How to push the Pentax Full-Frame Idea and get that FF out faster...

vrrattko · 01-20-2012, 12:38 AM

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...

Kryscendo · 01-20-2012, 12:45 AM

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.

_quicksilver_ · 01-20-2012, 02:52 AM

Originally posted by maxfield_photo

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...

**RuiC** · 01-20-2012, 03:59 AM

Originally posted by Roob-N-Boots

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!

kswier · 01-20-2012, 05:25 AM - **1 Like**

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).

jogiba · 01-20-2012, 05:45 AM

I would like a FF Pentax version of the Panasonic GH2 with full manual control in video mode and 1080p60.

**Aristophanes** · 01-20-2012, 06:59 AM

Originally posted by Kryscendo

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.

DirkG · 01-20-2012, 07:22 AM

Originally posted by Fontan

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!

mattdm · 01-20-2012, 09:54 AM

Originally posted by mikeSF

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.

mattdm · 01-20-2012, 09:55 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by maxfield_photo

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".

mattdm · 01-20-2012, 09:58 AM

Originally posted by Fontan

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.

**Canada_Rockies** · 01-20-2012, 10:23 AM

Liked and commented.

**Clinton** · 01-20-2012, 10:29 AM - **1 Like**

I liked it already. It seems there are a few people here that would like to hit a dislike button though.

Round 2581: FIGHT!

Adam · 01-20-2012, 11:29 AM

Over 2,400 on the FF page already- I would say that's progress! I'm confident that we'll reach our goal

**luftfluss** · 01-20-2012, 01:13 PM

Originally posted by mattdm

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.

01-20-2012, 11:29 AM	#44
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,594 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 server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

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

01-20-2012, 12:38 AM	#31
vrrattko Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Photos: Albums Posts: 753	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
Kryscendo Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 222	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
_quicksilver_ Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 207	Originally posted by maxfield_photo 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
RuiC Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Lisboa - The best destination in Europe Posts: 633	Originally posted by Roob-N-Boots 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
kswier 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
jogiba 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
Aristophanes Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Rankin Inlet, Nunavut Photos: Albums Posts: 3,948	Originally posted by Kryscendo 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
DirkG Forum Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Posts: 72	Originally posted by Fontan 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
mattdm Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Boston, MA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,948	Originally posted by mikeSF 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
mattdm Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Boston, MA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,948	Originally posted by maxfield_photo 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".

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

01-20-2012, 09:58 AM	#41
mattdm Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Boston, MA Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,948	Originally posted by Fontan 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
Canada_Rockies Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Sparwood, BC, Canada Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,385	Liked and commented.

01-20-2012, 10:29 AM - 1 Like	#43
Clinton Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Salt Lake City, UT Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,910	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, 01:13 PM	#45
luftfluss Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,618	Originally posted by mattdm 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.