[illdefined]

Some points were already answered by Clavius, I won't repeat what he said.

Where?

I'm sorry but the few users here who would buy a "full frame" if it doesn't have SR are not enough to make for a market (no offense; it's about numbers, not quality). I firmly believe that overall, SR would make the camera more desirable, not less.
History lesson: the K100D did quite OK, but the $100 cheaper K110D failed.

"Much that once was is lost" You can't promote a brand new $3000 "full frame" camera with second hand lenses...

history lesson: 645D

Everyone is making better lenses, including 3rd-party lens makers; Pentax can't afford to be sub-par. So, new lenses with improved designs are an absolute requirement.

And please note I'm only saying it won't be easy, not that they shouldn't do it (on the contrary, I think they should). But underestimating the effort and risks, and overestimating the benefits won't help. Nor does asking for "cheaper and better", i.e. not being willing to pay what it's worth

Pentax already is being called sub-par by press and media, what they can't afford to do is sit back and not make some real effort right now. the demand and expectation for FF now that high-end DSLRs are becoming synomous with FF dictates their next move. the only risk is not doing it and trying to overspecialize in a shrinking segment.

[Kunzite]

Here: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-news-rumors/201457-ff-under-develo...ml#post2129159

FTR, Pentax is the first and the only DMF manufacturer who offer some sort of stabilization. Things are slightly different on the small format market.

Pentax must do many things, what I disagree with is that they must throw everything away in order to rush out a "full frame", and that it's so easy and they don't do it just to spite us.
What is the "shrinking segment"? Please show us some relevant data, otherwise I'll assume it was a typo and it's a growing segment

[illdefined]

Not disagreeing with much other than your tone, except the above.

SR is a space-saver and a lens-maker. It has also become a Pentax default. Much like, image quality, build quality and WR.

They make what Pentax is in the modern era, and I'd be loathe to see any facet compromised on a FF.

Of course we'd all rather have it than not have it, but in many of the exasperating anti-FF posts people claim "it'd make the camera too big" or that it simply cant be done. I personally believe Pentax can take what they learned from the 2 sided sensor platter in the K-01 and make it smaller than Sony's FF IBIS, but then again I wouldn't be offended if they decided to go the 645D route in the name of bringing a market-differentiating "small" FF.

I'm holding out hope we'll have both.

[illdefined]

Here: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-news-rumors/201457-ff-under-develo...ml#post2129159

FTR, Pentax is the first and the only DMF manufacturer who offer some sort of stabilization. Things are slightly different on the small format market.

Pentax must do many things, what I disagree with is that they must throw everything away in order to rush out a "full frame", and that it's so easy and they don't do it just to spite us.
What is the "shrinking segment"? Please show us some relevant data, otherwise I'll assume it was a typo and it's a growing segment

Pentax is also now the only DSLR manufacturer left without FF (unless you also count Sigma..)

Who's saying Pentax should throw everything away? on the contrary, I've called for a serious APS-C K-mount mirrorless camera (OK, they can throw the K-01 away..) to sustain DA lenses, as well as keep the excellent K-30s, K-5s and all their derivatives. at this point in the game, nothing Pentax could do could be called "rushed", its that far behind.

The "growing segment" you're talking about was 2011. the year before the literal flood of "affordable" FF and high-end mirrorless. you want data, wait until 2012's numbers and beyond.

[LFLee]

Is this the interview? http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/news/interview/20121010_564928.html

In Japanese, but someone in Taiwan forum said they talk about FF. Can anyone translate?

Lee

[Kunzite]

@illdefined:
Then, you understand their priorities aren't "full frame now, everything else is secondary". Nice to see we agree on that

A "full frame" that was been developed in a hurry, reusing components even where they should build specific ones, insufficiently tested, with incomplete firmware etc is "rushed", even if 10 years late to market. The K-5 was kinda rushed out, with its incomplete firmware - even though Pentax made APS-C cameras since 2003. This is what I'm talking about.

Until we'll have new data which would say otherwise, it's safe to assume the growing trend is continuing - and that's what I'll be doing. Everything else is speculation.

[TomTextura]

Is this the interview? http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/n...10_564928.html

Mistral75 also found that interview and started a thread about it here. It is an interview with Mr Toshiyuki Kitazawa who I guess is Pentax's Head of Business Development. Seems pretty legit. Google translate does a really spotty job of putting it in English but it mentions full size sensors a ton. It might just be one of the more promising signs yet.

[illdefined]

@illdefined:
Then, you understand their priorities aren't "full frame now, everything else is secondary". Nice to see we agree on that

A "full frame" that was been developed in a hurry, reusing components even where they should build specific ones, insufficiently tested, with incomplete firmware etc is "rushed", even if 10 years late to market. The K-5 was kinda rushed out, with its incomplete firmware - even though Pentax made APS-C cameras since 2003. This is what I'm talking about.

Until we'll have new data which would say otherwise, it's safe to assume the growing trend is continuing - and that's what I'll be doing. Everything else is speculation.

no, the K-7 was rushed out...but i digress..

you can wait and see and assume the trend is still growing all you want (also speculation), but if Pentax does the same then it's continuing to react to the market instead of taking part in driving it. in other words, it would only assure it remains behind. Fuji, Sony and even beleaguered Olympus have all thrived looking ahead, past Canon and Nikon. meanwhile Pentax is still buried deep under their shadow.

[cali92rs]

you can wait and see and assume the trend is still growing all you want (also speculation), but if Pentax does the same then it's continuing to react to the market instead of taking part in driving it. in other words, it would only assure it remains behind. Fuji, Sony and even beleaguered Olympus have all thrived looking ahead, past Canon and Nikon. meanwhile Pentax is still buried deep under their shadow.

I agree...either you are moving forward or you are falling behind. When you tread water, i.e. iterate your 2 year old flagship instead of deveolping a new one, you are falling behind.

[Kunzite]

no, the K-7 was rushed out...but i digress..

you can wait and see and assume the trend is still growing all you want (also speculation), but if Pentax does the same then it's continuing to react to the market instead of taking part in driving it. in other words, it would only assure it remains behind. Fuji, Sony and even beleaguered Olympus have all thrived looking ahead, past Canon and Nikon. meanwhile Pentax is still buried deep under their shadow.

Why do you think the K-7 was rushed out, but K-5 wasn't? At Photokina 2010, nobody knew how big is the K-5's buffer - in the brochures it was 15 frames, the camera did about 8 - after which the 20+ frames firmware was released. I would call this rushed out

You cannot convince me the APS-C DSLR market is shrinking unless you'll provide data. Trying to provoke an emotional response doesn't count, by the way
About driving the market, it's a dangerous proposition - and in their current state, quite difficult for Pentax. I will point out this concept doesn't necessarily means "mirrorless", and that Olympus (for whatever reasons) doesn't really thrive compared to Canon and Nikon.

cali92rs, what makes you think the K-5 II is a sign of Pentax falling behind? One (two, actually) stop gap products less than a year after a buy-out and extensive organizational changes is to be expected; besides, finally launching a super telephoto (after 2 decades) and the first medium format stabilized lens means they did quite OK, considering the conditions.

[illdefined]

Why do you think the K-7 was rushed out, but K-5 wasn't? At Photokina 2010, nobody knew how big is the K-5's buffer - in the brochures it was 15 frames, the camera did about 8 - after which the 20+ frames firmware was released. I would call this rushed out

because the K-5 at least had finished hardware, with a competitive sensor. the K-7 did not, in a rush to bring video.

You cannot convince me the APS-C DSLR market is shrinking unless you'll provide data. Trying to provoke an emotional response doesn't count, by the way

the introduction of eight new cameras (OM-D, both FUJI-Xs, NEX6&7, GH3, D600, 6D) in or around the same price bracket as APS-C DSLRs are aiming clearly at them (and not P&S shooters like some here have tried to claim). unless you can assure me they will all utterly FLOP (early signs say that's far from the case), the APS-C DSLR market is under heavy attack from both sides. that's logic.

again, if you want to play it safe and postpone any conclusions to wait on data, by all means do so. but i sincerely hope Pentax doesn't, because every second they wait is another second the market is moving on ahead without them.

About driving the market, it's a dangerous proposition - and in their current state, quite difficult for Pentax. I will point out this concept doesn't necessarily means "mirrorless", and that Olympus (for whatever reasons) doesn't really thrive compared to Canon and Nikon.

compared to no, but in relation to, Olympus's sales are far better now than when it was fighting against Canon and Nikon in the DSLR market like a certain beloved brand of ours...

[RonHendriks1966]

You cannot convince me the APS-C DSLR market is shrinking unless you'll provide data. Trying to provoke an emotional response doesn't count, by the way

I think that global economy is hurting the dslr market harder then FF is hitting on aps-c. On the other hand, the gap is closing at double speed, since every aps-c owner who buys a FF, doesn't invest in aps-c, making one market by one point smaller and the other by one point bigger. FF is a market for (mostley) photographers who already own a FF and update, or for aps-c owners who upgrade with little newcomers to this market.

[Pål Jensen]

I think that global economy is hurting the dslr market harder then FF is hitting on aps-c. On the other hand, the gap is closing at double speed, since every aps-c owner who buys a FF, doesn't invest in aps-c, making one market by one point smaller and the other by one point bigger. FF is a market for (mostley) photographers who already own a FF and update, or for aps-c owners who upgrade with little newcomers to this market.

..but tnere are plenty of people on this forum (and certainly elsewhere) that change from FF to APS...

[RonHendriks1966]

..but tnere are plenty of people on this forum (and certainly elsewhere) that change from FF to APS...

Yes, but since the launch off the D800 there is a little rush the other way. Currently that rush isn't as hard as in the beginning, since there is plenty of stock everywhere.

[Vylen]

People switching between FF and APS doesn't prove anything - the grass is always greener on the other side. It's just that those who do switch, especially between brands, are those who can actually afford to do so.