FF Under Development

TomTextura · 10-09-2012, 08:15 PM

Originally posted by Unsinkable II

I think the introduction of the D600 and 6D may actually do Pentax some good. Both the Nikon and the Canon have had their wings clipped in various ways and if Pentax bring out a FF at the same price point that feels as premium as a K-5, and keeps all its features intact, people are likely to see the Pentax as the superior product.

I like that prospect. One area though that Pentax has catching up to do, and that isn't just up to them, is in third-party support. I hope they start aggressively courting some of the industry players. For example, I'd really like to see PocketWizard supply Pentax specific transceivers that enable their hyper-sync feature. Tethering in popular applications like Lightroom and Capture One is also desperately needed.

Blue · 10-09-2012, 08:29 PM

Originally posted by TomTextura

Why in the world would Pentax even think about ditching the K-mount?! That'd probably spell suicide. It's a great mount, meant to house a 35mm imaging device, be it film or chip.

There is no need for Pentax to drop the k-mount than there is for Nikon to drop the 53 year old F mount.

Kunzite · 10-09-2012, 11:15 PM

Originally posted by Vylen

I see a lot of ranting on about data, data, and data. But, have yet to actually see any data that people are supposedly using...

I'm not ranting; however, illdefined claimed something ("shrinking segment") and he refuses to bring any proof to his claim - because he actually doesn't know. Now he's trying to put the burden of proof on me; it won't work. His claim, his job to prove it.
If you want some data, this was posted on another thread:
CIPA starts to report growing mirrorless sales: Digital Photography Review
Note the mention of natural disasters affecting the DSLRs more than MILCs, and that this are relative figures (%) - not absolute (sale volumes).

Originally posted by illdefined

you're guessing APS-C DSLRs will keep growing and go on to do well, in spite of new competition from above and below.

I'm making no such guesses. I only said that, unless otherwise proved, it's safe to assume that right now the growing trend was continued. That's how trends works

Originally posted by illdefined

um, there weren't any MILCs back then. the MICRO 4/3 "standard" mainstreamed MILCs and Olympus was on the ground floor with that push. together with Panasonic, they "drove the market", creating an entirely new market category that the establishment (Canon, Nikon, Sony) are now entering themselves.

You didn't read what I wrote? I'll write it again: "driving the market" doesn't necessarily means MILCs, and doesn't guarantee success.

Originally posted by illdefined

see? again, says your old data. keep watching.

Talking is cheap; but show me your new data - if you can.

Originally posted by illdefined

I see Olympus taking shots, learning from them and co-dominating a growing market they had a hand in making. all the while, gaining crucial marketshare on the way. that last part cannot be said for Pentax. I'm not sure Pentax knows what its doing yet, as it stands now, we can only guess.

Yes, Olympus is doing great losing money on their Imaging Systems division; Pentax should use the same tactic.

Originally posted by Blue

There is no need for Pentax to drop the k-mount than there is for Nikon to drop the 53 year old F mount.

Absolutely!

Clavius · 10-10-2012, 12:08 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

If you want some data, this was posted on another thread:
CIPA starts to report growing mirrorless sales: Digital Photography Review
Note the mention of natural disasters affecting the DSLRs more than MILCs, and that this are relative figures (%) - not absolute (sale volumes).

Interesting link, with usefull data. This confirms my view on a possible Pentax FF: Pentax could test the FF-waters first with a MILC without shrinking their APSC product line. There is slow steady growth in MILCs, and there is slow steady growth in FF, so combinging the two would be smart. Especially since the competitors don't have any of those yet. A nice niche for Pentax.

Mistral75 · 10-10-2012, 02:11 AM

Latest data from CIPA (the Japanese 'Camera and Imaging Products Association') are there:

http://www.cipa.jp/english/data/pdf/d-201208_e.pdf

During the period from January 1st till August 31st, 2012, total shipment of cameras with interchangeable lens (SLRs + non-reflex cameras) grew by 25% in units and 38% in value in comparison with the same period in 2011.

Hardly a shrinking market.

Non-reflex cameras represented 18% in units and 15.5% in value of the cameras with interchangeable lens shipped from January 1st till August 31st, 2012. Even though there are no data concerning non-reflex cameras in 2011, the fact that their share is smaller than the growth of total shipment implies that SLR shipment is also growing at a fast pace.

On the other hand, cameras with built-in lens were hit hard: minus 13% in units and minus 15% in value.

**RobA_Oz** · 10-10-2012, 04:20 AM

Originally posted by Franky2step

Check the ,marketplace and see how many Pentaxians are hitting the exits

I keep looking when others have said this, and I don't see evidence of a mass movement. Three or four prominent contributors, and maybe several others, but many have been talking about it for a while. Most people are still posting photos and talking about all manner of things, rather than jumping on the cheap D600 or 5dII or the more expensive D800. Others continue to join with their new Pentax gear. Of course, someone might attempt to do a proper count, but I don't think we're going to be devoid of Jeremiahs here for a while yet.

Originally posted by Franky2step

In business it's always cheaper to keep a client than to find a new one.

JMHO

No doubt about that. Good to see that they're actually getting on with it, from what we read now.

Kunzite · 10-10-2012, 04:51 AM

Originally posted by Clavius

Interesting link, with usefull data. This confirms my view on a possible Pentax FF: Pentax could test the FF-waters first with a MILC without shrinking their APSC product line. There is slow steady growth in MILCs, and there is slow steady growth in FF, so combinging the two would be smart. Especially since the competitors don't have any of those yet. A nice niche for Pentax.

I'm not sure you can combine the two "small growths".
IMO, since MILCs are on average lower value than DSLRs (see the data posted by Mistral), a MILC FF would be too much of a niche for Pentax. Going up there could be a risky, expensive maneuver - and Pentax right now should concentrate on things which would allow them a fast, sustainable growth.

Mistral: thank you for bringing up relevant data. It's far better when we have something to base our assumptions on, and/or verify them.

Clavius · 10-10-2012, 04:59 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

I'm not sure you can combine the two "small growths".
IMO, since MILCs are on average lower value than DSLRs (see the data posted by Mistral), a MILC FF would be too much of a niche for Pentax. Going up there could be a risky, expensive maneuver - and Pentax right now should concentrate on things which would allow them a fast, sustainable growth.

I believe that in the the other rumor thread a Pentax official already confirmed that "APSC is the maximum format for MILC".

But still, wouldn't that lower value of the MILCs make it possible to place a very highly featured high quality and very usefull FF camera on the market below the price of the competitors. Enabling that fast growth. And probably sustainable too, as digital has the future. DSLRs are only partly digital, all the moving parts, bouncing mirrors are still from the analog age.

bossa · 10-10-2012, 05:22 AM

Originally posted by Clavius

I believe that in the the other rumor thread a Pentax official already confirmed that "APSC is the maximum format for MILC"....

That could only be due to the speed of LCD and EVF technology and bandwidth issues that will, no doubt, be solved within a couple of years. Obviously FF would require a greater data throughput for Live View and EVF to keep up, but, all the same, I can't see absolute statements like that as anything more than an excuses frankly.

Mistral75 · 10-10-2012, 05:30 AM

Originally posted by Clavius

I believe that in the the other rumor thread a Pentax official already confirmed that "APSC is the maximum format for MILC".

(...).

Actually, he said that

Originally posted by leonsroar

mirrorless segment is moving forward to smaller size. Even though there was possibility to bring FF into this segment, it was our conclusion that APS-C should be the utmost size for mirrorless segment.

rawr · 10-10-2012, 05:33 AM

Originally posted by bossa

I can't see absolute statements like that as anything more than an excuses frankly.

Ouch!

The Pentax guy's quote was saying basically that FF makes it harder to go with small mirrorless. It's not an 'excuse' - Pentax know how to do small, after all. It's just a pretty sensible observation, especially if we are talking K-mount FF.

Mistral75 · 10-10-2012, 05:33 AM

Originally posted by bossa

That could only be due to the speed of LCD and EVF technology and bandwidth issues that will, no doubt, be solved within a couple of years. Obviously FF would require a greater data throughput for Live View and EVF to keep up, but, all the same, I can't see absolute statements like that as anything more than an excuses frankly.

No, it's a conclusion arrived at, a choice made by Pentax, cf. supra.

Sony RX-1 is mirrorless and 24x36 and so is Leica M (which has Live View and an optional EVF), not to mention Sony Alpha 99.

Medium FormatPro · 10-10-2012, 05:33 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

Olympus failed in the DSLR market, very true.. why was that? They tried to "drive the market" with their "made for digital" 4/3 system

I'll tell you exactly why...

The Olympus line had small sensors and then "charged" through the roof to have their items - but especially the lens' - some of which exceed Nikon's pricing of higher end lens'.

rawr · 10-10-2012, 05:38 AM

What's Nikon or Canons excuse for not doing FF mirrorless, by the way

Mistral75 · 10-10-2012, 05:41 AM

Originally posted by rawr

What's Nikon or Canons excuse for not doing FF mirrorless, by the way

Not to eat into the sales of their highly profitable 24x36 DSLR lines.

The same reason (extended to APS-C DSLRs) explains why Canon, Nikon and Pentax were the last to launch a mirrorless camera, far later than Olympus, Panasonic, Samsung and Sony.

10-10-2012, 02:11 AM	#155
Mistral75 Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Paris, France Posts: 7,527	Latest data from CIPA (the Japanese 'Camera and Imaging Products Association') are there: http://www.cipa.jp/english/data/pdf/d-201208_e.pdf During the period from January 1st till August 31st, 2012, total shipment of cameras with interchangeable lens (SLRs + non-reflex cameras) grew by 25% in units and 38% in value in comparison with the same period in 2011. Hardly a shrinking market. Non-reflex cameras represented 18% in units and 15.5% in value of the cameras with interchangeable lens shipped from January 1st till August 31st, 2012. Even though there are no data concerning non-reflex cameras in 2011, the fact that their share is smaller than the growth of total shipment implies that SLR shipment is also growing at a fast pace. On the other hand, cameras with built-in lens were hit hard: minus 13% in units and minus 15% in value. Last edited by Mistral75; 10-10-2012 at 02:16 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
ready to go! first development coming soon	dj_saunter	Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom	17	05-15-2011 09:14 PM
Development: Rwanda style.	ihasa	General Talk	16	04-07-2011 11:37 PM
two bath development	icywarm	Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom	22	01-08-2011 12:27 AM
UN Human Development Report	mikemike	General Talk	5	11-05-2010 05:55 AM
Any Arrested Development (TV) fans here?	RolloR	General Talk	8	10-21-2010 08:25 PM

10-09-2012, 08:15 PM	#151
TomTextura Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: Denver Photos: Albums Posts: 570	Originally posted by Unsinkable II I think the introduction of the D600 and 6D may actually do Pentax some good. Both the Nikon and the Canon have had their wings clipped in various ways and if Pentax bring out a FF at the same price point that feels as premium as a K-5, and keeps all its features intact, people are likely to see the Pentax as the superior product. I like that prospect. One area though that Pentax has catching up to do, and that isn't just up to them, is in third-party support. I hope they start aggressively courting some of the industry players. For example, I'd really like to see PocketWizard supply Pentax specific transceivers that enable their hyper-sync feature. Tethering in popular applications like Lightroom and Capture One is also desperately needed.

10-09-2012, 08:29 PM	#152
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by TomTextura Why in the world would Pentax even think about ditching the K-mount?! That'd probably spell suicide. It's a great mount, meant to house a 35mm imaging device, be it film or chip. There is no need for Pentax to drop the k-mount than there is for Nikon to drop the 53 year old F mount.

10-09-2012, 11:15 PM	#153
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by Vylen I see a lot of ranting on about data, data, and data. But, have yet to actually see any data that people are supposedly using... I'm not ranting; however, illdefined claimed something ("shrinking segment") and he refuses to bring any proof to his claim - because he actually doesn't know. Now he's trying to put the burden of proof on me; it won't work. His claim, his job to prove it. If you want some data, this was posted on another thread: CIPA starts to report growing mirrorless sales: Digital Photography Review Note the mention of natural disasters affecting the DSLRs more than MILCs, and that this are relative figures (%) - not absolute (sale volumes). Originally posted by illdefined you're guessing APS-C DSLRs will keep growing and go on to do well, in spite of new competition from above and below. I'm making no such guesses. I only said that, unless otherwise proved, it's safe to assume that right now the growing trend was continued. That's how trends works Originally posted by illdefined um, there weren't any MILCs back then. the MICRO 4/3 "standard" mainstreamed MILCs and Olympus was on the ground floor with that push. together with Panasonic, they "drove the market", creating an entirely new market category that the establishment (Canon, Nikon, Sony) are now entering themselves. You didn't read what I wrote? I'll write it again: "driving the market" doesn't necessarily means MILCs, and doesn't guarantee success. Originally posted by illdefined see? again, says your old data. keep watching. Talking is cheap; but show me your new data - if you can. Originally posted by illdefined I see Olympus taking shots, learning from them and co-dominating a growing market they had a hand in making. all the while, gaining crucial marketshare on the way. that last part cannot be said for Pentax. I'm not sure Pentax knows what its doing yet, as it stands now, we can only guess. Yes, Olympus is doing great losing money on their Imaging Systems division; Pentax should use the same tactic. Originally posted by Blue There is no need for Pentax to drop the k-mount than there is for Nikon to drop the 53 year old F mount. Absolutely!

10-10-2012, 12:08 AM	#154
Clavius Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: De Klundert Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,150	Originally posted by Kunzite If you want some data, this was posted on another thread: CIPA starts to report growing mirrorless sales: Digital Photography Review Note the mention of natural disasters affecting the DSLRs more than MILCs, and that this are relative figures (%) - not absolute (sale volumes). Interesting link, with usefull data. This confirms my view on a possible Pentax FF: Pentax could test the FF-waters first with a MILC without shrinking their APSC product line. There is slow steady growth in MILCs, and there is slow steady growth in FF, so combinging the two would be smart. Especially since the competitors don't have any of those yet. A nice niche for Pentax.

10-10-2012, 04:20 AM	#156
RobA_Oz Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Tasmania, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,197	Originally posted by Franky2step Check the ,marketplace and see how many Pentaxians are hitting the exits I keep looking when others have said this, and I don't see evidence of a mass movement. Three or four prominent contributors, and maybe several others, but many have been talking about it for a while. Most people are still posting photos and talking about all manner of things, rather than jumping on the cheap D600 or 5dII or the more expensive D800. Others continue to join with their new Pentax gear. Of course, someone might attempt to do a proper count, but I don't think we're going to be devoid of Jeremiahs here for a while yet. Originally posted by Franky2step In business it's always cheaper to keep a client than to find a new one. JMHO No doubt about that. Good to see that they're actually getting on with it, from what we read now.

10-10-2012, 04:51 AM	#157
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by Clavius Interesting link, with usefull data. This confirms my view on a possible Pentax FF: Pentax could test the FF-waters first with a MILC without shrinking their APSC product line. There is slow steady growth in MILCs, and there is slow steady growth in FF, so combinging the two would be smart. Especially since the competitors don't have any of those yet. A nice niche for Pentax. I'm not sure you can combine the two "small growths". IMO, since MILCs are on average lower value than DSLRs (see the data posted by Mistral), a MILC FF would be too much of a niche for Pentax. Going up there could be a risky, expensive maneuver - and Pentax right now should concentrate on things which would allow them a fast, sustainable growth. Mistral: thank you for bringing up relevant data. It's far better when we have something to base our assumptions on, and/or verify them.

10-10-2012, 04:59 AM	#158
Clavius Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: De Klundert Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,150	Originally posted by Kunzite I'm not sure you can combine the two "small growths". IMO, since MILCs are on average lower value than DSLRs (see the data posted by Mistral), a MILC FF would be too much of a niche for Pentax. Going up there could be a risky, expensive maneuver - and Pentax right now should concentrate on things which would allow them a fast, sustainable growth. I believe that in the the other rumor thread a Pentax official already confirmed that "APSC is the maximum format for MILC". But still, wouldn't that lower value of the MILCs make it possible to place a very highly featured high quality and very usefull FF camera on the market below the price of the competitors. Enabling that fast growth. And probably sustainable too, as digital has the future. DSLRs are only partly digital, all the moving parts, bouncing mirrors are still from the analog age.

10-10-2012, 05:22 AM	#159
bossa Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Adelaide Posts: 4,546	Originally posted by Clavius I believe that in the the other rumor thread a Pentax official already confirmed that "APSC is the maximum format for MILC".... That could only be due to the speed of LCD and EVF technology and bandwidth issues that will, no doubt, be solved within a couple of years. Obviously FF would require a greater data throughput for Live View and EVF to keep up, but, all the same, I can't see absolute statements like that as anything more than an excuses frankly.

10-10-2012, 05:30 AM	#160
Mistral75 Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Paris, France Posts: 7,527	Originally posted by Clavius I believe that in the the other rumor thread a Pentax official already confirmed that "APSC is the maximum format for MILC". (...). Actually, he said that Originally posted by leonsroar mirrorless segment is moving forward to smaller size. Even though there was possibility to bring FF into this segment, it was our conclusion that APS-C should be the utmost size for mirrorless segment.

10-10-2012, 05:33 AM	#161
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Originally posted by bossa I can't see absolute statements like that as anything more than an excuses frankly. Ouch! The Pentax guy's quote was saying basically that FF makes it harder to go with small mirrorless. It's not an 'excuse' - Pentax know how to do small, after all. It's just a pretty sensible observation, especially if we are talking K-mount FF.

10-10-2012, 05:33 AM	#162
Mistral75 Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Paris, France Posts: 7,527	Originally posted by bossa That could only be due to the speed of LCD and EVF technology and bandwidth issues that will, no doubt, be solved within a couple of years. Obviously FF would require a greater data throughput for Live View and EVF to keep up, but, all the same, I can't see absolute statements like that as anything more than an excuses frankly. No, it's a conclusion arrived at, a choice made by Pentax, cf. supra. Sony RX-1 is mirrorless and 24x36 and so is Leica M (which has Live View and an optional EVF), not to mention Sony Alpha 99.

10-10-2012, 05:33 AM	#163
Medium FormatPro Banned Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: Charleston & Pittsburgh Photos: Albums Posts: 1,668	Originally posted by Kunzite Olympus failed in the DSLR market, very true.. why was that? They tried to "drive the market" with their "made for digital" 4/3 system I'll tell you exactly why... The Olympus line had small sensors and then "charged" through the roof to have their items - but especially the lens' - some of which exceed Nikon's pricing of higher end lens'.

10-10-2012, 05:38 AM	#164
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	What's Nikon or Canons excuse for not doing FF mirrorless, by the way

10-10-2012, 05:41 AM	#165
Mistral75 Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Paris, France Posts: 7,527	Originally posted by rawr What's Nikon or Canons excuse for not doing FF mirrorless, by the way Not to eat into the sales of their highly profitable 24x36 DSLR lines. The same reason (extended to APS-C DSLRs) explains why Canon, Nikon and Pentax were the last to launch a mirrorless camera, far later than Olympus, Panasonic, Samsung and Sony.