[RobA_Oz]

In the short term Pentax only need to refresh the FA Limiteds and offer a Limited edition Full Frame and call it a Pentax D-LX ( or LXD) . Even though I have a couple of Nikon D800E I'd try to grab that 'set' if the camera looked and felt anything like my old LX did.

Want to borrow mine, so you can recall it, beforehand?

If they did offer such a beast, we might have to scramble for the "limited" numbers here in Oz, but I'd happily join in the scrum.

[bossa]

Want to borrow mine, so you can recall it, beforehand?

If they did offer such a beast, we might have to scramble for the "limited" numbers here in Oz, but I'd happily join in the scrum.

No need Rob as it left an indelible imprint.

[Uluru]

K-5 |FA 31 LTD | DA* 55/1.4 | FA 77 LTD | Tam 90 Macro| DA* 200 |FA* 300 F/4.5 | Tam 1.4x Pz-AF MC4 |Sigma 8-16| DA* 50-135 | ]DA* 60-250 |
D800E | D800E | Zeiss 21/2.8 | Nikkor 35/1.4G | Sigma 50/1.4 | Sigma 85/1.4 | Nikkor 70-200/2.8 VR II | Sigma 150/2.8 OS Macro | Nikkor AF-S 300/4 | TC-14E II

Middle age crisis?

[bossa]

Middle age crisis?

And you are?

[bossa]

So in effect, you challenge someone, through the blackmail of the loyalty of your pathetic penny, to deliver something new, something that your preferred new company of choice cannot do at all. And as a reward, you'll embrace that someone again.
In real life, and within human relationships, do you know how is that called?
Hypocrisy. And you, and all of those like you, are hypocrites.

Unfortunately the so-called loyalty of my 'pathetic penny' is what drives all marketing and production of anything that people want to sell. I can't see the hypocrisy you speak of either so perhaps you could try explaining that, if you haven't had too much to drink?

[Blue]

I never said Film was a ripoff but I was implying that it was very expensive when compared to what we've become accustomed to with digital.

It requires computer software and digital storage including SD and Compact flash cards. Digital isn't free either at the slr level. In the late 70s and 80s, someone could buy and develop a lot of film for $1200 when shooting a K1000, an M50/1.7, M135 and M28.2.8. Of course if you get into scanning negatives or color reversal, it is a different ball game.

[ElJamoquio]

It requires computer software and digital storage including SD and Compact flash cards. Digital isn't free either at the slr level. In the late 70s and 80s, someone could buy and develop a lot of film for $1200 when shooting a K1000, an M50/1.7, M135 and M28.2.8. Of course if you get into scanning negatives or color reversal, it is a different ball game.

WD 3 TB Drive x 2 = $300

3 TB/ 24 MB = 131072

$300/131072 = $0.002 / shot (hard drive)

5 keepers per penny on a RAID

$100 every three or four years for software
$50 every other year or so for SD cards


How much film could you purchase/process in 1980 for ~$50?

[Blue]

Assuming a FF can be made with profit at D600 price point, Pentax can go all in with it's tech level without any need to protect a higher positioned body to compete in this price range.

That is a very good point.

[jsherman999]

Assuming a FF can be made with profit at D600 price point, Pentax can go all in with it's tech level without any need to protect a higher positioned body to compete in this price range.

This is the theory, anyway. It is an inherent (accidental) advantage Pentax would have because of it's product choices up until now.

Of course, Pentax would actually have to act on this advantage, something they've historically seemed loathe to do, because it might carry a little risk, or something

[Blue]

WD 3 TB Drive x 2 = $300

3 TB/ 24 MB = 131072

$300/131072 = $0.002 / shot (hard drive)

5 keepers per penny on a RAID

$100 every three or four years for software
$50 every other year or so for SD cards


How much film could you purchase/process in 1980 for ~$50?

Hard drives don't last for ever. If you are wise, you will have backup at about 1.5x your main storage. I also like how you ignored my scanning the film part. As far as the part in highlight, a bunch because the competition was fierce, especially for negative processing.

Edit: Photoshop and Lightroom cost money but currently are used on film and digital. However, my analogy had more to do with comparing 1982 to 2012.

[ElJamoquio]

Hard drives don't last for ever.

True. Let's double the hard drives - to four copies instead of the two I have listed - and you're at 2.5 pictures per penny.

I also like how you ignored my scanning the film part.

Huh?

As far as the part in highlight, a bunch because the competition was fierce, especially for negative processing.

I'll admit to taking ~10k pics per year. Admittedly not all are necessary. I doubt I could do 5k pics for a year on film for $70 or so, though.

Photoshop and Lightroom cost money but currently are used on film and digital.

True. I shouldn't have included the $80 for lightroom.

[Class A]

Of course, Pentax would actually have to act on this advantage, something they've historically seemed loathe to do, because it might carry a little risk, or something

They have this idea that they need to offer something special; an ordinary full-frame won't do.

AFAIC, the fact that it would be the only FF camera on the market with built-in SR and an optical viewfinder would be sufficient. If they can add a five axis SR, hybrid viewfinder, or something along these lines, all the better, but to be honest, I don't think something like this would make a Canikonian switch systems.

Pentax needs to offer solid cameras (as they have) and improve their overall system (lenses, and in particular the flash system). AFAIC, this will create attraction to shooters, not that a particular camera model does something different to any other.

[lightbulb]

Imagine a ff like the k5iis did to Apsc peers, sure to give canikon and fans some nightmare. ...

[Rondec]

They have this idea that they need to offer something special; an ordinary full-frame won't do.

AFAIC, the fact that it would be the only FF camera on the market with built-in SR and an optical viewfinder would be sufficient. If they can add a five axis SR, hybrid viewfinder, or something along these lines, all the better, but to be honest, I don't think something like this would make a Canikonian switch systems.

Pentax needs to offer solid cameras (as they have) and improve their overall system (lenses, and in particular the flash system). AFAIC, this will create attraction to shooters, not that a particular camera model does something different to any other.

I think SR in body is the key. If they can do that, then suddenly their small primes (FA limiteds, 100 WR macro, DA *55) are awfully attractive. Putting SR in a lens really does bump up size as well as cost of lenses and makes the overall package a lot bigger.

This is one of the biggest reasons that I stuck with Pentax when moving digital to the K100.

Obviously if someone owns a whole cadre of stabilized lenses for Nikon/Canon cameras, they are a lot less likely to jump to a new line, but there are still a lot of folks out there that are frustrated with the size of the full frame camera systems out there.

[Ash]

Agreed, if the Sony A99 has SR and the Pentax FF body doesn't, particularly given that all Pentax bodies since the K100D had SR, then it wouldn't bode well for Pentax. That SR is a huge marketing AND practical advantage. The other need is at least the fine 36Mp sensor of the D800 such that DA lenses that aren't FF compatible are automatically cropped to a 16Mp image of at least the quality of the K-5. If the same functionality and UI of the K-5 II appeared on the FF body, then I'm sure it will be a highly successful FF debut for Pentax.