[Mehlsack]

Yeah, but by the time the Pentax FF might come out, Pentax will have to face their own problems with FF. Canon/Nikon had several generations of FF-Cameras (and lenses) to learn and optimize. Thats the problem that i see and as Falk said, at PK 2012 the 3rd generation is already out and this might prove fatal ( in FF regards)

[Iren Jane]

Gimbal is right, a very accurate phrase, I like it. I currently sell my Canon 5DMKII just because I want Pentax independently from availability of other FF models. Image stabilization in camera body is a heaven for all who like M42 old lenses, and only FF who do it — Sony. So no real alternatives except Sony there, and I'll better do iPhone photo that something other than Pentax.

[falconeye]

Sipping Guinness on St. Patricks Day to save this doomsday

Oh, I'd like to join you

But our St. Patricks day was last weekend already. So too late again

[ElJamoquio]

little larval forms called kids

icky.

[disya2]

...
If you want to resent why I feel that way, I refer to the following 20min interview:

-> A month with the Nikon D800: Exclusive interview with Jim Brandenburg | Video product reviews | What Digital Camera

Jim Brandenburg worked with the D800 for a month -- LAST SUMMER! He describes how the camera changed the way he perceives photography. And it won't happen with APSC.
...

Falk: I'm not sure I captured all the details from this interview (I'm not native speaker) but in the end I have very mixed feelings. While the guy is good in wording and it is very clear that he believes and really excited in what he's talking, I found that a) the most of his excitement came from resolution AND b) that his main camera prior to D800 test was D3s. Indeed, it is quite a jump in MP count. I recall I was even more excited the first time I tried K-5 in low light. That was something unbelievable, I could simply take my camera and shot anything around in my room without a tripod or flash. With the K-7 I had to use flash in those circumstances and since I'm somewhat (ok, very) lazy, I really used it very few times indoors. But (and this is my point) had I had some experience with e.g. 5D mk 2 I wouldn't be that exited with K-5. Now, when I read about 36 Mp in D800 I was very intrigued and downloaded every sample file from Nikon web-site. What I found was not really impressing compared to stunning details found in Pentax 645D sample images. And that "canceled" AA-filter, as to my eye, doesn't equal to the lack of AA filter in digital MF cameras (I judge on the girl photo you posted somewhere somewhen). So... I'm nowhere near a pro photographer and I'm not someone to neglect such an authority... but I think that if Jim Brandenburg had used Sony A900 or 5D Mk2 excessively prior to D800, he wouldn't be that amazed and that camera wouldn't be something psychology-changing for him.
So... I personally wouldn't buy a FF camera from Pentax unless they make it at least Sony A700-sized (spend quite some time on camerasize.com - that size would be just perfect for FA limiteds (which is the only true strength of Pentax

[Coeurdechene]

What I found was not really impressing compared to stunning details found in Pentax 645D sample images

You're comparing apples and oranges there...the d800 IS NOT IN MEDIUM FORMAT LEAGUE (i'm not shouting at you i've just read it too many times and it's kind of getting under my skin), Nikon has been saying that as a marketing strategy. What it is is a hell of a lot of camera for the price, it's got huge resolution for a 35mm format camera, in a fairly compact camera, with decent Fps and high Iso capabilities...
Being a 35mm format it can't really compete with a MF system (and it ain't competing with them, not in that league resolving wise and fortunately price wise), but it's got it's advantages just as it's got it's downfalls...try pushing the Iso on a MF over 400 and see how it fares.
Compared to the existing 35mm Dslr's the d800 is a stunning beast.
If i had the money i would own the d800 and a leaf aptus II 65 or 80 MPs with a Mamiya 645Df, oh and what the hell if i'm just dreaming i would add a d4 to the pack and a Sinar Big Format camera just for the "why the hell not?" and all the control it can give you over perspective and focus
that said if the pentax 645D costed 1/2 or 2/3 of it's price i'm sure much more people would be tempted (although i doubt those price points are economically viable).

[falconeye]

I think that if Jim Brandenburg had used Sony A900 or 5D Mk2 excessively prior to D800, he wouldn't be that amazed and that camera wouldn't be something psychology-changing for him.

What you say is rather possible. However, I still found the level of excitement of this rather humble photographer amazing. And he did use a D7000 before, so, he has seen a K-5 alike camera. His main statement was that it was for the first time in his life a camera he was able to afford felt like one of those medium format or 4x5 film cameras he used for landscape -- and he did not refer to resolution in particular. He said the D800 is in territory inaccessible to 35mm before. He did not say a 645D wouldn't have provided an even more convincing experience.

Btw, the samples shown so far are subpar as is always the case for a new camera. You may however get just an idea of what we're talking about by looking here

-> http://files.fotopolis.pl/download/pw-d800-dw05.JPG (D800E ISO 100)


OTOH, a 645D isn't much more expensive if you include the cost of top resolving lenses.

---

Last edited by falconeye; 03-17-2012 at 06:15 PM.

[disya2]

You're comparing apples and oranges there...the d800 IS NOT IN MEDIUM FORMAT LEAGUE

Yes, I just mentioned that because the guy in the interview was referring to MF cameras and that D800 provided him amount of details he never saw. That is, I saw that amount of details (much more in fact) in 645D samples. I never handled any of the two so I can't comment on anything but samples from Nikon web-site and some posted 645D and other MF photos.
Anyway, I'm totally agree with what you said.

[Coeurdechene]

OTOH, a 645D isn't much more expensive if you include the cost of top resolving lenses.

mmm...well if you include some MF glass the difference widens again..old lenses have about the same price than gold nikon lenses and new ones will cost either the same or much more:
The 25 f4 is at 5000$! That's almost the price of what's gonna be my working set: d800, 24-70 and 70-200 f2,8. even if you add right angle viewfinder, grip, a cheap 50 f1,8, you're still looking at 3000$ less than 645D with the 50mm. You could own a d4, d800, and the three zooms (14-24,24-70,70-200) for around 1000 less than 645D, the 25 and the 50.

Thanks for the link, i had not seen that one yet! the details on the bill are just stunning...
I too liked the interview with Brandenburg and liked a lot his explanations to why he thought this was the camera he would choose if he was asked to pick just one camera. I didn't like how many times he mentioned MF because i think this is Nikon trying to push it's marketing strategy...But i do value that a proven photographer has found this camera so exiting and that he explained what could remind him of the bigger format. I'm sure he's used MF lots of times, probably even big format, and in the interview he, at some point, contextualizes that it's a big achievment for a 35mm camera, and implies that it's not resolution perse what's so exiting but this kind of resolution in a compact body and the strenghs of 35mm format over MF (like the fps or the high ISO capabilities).

[disya2]

...
And he did use a D7000 before, so, he has seen a K-5 alike camera. His main statement was that it was for the first time in his life a camera he was able to afford felt like one of those medium format or 4x5 film cameras he used for landscape -- and he did not refer to resolution in particular. He said the D800 is in territory inaccessible to 35mm before. He did not say a 645D wouldn't have provided an even more convincing experience.

Btw, the samples shown so far are subpar as is always the case for a new camera. You may however get just an idea of what we're talking about by looking here

-> http://files.fotopolis.pl/download/pw-d800-dw05.JPG (D800E ISO 100)

Ok, that sample is very close resolution-wise. I convinced that D800E is a break-through camera for some.
As for D7000 and K-5 - I only mentioned my own experience to show that his excitement has the same roots. I'm not sure why you mentioned them here.

Why I even mentioned that, and dare to post a reply here: I see your scientific approach and all your statements are usually perfectly correct and precise. But lately (namely after CP+) most of your posts were very dim and predicting dark Pentax ages and here you posted the link to the interview and said that it explains why you feel so. That's why I carefully listened to the interview, spot some details and draw some conclusions. First: he was so excited because he used D3s as his main camera and change in sensor resolution was stunning for him, not the number of MP directly but e.g. the ability to see how resolution depends on aperture in real time. Second: he didn't use a digital MF camera in the field because it doesn't suit to his needs in fast automatic exposure metering and focusing. Third: his most used lens is 70-200 2.8. Taking these three into account I can't see how Nikon D800 is related to your statement that Pentax should release a FF camera next few months at most. Not that I don't want them to, I do and I really think that they ought to. I just don't see why D800 should be a merit and the reason of their hurry. Would you buy a D800 labeled "Pentax" (i.e. camera of the same size and weight, and shape)? I won't. But I would buy a FF camera roughly K-7 sized with autofocus version of A 50 1.2 as a kitlens in a heartbeat.

[falconeye]

I see your scientific approach and all your statements are usually perfectly correct and precise. But lately (namely after CP+) most of your posts were very dim and predicting dark Pentax ages

Maybe, I am overdoing this. You're right.

I referred to the interview because it expresses well what I observe among fellow photographers (not necessarily Pentaxians). The D800 got them excited like no other camera in recent years. I agree with your analysis, that it may, after all, be not such a big thing. It isn't anything what I can describe precisely. It's an emotional thing. Which is why I referred to the interview as it expresses this emotion well.

I don't predict dark Pentax ages though. Just that they've eventually missed the perfect moment to add FF to their lineup. They can survive w/o FF just like Canikon can survive w/o medium format

[Class A]

If you want to resent why I feel that way, I refer to the following 20min interview:

That was interesting to watch.

I'm surprised, however, that Brandenburg said he was happy with the placement of all buttons. Clearly, the ISO button is ill-placed (cannot be reached with the right hand and the left hand should always be under the lens; large lenses make it difficult to even just temporarily move the left hand away from under the lens).

Regarding "too late". I think Falk was/is right in the following sense: Pentax will be in a "catch up" position again. They had a window of opportunity to be the first to offer a great FF camera with an affordable price tag. Now that Canikon started to compete with themselves (before someone else does it), Pentax has a much harder time to throw something into the market that will turn everyone's head (for the right reasons; don't get me started on the K-01 ).

[Fontan]

Ah, what the hell. I guess I will find out what this FF thing is all about. I will buy D800E when I can get my hands on it along with a couple of lenses and compare it to 645d. I only live once. I suppose this is the only way to find out, really.

[Clavius]

Regarding "too late". I think Falk was/is right in the following sense: Pentax will be in a "catch up" position again. They had a window of opportunity to be the first to offer a great FF camera with an affordable price tag. Now that Canikon started to compete with themselves (before someone else does it), Pentax has a much harder time to throw something into the market that will turn everyone's head (for the right reasons; don't get me started on the K-01 ).

That's just a matter of opinion. Pentax has always been somewhat later with new features and tech then the other bigger brands. That's not so good, but - as always - there is a advantage to that, and Pentax usually makes good use of that: They always do a very good job at learning from the mistakes of others.

Why is it so important to be the first? Pentax is just to small to go first and take all the flak. I would rather see that they learn from the the other brands again, and delivery a very good product.

[Mehlsack]

Would you please elaborate which feature pentax improved over their competitors?