Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

View Poll Results: Would you buy a Pentax Full Frame DSLR? extended poll
I have money and will buy FF 7758.33%
I have money but won't buy FF 1410.61%
I don't have money but I want to buy FF 3325.00%
I don' have money and will not buy FF 86.06%
Voters: 132. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-21-2014, 08:37 AM   #76
Veteran Member
Parry's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 541
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
And it's that mindset that means you probably shouldn't be a Pentax owner. If you don't value what the camera does, and there's another feature set you like more, why are you keeping your Pentax gear?

My DP2 Merrill compare quite nicely to your A7r and Zeiss 35 at a fraction the size and cost. We each pick our set of compromises. And most of us choose not to have expensive equipment sitting unused on our shelf. Time to admit you don't like what Pentax has to offer and move on. Oh wait, you already admitted you don't like what Pentax has to offer, now all you have to do is move on.
I don't understand these DP Merrill things, there seems to be three of them, 1, 2 and 3.

What's all that about?

I've seen pics from them and yes they are very good. I just wonder if Pentax wouldn't be better using a sensor other than Bayer in the future for crop format.

01-21-2014, 08:46 AM   #77
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,195
QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
How does your reaction relate to the topic at all? Heck, I'll bite anyway.


Correct. Pentax was still known as an innovator back when I bought into the system. Surely not as conservative as they now suddenly are. Were I to do it all again right now I wouldn't buy into Pentax. Chances are though, they'll change direction a few more times in the next years.

Nevertheless, I now own a very capable Pentax APS-C kit that does an above excellent job. And when I do shoot with it, I enjoy it a lot. And for all the stuff that it doesn't do well, I've got other systems to fill the holes. You should understand, being a user of multiple systems as well.



Correct again. I didn't want to compromise on the exchangeable lenses.



First of all, it's not your call to judge if I use my gear enough to keep it or sell it.

Secondly, I never said it was sitting useless on a shelf. You're making up stuff again. It's being used equally as much as when I didn't have the A7r: When I actually plan shooting in advance. The A7r has the advantage of just always being there with me.
QuoteQuote:
After I added the 5DMKII and later the A7r to my equipment, I've kept most of my Pentax gear. Because APS-C does have its own advantages and the resale value is abysmal. Pentax can jump high and low with the worlds most compact FF DSLR, but I have no intention of ever buying one of those. Even if it's the exact same size of the K-3 it's still to big to always carry with me. And that is quite important to me. (And should be very important to manufacturers too, if they want to compete against cellphones.)

The A7r is perfect for my wide angle to normal FF needs. And with the 35mm Zeiss I can carry it in my jacket pocket everywhere I go.
QuoteQuote:
And the Pentax kit is now perfect for my (very) sporadic tele shots. But because of its size, and as it always did, it only gets out when I really actually plan on doing some shooting, which is much more sporadic.
Mind you, the A7r kit would be even more fantastic if I could attach Pentax-like pancakes to it; even if they are slow. The small Pentax lenses are one of those paradoxes that I find so intruiging about Pentax. They find miniaturisation in their lenses so ultimately important that they are even prepared to even several stops. (Sacrificing valueble low light performance, versatility and even sharpness.) But then again, they don't find miniaturisation important enough to sacrifice a mirrorbox and mechanism in their cameras. A much smaller sacrifice that doesn't even influence the quality of the images, but only the view through the viewfinder.
I can't believe I have to tell you what you said. Given your statement high lighted in bold, I don't see how my statement is at all inappropriate as a suggestion. Or is this the Clavius tells the world what he thinks thread. Any comments other than what Clavius thinks will be ridiculed. Is that the way it works? If you put your stuff out there, people are going to comment. If you emotionally can't handle the comments , don't put it out there.

Last edited by normhead; 01-21-2014 at 08:51 AM.
01-21-2014, 10:43 AM   #78
Pentaxian
Clavius's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: De Klundert
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,122
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
I can't believe I have to tell you what you said. Given your statement high lighted in bold, I don't see how my statement is at all inappropriate as a suggestion.
You don't find that your iteration of my words differ at all then? Then there's no hope for you...
01-21-2014, 11:12 AM   #79
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,195
Exactly, I go by what you said, not by what you think you said. You might want to look up the meaning of sporadic.

01-21-2014, 11:52 AM   #80
Banned




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Millstone,NJ
Posts: 6,491
QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
Nope, not any more!

After I added the 5DMKII and later the A7r to my equipment, I've kept most of my Pentax gear. Because APS-C does have its own advantages and the resale value is abysmal. Pentax can jump high and low with the worlds most compact FF DSLR, but I have no intention of ever buying one of those. Even if it's the exact same size of the K-3 it's still to big to always carry with me. And that is quite important to me. (And should be very important to manufacturers too, if they want to compete against cellphones.)

The A7r is perfect for my wide angle to normal FF needs. And with the 35mm Zeiss I can carry it in my jacket pocket everywhere I go. And the Pentax kit is now perfect for my (very) sporadic tele shots. But because of its size, and as it always did, it only gets out when I really actually plan on doing some shooting, which is much more sporadic.

Mind you, the A7r kit would be even more fantastic if I could attach Pentax-like pancakes to it; even if they are slow. The small Pentax lenses are one of those paradoxes that I find so intruiging about Pentax. They find miniaturisation in their lenses so ultimately important that they are even prepared to even several stops. (Sacrificing valueble low light performance, versatility and even sharpness.) But then again, they don't find miniaturisation important enough to sacrifice a mirrorbox and mechanism in their cameras. A much smaller sacrifice that doesn't even influence the quality of the images, but only the view through the viewfinder.
I have the SMC Pentax-M 20mm F4 and SMC Pentax-M 40mm F2.8 full frame lenses that are very compact even with the PK-E mount adapter but the 35mm Zeiss FE lens makes much more sense than the 40mm . I also have the Zeiss 24-70mm F4 FE OSS lens on pre-order that looks like a nice compact zoom.
01-22-2014, 02:54 PM   #81
Banned




Join Date: May 2010
Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,541
The FF by Pentax will not compete with the K-3, it will be a different experience.
In a rapidly shrinking camera market, Pentax will not go the usual FF route.
That is why all this delay.

So by that mark it is viable to think some would love to have both cameras — if you can appreciate different experience. In other words, do not expect the FF to be your D800e with Pentax on the pentaprism.

Last edited by Uluru; 01-22-2014 at 03:07 PM.
01-22-2014, 03:42 PM   #82
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
QuoteOriginally posted by Uluru Quote
The FF by Pentax will not compete with the K-3, it will be a different experience.
In a rapidly shrinking camera market, Pentax will not go the usual FF route.
That is why all this delay.

So by that mark it is viable to think some would love to have both cameras if you can appreciate different experience. In other words, do not expect the FF to be your D800e with Pentax on the pentaprism.

...expect it to be the A7R?


01-22-2014, 05:12 PM   #83
Pentaxian
mecrox's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,126
QuoteOriginally posted by Uluru Quote
The FF by Pentax will not compete with the K-3, it will be a different experience.
In a rapidly shrinking camera market, Pentax will not go the usual FF route.
That is why all this delay.

So by that mark it is viable to think some would love to have both cameras — if you can appreciate different experience. In other words, do not expect the FF to be your D800e with Pentax on the pentaprism.
I think that a "non-compete" option is rather too hopeful. For the vast majority of potential owners, it will not be both but one or the other. So even if the eventual camera is Ricoh-branded and does not use a K-mount, those who opt for it won't also buy the Pentax K-mount APS-C line in most cases (assuming they still have the funds). However you cut it, Ricoh will be cannibalizing their market - just as everyone else is. I could just about see this if the camera had a fixed prime lens like the Sony RX1, but it's hard to see how many folks would really want only that.

Furthermore, Ricoh still have to produce a highly competitive camera in the general market, so it can't be too far out, wacky and appealing to acute minority tastes, I'd have thought. The more mainstream such a camera is, the closer it gets to a K-mount.

A possible unintended consequence of introducing a K-mount FF is the swift collapse in sales of most of Pentax's lenses since these are only for APS-C. It's a fair guess that buyers will either want a lens capable of FF so they can upgrade later or steer clear of the APS-C ones for fear that the introduction of a K-mount FF means that the APS-C line, at least at it's higher DA end, is for the chop.

Yes, it's complicated. Particularly if you are a Pentax owner.


Last edited by mecrox; 01-22-2014 at 05:17 PM.
01-22-2014, 05:37 PM   #84
Banned




Join Date: May 2010
Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,541
QuoteOriginally posted by mecrox Quote
I think that a "non-compete" option is rather too hopeful. For the vast majority of potential owners, it will not be both but one or the other. ... However you cut it, Ricoh will be cannibalizing their market ...
No, they won't cannibalise anything.
If worse comes to worse, it may help sell a few more APS-C DSLRs, as the FF will improve the image of the company.
The only possible 'drawback' is the FF itself: if the cost of producing it is too high, then sales may be a problem in a shrinking market. But if the balance of cost and retail price is good, then the FF will sell, and the company won't suffer. It will not sell as well as APS-C DSLRs, but still well enough in terms of Pentax — not in terms of Nikon.

Relative terms are important to understand. What is not worth considering for Nikon, it may be a paradise for Pentax. I believe Ricoh Imaging was concerned more about making a production viable for tough times, even in smaller market overall. According to Ricoh's last financial report, and the word of mouth, they are about as ready.

Last edited by Uluru; 01-22-2014 at 05:56 PM.
01-23-2014, 10:56 PM   #85
Senior Member
Paul MaudDib's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 292
QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
The small Pentax lenses are one of those paradoxes that I find so intruiging about Pentax. They find miniaturisation in their lenses so ultimately important that they are even prepared to sacrifice several stops. (Sacrificing valueble low light performance, versatility and even sharpness.) But then again, they don't find miniaturisation important enough to sacrifice a mirrorbox and mechanism in their cameras. A much smaller sacrifice that doesn't even influence the quality of the images, but only the view through the viewfinder.
I'd hazard a guess that it's a matter of production cost. It's easier to produce decently corrected images with slower maximum apertures. You need fewer elements and less exotic materials and techniques. It's a lot easier to make a worthwhile 35/3.5 than a 35/2, for example. There's a lot of demand for prime lenses in the middle range, and Pentax addresses this.

Of course Fuji is making very fast lenses that are very compact. I'm very impressed with the X system lately, the X-T1 is basically the closest thing to the "digital ME" that I want. They're doing a great job of putting out high quality fast primes, pushing firmware improvements to legacy gear, and generally being an ergonomic camera to work with. While a FF version would be very interesting, they're doing fine as it is.

Last edited by Paul MaudDib; 01-23-2014 at 11:02 PM.
01-24-2014, 01:27 AM   #86
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,459
QuoteOriginally posted by mecrox Quote
A possible unintended consequence of introducing a K-mount FF is the swift collapse in sales of most of Pentax's lenses since these are only for APS-C. It's a fair guess that buyers will either want a lens capable of FF so they can upgrade later or steer clear of the APS-C ones for fear that the introduction of a K-mount FF means that the APS-C line, at least at it's higher DA end, is for the chop.
Doubtful. Most people don't plan going to "full frame" - it's actually not mandatory - why should they buy unsuitable lenses? And why doesn't that happens with Canikon?

Anyway, I'd guess Ricoh won't be upset if one would buy their more expensive cameras and lenses.
01-24-2014, 01:49 AM   #87
Pentaxian
Clavius's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: De Klundert
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,122
QuoteOriginally posted by mecrox Quote
A possible unintended consequence of introducing a K-mount FF is the swift collapse in sales of most of Pentax's lenses since these are only for APS-C. It's a fair guess that buyers will either want a lens capable of FF so they can upgrade later or steer clear of the APS-C ones for fear that the introduction of a K-mount FF means that the APS-C line, at least at it's higher DA end, is for the chop.

Yes, it's complicated. Particularly if you are a Pentax owner.
Neh... Most people that bought into the Pentax system in the last decade knew perfectly well there was no 135mm digital Pentax camera. So they must have been fans of the APS-C system. The ones that need FF probably already got it. So I don't see the DA lens lines getting hurt to much.
01-24-2014, 02:23 AM   #88
Pentaxian
dcBear78's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Gladstone, QLD
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 822
QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
Neh... Most people that bought into the Pentax system in the last decade knew perfectly well there was no 135mm digital Pentax camera. So they must have been fans of the APS-C system. The ones that need FF probably already got it. So I don't see the DA lens lines getting hurt to much.
I bought my first ever dslr at christmas last year. A K-30 because when weighing up features vs cost it blew the competition out of the water. Not because I was a fan of APS-C...

<--- Some time after that date over there was when I was first made aware there was such a thing as APS-C and full frame cameras (and others). People buying entry level cameras, which is the biggest section of the market are not aware, nor do they really care about such things.
01-24-2014, 03:03 AM   #89
Pentaxian
Clavius's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: De Klundert
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,122
QuoteOriginally posted by dcBear78 Quote
I bought my first ever dslr at christmas last year. A K-30 because when weighing up features vs cost it blew the competition out of the water. Not because I was a fan of APS-C...

<--- Some time after that date over there was when I was first made aware there was such a thing as APS-C and full frame cameras (and others). People buying entry level cameras, which is the biggest section of the market are not aware, nor do they really care about such things.
That's part of the problem. At first they don't care and without researching buy into a system that doesn't have an FF line, and then some time later some of those are here on PF cursing Pentax for not having an FF line.
01-24-2014, 06:03 AM   #90
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 198
I am in the same boat as dcBear78. However, I am not complaining about no FF. I am a beginner and am taking my time learning to take good photos, rather than worrying about upgrading equipment. Down the road, I might look at FF when it comes out, but not now.
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!
frame, full-frame, pentax, pentax full frame
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Would you buy a Pentax Full Frame DSLR? Tesla Pentax Full Frame 364 07-11-2013 10:01 AM
Pentax full frame fisheye for the 645D...would you buy one? slackercruster Pentax Medium Format 7 06-19-2012 07:01 AM
Pentax Full Frame Poll RonHendriks1966 Pentax DSLR Discussion 287 11-03-2011 11:36 AM
What would you buy? A Full Frame Pentax or an EVIL Pentax? johnmflores Pentax DSLR Discussion 104 07-29-2010 07:55 PM
What would urge you to buy a new Pentax DSLR? froeschle Pentax DSLR Discussion 39 12-09-2008 09:22 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:31 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