[Kunzite]

You still haven't:
- given a reasonable explanation (proof would be too much to ask) about why a custom made APS-H sensor would be significantly cheaper than an off the shelf FF one. Note that one sensor is not enough, Pentax will have to continue requesting custom made APS-H sensors to keep up with APS-C and FF.
- explained how Pentax would compete with the Canikony's FF (perhaps just like 4/3 "managed" to compete with APS-C?)
- explained why should they put a lot of effort into APS-H when they could do it for FF.

[akanarya]

It is about to end this topic and open a new one for 2016. Congrats to Pentax.

[easyreeder]

You still haven't:
- given a reasonable explanation (proof would be too much to ask) about why a custom made APS-H sensor would be significantly cheaper than an off the shelf FF one. Note that one sensor is not enough, Pentax will have to continue requesting custom made APS-H sensors to keep up with APS-C and FF.
- explained how Pentax would compete with the Canikony's FF (perhaps just like 4/3 "managed" to compete with APS-C?)
- explained why should they put a lot of effort into APS-H when they could do it for FF.

I feel like he did explain why APS-H would be a good fit. But it also seems like the price and availability of the sensor is a critical part of the discussion, and that's feels like 95% speculation to me. If it's the same price or more expensive than ff, obviously, it's unlikely.

[Kunzite]

I feel like his explanations so far were more like suppositions and wishful thinking. Before 2010 it might've worked... but now, with the cheaper FFs being launched at $1700? That's only $400 more than the K-3.
I'm not saying that Pentax should make their FF that cheap (in fact I'm against that); but a camera more expensive than the K-3 cannot avoid competing with those FFs.

[easyreeder]

I feel like his explanations so far were more like suppositions and wishful thinking.

Well, I'd like a Pentax FF, but at this point I'm also interested in video, and I wonder if a Pentax 4k is more important to me. The k3 is great, and I don't feel a burning desire for an FF anymore in stills. In video, clearly the K3 is lacking, but if Pentax were to move more toward video, the rolling shutter issue in FF could be enough to keep me in APS-C, which shouldn't be as prone to rolling shutter as FF. Of course, the 4k, haha, haha, might be easier to handle in a slightly smaller sensor. So, there's the video side. I believe the rest of the rationale is: cheaper (which is the big sticking point); more DA lenses make the transition; more legacy K mount lenses make the transition (no dark corners etc); keep some crop for the birders; don't have major issues with SR in a larger sensor (I don't fully understand this one, but I believe it was there). Of course, I don't presume to speak for Ken, and I may have read the video stuff somewhere else, but that was my take. Summary: APS-H could be a step toward FF, and offer a competitive sensor in video (much bigger than M43, and the same crop as 4k video in FF, which is shot at a crop anyway).

Ha, maybe all of that is wishful thinking! Tech speculation is a fine line, huh.

[RonHendriks1966]

Well they can make a FF camera with the 24 megapixelsensor that is allready in several camera's from Nikon and Sony. The problem is that it won't attrackt new users to the K-mount. At Ricoh they know this. And the current userbase isn't large enough to make that a good idea. Is it cheaper to order an APS-H sized sensor? I don't think so! Is it the sensor making the 1Dx costing so much? I don't think so. They have to make one gamble on this. Special order a 20 megapixel APS-H sized sensor cut from the same wafer as the 645z is made of and you have one great sensor. Around 55 % larger then APS-C, so this will bring IQ one step above the K-3! Also a not to big sensor so many lenses will perform great on it. Don't drain your current userbase since many of them have lenses that can perform on this platform. Put it inside the K-3 body and update the SR-system. The SR-system is less stressfull on this smaller then Full Frame sensor, so this will save on costs and will perform better. Anything else needed? Well an updated AF-system would be great, but if not no problem. All the rest could stay as it is. The K-3 would be the midrange camera and this new one the topcamera. Now you have at least a unique offering in the market. For that you have to pull a risk, since you need to order at least a minimum number of sensors. So maybe you have to order at least 50.000 or even 100.000 of them, but there is a lifespan of 3 years for this camera to sell them. With some improvements this camera can attracket new users to the K-mount.

I commented on improvements on another thread:

Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 Well to be honest I don't want the pixeldensity of the K-3. So either a 16mp aps-c or a larger sensor.
I would like improvements:choice between 14-bit and 12-bit RAW (for sports) Faster saving to the card, there is a limitation in the system that isn't coming from the PRIME III engine. Better video codecs, not perse 4k, but a better performance. connectivity to internet I would like the option to choose the framerate, just with the wheel anything from 1fps to 8,3 fps. I would like to enter a voice recording with images. I would like to have an option to give images a * designation, so you can choose to see all great images in just one choice. Out of the few hundred images you select directly the maybe 20 great outstanding images. improved AF is Always welcome (but lenses need to be faster for that)
It is a great camera....But making 1000 images each 32 MB large at a sportsgame is not my cup of thea.

So you have two camera's with both the same pixelcount. The flashy K-S1 and the workhorse APS-H camera. In between the K-3(II) and then under that the K-50(0)(follower). Looks like a full productrange to me.

It needs to be a multifunctional to serve everyone. So with those 20 megapixel it is still the best K-mount camera when it comes to IQ. I don't think it will be better in AF then K-3 is, but it has to be equal to be a good performer (not 1Dx/D4s performance). It would be great to have even improvement over K-3 for AF sensor,so some f4 AF points, since some lenses don't benefit from the F2.8 AF points. Maybe having a bigger aray of AF points, not the 5x5 and two outsiders of the K-3, but around that and extra row of AF points. An array of 6x6 and on each site two extra points, making a larger area and 40 AF points.

The transport to the memorycard can be improved so we can save images faster to the card then current with K-3/645Z that max out under 45MB/s.

The sensor should give 14-bit RAW or 12-bit RAW, wich is something on the sensormodule, since the conversion is on the sensor. Making it more expensive. But the 20 megapixel in 14-bit will be starting from 24 MB per file while the 12-bit RAW will start at 16 MB. So on a full (larger) buffer the camera should still be able to make up to 4 fps in 12-bit RAW (depending on iso-setting and filesize). That is a fast camera compared to K-3.

You still haven't:
- given a reasonable explanation (proof would be too much to ask) about why a custom made APS-H sensor would be significantly cheaper than an off the shelf FF one. Note that one sensor is not enough, Pentax will have to continue requesting custom made APS-H sensors to keep up with APS-C and FF.
- explained how Pentax would compete with the Canikony's FF (perhaps just like 4/3 "managed" to compete with APS-C?)
- explained why should they put a lot of effort into APS-H when they could do it for FF.

So I don't think it will be cheaper, I do think it can stand out in the market. With some nice aditions (wich could also go into FF or aps-c) it can make for a great camera.

On the 4k subject. Well then the PRIME III fals short, so it does need a new electronic lay-out, wich I don't think we get this year (or next).

I think the APS-H should compete with the APS-C market. Since that is 90 % of the market. In this competition the aps-h sensor will be the better camera, while still offering a better camera to the current K-mount users. If you can't make descent images with aps-h I think that won't happen with FF.

Better performance for more of the lenses out there with K-mount. So this also serves the current userbase.

My suggestion for having 12-bit and 14-bit RAW from the sensor makes the sensormodule probably even a little more expensive, but also giving anew future to the camera.

SR should be easier to handle then on the larger FF sensor. This is where the aps-h actually brings some technical developement benefits.

[Kunzite]

Standing out for being (almost?) as expensive as FF, yet inferior?

You thinking that it "should" compete with APS-C is why I said wishful thinking. You cannot make it compete with APS-C (and not with FF) unless it's priced into APS-C territory - the gap between APS-C and FF being so small.
The ability to make decent images stuff is a red herring. Please don't do that.

About lenses - FF or APS-H, new ones would be required anyway; and on FF, there's always the option of cropping. No reason to go as far as introducing a special format - for old lenses - when there's a solution which can be implemented in firmware.

Sorry, but FF is the winner, and for good reasons:
- modern sensors are readily available, and will continue to be
- it would put Pentax on equal, and not an inferior footing with Canikony
- it's easier to differentiate between it and APS-C
- it allows for larger margin products (if we accept the point that APS-H needs to be sold at APS-C prices).
- its market is more than just you

[RonHendriks1966]

- its market is more than just you

This is a small concern to many people.

[easyreeder]

On the 4k subject. Well then the PRIME III fals short, so it does need a new electronic lay-out, wich I don't think we get this year (or next).

Yeah, prolly. But I don't think we'll see too many more emounts without 4k, and very few M43, and even APS-C if samsung is a harbinger. One of the major selling points of crop sensors is now 4k.

[Tan68]

Yes, Pentax has weathered another thrash on the FF topic

It is about to end this topic and open a new one for 2016. Congrats to Pentax.

[Poit]

It is about to end this topic and open a new one for 2016. Congrats to Pentax.

Yes, Pentax has weathered another thrash on the FF topic

Congrats indeed.

Pretty impressive. They must be breaking some sort of record for resisting what their customers ask for...

Roll on 2016 eh?

[rawr]

They must be breaking some sort of record for resisting what their customers ask for...

Very true.

OK, in 2003 FF may not have been a good idea for Pentax to deliver, and they made the right call at the time. But over the last few years, digital FF no longer seems impossibly complex or expensive to deliver as it once may have been. Especially for a camera maker like Pentax that is also happy to continue making digital 645 bodies.

[cali92rs]

You still haven't:
- given a reasonable explanation (proof would be too much to ask) about why a custom made APS-H sensor would be significantly cheaper than an off the shelf FF one. Note that one sensor is not enough, Pentax will have to continue requesting custom made APS-H sensors to keep up with APS-C and FF.
- explained how Pentax would compete with the Canikony's FF (perhaps just like 4/3 "managed" to compete with APS-C?)
- explained why should they put a lot of effort into APS-H when they could do it for FF.

To be fair to Ron, he never mentioned APS-H in this thread.
I brought it up in jest.

[RonHendriks1966]

To be fair to Ron, he never mentioned APS-H in this thread.
I brought it up in jest.

Thank you for bringing it up

[jcdoss]

I finally figured it out... APS-H... The H stands for Hendriks.