-25-2011, 09:21 AM

Originally posted by Clavius

I myself would be quite happy if Pentax was to release a well functioning, fully beta-tested, FF camera.

I think the easiest way to think about what a Pentax FF should/could/may look like would be to identify what existing FF model (from another manufacturer) that it would be good for Pentax to clone, at least in features and performance.

Probably the Canon 5D2, I'd say. High res, decent video, OK high ISO etc. The Nikon D700 lacks video, the D3s is too low res, the D3X is too expensive, the A900 is mediocre etc. I think a K-mount 5D2 clone would make everyone pretty happy

eddie1960 · 10-25-2011, 09:33 AM

Originally posted by rawr

I think the easiest way to think about what a Pentax FF should/could/may look like would be to identify what existing FF model (from another manufacturer) that it would be good for Pentax to clone, at least in features and performance.

Probably the Canon 5D2, I'd say. High res, decent video, OK high ISO etc. The Nikon D700 lacks video, the D3s is too low res, the D3X is too expensive, the A900 is mediocre etc. I think a K-mount 5D2 clone would make everyone pretty happy

All those models are pending replacement shortly. you can be pretty certain the 5DmkII will jump in performance in several areas. The D800 will as well and add Video. The D3s/x will likely combine like the Canon's did. The rumour is Sony will have 3 new model within a year one being Mirror-less like the Nex7. of course most of these aside from the Canon have been delayed due to the Floods in Thailand. but that is short term.

I agree from a content standpoint the 5Dmk whatever is the target to some degree as it has the biggest share i would think (certainly it doesn't hurt that it has managed to stay in production where Nikon has now suffered 2 production issues in a year. Sony only counts here because they make them their share of FF is small to say the least - Really Pentax should just look to them for what they did wrong that They could do better like the K5 vs the Sony

but to come out with something that competes with a 5D MKII would be backward thinking. by the time it's at market it would be slaughtered by the new models on the way. The goal would be to outperform say the new D800 or Sony 9xxx while hitting the same or lower price point or offering more (better construction and weather sealing etc)

bwDraco · 10-25-2011, 09:49 AM

I've examined the K mount on my Vivitar V3800N 35mm SLR, and I'm not sure whether it's possible to implement SR on a full-frame camera given the constraints of the mount. The mount does not appear to be physically large enough to allow the sensor enough space to move for SR. However, PENTAX could design the mirror box in a manner similar to what Sony did: lift up the mirror instead instead of swinging it up. This should make SR possible with a full-frame sensor. For more information on the SteadyShot INSIDE implementation by Sony, see the Imaging Resource's review of the Sony DSLR-A900.

--DragonLord

Emacs · 10-25-2011, 09:57 AM

Originally posted by DragonLord

I've examined the K mount on my Vivitar V3800N 35mm SLR, and I'm not sure whether it's possible to implement SR on a full-frame camera given the constraints of the mount. The mount does not appear to be physically large enough to allow the sensor enough space to move for SR. However, PENTAX could design the mirror box in a manner similar to what Sony did: lift up the mirror instead instead of swinging it up. This should make SR possible with a full-frame sensor. For more information on the SteadyShot INSIDE implementation by Sony, see the Imaging Resource's review of the Sony DSLR-A900.

--DragonLord

Good news. The sony method is patented, and the pentax one is too dependent on quality (and the former is extremely poor). It doens't work in too many cases, just ruins the picture. So I keep it disabled. Hope there will be no SR at all, and this will help to decrease body size.

bwDraco · 10-25-2011, 10:05 AM

Originally posted by Emacs

Good news. The sony method is patented, and the pentax one is too dependent on quality (and the former is extremely poor). It doens't work in too many cases, just ruins the picture. So I keep it disabled. Hope there will be no SR at all, and this will help to decrease body size.

It may be possible to widen the mirror box towards the sensor so that the image circle can cover a larger area over the image plane. This would allow sufficient room to implement SR, but the mirror could be tricky to design. I suppose it's possible - I can envision the mirror being held by an extended bar near the focusing screen. Of course, this would make the body larger, but this is a necessary compromise. Keep in mind that PENTAX has its own set of patents for its SR system, which uses electromagnets and not moving rails to move the sensor as in Sony SSI.

--DragonLord

Chex · 10-25-2011, 10:13 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Emacs

Good news. The sony method is patented, and the pentax one is too dependent on quality (and the former is extremely poor). It doens't work in too many cases, just ruins the picture. So I keep it disabled. Hope there will be no SR at all, and this will help to decrease body size.

I shoot a lot of older manual lenses and all it takes is to leave SR on and forget to set the SR's focal length to the appropriate lens.. or worse.. have an old manual zoom lens and SR set at one FL.. and your images are ruined... so most of the time my SR is off as well. So I completely agree.. as handy as some may find SR.. I think it's a crutch people should learn proper technique (faster shutter speeds!!) instead of hoping the SR function will compensate. I would be just fine with out this function in the body or on the lens.. wish lens manufacturers would release each of their lenses without OS/IS/VC.. and then a line of ones with.. for the appropriate price difference. Let the end user decide if their R&D dollars are spent in the wrong way.. instead of cramming IS/OS/VC tech down our throats at $XXX cost per unit when many do not care either way for the feature.
No SR would help wedge that FF sensor in the current K-5 size body!

**Aristophanes** · 10-25-2011, 11:04 AM

Originally posted by jsherman999

Did you get a hat? Sometimes they give out hats on those tours.

I got to keep my clean room slippers. Seriously!

The idea that Pentax should use a 5 year old D3 chip in a 2012 Pentax FF DSLR, an item expected to last for 4-5 years in production, would kill the Pentax FF market outright. The supply chain don't work like that. A for effort.

jsherman999 · 10-25-2011, 11:10 AM

Originally posted by Aristophanes

The idea that Pentax should use a 5 year old D3 chip in a 2012 Pentax FF DSLR, an item expected to last for 4-5 years in production, would kill the Pentax FF market outright. The supply chain don't work like that. A for effort.

Are you intentionally missing my point?

There was another thread like this one, in which I had to explain my point over and over again to you, while others casually reading the thread understood the point at first glance.

Are you just reading very fast, not making the effort to understand the points and digest the information, just looking for things to pick apart? Because I'm starting to think it's either laziness, lack of reading comprehension or possibly a passive-aggressive attempt to build straw-man arguments by intentionally misinterpreting what others write. Either way, I think you can do better.

Here:

Originally posted by jsherman999

...
Of course I'm not advocating putting that older sensor in a modified K-5 and trying to sell that combo against the D800 (I said that several times up there, may want to re-read if that's not clear.) I was trying to show how the "$2000 FF bodies sell at a loss" statement doesn't hold up to scrutiny, especially when the delta between the D3X and D7000 sensors is probably greater than the delta between, say, the brand new Sony 24MP aps-c and 24MP FF sensors.
.

.

**Aristophanes** · 10-25-2011, 11:11 AM

Originally posted by Chex

So I guess the FAFA50, the FA Ltd trio.. the old 50 f1.2, even the 85 1.4's are BIG glass?? besides.. when the glass outweighs the lens, most of those BIG lenses have a tripod mount on them for a reason.. so the mount only has to be able to support the camera's weight, not the "big glass"

Zooms outsell primes by about 6:1.

You need top-flight f/2.8 zooms to make any market APS-C or FF. Look at M43. They all came out with zooms before primes.

A system is enhanced by its primes, but is made but its zooms.

10-25-2011, 11:10 AM	#554
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	Originally posted by Aristophanes The idea that Pentax should use a 5 year old D3 chip in a 2012 Pentax FF DSLR, an item expected to last for 4-5 years in production, would kill the Pentax FF market outright. The supply chain don't work like that. A for effort. Are you intentionally missing my point? There was another thread like this one, in which I had to explain my point over and over again to you, while others casually reading the thread understood the point at first glance. Are you just reading very fast, not making the effort to understand the points and digest the information, just looking for things to pick apart? Because I'm starting to think it's either laziness, lack of reading comprehension or possibly a passive-aggressive attempt to build straw-man arguments by intentionally misinterpreting what others write. Either way, I think you can do better. Here: Originally posted by jsherman999 ... Of course I'm not advocating putting that older sensor in a modified K-5 and trying to sell that combo against the D800 (I said that several times up there, may want to re-read if that's not clear.) I was trying to show how the "$2000 FF bodies sell at a loss" statement doesn't hold up to scrutiny, especially when the delta between the D3X and D7000 sensors is probably greater than the delta between, say, the brand new Sony 24MP aps-c and 24MP FF sensors. . . Last edited by jsherman999; 10-25-2011 at 11:24 AM.

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

10-25-2011, 06:02 AM	#541
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by Jan67 We all just speculate. Nobody can prove what is right, since there is no such camera on the market, except M9 (and that is different story). I don't think that missing video influences M9's sales. So FF camera, going back to roots, is maybe big risk, maybe big opportunity. Pentax can choose. No, not really. In fact is quite logical: if a feature you don't necessarily want is there, you can always opt not to use it (and still buy and enjoy the camera). But if something you want or believe you may want is missing - bye-bye! Why should they lose customers big time by playing this game? By the way, since you were talking about video - what sensor should be used? Some old sensor (with bad high ISO and no Live View), or a modern sensor - but "cripple" the camera by not having a movie mode? Either way, people wouldn't like that

10-25-2011, 06:08 AM	#542
yusuf Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Palo Alto, CA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,497	appears to me as standard polite response - nothing much to read from nor I am expecting anything more on FF front in near future. At this moment, I would love to see k-3 or whatever next model it is as my upgrade path.

10-25-2011, 06:25 AM	#543
Byrd-2020 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: eastern Pennsylvania, USA Posts: 151	Originally posted by Kunzite ... if a feature you don't necessarily want is there, you can always opt not to use it (and still buy and enjoy the camera). But if something you want or believe you may want is missing - bye-bye! Why should they lose customers big time by playing this game? By the way, since you were talking about video - what sensor should be used? Some old sensor (with bad high ISO and no Live View), or a modern sensor - but "cripple" the camera by not having a movie mode? Either way, people wouldn't like that Here's an idea. What if Pentax-Ricoh were to produce a stripped-down FF that would make folks like '007', 'Unfocused' and 'Byrd-2020' (me) happy, but included in a battery-pack style accessory all the 'bells-and-whistles' that others desire? This would keep the basic camera as small as possible as the electronic components (most anyway) that are required to drive the non-essential features would reside in the bolt-on device. Pentax could even offer different versions of such a device. For example, one might include GPS and one not (etc.). I'm not sure if this would be feasible. (Who would have thought that the GXR concept would work?) However, such a camera might have very broad appeal.

10-25-2011, 06:26 AM	#544
Clavius Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: De Klundert Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,150	I think we cannot discuss which features are needed and which are ok to leave out. Because this is a matter of personal taste. Some folks state we can lose the video function. But personally, I love being able to do a bit of video in between shots, without having to switch devices. Primarily, my hobby is fotography. But in some cases I love the fact that I can do the incidental video with the flick of a switch. And - again - personally, I can do without liveview. That big screen on the back can be stolen for all I care. A FF camera, with a EVF and without a LCD screen (just to lower sales price) would suit my personal needs the best. Lots of people think it's important that the camera is compact. I don't care about that either. It can weigh 10 kg and have the size of the 645D for all I care. Bottom line is, there's not a single company that can build a camera to suit everybody's specific personal needs. I myself would be quite happy if Pentax was to release a well functioning, fully beta-tested, FF camera. Which is capable of competing with the competitors at the smaller-then-canikon-price-range for which Pentax is renowed. Last edited by Clavius; 10-25-2011 at 07:11 AM.

10-25-2011, 06:42 AM	#545
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by Clavius I think we cannot discuss which features are needed and which are ok to leave out. Because this is a matter of personal taste. My point exactly. Byrd-2020, that would work only for some features - GPS, maybe (the antenna would be poorly positioned); Wi-Fi, certainly. Video? I doubt, because all the required components should be already on the camera.

10-25-2011, 08:38 AM	#546
cali92rs Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 3,354	Why is it that only the big 3 currently or in the case of Sony have cemented plans to produce Full Frame DSLRs? Is it because they have more capital and it costs more than any of us realize? This is not a rhetorical question, I don't know the answer, but I don't think its a coincedence that none of the smaller guys are taking the plunge. Ricoh has the money to play with the big boys, the question is will they. There has been no indications one way or another.

10-25-2011, 09:21 AM	#547
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Originally posted by Clavius I myself would be quite happy if Pentax was to release a well functioning, fully beta-tested, FF camera. I think the easiest way to think about what a Pentax FF should/could/may look like would be to identify what existing FF model (from another manufacturer) that it would be good for Pentax to clone, at least in features and performance. Probably the Canon 5D2, I'd say. High res, decent video, OK high ISO etc. The Nikon D700 lacks video, the D3s is too low res, the D3X is too expensive, the A900 is mediocre etc. I think a K-mount 5D2 clone would make everyone pretty happy

10-25-2011, 09:33 AM	#548
eddie1960 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,666	Originally posted by rawr I think the easiest way to think about what a Pentax FF should/could/may look like would be to identify what existing FF model (from another manufacturer) that it would be good for Pentax to clone, at least in features and performance. Probably the Canon 5D2, I'd say. High res, decent video, OK high ISO etc. The Nikon D700 lacks video, the D3s is too low res, the D3X is too expensive, the A900 is mediocre etc. I think a K-mount 5D2 clone would make everyone pretty happy All those models are pending replacement shortly. you can be pretty certain the 5DmkII will jump in performance in several areas. The D800 will as well and add Video. The D3s/x will likely combine like the Canon's did. The rumour is Sony will have 3 new model within a year one being Mirror-less like the Nex7. of course most of these aside from the Canon have been delayed due to the Floods in Thailand. but that is short term. I agree from a content standpoint the 5Dmk whatever is the target to some degree as it has the biggest share i would think (certainly it doesn't hurt that it has managed to stay in production where Nikon has now suffered 2 production issues in a year. Sony only counts here because they make them their share of FF is small to say the least - Really Pentax should just look to them for what they did wrong that They could do better like the K5 vs the Sony but to come out with something that competes with a 5D MKII would be backward thinking. by the time it's at market it would be slaughtered by the new models on the way. The goal would be to outperform say the new D800 or Sony 9xxx while hitting the same or lower price point or offering more (better construction and weather sealing etc)

10-25-2011, 09:49 AM	#549
bwDraco Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: New York Photos: Albums Posts: 1,071	I've examined the K mount on my Vivitar V3800N 35mm SLR, and I'm not sure whether it's possible to implement SR on a full-frame camera given the constraints of the mount. The mount does not appear to be physically large enough to allow the sensor enough space to move for SR. However, PENTAX could design the mirror box in a manner similar to what Sony did: lift up the mirror instead instead of swinging it up. This should make SR possible with a full-frame sensor. For more information on the SteadyShot INSIDE implementation by Sony, see the Imaging Resource's review of the Sony DSLR-A900. --DragonLord

10-25-2011, 09:57 AM	#550
Emacs Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Moscow Posts: 1,223	Originally posted by DragonLord I've examined the K mount on my Vivitar V3800N 35mm SLR, and I'm not sure whether it's possible to implement SR on a full-frame camera given the constraints of the mount. The mount does not appear to be physically large enough to allow the sensor enough space to move for SR. However, PENTAX could design the mirror box in a manner similar to what Sony did: lift up the mirror instead instead of swinging it up. This should make SR possible with a full-frame sensor. For more information on the SteadyShot INSIDE implementation by Sony, see the Imaging Resource's review of the Sony DSLR-A900. --DragonLord Good news. The sony method is patented, and the pentax one is too dependent on quality (and the former is extremely poor). It doens't work in too many cases, just ruins the picture. So I keep it disabled. Hope there will be no SR at all, and this will help to decrease body size.

10-25-2011, 10:05 AM	#551
bwDraco Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: New York Photos: Albums Posts: 1,071	Originally posted by Emacs Good news. The sony method is patented, and the pentax one is too dependent on quality (and the former is extremely poor). It doens't work in too many cases, just ruins the picture. So I keep it disabled. Hope there will be no SR at all, and this will help to decrease body size. It may be possible to widen the mirror box towards the sensor so that the image circle can cover a larger area over the image plane. This would allow sufficient room to implement SR, but the mirror could be tricky to design. I suppose it's possible - I can envision the mirror being held by an extended bar near the focusing screen. Of course, this would make the body larger, but this is a necessary compromise. Keep in mind that PENTAX has its own set of patents for its SR system, which uses electromagnets and not moving rails to move the sensor as in Sony SSI. --DragonLord

10-25-2011, 10:13 AM - 1 Like	#552
Chex Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,678	Originally posted by Emacs Good news. The sony method is patented, and the pentax one is too dependent on quality (and the former is extremely poor). It doens't work in too many cases, just ruins the picture. So I keep it disabled. Hope there will be no SR at all, and this will help to decrease body size. I shoot a lot of older manual lenses and all it takes is to leave SR on and forget to set the SR's focal length to the appropriate lens.. or worse.. have an old manual zoom lens and SR set at one FL.. and your images are ruined... so most of the time my SR is off as well. So I completely agree.. as handy as some may find SR.. I think it's a crutch people should learn proper technique (faster shutter speeds!!) instead of hoping the SR function will compensate. I would be just fine with out this function in the body or on the lens.. wish lens manufacturers would release each of their lenses without OS/IS/VC.. and then a line of ones with.. for the appropriate price difference. Let the end user decide if their R&D dollars are spent in the wrong way.. instead of cramming IS/OS/VC tech down our throats at $XXX cost per unit when many do not care either way for the feature. No SR would help wedge that FF sensor in the current K-5 size body!

10-25-2011, 11:04 AM	#553
Aristophanes Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut Photos: Albums Posts: 3,948	Originally posted by jsherman999 Did you get a hat? Sometimes they give out hats on those tours. I got to keep my clean room slippers. Seriously! The idea that Pentax should use a 5 year old D3 chip in a 2012 Pentax FF DSLR, an item expected to last for 4-5 years in production, would kill the Pentax FF market outright. The supply chain don't work like that. A for effort.

10-25-2011, 11:11 AM	#555
Aristophanes Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut Photos: Albums Posts: 3,948	Originally posted by Chex So I guess the FAFA50, the FA Ltd trio.. the old 50 f1.2, even the 85 1.4's are BIG glass?? besides.. when the glass outweighs the lens, most of those BIG lenses have a tripod mount on them for a reason.. so the mount only has to be able to support the camera's weight, not the "big glass" Zooms outsell primes by about 6:1. You need top-flight f/2.8 zooms to make any market APS-C or FF. Look at M43. They all came out with zooms before primes. A system is enhanced by its primes, but is made but its zooms.