Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-09-2013, 08:26 PM   #46
Site Supporter
Biro's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 1,159
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Got it in one. Combination of more fun than 4/3 and better IQ than compacts.
You got that right. To try to analyze the Q with traditional metrics is to totally misunderstand what the Q is all about: Fun.

08-09-2013, 11:24 PM   #47
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,780
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Got it in one. Combination of more fun than 4/3 and better IQ than compacts.

+1.
There is a photography World out there (and a bigger one than photo forums).
Made up of enthusiasts who don't join forums (maybe the are just too busy taking photos ) and layman of various level of ability.

The Q is very present in Japan.
I've seen it on all camera stores and often arrayed in various colors.
Something does not necessarily need to be successful in the US to be successful.
As long as domestic demand exceeds costs, a product can do well enough in its own niche.
If it makes it into Taiwan, China, SEA, then even better.


Those who like to look at the tech side of cameras will never get it.
I've got one (in my hands and not on theory, not on some downloaded samples from ppls camera for arguing on forums)
Its a joy to use and good enough for A4 prints even.
In fact, it just got better with Q7.

Last edited by pinholecam; 08-09-2013 at 11:43 PM.
08-09-2013, 11:42 PM   #48
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Southern California
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,082
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Got it in one. Combination of more fun than 4/3.
Subjective, while there are quite a few dull m4/3 offerings, there's plenty of fun to be had in the m4/3 environment, too. We're kind of spoiled with choice these days. There are so many exciting things from many manufacturers. My friend's GH3 is a blast. Of course it can't take a moon shot like the Q, not much can.

Last edited by kenafein; 08-10-2013 at 06:50 AM.
08-10-2013, 03:32 AM   #49
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,557
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
.

How is Q going to catch m43 in IQ, much less surpass it, unless they radically enlarge the sensor? They just bumped Q up to 1/1.7'', which finally matches the Powershot P&S!
.
Well NOT offcourse. They have to win competition against tablets and phoes these day's since the P&S will be dead in the near future. Wich allready will be a hard task with growing image quality in those smart devices.

08-11-2013, 01:28 PM   #50
Pentaxian
ChristianRock's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Marietta, GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,048
QuoteOriginally posted by psychdoc Quote
Maybe that is already covered by Pentax still making medium format cameras that cost around 10,000 dollars?
I may be wrong but I thought those were discontinued...

But you do bring up a very good point.
08-11-2013, 03:34 PM   #51
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,289
QuoteOriginally posted by ChristianRock Quote
I may be wrong but I thought those were discontinued...
Amazon.com: Pentax 645D 40MP Medium Format Digital SLR Camera with 3-Inch LCD Screen (Black): Camera & Photo

Not discontinued AFAIK but they did drop the price a bit.
08-11-2013, 03:36 PM   #52
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,780
QuoteOriginally posted by kenafein Quote
Subjective, while there are quite a few dull m4/3 offerings, there's plenty of fun to be had in the m4/3 environment, too. We're kind of spoiled with choice these days. There are so many exciting things from many manufacturers. My friend's GH3 is a blast. Of course it can't take a moon shot like the Q, not much can.
Yes, the m4/3 is certainly a more complete system.
Something to take over Q for that and better IQ if needed (the Q, esp Q7 is good enough for most intents though)

But, I gave up on mine (m4/3)
The funny reason was that it was too much like my aps-c system but with files that were not as robust to PP.
Shallow DOF shots were possible on it, but framing was tighter for it and/or working distance was a bit too far to taste.
I decided I could live with the little bigger system for the little better of the above two advantages I got.
APS-C NEX, NX, X-series have since eaten into some of the m4/3 advantages too. (smallish with some new f2.8 primes on NEX; NX lenses were never too big)


The Q offered something a bit different (extreme macro, tele, real small, fun spontaneous feel because it was not to be taken seriously and also with the quick dial)


But thats me of course.
08-11-2013, 04:15 PM   #53
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2012
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 587
I must be a rare mind. I came from a full frame Nikon and now a Pentaxian. My Nikon is gathering dust.

I don't understand the full frame obsession especially those who switched camps.

08-11-2013, 05:43 PM   #54
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 198
I am a newbie, but are the images produced with a full frame camera significantly better than those produced with other types of cameras?
08-11-2013, 05:51 PM   #55
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Southern California
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,082
QuoteOriginally posted by Kenntak Quote
I am a newbie, but are the images produced with a full frame camera significantly better than those produced with other types of cameras?
The image quality, using the same generation of technology, should be better on a larger sensor. How much so is up for some debate. That's why we have so many of these threads where we bicker among each other
08-11-2013, 07:45 PM   #56
Pentaxian
maxfield_photo's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 1,216
QuoteOriginally posted by Kenntak Quote
I am a newbie, but are the images produced with a full frame camera significantly better than those produced with other types of cameras?
I can't speak for everyone, but for some of us, the desire for a full frame camera has little if anything to do with image quality, and much more to do with depth of field control, a bigger, easier-to-see viewfinder, view angle, and being able to get closer to our subject with certain types of lenses.
08-11-2013, 08:18 PM   #57
Pentaxian
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Got it in one. Combination of more fun than 4/3 and better IQ than compacts.
The way you originally wrote it stated better IQ than both bridge compacts *and* m43, which isn't going to happen.

Better IQ than bridge cameras and more fun that m43 - maybe - but only if you define 'fun' as small and cute, and don't include IQ, don't care about VF's and never need any significant DOF control
08-11-2013, 11:32 PM   #58
Veteran Member
drypenn's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2012
Photos: Albums
Posts: 948
Compared to many of you, I'm a complete dimwit when discussing about the technicalities between an APS-C and a FF. What I lack in technical know-how, please allow me to make up with my "corporate/financial" mindset, as a self-confessed bean counter.

I'm a corporate finance guy. I borrow funds for specific projects, and lately I've been tapping international sources to fund local projects. On top of that I'm an accountant by education. I'm your "traditional" bean counter in the truest, most abominable sense.

Let me make a guess. From the point of view of Ricoh, it will not make any "corporate sense" to produce a FF camera at this moment. It will also not make any perfect sense for them to tell outright that it is not in their immediate plan right now.

Sales have been floundering. Producing a FF camera for Pentax will basically be a "catch-up/me-too" product line, unless they can inject a big something that will revolutionize the DSLR FF line. Something that will help them stand out in a plethora of Canons/Nikons out there. Nothing short of something akin to "Steve Jobs" magic will make an FF line for Pentax desirable/profitable.

A new product line is always a serious money-pit: raw mats inventory, work space re-tooling, resource planning and re-allocation, and of course, marketing, promotion and distribution. That will be a huge risk to take especially with a gloomy forecast in the industry. If I were in Ricoh's Board, I will definitely be against producing a new "me-too" product line, when I can't even make the existing product lines profitable enough to my stakeholder's liking. Pump-priming in a flourishing industry is so much easier as against a bearish industry. Worst case scenario, I spend a lot for a product line that will not sell, while incurring all of those production costs which I have to write off directly impacting my income statements. After a year of sparse sales, I write them down in my balance sheets, move it to a fire sale to liquidate the inventory, and end up worse than I was doing a year before. We need not look far and see that this is the case with Nikon 1 and Blackberry's Playbook.

But then again, I'm a bean counter.
08-12-2013, 01:36 AM   #59
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,557
QuoteOriginally posted by Kenntak Quote
I am a newbie, but are the images produced with a full frame camera significantly better than those produced with other types of cameras?
Well the simple answer to this is yes.

So if you use:
- Pentax K-5 II with sigma 70-200mm/f2.8 EX DG OS HSM
- Nikon D4 with nikon 300mm/f2.8
then the image from the Nikon is on several matters better. But you are also comparing some very different equipements.

If you own a Sigma 24-70mm/f2.8 IF EX DG HSM you probably just stick with the aps-c sized sensor camera and don't spoil the FF on it.
08-12-2013, 02:50 AM   #60
Pentaxian
mecrox's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,913
QuoteOriginally posted by drypenn Quote
Compared to many of you, I'm a complete dimwit when discussing about the technicalities between an APS-C and a FF. What I lack in technical know-how, please allow me to make up with my "corporate/financial" mindset, as a self-confessed bean counter.

I'm a corporate finance guy. I borrow funds for specific projects, and lately I've been tapping international sources to fund local projects. On top of that I'm an accountant by education. I'm your "traditional" bean counter in the truest, most abominable sense.

Let me make a guess. From the point of view of Ricoh, it will not make any "corporate sense" to produce a FF camera at this moment. It will also not make any perfect sense for them to tell outright that it is not in their immediate plan right now.

Sales have been floundering. Producing a FF camera for Pentax will basically be a "catch-up/me-too" product line, unless they can inject a big something that will revolutionize the DSLR FF line. Something that will help them stand out in a plethora of Canons/Nikons out there. Nothing short of something akin to "Steve Jobs" magic will make an FF line for Pentax desirable/profitable.

A new product line is always a serious money-pit: raw mats inventory, work space re-tooling, resource planning and re-allocation, and of course, marketing, promotion and distribution. That will be a huge risk to take especially with a gloomy forecast in the industry. If I were in Ricoh's Board, I will definitely be against producing a new "me-too" product line, when I can't even make the existing product lines profitable enough to my stakeholder's liking. Pump-priming in a flourishing industry is so much easier as against a bearish industry. Worst case scenario, I spend a lot for a product line that will not sell, while incurring all of those production costs which I have to write off directly impacting my income statements. After a year of sparse sales, I write them down in my balance sheets, move it to a fire sale to liquidate the inventory, and end up worse than I was doing a year before. We need not look far and see that this is the case with Nikon 1 and Blackberry's Playbook.

But then again, I'm a bean counter.
No, I'm sure you are spot on. However, there are ways such costs can at least be mitigated. The FF camera is essentially a bigger version of what the company already has (whether in the style of a K5 or a Ricoh GR, for example, in this case). The design is adapted not created de nada, the electronics like the focusing and imaging systems are dropped in from other cameras and you already have brand advertising into which the new camera will easily fit. None of this means the costs are nothing or cheap because there are still things you will need to commission, like a more powerful buffering system and mirror assembly (if it uses one), a lens and so forth but if/when things are going well then maybe the idea starts to look a little do-able. We've no idea whether Ricoh will produce an FF camera, of course, least of all against a bearish industry. There's perhaps more than enough foundation-building on the company to be done first. On the present lines of Pentax cameras, for example, the Prime imaging engine and Safox focusing system are clear candidates for upgrades because they are essential to the APS-C cameras, but if ever repurposed for FF then perhaps their development costs would have been mostly paid for by (one hopes) good APS-C sales. It must be a real game of chess.

Last edited by mecrox; 08-12-2013 at 05:16 AM.
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!
camera, care, customers, d600, ff, firm, frame, full-frame, nikon, pentax, segment
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax Full Frame , what does that mean ? jogiba Pentax Full Frame 8 07-08-2013 07:49 AM
from pentax australia about full frame zmohie Pentax Full Frame 16 04-03-2013 02:03 AM
Why I don't care if Pentax goes full frame. JJJPhoto Pentax DSLR Discussion 22 03-01-2013 01:13 AM
If Pentax brings out a full frame, what about my lenses ? lesmore49 Pentax DSLR Discussion 12 09-30-2012 04:36 PM
Fuji Says It's Serious About Full Frame; Should Pentax Too? DSims Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 33 09-26-2012 11:07 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:48 PM. | See also: NikonForums.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