[repaap]

Nikon D600 is 1750 on amazon right now
Canon 6D is 1575 on amazon right now

What are you competing with?

I don't mind if the Pentax full frame is $1500 or $3500, but I want it to be a good value whatever the price is.

Yes, I'm avare of that, as I said in previous post. I just don't think that pentax just should aim for that class(1400-1600), but higher with their first FF. This is just what I feel. Perhaps they will do first cheaper model and see how it will go...or they try to make something really different. Dunno what that will be thou, there seems to be quite many options. And I must say that Sony is most interesting of them all...

[Rondec]

My guess is that if Pentax releases a full frame camera, they will try to match (or beat) most of the D800 specs for a price slightly below the D800. That really does seem to be Ricoh's way and what they did with the K3 in relation to the D7100.

My big hope is that they will be able to put SR on the sensor for such a camera. It just feels like IBIS has so many more uses than in lens stabilization and it can really bring down lens size as well, I just hope they can manage it.

[Stone G.]

My big hope is that they will be able to put SR on the sensor for such a camera. It just feels like IBIS has so many more uses than in lens stabilization and it can really bring down lens size as well, I just hope they can manage it.

I am pretty sure that this nut has been cracked already: A full frame camera like the Sony A99 has sensor-shift based IBIS and works with "any" lens. I don't think that the A99's lack of a moving mirror has much to say here(?)

I agree with you on the many uses/benefits of IBIS and I do believe that gone are those days where it was **self-evident** for **everybody** that lens-stabilization had to be better than IBIS.

[ElJamoquio]

Yes, I'm avare of that, as I said in previous post. I just don't think that pentax just should aim for that class(1400-1600), but higher with their first FF. This is just what I feel. Perhaps they will do first cheaper model and see how it will go...or they try to make something really different. Dunno what that will be thou, there seems to be quite many options. And I must say that Sony is most interesting of them all...

I would prefer the D600 ish model, myself, but expect them to make the D800ish model. I'll buy either one assuming they're competitive with the Nikons...

[stevebrot]

My opinion is that for most purposes APS-C was a stop-gap format until cameras with larger sensors could be made for a reasonable price. There is a reason why 35mm film was so dominant for so long, despite 1/2 frame and 16mm options. That size image is simply the sweet spot in regards to image quality, manageable DOF, and weight/bulk of kit.

Will APS-C go away? Probably not. It is a god-send for action, wildlife, and macro photographers.


Steve

[kricha6431]

We had a discussion here at PF if full frame is a niche market (too small for Pentax actually), or not.

In this respect, it may be worthwhile to notice that Nikon Germany has just published a press release entitled:

"Volles Format. Alle Möglichkeiten – Nikon mit Fokus auf FX-Vollformat-Fotografie" (engl.: Full Frame. All Possibilities -- Nikon with focus on FX full frame photography)

The full text is published here: Nikon setzt voll aufs Kleinbildformat | photoscala

It basically announces that future Nikon sales and marketing activities in Germany will be focused on FX.

The announcement incudes a URL, currently under construction: Nikon FX und die Vorteile der Vollformat-Fotografie

--

My personal take at this is that camera sales have come under serious pressure over the last year or so and that full frame emerged as a segment being somewhat immune.

Moreover, I think this pretty much rules out any possibility Nikon would deploy a DX-size D400 any time soon. This should be good news for the K-3, however I see 7D and D300s users post about K-3 missing selection of 500-800 mm glass, TCs and possibly inferior 3D tracking AF.

So, it may well be that between smart phones and full frame, pretty much everything else is collapsing right now.

Maybe, it is just that the fashion trend for digital cameras incl. dSLRs which grew for 10 years now comes to an end, leaving the photography industry where it started off in the late 90s. Not the worst thing if you ask me. And it makes DX synonym to this fashion trend, at least for Nikon.

In the end, the 35mm format may not be as niche anymore as it used to be for the last 10 years. Partly because of shrinking APSC SLR and shrinking mirrorless system camera sales.

Falconeye
I hope you don't mind if I correct on your D400 observance, but you are Sir are wrong, cause I read here about a week ago that Nikon is planning on D400 release 1st part of 2014, as they stated they were waiting for Canon to make their move with the Canon 7D II!
As most People know Canon and Nikon have been competing against each other for the longest time

[Digitalis]

My opinion is that for most purposes APS-C was a stop-gap format until cameras with larger sensors could be made for a reasonable price. There is a reason why 35mm film was so dominant for so long, despite 1/2 frame and 16mm options. That size image is simply the sweet spot in regards to image quality, manageable DOF, and weight/bulk of kit. Will APS-C go away? Probably not. It is a god-send for action, wildlife, and macro photographers.

I agree, APS-C certainly has its uses. For commercial work I use my pentax K5IIs with the FA*200mm f/4 for macro photography alongside my 645D with the 645 90mm f/2.8. I find macro work is much easier to do with the smaller K5IIS than the hulking 645D - which due to its size can cast unfortunate shadows on my subjects. The FA*200mm f/4 ED on APS-C gives me greater freedom in how my subjects are lit because of the generous working distance.

[RonHendriks1966]

Falconeye
I hope you don't mind if I correct on your D400 observance, but you are Sir are wrong, cause I read here about a week ago that Nikon is planning on D400 release 1st part of 2014, as they stated they were waiting for Canon to make their move with the Canon 7D II!
As most People know Canon and Nikon have been competing against each other for the longest time

That is about the stupidest thing to do, waiting for someone else to move and stay foot.

[kricha6431]

That is about the stupidest thing to do, waiting for someone else to move and stay foot.

I'll have to agree, but that is what Nikon said

[kricha6431]

knowing Nikon, it maybe, they want to wait! I have read some of the specs over time periods and i think they were redoing the AF system, and so they may have other reasons, setbacks, and so on

[Pål Jensen]

APS-C will probably still get a good run in compacts and entry-level mirrorless for the next several years, but I agree: in the future, serious cameras will need the larger format to be able to stay in the game.

Cameras are portable devices and the trend for such devices are reduced size (within reason). There are no general wish for larger cameras or lenses among consumers.
If you look at the history of photography the trend is towards reduced size; the smallest system that get good enough results wins the market. Doesn't matter if it is film or digital. Whereas it is true that more and cheaper FF options will increase its market penetration it is a mistake to think this is a trend...

[Pål Jensen]

Why would Pentax need to make FF and price it under 1600, even under 2000? This FM is going to be expensive, D 800 is expensive and 5DIII is expensive, more than 2500...? Seem to be out of logic, and also make new K-3 look like nothing, wich it is not by any means... oh my, Have I been provoked by troll?

A Pentax FF camera needs to fill the gap between the K-3 and the 645D(II). It won't be cheap.
The retro Nikon is almost certainly going to be expensive as well. What else is the point? A product that can make profit, aparently with a slow selling sensor (overstock?), why sell it cheap?

[Pål Jensen]

My opinion is that for most purposes APS-C was a stop-gap format until cameras with larger sensors could be made for a reasonable price. There is a reason why 35mm film was so dominant for so long, despite 1/2 frame and 16mm options. That size image is simply the sweet spot in regards to image quality, manageable DOF, and weight/bulk of kit.

Will APS-C go away? Probably not. It is a god-send for action, wildlife, and macro photographers.


Steve

But image quality have increased massively since the 35mm film days. The samples from the K-3 have better image quality than my 645 system can provide. We are far ahead of 35mm film quality a long time ago.
The sweetspot changes over time....APS is the new sweetspot....

[northcoastgreg]

Will APS-C go away? Probably not. It is a god-send for action, wildlife, and macro photographers.

Those are all good justifications for APS-C, but the greatest strength for APS-C is cost of entire system (not just the camera). The Nikon kit lens for FX retails for around $600. The Nikon kit lens for DX retails around $120. For a lot of hobbyists, $600 is a lot to spend on a kit lens.

[stevebrot]

Those are all good justifications for APS-C, but the greatest strength for APS-C is cost of entire system (not just the camera). The Nikon kit lens for FX retails for around $600. The Nikon kit lens for DX retails around $120. For a lot of hobbyists, $600 is a lot to spend on a kit lens.

And the FX kit lens will run circles around the DX lens. Sort of like comparing the DA 18-55 with the DA* 16-50. Quality comes at a cost.

That being said, as long as all the consumer dSLRs are APS-C, that is where the cheap glass will be.


Steve