[Clavius]

You don't?
Well, then this thread started, there was hope.

When this thread started, there was nothing. Now, there's a big organized group that actively expresses their hopes to Pentax. Moreover, Pentax is expanding their productlines and stated they will keep investing in developing pro/prosumer equipment. Which means they will be open to the abovementioned 'demands'.

There's more hope right now, then when this thread started.

A FF k-01 with 2 dials and EVF and focus peaking would be acceptable to me, if it really helps to keep costs down.

The ONLY advantage of the EVF is the brighter viewfinder. A FF OVF already has the brighter and bigger viewfinder. But I guess, if a crappy EVF is cheaper, it would help bring the cost down. The fully featured version should have a OVF though of course..

[falconeye]

But at the price of 3 K-5 bodies

It's 2 K-5s (comparing launch MSRP) and it may deprecate no more than a K-5. But you're right, it's in another price league. The Nikkor glass makes it so...
But for many of us it is a hobby and you would be amazed how much people spend on their hobbies, members on this forum included. Funds lost for Pentax now.

Or to say it with a sentence of Michail Sergejewitsch Gorbatschow who is famous in Germany:

"Those who are late will be punished by life itself"

He was right, it is happening to Pentax now. Thus the defeated mood.

[gazonk]

It's 2 K-5s (comparing launch MSRP) and it may deprecate no more than a K-5. But you're right, it's in another price league. The Nikkor glass makes it so...
But for many of us it is a hobby and you would be amazed how much people spend on their hobbies, members on this forum included. Funds lost for Pentax now.

Nikon used to be even more in a different league than it is now (Even Nikkormat was out of my price range when I bought my first Pentax, an MX), but I guess the lenses will really hurt your wallet if you're going to really make use of that 36mp sensor...

I agree with much of what you say, though. And in a few years I may also spend more money on photo equipment than I do now.

Edit: ...but (this is a reoccurring comment, but I'll repeat it still) what if Pentax instead of being late to the FF party will be the first to offer something even larger that is affordable for a larger group of enthusiasts than the mad camera geeks that already own the 645D?

[_quicksilver_]

Digital 6X7?

[thibs]

I wonder why pentax chose to go down to 1/180th when several of the old film bodies were capable of 1/250th...

SR is the culprit.

[topace]

SR is the culprit.

Really? If I was shooting at say 1/320, I would care very little about weather SR was on or off. Or is the problem with the mechanical parts of the SR system? Seems to me that flash sync is only numbers and shutter delay calibration.

[thibs]

Well, no. Sony has the same problem but Sony allows faster sync when SR is off.

[sandilands]

All that being said, it still is only a stop gap camera on the way to wanting to get the IQ of a FF camera, which you won't without a FF sensor.

Not to be argumentative, but I'll be argumentative. APS-c is not a stop gap to anything. There is no magic to FF other than a generation of glass optimized for it- an ancient generation at that. My first camera used 120 film. Using the FF logic on this thread, THAT's what you should be demanding from Pentax. There is nothing wrong with the IQ from a K-5 and a decent DA lens.

Now I would LIKE to get more from my old Pentax glass. What I NEED is better and faster AF. Low light (high aperture) AF currently stinks. I bring a high power flashlight to my outdoor model shoots, just so I can focus. I don't care how Pentax does it (CD, PD, mirrorless) but the K-5 doesn't hit the mark let alone lead the industry.

I NEED a useful flash system, and Pentax NEEDS to market flashes that compete with much better flash systems from Canikon.

I NEED much less noise in my images. I make promotional photographs for live theatre productions. These are shot in TAv mode (actors move so 1/60 is about as slow as I can go, and I have to dedicate aperture to control depth of field; that is I can't just shoot wide open). So when the only alternative is to shoot above ISO 800 Pentax stinks again.

To wrap up this diatribe - and to address the issue of various camps mentioned before, lack of FF won't make me jump ship. Wasting R&D time and money to make a FF body instead of fixing these real problems is far more likely to cause me and my camp (if I have one) to jump ship.

[coa75]

It will probably something like tihs

MZ-D

[jsherman999]

Not to be argumentative, but I'll be argumentative. APS-c is not a stop gap to anything. There is no magic to FF other than a generation of glass optimized for it- an ancient generation at that. My first camera used 120 film. Using the FF logic on this thread, THAT's what you should be demanding from Pentax. There is nothing wrong with the IQ from a K-5 and a decent DA lens.

Now I would LIKE to get more from my old Pentax glass. What I NEED is better and faster AF. Low light (high aperture) AF currently stinks. I bring a high power flashlight to my outdoor model shoots, just so I can focus. I don't care how Pentax does it (CD, PD, mirrorless) but the K-5 doesn't hit the mark let alone lead the industry.

I NEED a useful flash system, and Pentax NEEDS to market flashes that compete with much better flash systems from Canikon.

I think it's naive to assume that these issues would not be addressed as part of a FF initiative, which really is a K-mount initiative.

Yes, they can be addressed partially at the aps-c DSLR level, but is in Ricoh's best interest to 'fix' things that are more likely needed by the type of photographer that might be migrating to FF anyway, which they don't offer?

In other words - they seem to be choosing to not cater to the 'pro' Penax aps-c market, because that's indeed a small market, but the 'pro' Pentax aps-c market would directly benefit from the tech brought down from a FF initiative (pro-class flash, pro-class AF, etc.)

I NEED much less noise in my images. I make promotional photographs for live theatre productions. These are shot in TAv mode (actors move so 1/60 is about as slow as I can go, and I have to dedicate aperture to control depth of field; that is I can't just shoot wide open). So when the only alternative is to shoot above ISO 800 Pentax stinks again.

This is confusing - what do you hope Pentax could deliver, here, in aps-c? The K-5 already delivers the best ISO-noise capability in aps-c. If that's not working for you, FF is your only option.


.

[northcoastgreg]

The thing is, APS-c was a stop-gap solution until FF could be practically possible.

That may have been so originally with Nikon and particularly Canon, but millions of APS-C cameras and lenses later it's no longer so, and it's definitely not so with Pentax, which chose to commit to APS-C to a degree no one else has. The majority of Pentax's customers either are not interested in FF or cannot afford it. If Pentax thought it could make money producing an FF, Pentax would introduce such a camera. They are in a better position to make this judgment than anyone speculating about it here.

[jsherman999]

It's 2 K-5s (comparing launch MSRP) and it may deprecate no more than a K-5. But you're right, it's in another price league. The Nikkor glass makes it so...
But for many of us it is a hobby and you would be amazed how much people spend on their hobbies, members on this forum included. Funds lost for Pentax now.

Or to say it with a sentence of Michail Sergejewitsch Gorbatschow who is famous in Germany:

"Those who are late will be punished by life itself"

He was right, it is happening to Pentax now. Thus the defeated mood.

.

Just think where Pentax could be right now if they were able to take your advice two years ago. Two years of roadmap, perhaps five or six more FF lenses right now, and they could either have a FF mirrorless with good EVF (and have been the first, besides Leica, which doesn't count) and/or have something in the fertile field that the D800 and maybe D700S is going to graze in for the next two years or so.

Personally, I think it's not too late to start the lens roadmap, or continue it with more gusto, and try to play a move ahead for once instead of two moves behind.


.

[eddie1960]

I think it's naive to assume that these issues would not be addressed as part of a FF initiative, which really is a K-mount initiative.

Yes, they can be addressed partially at the aps-c DSLR level, but is in Ricoh's best interest to 'fix' things that are more likely needed by the type of photographer that might be migrating to FF anyway, which they don't offer?

In other words - they seem to be choosing to not cater to the 'pro' Penax aps-c market, because that's indeed a small market, but the 'pro' Pentax aps-c market would directly benefit from the tech brought down from a FF initiative (pro-class flash, pro-class AF, etc.)



This is confusing - what do you hope Pentax could deliver, here, in aps-c? The K-5 already delivers the best ISO-noise capability in aps-c. If that's not working for you, FF is your only option.


.

Exactly a FF gives one more body to spread the development cost of the improvements across (645D could use all these as well BTW)

As for ISO noise really even most FF you can buy right now aren't dramatically better than the K5....but when the D800 and D4 and the 5D and 1d replacements actually hit the market i think they will raise the bar again (which the K5 had pretty much caught up to)
The real question is how high with no noise do you need iso to go. It already exceeds any film you could shoot (I've shot pretty much any B/W film you can shoot native or pushed to 3000 and even my K7 has lower noise for the most part - just on film we called it grain and actually pursued it sometimes )
the ability to push the iso to silly levels is nice but in reality is no substitute for good light IMO

Going FF for The bigger OVF , the more creative options (narrower DOF or sharper performance at the same DOF due to stopping down) and now with the big MP models the ability to print larger even if you crop 25% of the image are all pretty valid reasons for wanting it. Of course with canikon as your choice it is also to access the features they cripple on lower end cameras in the apsc line (like top notch WR for instance and full mag alloy construction)

[markku55]

I NEED much less noise in my images. I make promotional photographs for live theatre productions. These are shot in TAv mode (actors move so 1/60 is about as slow as I can go, and I have to dedicate aperture to control depth of field; that is I can't just shoot wide open). So when the only alternative is to shoot above ISO 800 Pentax stinks again.

I do not understand, K5 is one of the best in high ISO area, one of the best APS-C together with Nikon D7000

[eddie1960]

I NEED much less noise in my images. I make promotional photographs for live theatre productions. These are shot in TAv mode (actors move so 1/60 is about as slow as I can go, and I have to dedicate aperture to control depth of field; that is I can't just shoot wide open). So when the only alternative is to shoot above ISO 800 Pentax stinks again.
.

Pentax stinks above 800. what body are you using again??. even my K7 is more than adequate at 1600 and i too shoot low light promos (for live music so lower light than theater in many cases )
K5 is very usable to 6400 - an ISO that was not usable in film at all yet people managed and at 1600 the K5 really is better than most film cameras at 800.
FF will gain a stop maybe 2 depending on the sensor and how it is implemented (regardless of what they set as an upper limit)

Edit - on looking I see you have a K7 so maybe you should try out a K5 first, because the difference i've seen on it from the K7 the really big difference is in high iso and DR - plus being they can be had pretty cheaply now at sub $1000