Why there might NOT be a FF

**monochrome** · 05-09-2013, 06:22 PM

My bet is, "Pentax FF is real, but not soon," so add that last word at the end of the thread title.

Allison · 05-09-2013, 07:42 PM

If legacy glass was a real issues, I don't think they would have done backwards compatibility when they released their first dslr. A good many people on here had legacy glass and still buy new lenses. Personally, if they released ff tomorrow, I would but it and a ff zoom on release.

I think the biggest inhibitor of ff is if having one will get them more aps-c consumers. As much as I want them to do it, I understand that it only makes sense if it is the only way to grow or even maintain current market share.

Kunzite · 05-09-2013, 11:57 PM

Originally posted by oppositz

Because after waiting forever for the FF to come out, I finally gave in and bought a K-5 IIs to replace my K-10.

It came today. Beautiful camera. Love it already.

Tomorrow there will likely be a FF announcement....

Fortunately, I was able to convince them it wouldn't be nice - and to postpone the announcement

Originally posted by rawr

Hmmm. Maybe Pentax should have kept their old partnership going with Samsung? And if Samsung bought them instead of Ricoh, that would have been interesting.

Interesting as in: Samsung completely dismantling Pentax, not even the brand remaining - because they couldn't care less about the K-mount, 645D or Q? (but it's way too expensive, for little or no benefit)
While they were "partnering" (rebadging some products) with Pentax, they were separately developing an entirely new system. Aparently Pentax was not given a chance to participate, and was kept in the dark instead. So far for the good partner image

Clavius · 05-10-2013, 12:26 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

Interesting as in: Samsung completely dismantling Pentax, not even the brand remaining - because they couldn't care less about the K-mount, 645D or Q? (but it's way too expensive, for little or no benefit)
While they were "partnering" (rebadging some products) with Pentax, they were separately developing an entirely new system. Aparently Pentax was not given a chance to participate, and was kept in the dark instead. So far for the good partner image

Do you find it a shame that Pentax didn't participate in the new Samsung line? I think it would have damaged the Pentax high quality image.

TOUGEFC · 05-10-2013, 12:33 AM

Don't be silly, of course full frame will happen. Its coming this year!!!

Kunzite · 05-10-2013, 12:36 AM

No, I don't find it a shame; I was only showing the limits of their "partnership". I'm not trying to exclusively blame Samsung, I don't know exactly what happened; but it didn't work.

bossa · 05-10-2013, 12:44 AM

It seems to me that there would be a pretty decent market in niche products that really cut it.
e.g. A B&W APS-C camera (no AA and no Bayer) would take over the street photography and landscape genre in a flash (sorry) if it were the right design format.

But I can appreciate that their 'baby' might really be the 645D and that they probably should develop that as far as possible because they really don't need to produce so many units and can reap a greater reward for the output compared to a FF offering. A 60 or 80MP sensor could allow them to maintain their $10k price-tag and stay well ahead of the FF market in quality and really allow them to develop a system unencumbered by the past or comparisons with Canikon. Having a couple of D800E's and a few lenses has given me a taste for MF resolution but a realization that this camera has issues with long exposures and high ISO that I would prefer to have avoided. I would consider selling both of my D800E's and lenses for one 645D II and three or four lenses. As long as they keep that price down they have a chance IMO.

Last edited by bossa; 05-10-2013 at 12:51 AM.

**RussV** · 05-10-2013, 01:02 AM

Originally posted by bossa

Having a couple of D800E's and a few lenses has given me a taste for MF resolution but a realization that this camera has issues with long exposures and high ISO that I would prefer to have avoided. I would consider selling both of my D800E's and lenses for one 645D II and three or four lenses. As long as they keep that price down they have a chance IMO.

Interesting, I as I said in the original post, Pentax have medium format in their arsenal.

I speculate that as APS-C technology advances (and surely it will) FF will be less of an option because APS-C will be able to 'out-resolve' the lens in front of it. Generally speaking there must come a point when camera makers say there's no point in adding more sensor pixels. I don't know when that wil be though.

Clavius · 05-10-2013, 01:51 AM

Originally posted by RussV

Great, except for the mass of FF auto and manual lenses already out there. How many people are going to buy new lenses to replace one that already does the job. In this instance the tradition of backwards compatibility seems to work against users.

The Pentax FF having a new mount would solve that problem quite efficiently. Yes, a few current users will be angry. But if the amount of new users that it attacts is higher then the amount of angry existing ones, then it's a good deal for Pentax.

Tonto · 05-10-2013, 02:29 AM

Pentax FF will be a Halo product to attract new photo enthusiasts to the brand. It is to show that Pentax has a future. They will sell very little initially but the body along with the essential 24-70/70-200 zooms will give people confidence in investing in the K mount system with a FF option if they want it later on. It will not steal customers from Canon and Nikon in any significant number but it is in the young people now who have had their eyes opened to the world of photography via the iPhone. These people go on to study photography either on-line or in schools.
Pentax have several GREAT features to attract new photographers.
Backward lens compatibility means playing round with heads of cheap old glass. Small primes and SR to stabilize them.
Ask ANY decent photographer and ask what is better to use if you have the time a Prime OR Zoom lens.
Exceptional ergonomics, controls, and compact size and WR in entry level body (K30) and exceptional sharpness in a package smaller than its FF equivalents (K5iis).
I wouldn't expect to see a low cost FF ala Nikon d600 but a super compact high end FF with hopefully class leading DR and ISO performance for the price.
Haha just don't quote me on it! ;p

**Rondec** · 05-10-2013, 03:26 AM

I don't see the lack of glass as being an issue. Pentax would be glad to make new full frame compatible lenses and sell them for a premium price. The question really is whether Pentaxians would be willing to pay what is necessary for full frame to be worthwhile for Pentax. In general, Pentaxians are cheap, meaning that they complain about 1000 dollar lenses and 1500 dollar camera bodies. All well and good, but a full frame camera is going to run 2500 minimum for it to be worth Pentax's while. And the full frame zooms will 1500 to 2000 dollars as well. Not cheap. I think I would buy in, but I wonder how many others really would put their money where their mouth is...

Clavius · 05-10-2013, 03:51 AM

Originally posted by Rondec

I don't see the lack of glass as being an issue. Pentax would be glad to make new full frame compatible lenses and sell them for a premium price. The question really is whether Pentaxians would be willing to pay what is necessary for full frame to be worthwhile for Pentax. In general, Pentaxians are cheap, meaning that they complain about 1000 dollar lenses and 1500 dollar camera bodies.

Are you talking about Pentax in 2013? Because they are far away from being the big-bang-for-the-buck-brand that they used to be. Here in Europe, for the money you spend on a mediocre Pentax lens, without OS, without motor, but with terribly noisy AF, you can get two from the other brands with better IQ to boot. Or one from the other brands with OS, silent & fast motor and good IQ.

So imho, current and new Pentaxians are not cheap at all.

bossa · 05-10-2013, 04:14 AM

Originally posted by Clavius

Are you talking about Pentax in 2013? Because they are far away from being the big-bang-for-the-buck-brand that they used to be. Here in Europe, for the money you spend on a mediocre Pentax lens, without OS, without motor, but with terribly noisy AF, you can get two from the other brands with better IQ to boot. Or one from the other brands with OS, silent & fast motor and good IQ.

So imho, current and new Pentaxians are not cheap at all.

OS is not an issue but I would like some specific information regarding these lenses with superior IQ.

Clavius · 05-10-2013, 04:41 AM

Originally posted by bossa

OS is not an issue but I would like some specific information regarding these lenses with superior IQ.

For example: The price and quality of the FA 50 1.4 vs the Nikon 50 1.4 D and G. They are both cheaper and sharper.

And you can buy the Nikon 35 f2 G three times over for the price of the Pentax FA35 f2. (Pentax $600 vs Nikon $196) When you look at PZ's ratings... Oh wait, how was it again? Pentax lenses don't perform well when shooting test charts, we should just buy them without consulting any measurements.

Current Pentax and Pentaxians are not cheap.

**RobA_Oz** · 05-10-2013, 05:15 AM

Originally posted by rawr

Hmmm. Maybe Pentax should have kept their old partnership going with Samsung? And if Samsung bought them instead of Ricoh, that would have been interesting.

Interesting? Possibly the Chinese version of that word. I don't see Samsung as being the sort of innovator that is needed to invest in developing Pentax. Their history has been to copy and improve someone else's technology, or at least make it cheaper – in that sense, they have "out-Japanesed" the Japanese, which, given the lack of love for Japan in Korea, must have given them a nice warm feeling. I suspect Pentax/Hoya recognised that and didn't try too hard to renew their agreement with Samsung.

05-09-2013, 11:57 PM	#18
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by oppositz Because after waiting forever for the FF to come out, I finally gave in and bought a K-5 IIs to replace my K-10. It came today. Beautiful camera. Love it already. Tomorrow there will likely be a FF announcement.... Fortunately, I was able to convince them it wouldn't be nice - and to postpone the announcement Originally posted by rawr Hmmm. Maybe Pentax should have kept their old partnership going with Samsung? And if Samsung bought them instead of Ricoh, that would have been interesting. Interesting as in: Samsung completely dismantling Pentax, not even the brand remaining - because they couldn't care less about the K-mount, 645D or Q? (but it's way too expensive, for little or no benefit) While they were "partnering" (rebadging some products) with Pentax, they were separately developing an entirely new system. Aparently Pentax was not given a chance to participate, and was kept in the dark instead. So far for the good partner image Last edited by Kunzite; 05-10-2013 at 12:02 AM.

05-10-2013, 03:51 AM	#27
Clavius Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: De Klundert Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,150	Originally posted by Rondec I don't see the lack of glass as being an issue. Pentax would be glad to make new full frame compatible lenses and sell them for a premium price. The question really is whether Pentaxians would be willing to pay what is necessary for full frame to be worthwhile for Pentax. In general, Pentaxians are cheap, meaning that they complain about 1000 dollar lenses and 1500 dollar camera bodies. Are you talking about Pentax in 2013? Because they are far away from being the big-bang-for-the-buck-brand that they used to be. Here in Europe, for the money you spend on a mediocre Pentax lens, without OS, without motor, but with terribly noisy AF, you can get two from the other brands with better IQ to boot. Or one from the other brands with OS, silent & fast motor and good IQ. So imho, current and new Pentaxians are not cheap at all. Last edited by Clavius; 05-10-2013 at 04:05 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Help - any idea why there would be oversaturation using a manual lens?	mephistophelean	Pentax K-r	23	09-09-2012 06:34 PM
You might not be able to take your (American) citizenship for granted	Wheatfield	General Talk	33	01-21-2012 02:06 PM
Secure Macs might not be so	photolady95	General Talk	17	10-24-2011 09:16 AM
Might there one day be a "Pentax Arena"? ;)	Unsinkable II	Pentax News and Rumors	10	09-04-2011 10:20 PM
There may not be a 2nd mirrorless camera	rustynail925	Pentax News and Rumors	5	06-29-2011 05:36 PM

05-09-2013, 06:22 PM	#16
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	My bet is, "Pentax FF is real, but not soon," so add that last word at the end of the thread title.

05-09-2013, 07:42 PM	#17
Allison Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Pittsburgh, PA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 667	If legacy glass was a real issues, I don't think they would have done backwards compatibility when they released their first dslr. A good many people on here had legacy glass and still buy new lenses. Personally, if they released ff tomorrow, I would but it and a ff zoom on release. I think the biggest inhibitor of ff is if having one will get them more aps-c consumers. As much as I want them to do it, I understand that it only makes sense if it is the only way to grow or even maintain current market share.

05-10-2013, 12:26 AM	#19
Clavius Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: De Klundert Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,150	Originally posted by Kunzite Interesting as in: Samsung completely dismantling Pentax, not even the brand remaining - because they couldn't care less about the K-mount, 645D or Q? (but it's way too expensive, for little or no benefit) While they were "partnering" (rebadging some products) with Pentax, they were separately developing an entirely new system. Aparently Pentax was not given a chance to participate, and was kept in the dark instead. So far for the good partner image Do you find it a shame that Pentax didn't participate in the new Samsung line? I think it would have damaged the Pentax high quality image.

05-10-2013, 12:33 AM	#20
TOUGEFC Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Brisbane Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,561	Don't be silly, of course full frame will happen. Its coming this year!!!

05-10-2013, 12:36 AM	#21
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	No, I don't find it a shame; I was only showing the limits of their "partnership". I'm not trying to exclusively blame Samsung, I don't know exactly what happened; but it didn't work.

05-10-2013, 12:44 AM	#22
bossa Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Adelaide Posts: 4,546	It seems to me that there would be a pretty decent market in niche products that really cut it. e.g. A B&W APS-C camera (no AA and no Bayer) would take over the street photography and landscape genre in a flash (sorry) if it were the right design format. But I can appreciate that their 'baby' might really be the 645D and that they probably should develop that as far as possible because they really don't need to produce so many units and can reap a greater reward for the output compared to a FF offering. A 60 or 80MP sensor could allow them to maintain their $10k price-tag and stay well ahead of the FF market in quality and really allow them to develop a system unencumbered by the past or comparisons with Canikon. Having a couple of D800E's and a few lenses has given me a taste for MF resolution but a realization that this camera has issues with long exposures and high ISO that I would prefer to have avoided. I would consider selling both of my D800E's and lenses for one 645D II and three or four lenses. As long as they keep that price down they have a chance IMO. Last edited by bossa; 05-10-2013 at 12:51 AM.

05-10-2013, 01:02 AM	#23
RussV Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2013 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 300 Original Poster	Originally posted by bossa Having a couple of D800E's and a few lenses has given me a taste for MF resolution but a realization that this camera has issues with long exposures and high ISO that I would prefer to have avoided. I would consider selling both of my D800E's and lenses for one 645D II and three or four lenses. As long as they keep that price down they have a chance IMO. Interesting, I as I said in the original post, Pentax have medium format in their arsenal. I speculate that as APS-C technology advances (and surely it will) FF will be less of an option because APS-C will be able to 'out-resolve' the lens in front of it. Generally speaking there must come a point when camera makers say there's no point in adding more sensor pixels. I don't know when that wil be though.

05-10-2013, 01:51 AM	#24
Clavius Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: De Klundert Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,150	Originally posted by RussV Great, except for the mass of FF auto and manual lenses already out there. How many people are going to buy new lenses to replace one that already does the job. In this instance the tradition of backwards compatibility seems to work against users. The Pentax FF having a new mount would solve that problem quite efficiently. Yes, a few current users will be angry. But if the amount of new users that it attacts is higher then the amount of angry existing ones, then it's a good deal for Pentax.

05-10-2013, 02:29 AM	#25
Tonto Inactive Account Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Wellington Posts: 969	Pentax FF will be a Halo product to attract new photo enthusiasts to the brand. It is to show that Pentax has a future. They will sell very little initially but the body along with the essential 24-70/70-200 zooms will give people confidence in investing in the K mount system with a FF option if they want it later on. It will not steal customers from Canon and Nikon in any significant number but it is in the young people now who have had their eyes opened to the world of photography via the iPhone. These people go on to study photography either on-line or in schools. Pentax have several GREAT features to attract new photographers. Backward lens compatibility means playing round with heads of cheap old glass. Small primes and SR to stabilize them. Ask ANY decent photographer and ask what is better to use if you have the time a Prime OR Zoom lens. Exceptional ergonomics, controls, and compact size and WR in entry level body (K30) and exceptional sharpness in a package smaller than its FF equivalents (K5iis). I wouldn't expect to see a low cost FF ala Nikon d600 but a super compact high end FF with hopefully class leading DR and ISO performance for the price. Haha just don't quote me on it! ;p

05-10-2013, 03:26 AM	#26
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,650	I don't see the lack of glass as being an issue. Pentax would be glad to make new full frame compatible lenses and sell them for a premium price. The question really is whether Pentaxians would be willing to pay what is necessary for full frame to be worthwhile for Pentax. In general, Pentaxians are cheap, meaning that they complain about 1000 dollar lenses and 1500 dollar camera bodies. All well and good, but a full frame camera is going to run 2500 minimum for it to be worth Pentax's while. And the full frame zooms will 1500 to 2000 dollars as well. Not cheap. I think I would buy in, but I wonder how many others really would put their money where their mouth is...

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-10-2013, 04:14 AM	#28
bossa Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Adelaide Posts: 4,546	Originally posted by Clavius Are you talking about Pentax in 2013? Because they are far away from being the big-bang-for-the-buck-brand that they used to be. Here in Europe, for the money you spend on a mediocre Pentax lens, without OS, without motor, but with terribly noisy AF, you can get two from the other brands with better IQ to boot. Or one from the other brands with OS, silent & fast motor and good IQ. So imho, current and new Pentaxians are not cheap at all. OS is not an issue but I would like some specific information regarding these lenses with superior IQ.

05-10-2013, 04:41 AM	#29
Clavius Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: De Klundert Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,150	Originally posted by bossa OS is not an issue but I would like some specific information regarding these lenses with superior IQ. For example: The price and quality of the FA 50 1.4 vs the Nikon 50 1.4 D and G. They are both cheaper and sharper. And you can buy the Nikon 35 f2 G three times over for the price of the Pentax FA35 f2. (Pentax $600 vs Nikon $196) When you look at PZ's ratings... Oh wait, how was it again? Pentax lenses don't perform well when shooting test charts, we should just buy them without consulting any measurements. Current Pentax and Pentaxians are not cheap.

05-10-2013, 05:15 AM	#30
RobA_Oz Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Tasmania, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,191	Originally posted by rawr Hmmm. Maybe Pentax should have kept their old partnership going with Samsung? And if Samsung bought them instead of Ricoh, that would have been interesting. Interesting? Possibly the Chinese version of that word. I don't see Samsung as being the sort of innovator that is needed to invest in developing Pentax. Their history has been to copy and improve someone else's technology, or at least make it cheaper – in that sense, they have "out-Japanesed" the Japanese, which, given the lack of love for Japan in Korea, must have given them a nice warm feeling. I suspect Pentax/Hoya recognised that and didn't try too hard to renew their agreement with Samsung.