Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-20-2012, 12:38 AM   #31
Veteran Member
vrrattko's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 734
This is a dilemma: As far as I would like to see Fullframe K-mount Pentax in near future I don't think I can rightfully push the 'like button' because I myself won't be buying this camera soon. Many of us would like to have the possibility to upgrade to more serious camera or to have their legacy lenses used as they were intended, but in reality how many of Pentaxians could really afford such camera or justify it? 'I like to see fullframe pentax' is not the same as 'i will buy fullframe pentax' afterall...

01-20-2012, 12:45 AM   #32
Senior Member
Kryscendo's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 223
I'd like to see an EVIL version of the MX or K1000 with the K-mount. No auto focus assist lamps. No silly scene modes or in camera processing other than the ability to write to DNG or JPEG. Just a streamlined full frame digital camera that if priced right, might just be an attractive student's SLR once more.
01-20-2012, 02:52 AM   #33
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 209
QuoteOriginally posted by maxfield_photo Quote
Why buy a camera that I don't want? I bought the K20d because the digital age was leaving me behind. Soon after the K7 came out, I yawned. The K-x came out, I yawned. The K-r came out, I yawned. The K5 came out, I yawned. The 645d came out, now that got my attention, but it's out of my price range. The Q came out, I snickered. There's talk of a new mirrorless K-01 <yawn>

I vote with my dollars, why should I encourage them to continue on with the status quo? When Pentax releases a camera that I want, I'll buy it, until then I'll keep buying old film lenses and they'll keep losing my business. You may think me disloyal, but I feel that loyalty has to be earned. Maybe I'll get an FA 31 ltd to support them, those are pretty sweet, but I refuse to spend a dime on a camera that I don't want.
+1

Why buy another APS-C, when the difference in IQ with the new models is very close to the older models anyway..? At the same time the QC has gone downhill...
01-20-2012, 03:59 AM   #34
Veteran Member
RuiC's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Lisboa - The Grocery
Posts: 616
QuoteOriginally posted by Roob-N-Boots Quote
With the release of a fullframe, Pentax will have to release professional grade lenses like the two you are asking for and then some.
It seems to me that a 135mm FL lens is more for amateurs. Remember the 28/135 duet for starters? Profs would use other Focals more appropriate to their work. And a 135mm (FF) body would be intended for more serious/prof users rather than amateurs. The only feature that's appealing is the f/1.8 but that is all!

01-20-2012, 05:25 AM - 1 Like   #35
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 426
On the business side, It might be worthwhile for Pentax to come out with just a full frame body. Since many of the people who would buy a Pentax full frame are those with old Pentax lenses, they could make the body a limited edition type deal. That way they could avoid having to come out with a bunch of full frame lenses to begin with. Then they could work some D-FA lenses into the lineup if the body was selling successfully enough.

I do not think Pentax will capture many Canon or Nikon full frame shooters (good brand recognition and they have good cameras). I believe this strategy would allow them to cater to those who have Pentax equipment and want a full frame body (Decently few people), while avoiding a large investment in lenses.

As a side note. You should also provide a price range that people would be willing to pay for a full frame body in the survey Adam is creating. I have a feeling that there are people intrigued by the thought of a full frame camera, but would only be willing to spend ~$1,500 on one. In Pentaxe's view, these people will not count (I believe a Pentax full frame would be significantly more than that). Then there are those who would pay $2,500 - $3,000 for one. These will be the people who actually purchase a full frame body. I do not think you can lump these people together and still have a legitimate survey that Pentax will listen to (yes, I think those that would at $1,500 outnumber those that would pay $2,500 - $3,000).
01-20-2012, 05:45 AM   #36
Banned




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Millstone,NJ
Posts: 6,491
I would like a FF Pentax version of the Panasonic GH2 with full manual control in video mode and 1080p60.
01-20-2012, 06:59 AM   #37
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,922
QuoteOriginally posted by Kryscendo Quote
I'd like to see an EVIL version of the MX or K1000 with the K-mount. No auto focus assist lamps. No silly scene modes or in camera processing other than the ability to write to DNG or JPEG. Just a streamlined full frame digital camera that if priced right, might just be an attractive student's SLR once more.
You have to have in-camera processing and scene modes. The vast majority of consumers in the developing world do not own or have regular access to home computers for post-processing. The camera *is* their processor. non-Western markets account for nearly 50% of sales now and are growing faster.
01-20-2012, 07:22 AM   #38
Forum Member




Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 72
QuoteOriginally posted by Fontan Quote
I do think that there is one way for Pentax to succeed with FF. In fact it may be the only way. That is to have a FF model that is stripped down with not a whole lot of features, and it will cost less than $1,000. Maybe even cheaper. Personally, I don't even need AF, but that maybe a bit too stripped down for most. I say no SR, no live view, no burst mode (ok, maybe 3 fps), no pop up flash. Manual control and A mode only. No in camera processing. But, with a kick ass sensor and a viewfinder.
Yes, yes, yes! One of the major assets of Pentax is the usability and availability of lots of brilliant legacy glass. But those who use it may find, on the one hand, that many of the digital features of current cameras remain unused, whereas on the other, FF would be a way getting the most out of the older lenses. So, Pentax, let us have an LX with only registration digitized!

01-20-2012, 09:54 AM   #39
Veteran Member
mattdm's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Boston, MA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,964
QuoteOriginally posted by mikeSF Quote
i've no particular interest in a FF camera but i'll wave the flag for the rest o' ya if it will help.
Exactly the problem I was talking about.
01-20-2012, 09:55 AM - 1 Like   #40
Veteran Member
mattdm's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Boston, MA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,964
QuoteOriginally posted by maxfield_photo Quote
You may think me disloyal, but I feel that loyalty has to be earned. Maybe I'll get an FA 31 ltd to support them, those are pretty sweet, but I refuse to spend a dime on a camera that I don't want.
I don't think you're disloyal at all. I'm just objecting to the idea that "all true Pentaxians want full frame".
01-20-2012, 09:58 AM   #41
Veteran Member
mattdm's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Boston, MA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,964
QuoteOriginally posted by Fontan Quote
I would join you for the hell of it. I already got 645d and M8. I don't need anything in between.


I do think that there is one way for Pentax to succeed with FF. In fact it may be the only way. That is to have a FF model that is stripped down with not a whole lot of features, and it will cost less than $1,000. Maybe even cheaper. Personally, I don't even need AF, but that maybe a bit too stripped down for most. I say no SR, no live view, no burst mode (ok, maybe 3 fps), no pop up flash. Manual control and A mode only. No in camera processing. But, with a kick ass sensor and a viewfinder. K mount is fine, and a slew of adapter for m mount, Nikon, and canon lenses, and so on.

They maybe able to undercut the whole industry with that. It won't compete with aps-c models with bells and whistles that not many would use.
The problem is: those bells and whistles don't add much at all to the cost, and so stripping them out isn't going to get the cost down. Not having a Tv mode saves nothing. Low quality control, cheap materials, cheap manufacture now that brings the cost down.
01-20-2012, 10:23 AM   #42
Loyal Site Supporter
Canada_Rockies's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,535
Liked and commented.
01-20-2012, 10:29 AM - 1 Like   #43
Site Supporter
Clinton's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,826
I liked it already. It seems there are a few people here that would like to hit a dislike button though.

Round 2581: FIGHT!
01-20-2012, 11:29 AM   #44
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 43,114
Original Poster
Over 2,400 on the FF page already- I would say that's progress! I'm confident that we'll reach our goal

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com's high server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover those costs by donating. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

01-20-2012, 01:13 PM   #45
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NJ
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,880
QuoteOriginally posted by mattdm Quote
The problem is: those bells and whistles don't add much at all to the cost, and so stripping them out isn't going to get the cost down. Not having a Tv mode saves nothing. Low quality control, cheap materials, cheap manufacture now that brings the cost down.
I agree that features don't add much to the cost, but the marketing possibility is intriguing. Consider this: a Pentax FF, maybe 10-20% less expensive than the competition. No scene modes, no video, simplified operation - that is, no reliance on a menu system. A marketing campaign built around the idea, "Pentax, the heart of a photographer" or something like that. The Pentax FF would be a barebones sports car compared to the luxury sports cars of Canikon.
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!
24x36mm, aps-c, camera, capacity, company, d4s, dont, ff, followers, frame, full-frame, idea, im, iso, k-3, lens, lenses, letter, light, lw/ph, nikon, page, pentax, release, time, traffic
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The full frame Pentax that never was dj_saunter Pentax DSLR Discussion 23 05-06-2011 04:06 AM
Pentax and Full Frame oppositz Pentax DSLR Discussion 58 03-18-2011 09:39 AM
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



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:17 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