[Ubuntu_user]

The idea of a small minimalist FF camera that is about the size of the old Pentax film cameras (think ME, etc.), and that would only cost $<2,000, is really starting to appeal to me. I don't care about liveview, or video, just give me a nice big bright viewfinder... Keep the camera small, drop the auto modes, and maybe only keep Bulb, Av, Tv, and M. The priority would be on IQ and DR. I don't care about buffer, FPS, or any of that. Just give me a FF that I can carry everywhere with me...

Why video, FPS, AF speed, etc. is not a concern for me in such a FF, is because I have a K-5 (or K-5 successor) that has great FPS, AF, Buffer, etc. that I can use when I'm shooting sports, or wildlife, etc. There are some advantages to APSC...

Just a FF that is like an old film camera... that can go everywhere with me.

[eddie1960]

The idea of a small minimalist FF camera that is about the size of the old Pentax film cameras (think ME, etc.), and that would only cost $<2,000, is really starting to appeal to me. I don't care about liveview, or video, just give me a nice big bright viewfinder... Keep the camera small, drop the auto modes, and maybe only keep Bulb, Av, Tv, and M. The priority would be on IQ and DR. I don't care about buffer, FPS, or any of that. Just give me a FF that I can carry everywhere with me...

Why video, FPS, AF speed, etc. is not a concern for me in such a FF, is because I have a K-5 (or K-5 successor) that has great FPS, AF, Buffer, etc. that I can use when I'm shooting sports, or wildlife, etc. There are some advantages to APSC...

Just a FF that is like an old film camera... that can go everywhere with me.

I agree this would be a nice camera.....but not having Video in this market would be a massive mistake IMO. I barely use it but I recognize the demand. video, more modes, and k5 level af and buffer cost nothing effectively to implement since they are already developed for the k5, leaving them out may cost more if you need to have a custom chipset developed that leaves them off. Any FF will likely share the same processor/AF/Buffer with the K5 replacement and the 645D replacement for that matter. It makes sense to build them to the highest level feasible since they will spread the cost over at least 3 models

Personally i don't think they should cripple either the Ff or the Top apsc since they are showcase mass market products

[ElJamoquio]

Personally I would be just as happy without any video... in fact I'm LESS happy if video is included because it's usually an extra button/switch/etc that I don't want to use and don't want to have to avoid. ... but I don't think there are all that many people who have a similar opinion.

[Spare Tire]

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.

No. I said the K-mount was designed for FF. It wasn't designed for 120. APS-c K-mount is a stop gap solution, because its using a mount designed for FF.
Worst still, the K-01 is APS-c using an FF mount, AND it's using a mount designed for a reflex.

And yes, using the FF logic, the 645 mount was designed for 6x4.5 but the 645D is using a crop sensor and i demand FF 645 for that mount also.

µ4/3 is perfectly fine in my book.

[topace]

And yes, using the FF logic, the 645 mount was designed for 6x4.5 but the 645D is using a crop sensor and i demand FF 645 for that mount also.

AFAIK, all the new 645 glass is FF(645) capable. So they're at least keeping the option.

[eddie1960]

AFAIK, all the new 645 glass is FF(645) capable. So they're at least keeping the option.

I think the only reason it's not a full 645 is the price of the sensor when it was released and the plan was always to offer that down the road which is why the new lenses are all full 645 compliant
full frame 645 sensors are still crazy expensive so it may be a year or 2 yet.

[Clavius]

Personally I would be just as happy without any video... in fact I'm LESS happy if video is included because it's usually an extra button/switch/etc that I don't want to use and don't want to have to avoid. ... but I don't think there are all that many people who have a similar opinion.

Agreed, I a new Pentax DSLR with CCD instead of CMOS. Just for the better IQ. CCD historically always had better IQ, but lacks the option of video or liveview. Both options are worthless compared to IQ increase.

---

Last edited by Clavius; 02-22-2012 at 01:21 PM.

[markku55]

Actually, for those having several FF Pentax lenses, for sure do ask for a boby with which they can get the potential of those lenses.
But, what do Pentax need to get more of buyers potential to buy their lenses?
I'm also fond of idea to get a cheap simple body for all FF lenses, but do you think that would be a good profitably business idea for Pentax... I do not believe that.
Pentax seems to have loosen the focus of the business.
I'm going to concentrate to m4/3 in future, and if I can get a cheap body to my Minolta lenses, I buy one.
Sorry Pentax, but I can not trust you anymore

[Chex]

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.

Well my K-5 can produce solid images at ISO's up to and even over ISO 3200.. of course it depends if your shooting hand-held or on a tripod... and Yes, Pentax NEEDS a better Flash system. I do like the idea of disable SR for faster flash sync.. I'm ok with loosing SR all together for how little I ever use it.

They need to address their AF system to bring it up to the competitions level more-so than updating their flash system.. But there is no reason this can't be done while implementing it IN a new FF system..
bring it out as their new flagship FF.. even for $2000-2500 it WILL sell. As for "Wasted" R&D money.. to me that is what SR was all about.. yes it's a nice feature.. but IMHO it's also gimmicky.. if you know WTF your doing and how your settings should be, you should need it anyways. For the amount of pics "saved" by SR, if that money was put into a better AF system, you would end up with more keepers than those "saved" by SR.

PP work cleans up a LOT of noise, and PP work on a FF image (especially something like the D800's 36MP image) would be able to be cleaned up and then resized say, down to 20MP size and you would have never known there was noise.. and still be able to get any size of large print etc..

The IQ from the K-5 is great, FOR an APS-C, when comparing to a FF competitor (even those that are older than it, D700 or 5DMark II, and can be picked up for under $2000) the difference in FoV/DoF, and overall IQ is quite noticeable. If you have tried out a FF camera you would see the difference. I've tried a 5D MarkII and a D3 so far.. I sure would have LOVED a K-mount FF (K-5 on steroids) type of camera.

I am wondering if Pentax simply cannot GET a FF sensor from Sony to do it, until XX/XX/XXXX date and is simply waiting for availability, instead of going to another vendor and seeing what the PRIME Processor can do with a different FF sensor.

Saying APS-C is all that's ever needed is like saying a AWD minivan should be the only vehicle made.. it can do pretty much everything.. even though it doesn't do any of them "the best possible"

[Zygonyx]

AFAIK, all the new 645 glass is FF(645) capable. So they're at least keeping the option.

Not to forget they intend also to sell these lenses to Film 645/645N/645NII users...

[eddie1960]

Agreed, I wouldn't a new Pentax DSLR with CCD instead of CMOS. Just for the better IQ. CCD historically always had better IQ, but lacks the option of video or liveview. Both options are worthless compared to IQ increase.

CCD is also worse at Hi iso

With the advent of the K5 it's main advantage is 200 iso and below. now if it's the 18mp leica ccd with no AA filter, un-crippled k mount (so no need for green button metering) and b/m/av/tv and x modes with a program functions as well
make it look like an lx or mx (as said before my vote is LX mirrorless top lcd with add on prisms or WL finder - no need for WL to be backwards either that can jst be linked to the mounted finder backwards for mirrored ones). it would be pretty sweet . I imagine though it would actually be cheaper to make the same FF with 24MP CMos Sony sensor and Movie mode for possibly even less as the sensor has greater volume than the leica one (which in any case is now a pretty old sensor and leica is replacing it supposedly as well - the rumors are with Cmos)

problem is all us old guys who this appeals to are not the broad market
no Video = low sales. aside from the 645D (and other MF cams) and the leica name one DSLR that has no live view and Video. It's a standard feature now. (And i would guess it's removal would mean little to the final price since the sensor is still likely a video capable sensor - the prime engine too since not a chance a more primitive prime will be developed for 1 camera)

[LFLee]

Full Frame Dream Crushed today. Pentax change the name of the new DA50 f1.8 to mid tele from "normal'.

See this page: http://www.pentax.jp/japan/news/announce/20120208.html

標準中望遠
normal mid-tele

[Clavius]

I'm also fond of idea to get a cheap simple body for all FF lenses, but do you think that would be a good profitably business idea for Pentax... I do not believe that.

Maybe they'll concentrate on a sensor in between the size of APS-C and FF? Bigger then APS-C, but still being able to use DA's.

I'm going to concentrate to m4/3 in future, and if I can get a cheap body to my Minolta lenses, I buy one.
Sorry Pentax, but I can not trust you anymore

Second best to FF is m4/3?!? That's some weird logic you've got there.

[eddie1960]

I am wondering if Pentax simply cannot GET a FF sensor from Sony to do it, until XX/XX/XXXX date and is simply waiting for availability, instead of going to another vendor and seeing what the PRIME Processor can do with a different FF sensor.

Who is this mythical vendor of a developed FF sensor. AFAIK there is the CCD from Kodak that leica uses (available but inferior in many ways better in others), the Sony/Nikon fabs (maybe available but priced too high, maybe locked out by an agreement with Nikon to purchase the bulk of the run) and Canon (not a chance they will sell proprietary tech to their biggest competitor)

I know there are a number of other sensor companies but to go and get a sensor fabbed from scratch may be more expensive than it is worth for Pentax. Also as cmos tech goes currently Sony leads the pack so it means sourcing an inferior sensor at a higher price.
Maybe they could get one made by samsung but I've not seen anything from Samsung that says it's worth moving away from Sony sensors right now

The biggest hold up in a FF camera is probably Price of sensor combuined with possible agreements blocking access to the latest (the K5 was the first time they were simultaneous with Nikon on release)
It is possible Nikon has nailed down a 6 month exclusive on the FF sensor which would explain why the Sony model won't announce until the fall for instance even though they make the sensor. Buying 90% of a production run on a product gives you a lot of power over your vendor. Ask any small vendor who has sold to Walmart

[Clavius]

CCD is also worse at Hi iso

With the advent of the K5 it's main advantage is 200 iso and below. now if it's the 18mp leica ccd with no AA filter, un-crippled k mount (so no need for green button metering) and b/m/av/tv and x modes with a program functions as well
make it look like an lx or mx (as said before my vote is LX mirrorless top lcd with add on prisms or WL finder - no need for WL to be backwards either that can jst be linked to the mounted finder backwards for mirrored ones). it would be pretty sweet .

I would certainly buy the machine you described above.

problem is all us old guys who this appeals to are not the broad market

Hey hey hey! I'm only 33 and this appeals to me A LOT.

no Video = low sales.

Someone at THAT advanced level, someone who demands THAT amount of quality, doesn't buy a photocamera for the videocapability.