Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-09-2012, 12:01 AM   #76
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,336
QuoteOriginally posted by illdefined Quote
again, considering K-Mount is natively FF, it would be much easier to design and produce than the 645D was. the "re-used APS-C components" would handle FF much better as well.

the 645D wasn't a major flop and made the company some money the way it was implemented using standard components. the K-5 and K-5IIs still use most of the same components as the K-7, why arent those considered "half-assed"? The sensor they need is commercially available, the rest Pentax has already made plenty of real cameras out of.

if there's anything Pentax has had, it's time to consider FF. their very first digital SLR prototype was FF. in 2001.
In theory, yes - but is it, really?
A new processor is pretty much needed, for both speed and features (focus peaking, H264 video, UHS cards and other such things).It can be co-developed for the next generation of high end APS-C cameras, though.

A new AF must be designed specifically for the "full frame" camera; they used the same SAFOX IX+ on the 645D, 11 points gathered in the middle, but only because the competition didn't even had that. The much more competitive "full frame" wouldn't allow that, I'm afraid the AF module can't be reused.

The SR must be adapted to the larger sensor (missing from the 645D)

And, last but not least, lenses. They would need much more than one 55mm f/2.8 lens, followed by one lens each year.

Sorry, but I don't see how it would be much easier.

10-09-2012, 12:16 AM - 1 Like   #77
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 896
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
In theory, yes - but is it, really?
A new processor is pretty much needed, for both speed and features (focus peaking, H264 video, UHS cards and other such things).It can be co-developed for the next generation of high end APS-C cameras, though.
...or you can do what others have done plenty of times and use two current processors...

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
A new AF must be designed specifically for the "full frame" camera; they used the same SAFOX IX+ on the 645D, 11 points gathered in the middle, but only because the competition didn't even had that. The much more competitive "full frame" wouldn't allow that, I'm afraid the AF module can't be reused.
gosh, are you actually admitting SAFOX isn't competitive? because Canon and Nikon both re-used their APS-C AF systems for their new FF models...

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
The SR must be adapted to the larger sensor (missing from the 645D)
if they even want to have SR at all. they could always go the OIS route as well like they did with the 645D. members here have already stated they'd part with SR if it meant a small FF body..

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
And, last but not least, lenses. They would need much more than one 55mm f/2.8 lens, followed by one lens each year.

Sorry, but I don't see how it would be much easier.
Pentax currently has 4 FA primes in production (I think the FA 50mm still gets made for Japan), and designs, molds and patents for dozens more. Pentax would not be starting from zero. far from it. throw some HD coating on some of their best FA designs and they're nearly there.

to launch with FF, all they'd need to do is reintroduce a couple FA zooms (like my FA 24-90), and they're already good to start with primes. That's a better launch lineup than the Fuji-X System. certainly WAY better than the Q or 645D launches..

nice try though.

Last edited by illdefined; 10-09-2012 at 12:27 AM.
10-09-2012, 12:37 AM   #78
Site Supporter
Vylen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,250
With respect to the image processors, you're making the assumption that its a simple task two stick two processors onto a logic board and make them work together efficiently.
10-09-2012, 12:47 AM   #79
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 896
it's never just as simple as that no, but it's not a new technology in digital cameras by any means.

10-09-2012, 01:12 AM   #80
Pentaxian
gazonk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oslo area, Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,512
QuoteOriginally posted by frank Quote
Hmm, another FF thread. How many more such threads are we gonna have before Pentax really releases a FF dSLR/EVIL camera?
One new every day? And then we'll get even more "How Pentax did FF wrong" threads
10-09-2012, 01:23 AM - 1 Like   #81
Senior Member
paulusje's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 135
QuoteOriginally posted by gazonk Quote
One new every day? And then we'll get even more "How Pentax did FF wrong" threads
Sad but true

I really like this forum, but to be honest, the constant whining about practically every (good or bad) thing Pentax does is getting annoying.
10-09-2012, 01:44 AM   #82
Site Supporter
Vylen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,250
QuoteOriginally posted by paulusje Quote
Sad but true

I really like this forum, but to be honest, the constant whining about practically every (good or bad) thing Pentax does is getting annoying.
It's not like as if anyone is particularly forcing you to read or participate in them though... There's a lot of FF threads going on here but I only post when I feel I have something constructive or informative to say in them.

I'm also sure there are plenty of other threads in the multitude of subforums that are being posted of which could use your attention.
10-09-2012, 02:04 AM   #83
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,336
QuoteOriginally posted by illdefined Quote
...or you can do what others have done plenty of times and use two current processors...
Which won't add focus peaking, H264 video encoding and other features unsupported by the PRIME II. The code will also have to be (partially) re-written to support multiprocessing.
QuoteOriginally posted by illdefined Quote
gosh, are you actually admitting SAFOX isn't competitive? because Canon and Nikon both re-used their APS-C AF systems for their new FF models...
Is it competitive? If people bash Pentax for their 11-point SAFOX, in a $1200 camera, what would happen if they'll use the same (yet worse, since AF points will be gathered in the center) in a $2100-3000 one?
QuoteOriginally posted by illdefined Quote
if they even want to have SR at all. they could always go the OIS route as well like they did with the 645D. members here have already stated they'd part with SR if it meant a small FF body..
With the medium format, having stabilization at all is a big deal - since nobody else does.
With the small format, everyone has some form of stabilization; IMHO Pentax should try to stick with the in-body SR, since it's so much more convenient for their users.
A small user sample from a certain forum is not really relevant, I'm afraid.

QuoteOriginally posted by illdefined Quote
Pentax currently has 4 FA primes in production (I think the FA 50mm still gets made for Japan), and designs, molds and patents for dozens more. Pentax would not be starting from zero. far from it. throw some HD coating on some of their best FA designs and they're nearly there.

to launch with FF, all they'd need to do is reintroduce a couple FA zooms (like my FA 24-90), and they're already good to start with primes. That's a better launch lineup than the Fuji-X System. certainly WAY better than the Q or 645D launches..
Why were the FA Limiteds missing from Photokina? I was told they're out of production (but this can means anything from no longer being necessary, to having scheduled improved, digital versions).
Anyway, I never claimed they would be starting from zero; they certainly wouldn't (and didn't for 645D, either). But there is a considerable effort, and by the way there is a big difference from having "designs, molds and patents" to having actual, well-performing products on the market.
They can do it, of course; but it won't be "much easier".

QuoteOriginally posted by illdefined Quote
nice try though.
Thank you; but I believe I did better than that

10-09-2012, 02:25 AM   #84
Senior Member
paulusje's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 135
Wouldn't it be great to have a filter for those non-constructive 'it's gonna suck anyway' comments?


FF is coming!
10-09-2012, 02:42 AM   #85
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Manila
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,190
I don't see any reason for Pentax to stop production of the FA Limiteds; after all, they're one of their biggest USP's. I would believe it more if the DA*s are the ones out of production to be replaced soon (by Photokina perhaps) by updated models with re-designed SDM modules and HD coating.

or I'm dreaming too much, lol.
10-09-2012, 02:47 AM - 1 Like   #86
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: NYC
Posts: 896
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Which won't add focus peaking, H264 video encoding and other features unsupported by the PRIME II. The code will also have to be (partially) re-written to support multiprocessing.

Is it competitive? If people bash Pentax for their 11-point SAFOX, in a $1200 camera, what would happen if they'll use the same (yet worse, since AF points will be gathered in the center) in a $2100-3000 one?

With the medium format, having stabilization at all is a big deal - since nobody else does.
With the small format, everyone has some form of stabilization; IMHO Pentax should try to stick with the in-body SR, since it's so much more convenient for their users.
A small user sample from a certain forum is not really relevant, I'm afraid.


Why were the FA Limiteds missing from Photokina? I was told they're out of production (but this can means anything from no longer being necessary, to having scheduled improved, digital versions).
Anyway, I never claimed they would be starting from zero; they certainly wouldn't (and didn't for 645D, either). But there is a considerable effort, and by the way there is a big difference from having "designs, molds and patents" to having actual, well-performing products on the market.
They can do it, of course; but it won't be "much easier".
- The Prime M doesn't count as a current processor? one of each Prime maybe, for 14bit RAW processing and peaking...yes code would have to be written, imagine that. you said it yourself Pentax has to do this for their next camera anyway.

- yes SAFOX is inadequate. Pentax has to fix this for their next camera anyway too because it's still inadequate for APS-C.

- as for SR, I'm afraid a 'small user sample from a certain forum' would be more relevant than just YHO. IMHO.

- those 'designs, molds and patents" produced thousands of real, working AF, FF lenses that made it to market. not theoretical.

so yes, making an FF DSLR would be "much easier" than you made it out to be.

I don't know why Pentax is exempt from having to make some 'considerable effort' to remain relevant in the marketplace like the rest of its competitors. I don't think there will be enough Pentax apologists here to keep Pentax alive by buying K-5VIIIs with SAFOX XXVIII through 2015.

Last edited by illdefined; 10-09-2012 at 02:58 AM.
10-09-2012, 03:36 AM   #87
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2012
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 165
I love these FF threads

Cos Pentax must realize finally that it needs FF body also...something like K01 or that little Q? is minor thing comperad to FF. Those K01 and Qs can be buried forever and only focus 3 bodies like K30. K5 and FF
10-09-2012, 03:43 AM   #88
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Denver
Photos: Albums
Posts: 570
QuoteOriginally posted by boriscleto Quote
Not when there's not enough for those in line ahead of you.
Where are you getting this notion from? Again, what indication do you have that Sony doesn't have enough FF sensors? And what makes you think that if they don't currently have the supply they wouldn't remedy that situation so that they can make more money like any rational producer would? I can't imagine any reason that Sony wouldn't sell Pentax their FF sensors, if not immediately than in due time.
10-09-2012, 03:46 AM   #89
Senior Member
noVICE's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Brisbane
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 165
What happens when the FF does come out.... will Pentaxians everywhere have the thousands of dollars needed to buy this body? How many are going to say "oh I already have an amazing APS-C I will stick with that", how many will say "yes! I will choose the Pentax FF system over CaNikon's offerings" and how many are just going to wait for the next Pentax FF until they iron out the bugs with the first one? If I were Pentoh I would be having a long hard think about this move as it could represent a massive financial risk for the company.
10-09-2012, 03:47 AM   #90
Veteran Member
Caat's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: United Kingdom
Photos: Albums
Posts: 897
QuoteOriginally posted by illdefined Quote
- The Prime M doesn't count as a current processor? one of each Prime maybe, for 14bit RAW processing and peaking...yes code would have to be written, imagine that. you said it yourself Pentax has to do this for their next camera anyway.

- yes SAFOX is inadequate. Pentax has to fix this for their next camera anyway too because it's still inadequate for APS-C.

- as for SR, I'm afraid a 'small user sample from a certain forum' would be more relevant than just YHO. IMHO.

- those 'designs, molds and patents" produced thousands of real, working AF, FF lenses that made it to market. not theoretical.

so yes, making an FF DSLR would be "much easier" than you made it out to be.

I don't know why Pentax is exempt from having to make some 'considerable effort' to remain relevant in the marketplace like the rest of its competitors. I don't think there will be enough Pentax apologists here to keep Pentax alive by buying K-5VIIIs with SAFOX XXVIII through 2015.
- The Prime M clearly has some engineering issues around 14 bit RAW and possibly other areas otherwise it would have appeared in the K-5II/s. The fact that it didn't is indicative that it is more than a 'code' issue.

- We don't know if the performance of the new SAFOX is inadequate for APS-C but what we do know is that the focus point layout is inadequate for FF.

- The design molds etc haven't been used in over 10 years, and the optical designs are old. We don't even know that anything physical still exists. Pentax has limited lens production capabilities any production lines that get re-tooled for FF lenses aren't likely to be able to make APS-C lenses. It's not as simple as putting old designs back into production.
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!
d800, ff, full-frame, pentax, pentaxian, reps, seminar, tokyo, week
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


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



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:52 AM. | 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