[MarkJerling]

It had better be this year

Nope. Won't be this year, sorry!

I've gotten sick of not knowing, so I wrote to them and asked. Here's the response, from Ricoh Japan:
"Dear Sir,
We regret to inform you that we currently do not have actual plan to put the full-frame DSLR camera on the market.
However, we will certainly transfer your comment to the related section."

So, what does that tell us?
They have a FF Pentax under development. ("the full-frame") ("to the related section") They even have a "section" working on it.
But sadly: "we currently do not have actual plan to put the full-frame DSLR camera on the market"

So, as far as I can tell, not this year. Drat.

[Migno]

I'm pretty sure it won't.

[hoopsontoast]

Point taken. I wish Pentax listened plus had the means ...

But, then again, who shoots APS-C 16mm @ f/2.8 ... I don't get it.

It can be handy in low light (indoors) or interesting effect for shallow DOF or high speed....

Some with the DA14 @ f2.8



















And this one @ f4

[K'evo]

Pentax will not release a full-frame camera.
Pentax finally threw us, trusting and loyal users.
Do not wait in vain!

My answer is - NO.

[Chris Mak]

Nope. Won't be this year, sorry!

I've gotten sick of not knowing, so I wrote to them and asked. Here's the response, from Ricoh Japan:
"Dear Sir,
We regret to inform you that we currently do not have actual plan to put the full-frame DSLR camera on the market.
However, we will certainly transfer your comment to the related section."

So, what does that tell us?
They have a FF Pentax under development. ("the full-frame") ("to the related section") They even have a "section" working on it.
But sadly: "we currently do not have actual plan to put the full-frame DSLR camera on the market"

So, as far as I can tell, not this year. Drat.

Yes, a bit sad after at the start of 2014, it was looking like they might release it. I felt the bad news coming in july, so I went for the Sony A7r, and now that Zeiss is starting the tailor made Loxia line for FF e-mount, I am actually thinking of switching from k-mount to e-mount completely. It is just not happening, FF with Pentax.

Chris

[devouges]

Well...... should we start a count-down ??????

Strange..... no leaks.... no rumors..... no spies out there ????

[Jean Poitiers]

It can be handy in low light (indoors) or interesting effect for shallow DOF or high speed....

Some with the DA14 @ f2.8
And this one @ f4

Agreed, especially for a prime lens ... and the DA 14/2.8 is a giant compared to my DA 15 Ltd. I put a premium on size and the inherent advantages of primes over zooms, especially from my experience at the extreme ranges of a zoom.

I am sure this Fuji will find its owners. But it's not my cup of tea to lug around over-sized, unbalanced, heavy, expensive zoom lens when I can pack my bag with an array of nice small primes ... pass; thanks for the offer, but "no".

Also, I will be quite surprised in this Fuji comes in under $1,500.00 given what Fuji sells now ... and that next generation of cameras is not here yet. That might be wishful thinking (just saying) ... like Pentax is going to announce/put out a FF this year. There's a rush on all that legacy glass plus the "three amigos" ... n'est-ce pas ?!

---

Last edited by Jean Poitiers; 09-09-2014 at 05:10 AM.

[valonkuvaaja]

Hope so or i have looking it somewhere elsewhere..

[joe_c]

I don't want a FF-Pentax. Why? It's too small . This convinced me:

You Tube

You Tube

Honestly, when you look at two pictures, one taken with my K5 IIs, the other taken with my friends EOS 5D Mark2 you can't tell which is which.

Joe

[Winder]

I don't want a FF-Pentax. Why? It's too small . This convinced me: Crop Sensors vs Full Frame :: Crop Or Crap? - YouTube

Honestly, when you look at two pictures, one taken with my K5 IIs, the other taken with my friends EOS 5D Mark2 you can't tell which is which.

Joe

Maybe Pentax should join M4/3 and keep the 645. The difference between M4/3 and APS-C is the same as the difference between APS-C and FF. Skip both middle formats. What makes ASP-C better than M4/3?

[monochrome]

Users: "........" [scratch their heads — they have just sold their DSLR and a plethora of lenses to get a mirrorless Fuji that mimics the DSLR and comes with even bigger lenses]

But the hind end fits in a pocket! (Been down this path 1000 times).

[airjames]

How about no to FF but yes to a modified FF format that will allow the use of all their lenses? It would make sense if they adjust the FF sensor somehow to take advantage of the size of the sensor yet maintain functionality in their current lineup of existing lenses. If anyone can(or would) do it, it's Pentax(i.e. AA filter simulator, wifi controls via FLUcard, increasing higher ISO quality to make the most of APS-C, weatherproofing lower end cameras, adjusting to the use of millions of older manual lenses).

[hoopsontoast]

Maybe Pentax should join M4/3 and keep the 645. The difference between M4/3 and APS-C is the same as the difference between APS-C and FF. Skip both middle formats. What makes ASP-C better than M4/3?

Why would Pentax ditch their APS-C focused lens line up of arguably the best APS-C orientated Prime lenses of Lightweight - (DA/FA Limiteds) and specialist to start a whole new mount.

In terms of K-mount:
They have the basis of an excellent FF Lineup - FA31, FA43 and FA77 Limiteds, along with the D-FA 50mm Macro & D-FA 100 Macro are all in production, today.
The potential of instant D-FA 'Pancake' lenses in the DA40, DA70 even if these were re-released as D-FA versions although seems unlikely due to the recent HD versions of the DA Limiteds.
You also have the legacy FA35 and FA50 lenses that tend to still be in stock so still produced? As well as the FA20-35, FA20 and FA28 which was discontinued in ~2004?

Obviously the FA* lenses are not too old either, so there are 24mm, 85mm and the telephoto prime 200mm and 300mm as well as the FA*28-70mm.

It just seems to make sense that IF it did ever happen, they already have an excellent basis for a FF Lens line up, more so than starting all again from scratch.

The one thing that Pentax have as an advantage is relatively small and lightweight glass, even with a larger K-Mount based body. Whats the point of having a mirror-less thin body like the Sony A7 series if you are going to stick a huge f2.8 24-70mm lens on it. Unless you have a pancake lens (like Pentax has quite a few of already) an extra 20mm saved on the shallow lens mount is negated by a massive lens anyway.

A FF K-Mount with an APS-C crop mode seems the best of both worlds, access to ALL their current K-Mount Line up as well as ALL their legacy K-Mount glass on day one of release.


Now how about getting a de-crippled KAF2 K-Mount like in my MZ-5N........

[zmohie]

If they do..they have to be smarter and different than the others.
I think Pentax can do it with a new concept and a new lenses.
if pentax can build a good looking and pro 645 MF then it can biuld FF with out doubt.iam sure it is only a finanicial issue not the capability!!

[GlassJunkie]

Based on your thinking/numbers, the original Pentax Imaging purchase has zero hope of breaking even

Why would they need to think about LIBOR numbers if it's self-financed? That's something Pentax-standalone would have had to worry about - not a Ricoh. Plus, it's almost assuredly closer to $30-40 million above and beyond the cost of aps-c and other operations rather than $70m.

If Pentax sells 10% of the volume of Nikon's D800 alone, they sell 36,000 bodies the first year. At initial MSRP of $3K Nikon reportedly made at least $1000/body profit on the D800 (source: thogan,) If Pentax makes even half that margin, they're looking at $18 Million profit in the first year on the body alone. Then come the lenses, which usually can have even greater margins.

You should also factor in the cost of doing nothing, of watching aps-c DSLR volumes shrinking and K-mount lens volume along with it. (To be fair also factor in the opportunity cost of not going whole-hog into MILC, which they might be thinking about.)

Basically it comes down to:

1) Does Pentax/Ricoh want to stick with the K-mount business, do they want to be selling K-mount products 10 years from now?
2) How does Pentax keep selling K-mount products at respectable margins when their volume end (entry) is being eaten by MILC and their margin-rich upper-end is being eaten by entry-level FF? Remember, they survived in the film days without these two disruptions, there was no "FF" or MILC alternatives - 135mm bodies held a very strong position with lower products a joke and upper-end being $$ medium format.

If the answer to #1 is "no" then #2 doesn't apply.

They likely bought Ricoh with stock, and bought a ton of good R&D and engineering/ tooling for $150mm. I suspect the acquisition was about R&D sunk, and a breakeven business (free R&D which they didn't have in their compact camera line". They needed to escape the doom befalling compacts and P&S and this was a Brilliant move (IMHO) to become a major player FAST.... I used LIBOR since there are many national initiatives and government programs which subsidize R&D to feel like a low number.

You may like this... The price of a LEXUS or Toyota (there is was no LEXUS in Japan when I was there, the LS400 was the Toyota Cerisio) is roughly $20,000 higher than the US. Same on chips. Camera equipment they pay retail MSRP. In the law there... They recoup their R&D costs domestically, which is why the US created "Anti-Dumping" legislation. Stupid Americans didn't flex and compete.

I think Pentax "Knows" they cannot charge the same price as Nikon for an "equal" camera, brand is softer AND lenses (current tech for FF) are light...
So the $1000/body may not be there for a while...

#1... I don't think K-Mount is going anywhere.... so Yes On #2, there is a plan they are not sharing... FF is coming, but I believe in MILC, that will retain K-Mount utility (with or without an adapter).... DSLR in FF, several years out if at all, and not until they can leapfrog CaNikon (like K-3 did and 645z did to the medium formaters)