Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-12-2013, 07:03 AM   #16
Veteran Member
Nesster's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NJ USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 13,047
QuoteOriginally posted by civiletti Quote
Reasonable analysis suggests that Pentax will never sell another camera body.
That's because they will perfect the 5G Cloud Camera: in the future several lenses and sensors will be capturing every view from every angle, world-wide (including geosynchronous satellite & low altitude drone imaging). Via the use of a smart tablet (available from miniature eye-piece only 'camera' to a large screen workstation surface) the photographer assembles an image from the Cloud. The image itself is stored non-destructively as a set of paramaters, which the photographer can later manipulate for e.g. focus, color, detail, etc. asynchronously.

This of course means the photographer need not be on location to capture images. And that photo shoots will be accomplished via imaging arrays in studio.

Obviously this technology lends itself to truly innovative art forms; e.g. photographic cubism and interactive wedding pictures.

Canon and Nikon, being tied to massive legacy hardware inventories, will be left in the dust by this Ricoh development.

11-12-2013, 07:32 AM   #17
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,807
QuoteOriginally posted by mecrox Quote
I would argue that the next big jump isn't into FF. It is into cameras that are completely at home with mobile + apps, and that means rewriting the camera operating system from the ground up. If a company wants still to be around in five years' time, this may well make a lot more difference than having a small line in FF cameras.

I don't see much point in Ricoh producing a line of me-too FF DSLRs. The potential market is small and the majority of those who would be interested are existing Pentax owners. That's just more selling to the faithful; and, in any case, a lot of the faithful wouldn't bite. Why? Because when it comes to spending serious money, a lot of the faithful will buy Canon or Nikon FF instead. Those companies have the lenses, the system, the experience and by now several years of honing their products. In a year's time, Sony will have much more of a system up and running too and Sony has the branding advantage of being able to plaster "Zeiss" all over their products. As a little-known newcomer with a vestigial system, Pentax would find it fantastically tough to gain traction, I'd have thought (little known to the general public, that is).

I'd be very surprised if FF wasn't somewhere in Ricoh's plans and it may have to be if APS-C starts being seriously squeezed between FF above and the mass of other things below it. However, perhaps Ricoh would be better off doing FF under their own name with cameras that are mirrorless and much more post-DSLR, like Sony?

Anyway, who knows. Whichever way, deep pockets for a long haul will be needed and so Pentax is fortunate to have an owner which has them.
You do know that to take an image worthy of any camera enthusiast, you pretty much need to be working on a tripod don't you? Do any of those "smart phones" have tripod mounts? Is that a feature I missed?

The fact that an APS-c camera may way exceed your personal needs, and you can get by with a phone, in no way affects the opinions of those of us who don't. Why do you say such things to people, who already own phones, but don't use them much for pictures?

But yes, if you're the kind of person who takes most of their pictures with their phone already, and think the phone camera is a wonderful thing, as they get better, that will be important to you. But your assumption that that will somehow affect most camera enthusiasts is incorrect. While there is a place for every camera, the idea of one type of camera, like a phone camera, replacing all the other types of cameras is just not feasible. Camera enthusiasts are a very small subset of the population. Their behaviour is in no way predictable by watching general trends in the population as a whole. Their behaviour is only predictable by studying the group itself. And camera enthusiasts seem to want their cell phone, and their dedicated camera with added technical abilities.
11-12-2013, 07:40 AM   #18
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,213
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
You do know that to take an image worthy of any camera enthusiast, you pretty much need to be working on a tripod don't you? Do any of those "smart phones" have tripod mounts? Is that a feature I missed?

The fact that an APS-c camera may way exceed your personal needs, and you can get by with a phone, in no way affects the opinions of those of us who don't. Why do you say such things to people, who already own phones, but don't use them much for pictures?

But yes, if you're the kind of person who takes most of their pictures with their phone already, and think the phone camera is a wonderful thing, as they get better, that will be important to you. But your assumption that that will somehow affect most camera enthusiasts is incorrect. While there is a place for every camera, the idea of one type of camera, like a phone camera, replacing all the other types of cameras is just not feasible. Camera enthusiasts are a very small subset of the population. Their behaviour is in no way predictable by watching general trends in the population as a whole. Their behaviour is only predictable by studying the group itself. And camera enthusiasts seem to want their cell phone, and their dedicated camera with added technical abilities.
I feel like phone photos are pretty much all snaps. Sure, I have seen better photos from phones when taken by a person who knows what they are doing, but still, for the most part, they are what they are and no amount of post processing is going to make them more. I have no problem taking a photo with my phone and then uploading it to facebook.

On the other hand, when I go out shooting with an SLR, there is no way I would upload a photo directly to flickr. I can't really preview them adequately on the camera screen and further more, they just aren't done. I know out of camera jpegs are decent, but I prefer to view my photos on a real screen and if a photo is worth keeping (most aren't) then I will post process it.

I am sure that I am in the minority and that there are a bunch of folks who really want an SLR with an android OS that would allow them not only to upload photos, but would also allow them to make phone calls and play Angry Birds. That's just not for me...
11-12-2013, 12:21 PM   #19
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
8x10 is the smallest sensor I'll use. But I hand-hold exclusively.

11-12-2013, 01:01 PM   #20
Pentaxian
mecrox's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,115
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
You do know that to take an image worthy of any camera enthusiast, you pretty much need to be working on a tripod don't you? Do any of those "smart phones" have tripod mounts? Is that a feature I missed? .
Camera enthusiasts strike me as rather sad, if any such exist. You don't have to own a tripod to enjoy photography and you don't have to have anything more than a smartphone either, although a good camera will surely make a substantial difference and can be a pleasure in itself if someone wants to learn the craft and not be limited by their equipment. Of course a tripod is very important and a necessity for some kinds of photography but it is only a hindrance in other kinds.

QuoteQuote:
The fact that an APS-c camera may way exceed your personal needs, and you can get by with a phone, in no way affects the opinions of those of us who don't. Why do you say such things to people, who already own phones, but don't use them much for pictures?

But yes, if you're the kind of person who takes most of their pictures with their phone already, and think the phone camera is a wonderful thing, as they get better, that will be important to you. But your assumption that that will somehow affect most camera enthusiasts is incorrect. While there is a place for every camera, the idea of one type of camera, like a phone camera, replacing all the other types of cameras is just not feasible. Camera enthusiasts are a very small subset of the population. Their behaviour is in no way predictable by watching general trends in the population as a whole. Their behaviour is only predictable by studying the group itself. And camera enthusiasts seem to want their cell phone, and their dedicated camera with added technical abilities.
The big outfits - Canon, Nikon, Sony, e.g. - are in the business of selling consumer electronics. Their customers may be photographers, housewives, students, lawyers, truck drivers, visitors from the planet Zanussi, or these strange "camera enthusiasts". Why should these outfits care? The big outfits have to sell huge quantities of their products and that means appealing to mainstream tastes which, these days, embrace mobile and apps. That's in part because of the general move away from the desktop computer on which the traditional DSLR is predicated. It's hardly all rocket science, surely. There will always be those whose tastes are not mainstream and who want something altogether more specialized and costly. I am sure they will be tenderly catered to, but they won't be the #1 priority. That lies in the volume market, I'd suggest.
11-13-2013, 12:28 AM   #21
Veteran Member
Barry Pearson's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Stockport
Posts: 870
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I feel like phone photos are pretty much all snaps. Sure, I have seen better photos from phones when taken by a person who knows what they are doing, but still, for the most part, they are what they are and no amount of post processing is going to make them more. I have no problem taking a photo with my phone and then uploading it to facebook.

On the other hand, when I go out shooting with an SLR, there is no way I would upload a photo directly to flickr. I can't really preview them adequately on the camera screen and further more, they just aren't done. I know out of camera jpegs are decent, but I prefer to view my photos on a real screen and if a photo is worth keeping (most aren't) then I will post process it.

I am sure that I am in the minority and that there are a bunch of folks who really want an SLR with an android OS that would allow them not only to upload photos, but would also allow them to make phone calls and play Angry Birds. That's just not for me...
I agree. And I go further - I don't carry a mobile phone! A photo-shoot comprises me, the subject(s), and like-minded people to talk to face-to-face. (But I do have a mobile phone in the car for out-going emergency calls).
12-20-2013, 03:19 PM   #22
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Canberra, Australia
Posts: 401
QuoteOriginally posted by rbefly Quote
Hello All,
Since it appears R/P is on track to jump into the FF market eventually, possibly as soon as 2014, it is in their best interest to observe what's already out there and what they're up against. Warning, it's pretty intimidating!

Stick with what you do best. The premimum APS-C market is there for the taking. Pick your fights well.
JMO,
Ron
The upshot to all this is really quite simple. Ricoh/Pentax will only ever be a manufacturer of 'enthusiast' cameras, and more importantly will only ever been SEEN as such, if they stick to the APS-C market.

I'm not casting aspersions either way as to the direction R/P should take, or where they should position themselves in the market, but IF they were / are still serious about being the 'third big player' in the market, then there's really no question or argument about whether they need to introduce a FF range.

In my personal view, R/P are at far greater risk of ridicule and poor market perceptions (or being 'slammed' as you put it) by not having a FF element to their range than they would be by introducing a FF system with a smaller lense line-up than Nikon. I have read more than one review that laments the lack of an upgrade path for new users considering Pentax, and I have no doubt that this fact has turned some potential new customers away (even if they don't really need an upgrade path). Perception can be as powerful as reality. I think the perception of 'these guys don't even have a FF camera' is worse than 'their lense line-up is a bit limited'.

Your points about the investment and resources required are, of course, valid ones, and I'm quite sure it keeps more than a few R/P execs awake at night. But, in my view, they will have to step up to the plate at some point (sooner rather than later), or run the risk of being sidelined and, ultimately, consigned to the history books.

As others have said (and I am inclined to agree), you don't need a cast of thousands of lenses to have a viable and respectable system that meets most requirements. That thought, combined with some co-operative lense development (such as with Tokina) would make the introduction of FF quite achievable, and more importantly, improve the market perception of the brand.

Last edited by Poit; 12-20-2013 at 03:29 PM.
12-20-2013, 03:51 PM   #23
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,826
QuoteOriginally posted by Poit Quote
in my view, they will have to step up to the plate at some point (sooner rather than later)
Especially when D610's, 6D's and A7's now available for less than $2000 (sometimes considerably less - eg 6D bodies are available new in Australia after Canon cash back for as low as about $1500). That puts these cameras very much into Pentax turf, price-wise and as a brand for 'serious amateurs'.

QuoteOriginally posted by Poit Quote
you don't need a cast of thousands of lenses to have a viable and respectable system that meets most requirements.
I agree. Proof of this is all the A7's and A7r's successfully flooding the market now, even with practically no native FF E-mount lenses available.

12-20-2013, 05:32 PM   #24
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,807
A7's are flooding the market? Who knew?

QuoteQuote:
Especially when D610's, 6D's and A7's now available for less than $2000 (sometimes considerably less - eg 6D bodies are available new in Australia after Canon cash back for as low as about $1500). That puts these cameras very much into Pentax turf, price-wise and as a brand for 'serious amateurs'.
Now maybe all the deluded amateurs who crave full frame cameras at cheap prices will quit hanging around Pentax land and go somewhere else. I guess it's just inconceivable that anyone would actually buy a Pentax, even if it cost more than some FFs? Oh wait, I can get a Canon 5D for $500, I already can. You're selling some series FF cool aid at your little stand here. I have no doubt some Pentax users, who are only here because they couldn't afford what they want it. The big question for me would be, if I had a Pentax FF, would I carry it around in my camera bag… and what exactly would I carry it for? Or would it just sit at home most of the time… I'm guessing it would be on the shelf 90% of the time. That's even $1500 is a lot of money for such a small percentage of my shooting. I'd buy it if it could pay for itself as a working camera, but, I'm not seeing how it would do that.
12-20-2013, 06:37 PM   #25
Kiwi Pentaxian
NZ_Ross's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Timaru
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,260
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
The big question for me would be, if I had a Pentax FF, would I carry it around in my camera bag… and what exactly would I carry it for? Or would it just sit at home most of the time… I'm guessing it would be on the shelf 90% of the time. That's even $1500 is a lot of money for such a small percentage of my shooting. I'd buy it if it could pay for itself as a working camera, but, I'm not seeing how it would do that.
The even bigger question for me - is if I had $1500 to spend would I actually spend it on a camera body which depreciates very quickly, or would I spend it on a RRS Tripod, or some more really good glass. I suspect in terms of practical bang for the buck I would get more benefit from the tripod or the glass.
12-20-2013, 06:43 PM - 1 Like   #26
Senior Member
Paul MaudDib's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 292
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
A7's are flooding the market? Who knew?
Anyone who wasn't deluding themselves. Sony sold 200% of their expected preorders, and there were lines out the door to get them in Korea. The numbers don't compete with Canon or Nikon's sales of their combined amateur/midrange/professional product lines, but it's really, really, really good for a brand new system with no existing mindshare or marketshare. I love seeing this kind of stuff when for years the proclamation was "there's no market for a downmarket FF SLR", it really shows how much groupthink is directed at excusing Pentax's lack of innovation.

And remember, this is sales of a camera with basically no lenses or accessories. The system isn't there yet, people are buying it anyway for adapting old glass and stuff, third party lenses, and the expectation that a company that's innovating like Sony is won't let them down. You'd do better if you had Canon's lens library or something like that. Or Pentax's for that matter.

QuoteQuote:
Now maybe all the deluded amateurs who crave full frame cameras at cheap prices will quit hanging around Pentax land and go somewhere else. I guess it's just inconceivable that anyone would actually buy a Pentax, even if it cost more than some FFs? Oh wait, I can get a Canon 5D for $500, I already can. You're selling some series FF cool aid at your little stand here. I have no doubt some Pentax users, who are only here because they couldn't afford what they want it. The big question for me would be, if I had a Pentax FF, would I carry it around in my camera bag… and what exactly would I carry it for? Or would it just sit at home most of the time… I'm guessing it would be on the shelf 90% of the time. That's even $1500 is a lot of money for such a small percentage of my shooting. I'd buy it if it could pay for itself as a working camera, but, I'm not seeing how it would do that.
Yeah man, they're not even ripe yet, you didn't want those sour grapes anyway! Who needs those stinking "customers" with their "cash monies" and all the sales they generate! Not Pentax, as shown by their obstinate refusal to listen to what their customer base had been telling them for a decade. Now that "there's no market for a cheap FF" has been shown to be pants-on-head crazy, the goalposts are shifting to how insane you would have to be to want an improved color space, shallower depth of field, better high-ISO performance, better noise, etc.

Again, posts like these are going to go away the second Pentax releases their FF body. You'll line up to hand them your money and you'll proclaim it to be the most innovative piece of camera technology since the SLR. People love shooting with 5D Classics and such even if they're not the most bleeding-edge sensor released and will frequently do so in preference to "more advanced" crop bodies. For most people, unless they're shooting birds or something where you need long reach + fast focus tracking they will probably reach for the full frame body instead.

Last edited by Paul MaudDib; 12-20-2013 at 07:06 PM.
12-20-2013, 08:49 PM   #27
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,826
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
You're selling some series FF cool aid at your little stand here.
Not really. It's not Kook Aid. For me FF (Pentax or Canon or Nikon or Sony) is really another way to push the high-quality low-light shooting envelope higher (with maybe a dash of 'bigger-brighter-viewfinder' thrown in). Issues of shallow DOF, resolution, airy disks or whatever aren't especially interesting to me.

It looks to me like APS-C (with current technology) has perhaps plateaued at low-light with K-3/D7100 level tech. So a Pentax FF on the same price and technology level as the 6d/D610/A7 will be the only way to continue to play in that space (and sell decent volumes).
12-20-2013, 08:57 PM   #28
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 7,103
The price you listed for the Nikkor 85/1.4G is short about $1000. It's more like the price of the 85/1.8G
12-20-2013, 08:58 PM   #29
Pentaxian
gmans's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Hunter Valley,NSW, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,469
Aside from the debate of previous posts, my son once asked me long time ago when was I going to get a mobile/cell phone with a camera in it? My reply was I will get a camera with a phone it.

The irony is i am lost without my Iphone. Literally use maps , google on the run. what can not be done with the smart phone.

Last edited by gmans; 12-20-2013 at 10:25 PM. Reason: Grammer
12-21-2013, 05:39 AM   #30
Pentaxian
mecrox's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,115
QuoteOriginally posted by Paul MaudDib Quote
Anyone who wasn't deluding themselves. Sony sold 200% of their expected preorders, and there were lines out the door to get them in Korea. The numbers don't compete with Canon or Nikon's sales of their combined amateur/midrange/professional product lines, but it's really, really, really good for a brand new system with no existing mindshare or marketshare. I love seeing this kind of stuff when for years the proclamation was "there's no market for a downmarket FF SLR", it really shows how much groupthink is directed at excusing Pentax's lack of innovation.

And remember, this is sales of a camera with basically no lenses or accessories. The system isn't there yet, people are buying it anyway for adapting old glass and stuff, third party lenses, and the expectation that a company that's innovating like Sony is won't let them down. You'd do better if you had Canon's lens library or something like that. Or Pentax's for that matter.



Yeah man, they're not even ripe yet, you didn't want those sour grapes anyway! Who needs those stinking "customers" with their "cash monies" and all the sales they generate! Not Pentax, as shown by their obstinate refusal to listen to what their customer base had been telling them for a decade. Now that "there's no market for a cheap FF" has been shown to be pants-on-head crazy, the goalposts are shifting to how insane you would have to be to want an improved color space, shallower depth of field, better high-ISO performance, better noise, etc.

Again, posts like these are going to go away the second Pentax releases their FF body. You'll line up to hand them your money and you'll proclaim it to be the most innovative piece of camera technology since the SLR. People love shooting with 5D Classics and such even if they're not the most bleeding-edge sensor released and will frequently do so in preference to "more advanced" crop bodies. For most people, unless they're shooting birds or something where you need long reach + fast focus tracking they will probably reach for the full frame body instead.
I fear the K-mount police may be after you now, lol.

The writing went up on the wall in 2012 with the release of the Canon 6D and subsequently the Nikon D600/D610 and now the Sony A7. and those are accompanied by scads of used D700s and 5D Mk IIs. And between them, Canon, Nikon and Sony can deliver a huge amount of marketing clout. I think this does put Pentax in a very difficult position. They aren't well known by comparison, cannot match the marketing muscle and, overall, may well look old school and, now, a bit uncompetitive. Where I live, a K3 and some decent Pentax lenses is only marginally less costly (or lighter in weight) than any of the above with some F4 FF zooms and sometimes the Pentax option may be more costly and heavier (and generally much harder to obtain in a store). It's hard to see how Pentax aren't going to suffer at their high end if they continue to play games around "FF? What's that?".

However, there is another question behind these format wars and that's the form factor which consumers most prefer. Sony, Fuji, Olympus, Panasonic and Samsung are lining up on short-registration mounts and EVFs, perhaps largely as a way of trying to compete against the other side which is traditional OVF mirrorbox, long-registration mounts from Canon, Nikon and Pentax all of which are predicated on a full-frame image even if they don't always use it. Will one side start to crumble or both continue to coexist for consumers (not professional, top-end buyers)? Quite a lot may turn on that.

Last edited by mecrox; 12-21-2013 at 09:51 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!
aps-c, f/1.4g, f/2.8, f/2.8g, ff, full-frame, lenses, market, nikon, pentax, tilt/shift
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A Pentax FF idea, a unique take on the FF market... theperception2008 Pentax DSLR Discussion 20 10-03-2012 01:07 PM
Would you buy the first FF if it is a K-01 or wait for the FF DSLR? slackercruster Pentax DSLR Discussion 19 07-18-2012 10:09 PM
Nature I Came for the Waters Tamia Post Your Photos! 5 08-21-2010 07:17 PM
People Testing the waters.... D4rknezz Post Your Photos! 5 08-10-2010 06:36 PM
testing the waters without the auto picture mode wrxwheelman Pentax DSLR Discussion 5 06-25-2008 04:50 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:47 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