PENTAX will never have Full Frame...

**jatrax** · 05-01-2014, 09:16 AM

Originally posted by cali92rs

Of course this will better than the D800e. But that camera is something a hobbyist can afford.

It is most definitely not a hobbyist camera.

But if you are selling fine art prints @ $1,000 per, then this is your camera, and you are already waiting in line at the camera store. And there are folks out there selling in that range. Admittedly a rare and exclusive club but it does exist.

normhead · 05-01-2014, 09:42 AM

At this point in my Pentax Forum career I refuse to get into discussion of what people can afford as part of technical discussions. That is probably the most subjective thing ever. From my perspective D800 is as much a working camera as a 645Z. I wouldn't pay for either of them unless I had a contract that required them. And the cost of the camera would be included in my bid for the contract. They are both Ferraris. There are rich people who buy them as hobbyists... there are rich people who buy Ferraris. Let's not start defining what's affordable from a perspective of the 1%.

jsherman999 · 05-01-2014, 10:54 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

They're selling the 645z as "better than FF", though.

It is, in terms of IQ, probably 'better than FF' - but that matters very little, because it's not going to ever be 'better enough' for 90%+ of people to surmount the 400% premium you need to pay over entry-level FF to buy the body alone.

It's an $8000 body, with lenses that start at $1500 and work their way up. Very, very, very few people who buy a $899 aps-c body would ever consider 'upgrading' to a new-mount, $10K, $12K, $15K body + lens kit. They would, however, consider buying a $1600 or $2000 or $2500 body that can mount their existing lenses.

645Z is a very nice specialty product, and for Pentax, perhaps an effective halo product - for the vast majority of people it's not an upgrade option, so it might as well be a Hassy or Leica or D4x.

**Pål Jensen** · 05-01-2014, 11:47 AM

Originally posted by jatrax

It is most definitely not a hobbyist camera.

But if you are selling fine art prints @ $1,000 per, then this is your camera, and you are already waiting in line at the camera store. And there are folks out there selling in that range. Admittedly a rare and exclusive club but it does exist.

...but people sell $1000 (even $5000) prints made from 8mp Canon APS DSLR. I know one who does...
Businesspeople generally do not spend more than they have to.

cali92rs · 05-01-2014, 11:54 AM

I don't think anyone is arguing with the fact that this will be one killer camera...and very reasonably priced when compared to other digital MF options.

My problem is the implication that Ricoh executives think we should skip the FF option and go straight to the 645Z. They may not be saying that directly, but their literature sure smells like that.

Kunzite · 05-01-2014, 12:10 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by sherman999

It is, in terms of IQ, probably 'better than FF' - but that matters very little, because it's not going to ever be 'better enough' for 90%+ of people to surmount the 400% premium you need to pay over entry-level FF to buy the body alone.

It's an $8000 body, with lenses that start at $1500 and work their way up. Very, very, very few people who buy a $899 aps-c body would ever consider 'upgrading' to a new-mount, $10K, $12K, $15K body + lens kit. They would, however, consider buying a $1600 or $2000 or $2500 body that can mount their existing lenses.

645Z is a very nice specialty product, and for Pentax, perhaps an effective halo product - for the vast majority of people it's not an upgrade option, so it might as well be a Hassy or Leica or D4x.

The confirmation that it's better is only a formality.
That's my point: a cheap 135 and the 645z are different products, and the Z certainly is not sold as a 135 camera. Pentax/Ricoh are clear IMO: not a replacement, not equal to but better.

Its presence on the market has little to do with the perceived need for a 135 camera. And on its niche it has competitive advantages over Hassie, PhaseOne, Leica and even the Nikon.

**Rondec** · 05-01-2014, 12:23 PM

Originally posted by jsherman999

It is, in terms of IQ, probably 'better than FF' - but that matters very little, because it's not going to ever be 'better enough' for 90%+ of people to surmount the 400% premium you need to pay over entry-level FF to buy the body alone.

It's an $8000 body, with lenses that start at $1500 and work their way up. Very, very, very few people who buy a $899 aps-c body would ever consider 'upgrading' to a new-mount, $10K, $12K, $15K body + lens kit. They would, however, consider buying a $1600 or $2000 or $2500 body that can mount their existing lenses.

645Z is a very nice specialty product, and for Pentax, perhaps an effective halo product - for the vast majority of people it's not an upgrade option, so it might as well be a Hassy or Leica or D4x.

I think we need to be clear that APS-C is probably adequate for "90 percent of the people out there." I don't honestly think that most people are that interested in up grading to a 1600 dollar full frame camera. Obviously some do purchase them, but at best full frame is 6 or 7 percent of the SLR market at this point.

The people who will buy a 645z will either be independently wealthy folks who have to have the best gear and landscape/studio photogs who are long time shooters of medium format gear. Probably more of the first segment than the second segment.

**jatrax** · 05-01-2014, 01:21 PM

Originally posted by Pål Jensen

...but people sell $1000 (even $5000) prints made from 8mp Canon APS DSLR. I know one who does... Businesspeople generally do not spend more than they have to.

While true it is not all inclusive. And I personally know people who only shoot landscapes on 4x5 film because they dislike the results of any digital camera including D800. Not saying they are correct just that is their belief. So medium format digital is definitely something they would be interested in. Not going to argue that this is a rarefied club, I believe I already said that. People in that club do not follow the 'general' rules. They can afford whatever gear they feel will get the job done.

normhead · 05-01-2014, 01:38 PM

People tend to underestimate how important what you believe is. Last show I went to, with a couple of photographers there, we were different enough in style that the people who bought from us, didn't buy from them. It doesn't matter what your style is, as long as you're technically competent, you'll sell some stuff. Whatever your style is, some people will like it. And if it'an intentional style, they'll probably be people you enjoy talking to. There are no bonus points for being an FF or APS-c or MF shooter as long as you accommodate your selected audience. You don't have to choose to serve a high resolution audience with an MF or D800, you can do fine and probably just as good with another format , should that tickle your fancy.

JimmyDranox · 05-01-2014, 04:44 PM

That's not about the camera qualities. Is about how Ricoh present 645z, like a FF replacement. And in my opinion, if they think that is a good strategy, I think they are wrong. Because, many Pentax users who waits for an FF Pentax could be made to think that this camera will never come, and they will think to move to other system. And I'm pretty sure that the number of people who want a FF camera is much bigger that those who can afford a 645z. So, this Ricoh marketing strategy can backfire.

No, I'm wrong. This strategy has already backfired. And this thread is a proof.

normhead · 05-01-2014, 07:00 PM

Originally posted by JimmyDranox

That's not about the camera qualities. Is about how Ricoh present 645z, like a FF replacement. And in my opinion, if they think that is a good strategy, I think they are wrong. Because, many Pentax users who waits for an FF Pentax could be made to think that this camera will never come, and they will think to move to other system. And I'm pretty sure that the number of people who want a FF camera is much bigger that those who can afford a 645z. So, this Ricoh marketing strategy can backfire.

No, I'm wrong. This strategy has already backfired. And this thread is a proof.

I think you might be putting words in Pentax's mouth there. The 645z will be the best image quality available under 10k. If that's what you're going for, there simply is no other choice. It's not replacing anything, it's offering a product not matched by any 36x24 sensor camera at a higher price. I hate to tell you , but, if you want to create distinctive pictures, many enthusiasts have a 36x24 sensor these days, it's hardly special anymore.

JimmyDranox · 05-01-2014, 07:07 PM

I don't want to create anything. I'm just reading this thread title, and consequently, the questions that many Pentax users have about the future.

Of course, there are some people who has more than one system, and don't care about a Pentax FF, but for the rest of us, who use only Pentax K system, is important.

aragondina · 05-01-2014, 08:15 PM - **1 Like**

After talking to the Pentax Canada rep this past weekend here in Edmonton at a local trade show, I am inclined to believe that Pentax will bring out a FF camera within the next year or so. Sooner rather than later. When talking about the 645Z and the fact that Pentax dropped 13 new lenses at announcement, that it must bode well for the "mythical full frame" everyone has been waiting for. He replied that he could conceivably see such a camera being released in the next year, and 'if' they were going to do that, they would have to release at least 3 new lenses to go with it to start with. That would be because the FF lenses that Pentax offers won't stand up to a high resolution FF sensor and they don't currently offer the standard zooms 24-70 and 70-200.

The fact that he didn't outright say no to what I asked, along with the release of so many lenses for the 645Z (which no one expected) Makes me believe there may be a chance yet for a 35mm sensor yet.

---------- Post added 05-01-2014 at 09:27 PM ----------

Originally posted by normhead

I think you might be putting words in Pentax's mouth there. The 645z will be the best image quality available under 10k. If that's what you're going for, there simply is no other choice. It's not replacing anything, it's offering a product not matched by any 36x24 sensor camera at a higher price. I hate to tell you , but, if you want to create distinctive pictures, many enthusiasts have a 36x24 sensor these days, it's hardly special anymore.

Umm, actually it 'should' be the best image quality under $10k for a digital camera. I have seen nothing to suggest that for pure image quality that it will even come close to 8x10 film, of which there are a dozen fantastic cameras available under $10k. Yes it will probably beat a 35mm sensor in fine detail and colour, which is again better than an APSC sensor, but nothing as of yet can beat large format film.

philbaum · 05-01-2014, 09:39 PM

At some point, Pentax will offer a FF.

The most likely reason for issuing the 645Z first, is that there is no existing Canikon product in that niche. Other than some overpriced existing MF manufacturers, Pentax has that niche to themselves, at least for the present. I'm sure Sony could testify to the difficulty of going up against existing Canikon FF products :-)

When you're a small company, one has to pick your marketing battles carefully so you don't bankrupt your company in the process.

Kunzite · 05-01-2014, 11:35 PM

Originally posted by JimmyDranox

That's not about the camera qualities. Is about how Ricoh present 645z, like a FF replacement. And in my opinion, if they think that is a good strategy, I think they are wrong. Because, many Pentax users who waits for an FF Pentax could be made to think that this camera will never come, and they will think to move to other system. And I'm pretty sure that the number of people who want a FF camera is much bigger that those who can afford a 645z. So, this Ricoh marketing strategy can backfire.

No, I'm wrong. This strategy has already backfired. And this thread is a proof.

I disagree; as I said, Ricoh is selling the Z as something better; not a replacement but an upper level camera.
What you see is Pentaxians, complaining that Ricoh/Pentax once again made something that's not a "full-frame". That's inevitable, be it a medium format camera or a compact sensor ILC; some people would always see them just a threat on the "one true camera".

05-01-2014, 10:54 AM	#123
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	Originally posted by Kunzite They're selling the 645z as "better than FF", though. It is, in terms of IQ, probably 'better than FF' - but that matters very little, because it's not going to ever be 'better enough' for 90%+ of people to surmount the 400% premium you need to pay over entry-level FF to buy the body alone. It's an $8000 body, with lenses that start at $1500 and work their way up. Very, very, very few people who buy a $899 aps-c body would ever consider 'upgrading' to a new-mount, $10K, $12K, $15K body + lens kit. They would, however, consider buying a $1600 or $2000 or $2500 body that can mount their existing lenses. 645Z is a very nice specialty product, and for Pentax, perhaps an effective halo product - for the vast majority of people it's not an upgrade option, so it might as well be a Hassy or Leica or D4x. Last edited by jsherman999; 05-01-2014 at 11:02 AM.

05-01-2014, 04:44 PM	#130
JimmyDranox Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Ploiesti, Romania Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,632	That's not about the camera qualities. Is about how Ricoh present 645z, like a FF replacement. And in my opinion, if they think that is a good strategy, I think they are wrong. Because, many Pentax users who waits for an FF Pentax could be made to think that this camera will never come, and they will think to move to other system. And I'm pretty sure that the number of people who want a FF camera is much bigger that those who can afford a 645z. So, this Ricoh marketing strategy can backfire. No, I'm wrong. This strategy has already backfired. And this thread is a proof. Last edited by JimmyDranox; 05-01-2014 at 04:49 PM.

05-01-2014, 07:07 PM	#132
JimmyDranox Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Ploiesti, Romania Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,632	I don't want to create anything. I'm just reading this thread title, and consequently, the questions that many Pentax users have about the future. Of course, there are some people who has more than one system, and don't care about a Pentax FF, but for the rest of us, who use only Pentax K system, is important. Last edited by JimmyDranox; 05-01-2014 at 07:32 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Fuji will release a Full Frame X-PRO 2 in 2015!	jogiba	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	8	04-06-2014 10:24 AM
From Full-Frame Sony... to Pentax... to Full-Frame Canon	Mr_Canuck	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	42	01-21-2014 12:50 AM
I have seen the mythical pentax full frame! Here it is!	zosxavius	Pentax Full Frame	12	09-23-2012 02:41 PM
The full frame Pentax that never was	dj_saunter	Pentax DSLR Discussion	23	05-06-2011 04:06 AM
Full Frame Vs High Quality Cropped Body - Will Pentax Win/Survive in the Game?	RiceHigh	Pentax News and Rumors	219	05-18-2009 07:15 AM

05-01-2014, 09:16 AM	#121
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by cali92rs Of course this will better than the D800e. But that camera is something a hobbyist can afford. It is most definitely not a hobbyist camera. But if you are selling fine art prints @ $1,000 per, then this is your camera, and you are already waiting in line at the camera store. And there are folks out there selling in that range. Admittedly a rare and exclusive club but it does exist.

05-01-2014, 09:42 AM	#122
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	At this point in my Pentax Forum career I refuse to get into discussion of what people can afford as part of technical discussions. That is probably the most subjective thing ever. From my perspective D800 is as much a working camera as a 645Z. I wouldn't pay for either of them unless I had a contract that required them. And the cost of the camera would be included in my bid for the contract. They are both Ferraris. There are rich people who buy them as hobbyists... there are rich people who buy Ferraris. Let's not start defining what's affordable from a perspective of the 1%.

05-01-2014, 11:47 AM	#124
Pål Jensen Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 4,371	Originally posted by jatrax It is most definitely not a hobbyist camera. But if you are selling fine art prints @ $1,000 per, then this is your camera, and you are already waiting in line at the camera store. And there are folks out there selling in that range. Admittedly a rare and exclusive club but it does exist. ...but people sell $1000 (even $5000) prints made from 8mp Canon APS DSLR. I know one who does... Businesspeople generally do not spend more than they have to.

05-01-2014, 11:54 AM	#125
cali92rs Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 3,354	I don't think anyone is arguing with the fact that this will be one killer camera...and very reasonably priced when compared to other digital MF options. My problem is the implication that Ricoh executives think we should skip the FF option and go straight to the 645Z. They may not be saying that directly, but their literature sure smells like that.

05-01-2014, 12:10 PM - 1 Like	#126
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by sherman999 It is, in terms of IQ, probably 'better than FF' - but that matters very little, because it's not going to ever be 'better enough' for 90%+ of people to surmount the 400% premium you need to pay over entry-level FF to buy the body alone. It's an $8000 body, with lenses that start at $1500 and work their way up. Very, very, very few people who buy a $899 aps-c body would ever consider 'upgrading' to a new-mount, $10K, $12K, $15K body + lens kit. They would, however, consider buying a $1600 or $2000 or $2500 body that can mount their existing lenses. 645Z is a very nice specialty product, and for Pentax, perhaps an effective halo product - for the vast majority of people it's not an upgrade option, so it might as well be a Hassy or Leica or D4x. The confirmation that it's better is only a formality. That's my point: a cheap 135 and the 645z are different products, and the Z certainly is not sold as a 135 camera. Pentax/Ricoh are clear IMO: not a replacement, not equal to but better. Its presence on the market has little to do with the perceived need for a 135 camera. And on its niche it has competitive advantages over Hassie, PhaseOne, Leica and even the Nikon.

05-01-2014, 12:23 PM	#127
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,663	Originally posted by jsherman999 It is, in terms of IQ, probably 'better than FF' - but that matters very little, because it's not going to ever be 'better enough' for 90%+ of people to surmount the 400% premium you need to pay over entry-level FF to buy the body alone. It's an $8000 body, with lenses that start at $1500 and work their way up. Very, very, very few people who buy a $899 aps-c body would ever consider 'upgrading' to a new-mount, $10K, $12K, $15K body + lens kit. They would, however, consider buying a $1600 or $2000 or $2500 body that can mount their existing lenses. 645Z is a very nice specialty product, and for Pentax, perhaps an effective halo product - for the vast majority of people it's not an upgrade option, so it might as well be a Hassy or Leica or D4x. I think we need to be clear that APS-C is probably adequate for "90 percent of the people out there." I don't honestly think that most people are that interested in up grading to a 1600 dollar full frame camera. Obviously some do purchase them, but at best full frame is 6 or 7 percent of the SLR market at this point. The people who will buy a 645z will either be independently wealthy folks who have to have the best gear and landscape/studio photogs who are long time shooters of medium format gear. Probably more of the first segment than the second segment.

05-01-2014, 01:21 PM	#128
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	Originally posted by Pål Jensen ...but people sell $1000 (even $5000) prints made from 8mp Canon APS DSLR. I know one who does... Businesspeople generally do not spend more than they have to. While true it is not all inclusive. And I personally know people who only shoot landscapes on 4x5 film because they dislike the results of any digital camera including D800. Not saying they are correct just that is their belief. So medium format digital is definitely something they would be interested in. Not going to argue that this is a rarefied club, I believe I already said that. People in that club do not follow the 'general' rules. They can afford whatever gear they feel will get the job done.

05-01-2014, 01:38 PM	#129
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	People tend to underestimate how important what you believe is. Last show I went to, with a couple of photographers there, we were different enough in style that the people who bought from us, didn't buy from them. It doesn't matter what your style is, as long as you're technically competent, you'll sell some stuff. Whatever your style is, some people will like it. And if it'an intentional style, they'll probably be people you enjoy talking to. There are no bonus points for being an FF or APS-c or MF shooter as long as you accommodate your selected audience. You don't have to choose to serve a high resolution audience with an MF or D800, you can do fine and probably just as good with another format , should that tickle your fancy.

05-01-2014, 07:00 PM	#131
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by JimmyDranox That's not about the camera qualities. Is about how Ricoh present 645z, like a FF replacement. And in my opinion, if they think that is a good strategy, I think they are wrong. Because, many Pentax users who waits for an FF Pentax could be made to think that this camera will never come, and they will think to move to other system. And I'm pretty sure that the number of people who want a FF camera is much bigger that those who can afford a 645z. So, this Ricoh marketing strategy can backfire. No, I'm wrong. This strategy has already backfired. And this thread is a proof. I think you might be putting words in Pentax's mouth there. The 645z will be the best image quality available under 10k. If that's what you're going for, there simply is no other choice. It's not replacing anything, it's offering a product not matched by any 36x24 sensor camera at a higher price. I hate to tell you , but, if you want to create distinctive pictures, many enthusiasts have a 36x24 sensor these days, it's hardly special anymore.

05-01-2014, 08:15 PM - 1 Like	#133
aragondina Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2009 Photos: Albums Posts: 117	After talking to the Pentax Canada rep this past weekend here in Edmonton at a local trade show, I am inclined to believe that Pentax will bring out a FF camera within the next year or so. Sooner rather than later. When talking about the 645Z and the fact that Pentax dropped 13 new lenses at announcement, that it must bode well for the "mythical full frame" everyone has been waiting for. He replied that he could conceivably see such a camera being released in the next year, and 'if' they were going to do that, they would have to release at least 3 new lenses to go with it to start with. That would be because the FF lenses that Pentax offers won't stand up to a high resolution FF sensor and they don't currently offer the standard zooms 24-70 and 70-200. The fact that he didn't outright say no to what I asked, along with the release of so many lenses for the 645Z (which no one expected) Makes me believe there may be a chance yet for a 35mm sensor yet. ---------- Post added 05-01-2014 at 09:27 PM ---------- Originally posted by normhead I think you might be putting words in Pentax's mouth there. The 645z will be the best image quality available under 10k. If that's what you're going for, there simply is no other choice. It's not replacing anything, it's offering a product not matched by any 36x24 sensor camera at a higher price. I hate to tell you , but, if you want to create distinctive pictures, many enthusiasts have a 36x24 sensor these days, it's hardly special anymore. Umm, actually it 'should' be the best image quality under $10k for a digital camera. I have seen nothing to suggest that for pure image quality that it will even come close to 8x10 film, of which there are a dozen fantastic cameras available under $10k. Yes it will probably beat a 35mm sensor in fine detail and colour, which is again better than an APSC sensor, but nothing as of yet can beat large format film.

05-01-2014, 09:39 PM	#134
philbaum Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA Posts: 3,659	At some point, Pentax will offer a FF. The most likely reason for issuing the 645Z first, is that there is no existing Canikon product in that niche. Other than some overpriced existing MF manufacturers, Pentax has that niche to themselves, at least for the present. I'm sure Sony could testify to the difficulty of going up against existing Canikon FF products :-) When you're a small company, one has to pick your marketing battles carefully so you don't bankrupt your company in the process.

05-01-2014, 11:35 PM	#135
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Originally posted by JimmyDranox That's not about the camera qualities. Is about how Ricoh present 645z, like a FF replacement. And in my opinion, if they think that is a good strategy, I think they are wrong. Because, many Pentax users who waits for an FF Pentax could be made to think that this camera will never come, and they will think to move to other system. And I'm pretty sure that the number of people who want a FF camera is much bigger that those who can afford a 645z. So, this Ricoh marketing strategy can backfire. No, I'm wrong. This strategy has already backfired. And this thread is a proof. I disagree; as I said, Ricoh is selling the Z as something better; not a replacement but an upper level camera. What you see is Pentaxians, complaining that Ricoh/Pentax once again made something that's not a "full-frame". That's inevitable, be it a medium format camera or a compact sensor ILC; some people would always see them just a threat on the "one true camera".