Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-12-2013, 08:40 AM   #16
Pentaxian
reeftool's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,157
Perhaps it's taking so long because they had no intention of ever building one. They said as much on many occasions. Now, under new owners and management, they have to at least consider building one because market pressures are demanding it. How long does it take to design and build a new camera from scratch and do it right? Then there's the lens issue. Expecting customers to make do with a handful of FA lenses and a TC isn't acceptable. They should do it right or not at all.

06-12-2013, 09:19 AM   #17
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,864
Anyone who knows what percentage of Nikon and Canon sales are FF cameras, and who knows how many k-5s Pentax sold should speak up and let us compute how many FF cameras Pentax is likely to sell. That would probably tell us faster than anything else how likely it is to happen.

When Pentax says they want to produce a camera that can differentiate them, what I hear is "our APS-c user base isn't big enough to support an FF camera, we have to steal users from other companies, and we have to have an offering that will enable us to do that" and "We don't know if such a product can be made, but we are investigating. " That's what I've heard to date... others hear what I hear and hear something different. That's life.
06-12-2013, 09:44 AM   #18
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 7,103
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote

...speak up and let us compute how many FF cameras Pentax is likely to sell. That would probably tell us faster than anything else how likely it is to happen.
From the last will-you-buy-a-FF poll I saw, they could sell at least 180 of them.
06-12-2013, 09:47 AM   #19
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,864
QuoteOriginally posted by tuco Quote
From the last will-you-buy-a-FF poll I saw, they could sell at least 180 of them.
Hmmm, now we need someone tell us what the price would have to be based on sales of 1000 cameras, using that as a best possible scenario, based on your estimate. Then ask them if they'd buy one.

06-12-2013, 11:27 AM   #20
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,922
QuoteOriginally posted by konraDarnok Quote
Pentax is a dedicated APS-C system. Compare the DA line to EF-S or Nikkor DX offerings -- DA is far more comprehensive; it's not even a contest. I just can't see how that's going to change anytime soon. It's like wondering when Olympus is going to make a "full frame" camera.
Except 43 and m43 were designed from scratch never to be FF.

K-mount is inherently FF. That's the Pentax problem. The mount is a little too large, a bit like oversize tires on a compact car.

I admire Pentax's approach by focussing [sic] on small lenses even at the expense of larger apertures, to get mass and dimensions down. It's the best they can do with K-mount.
06-12-2013, 11:47 AM   #21
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,922
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Anyone who knows what percentage of Nikon and Canon sales are FF cameras, and who knows how many k-5s Pentax sold should speak up and let us compute how many FF cameras Pentax is likely to sell. That would probably tell us faster than anything else how likely it is to happen.

When Pentax says they want to produce a camera that can differentiate them, what I hear is "our APS-c user base isn't big enough to support an FF camera, we have to steal users from other companies, and we have to have an offering that will enable us to do that" and "We don't know if such a product can be made, but we are investigating. " That's what I've heard to date... others hear what I hear and hear something different. That's life.
I calculated a few years ago that, at $2,000/body, Pentax in Year 1 would sell about 15,000 FF units, then under 7,000 per year for the next year, then probably 2,000 per year in years 3-4 to almost nothing just before the 5 year upgrade cycle gets going.

I am led to believe the 645D sells about 2,000 per year by comparison.

The issue is not the body; it's the lenses. Bodies only sell if a comprehensive lens array is available, especially zooms. At the $2,000/body price point Pentax would need both pro grade 2.8 glass and f/4 "prosumer" glass. They'd also need intermediate zooms and wide angle. That's 5 zoom lenses from the get-go up to 8 or 9 in the lens path. Primes are a lot simpler. Macros are done as is a fast 50. Hard to say if the Ltd's need to be re-worked. I hope that pentax sticks with quirky FL's because who cares about yet another 28mm. Go 31mm tough guy.

And then there's the question about what to do with the APS-C line and its pricing and the Ltd's and their relatively high cost, etc. even if FF comes, APS is still the bread and butter; it's the dominant revenue stream. A $2,000 camera body cannot replicate that.
06-12-2013, 12:23 PM   #22
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,149
It's not taking so long... As was mentioned above, they had no plans to have a FF camera, and so it has only been some months since they began considering it. I think people confuse the fast new model introduction pace with the product development duration. Development duration is much longer than the model introduction cycle. It's just that companies with short model change cycles have several products in development at one time, starting a new project while several are farther along in the process. Thus while a new model may be introduced yearly, it may be 3-4 years since they started development. They make small changes late in the cycle to keep responsive, but the early development takes a lot of time.
We had about a 5-year development cycle at my last company, but about two years between new models. So by the time one was released there were two newer ones in process. Sometimes Marketing would tell us they need X product in a year and a half, so our response would be that they needed to tell us two years ago.
I'm sure camera companies start development based on sensor specs of sensors still another generation away, so that they can have a camera hardware and firmware samples ready to start testing a sensor when the first sensor prototypes are provided to them, and that's probably half-way through the development cycle. If they start a project for an already established sensor, the sensor might be superseded before they got the model launched.
If Pentax decides to do FF I'd bet on 1-2 more years before we see it.
06-12-2013, 12:24 PM   #23
Pentaxian
konraDarnok's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2007
Photos: Albums
Posts: 962
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
Except 43 and m43 were designed from scratch never to be FF.

K-mount is inherently FF. That's the Pentax problem. The mount is a little too large, a bit like oversize tires on a compact car.

I admire Pentax's approach by focussing [sic] on small lenses even at the expense of larger apertures, to get mass and dimensions down. It's the best they can do with K-mount.

Was inherently FF. Was. The super telephoto 560mm DA's vignetting on 135 format is yet another indication the K-Mount is exclusively an APS-C system.

That's why I kinda think that rumor of a new mount and new lens line for the 135 format might be true. It'd give Pentax a chance to throw off all the legacy baggage and attract people who aren't interested in used glass that makes them no money.

06-12-2013, 12:42 PM   #24
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,864
I've got a Sigma 8-16, and 70macro, and an old A-400 5.6 in my lens kit. Those are all lenses Pentax could have sold me, because they lock the 3rd party lenses out of using selected focus points, if you can get the same thing in a new lens or equivalent lens in Pentax mount, obviously it's to my advantage to go for that. But, I have some excellent 3rd party and old lenses. Pentax isn't keeping up with where I spend my money on APS-c. Ask me how I feel about them developing for FF as well.
06-12-2013, 06:51 PM   #25
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,844
QuoteOriginally posted by konraDarnok Quote
The super telephoto 560mm DA's vignetting on 135 format is yet another indication the K-Mount is exclusively an APS-C system.
I believe this has already been discussed in other threads here. Expensive Canon and Sony full-frame super-telephotos also vignette heavily, esp wide open (pic related). So the jury may still be out on whether the Pentax 560 is a full-frame compatible design.

06-12-2013, 09:03 PM   #26
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
"calculated" ?

QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
I calculated a few years ago that, at $2,000/body, Pentax in Year 1 would sell about 15,000 FF units,
Based on?

10% of Nikon's FF sales is what the skuttlebut is in Hogan-land, assuming the initial product is not grossly sub-standard to the D800 in some very significant way. That puts them at about 30,000 units in the first year for a ~$3K camera

QuoteQuote:

I am led to believe the 645D sells about 2,000 per year by comparison.
It actually sold 10,000 in the first 18 months (source: Joseph Wisniewski)

.
06-12-2013, 11:48 PM   #27
Site Supporter
i83N's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Lithuania
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,154
Original Poster
Sort of offtopic; Q7 to soon, but i think Pentax is testing waters for bigger sensor in same body aka K5 FF.
06-13-2013, 05:49 AM   #28
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,343
QuoteOriginally posted by konraDarnok Quote
Was inherently FF. Was. The super telephoto 560mm DA's vignetting on 135 format is yet another indication the K-Mount is exclusively an APS-C system.
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
I believe this has already been discussed in other threads here. Expensive Canon and Sony full-frame super-telephotos also vignette heavily, esp wide open (pic related). So the jury may still be out on whether the Pentax 560 is a full-frame compatible design.
What I find incredible is that Pentaxforums didn't retract that statement ("our conclusion is that the DA 560mm lens cannot be labeled as a full-frame lens"), even if clear evidence was presented. Is it that difficult to admit you made a mistake and fix it? All it takes is to edit a webpage.

When Pentax will finally launch their FF camera (they admitted working on it, right?) we'll need accurate information about current lenses' FF compatibility.
06-13-2013, 06:01 AM   #29
Pentaxian
Clavius's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: De Klundert
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,122
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
What I find incredible is that Pentaxforums didn't retract that statement ("our conclusion is that the DA 560mm lens cannot be labeled as a full-frame lens"), even if clear evidence was presented. Is it that difficult to admit you made a mistake and fix it? All it takes is to edit a webpage.

When Pentax will finally launch their FF camera (they admitted working on it, right?) we'll need accurate information about current lenses' FF compatibility.
What clear evidence? Once I took notice the 560mm is APS-C only, I took my conclusions and never looked back.
06-13-2013, 06:57 AM   #30
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,343
That Canon and Nikon long lenses (500, 600mm f/4 - but not only those) vignettes as well, in the extreme corners. Take a look at the "Why there might NOT be a FF" thread, from post #108 (last page or so), so you won't have to go to the article and read the comments.

Yes, they told you that and you believed them; bad idea. Always double and triple-check.
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!
adapter, apc, camera, ff, full-frame, lens, pentax, witch
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Misc Why It Takes Me So Long to Sort Through Pictures GeoJerry Post Your Photos! 12 10-30-2012 01:29 PM
Wacky Theory: Square-sensor Pentax FF? deadwolfbones Photographic Industry and Professionals 43 03-25-2012 04:14 PM
Why does photo preview take so long to show up? hockmasm Pentax DSLR Discussion 4 08-10-2011 02:57 PM
RANT: Why is it taking so long for my package to get from the US to Canada? heatherslightbox General Talk 18 08-13-2009 10:09 PM
Why are the reviews of the K-M taking so long? Stefan Carey Pentax DSLR Discussion 37 12-12-2008 10:52 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:56 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