[kenyee]

Yep..ditto they have no choice w/ the D600/6D announcements. Makes me wonder if they had a K-5 APS-C successor in the works, then saw these low priced FF announcements and realized a K-5 successor at the D600/6D price point made no sense...

I only hope they get the video part of it right...really needs 1080/60p and full manual aperture/shutter/iso control to compete w/ what's getting released this year as well as getting FF features right. Hopefully Toshiba has a FF sensor too...their chip in the D5200 looks pretty impressive because it beats Sony's sensor that is in K-5...

[Alizarine]

They need to upgrade the Priime II also. The Prime M only maximized the sensor for video; for some reason it couldn't make Pentax cams go 14-bit processing.

[Blue]

The DA 12-24mm F/4 is a Tokina lens. It is a good lens, but Tokina has never been able to keep production up for Pentax. They have always supplied the Nikon/Canon mounts under the Tokina name, and then if there was any time left they would put out a few lenses for Pentax. Maybe it is just here in the USA, but Tokina has a poor record of being able to keep product on the shelf.

Tokina doesn't make lenses for Pentax even if the design is Tokina's. Tokina also builds lenses with Pentax optical designs such as the 35mm macro etc. Plus, the DA 12-24/4 isn't a full frame lens which makes this moot relative to my post which was regarding Hoya and full frame.

[Chuckie]

I am probably going to sound like a complete idiot, but I dont see what the big "lens-issue" is that needs to be solved. There are hundreds of Pentax lenses out there designed for full-frame. The lens database is full of them! Any older Pentax shooter already has a full set of lenses ready to go! And when FF does come along, the prices of all of the existing FA's and earlier lenses out there are going to go through the roof. I'll probably able to fund a new FF body from selling spare lenses. The only issue they will have to address might be modernising the focusing systems and applying updated coatings, but the basic optical designs already exist.

Or am I shaking the wrong end of the stick here?

[boriscleto]

I am probably going to sound like a complete idiot, but I dont see what the big "lens-issue" is that needs to be solved. There are hundreds of Pentax lenses out there designed for full-frame. The lens database is full of them! Any older Pentax shooter already has a full set of lenses ready to go!

That's the lens issue. Pentax is not going to make a camera just for legacy lenses. Plus most of those lenses aren't good enough. See Nikon's lens recommendations for the D800e.

[Rondec]

I am probably going to sound like a complete idiot, but I dont see what the big "lens-issue" is that needs to be solved. There are hundreds of Pentax lenses out there designed for full-frame. The lens database is full of them! Any older Pentax shooter already has a full set of lenses ready to go! And when FF does come along, the prices of all of the existing FA's and earlier lenses out there are going to go through the roof. I'll probably able to fund a new FF body from selling spare lenses. The only issue they will have to address might be modernising the focusing systems and applying updated coatings, but the basic optical designs already exist.

Or am I shaking the wrong end of the stick here?

In order for it make sense for Pentax to make a full frame camera, they have to have a line up of lenses that are available new (from Pentax) to use on the camera. Few people are going to buy a new camera specifically to use old lenses (although Pentaxians might if they already own them), but from Pentax's standpoint, they have to see a way of making money, which means selling new lenses.

[monochrome]

Few people are going to buy a new camera specifically to use old lenses (although Pentaxians might if they already own them), but from Pentax's standpoint, they have to see a way of making money, which means selling new lenses. PPG

The K-01 was supposed to establish Pentax as a different sort of camera company. They expected to make more money on the cameras and a bit less on the lenses. I believe they were absolutely blind-sided by the response to the camera - which I think was really a response to thier pricing strategy. It may even have been engineered by Canon.

[Rondec]

The K-01 was supposed to establish Pentax as a different sort of camera company. They expected to make more money on the cameras and a bit less on the lenses. I believe they were absolutely blind-sided by the response to the camera - which I think was really a response to thier pricing strategy. It may even have been engineered by Canon.

The K-01 was a completely different animal. Pentax thought that by having "amazing" styling (even without high end specs), they could command a high dollar amount for the camera. In the end, it just couldn't sell at that price, although I think it would have been a good seller as a kx substitute at 500-ish dollars (and probably would still have made decent money at that price).

[monochrome]

The K-01 was a completely different animal. Pentax thought that by having "amazing" styling (even without high end specs), they could command a high dollar amount for the camera. In the end, it just couldn't sell at that price, although I think it would have been a good seller as a kx substitute at 500-ish dollars (and probably would still have made decent money at that price).

I think I meant what you just wrote. Now they have to go back to being a feature-rich, (somewhat) value priced brand - but they've lost momentum, confused their customer base, shredded thier distribution channel and muddied their brand image.

Of course from the outside they appear frozen - that's what Reset looks like.

[Medium FormatPro]

Is it $7,000 good? I have no problem with expensive glass if it is really good, but I don't have much use for a 560mm. Is it better than a Sigma? Is the AF fast?

I wont judge it until I see some reviews, but $7,000 had better buy a lot of glass....

When it comes time to compare the Pentax 560 to items such as anything Sigma makes; such as the 300 or 500mm's, and also other cmaera companies glass, then... The 560 is never going to sell much at that price.

Just wait for the stats - it going to end up selling for less than the Sigma 500

[macdaddy50]

Tokina Confirms Pentax Full-frame Under Development - Pentax Camera News & Rumors - PentaxForums.com

So it's been in the works Obviously Pentax needs to solve the lens problem first...

Adam, any word on getting Pentax into the B&M locations?

[Kunzite]

Just wait for the stats - it going to end up selling for less than the Sigma 500

Why?
And why would you compare a 560mm with a 300mm one?

[Tanzer]

In order for it make sense for Pentax to make a full frame camera, they have to have a line up of lenses that are available new (from Pentax) to use on the camera. Few people are going to buy a new camera specifically to use old lenses (although Pentaxians might if they already own them), but from Pentax's standpoint, they have to see a way of making money, which means selling new lenses.

Yeah, during a previous interview with Pentax, they said that the image circle for existing FF lenses might not be enough to account for the in-body shake reduction of a potential full-frame sensor. Not sure why that would be true, since it would seem the sensor doesn't need to move much.

So personally, I speculate whether the future FF body would have some kind of limitation, such that existing FF lenses would work only with some limitations, like SR turned off. Or, maybe you will get a built in slight crop factor when using existing FF lenses, but you can get the full 24x36 only when using the next generation of lenses. The limitations could be for either technical or marketing reasons.

Come one, would Pentax really "cripple" old lenses? Heh heh .... see many threads on the crippled KAF2 mount.

I guess I am not sure it is clear what "FF" really means, in the context of the future body.

[ogl]

they said that the image circle for existing FF lenses might not be enough to account for the in-body shake reduction of a potential full-frame sensor.

it was the interview also where they said that problem is solved already...

[thibs]

The K-01 was a completely different animal. Pentax thought that by having "amazing" styling (even without high end specs), they could command a high dollar amount for the camera. In the end, it just couldn't sell at that price, although I think it would have been a good seller as a kx substitute at 500-ish dollars (and probably would still have made decent money at that price).

I'm not sure it is that simple though it is a part of it.
IMO the K-01 was more an attempt of something different (as is the Q). They knew it couldn't just sell as is but with the added design element (this is relative I know) it could make a package to be sold as a higher price. What I mean is that I don't think the design was the basis of the whole thing but more an afterthought, making the K-01 marketable (or so they thought). I think the idea of a mirrorless camera with the usual K-mount register was developped *before* the design part.

Well, we all know how it went...