Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-25-2014, 05:12 AM   #121
Banned




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Millstone,NJ
Posts: 6,491
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
APS is in fact better now than my 645 film camera. It is is good enough. The Q can compete with 35mm film.
Cameras are business expense. No reason to use more money than necessary.
The buyer of the finished product have no clue or interest in 99% of the cases of what format the photographer is using (in most cased they don't even know what format means).
i agree since my compact 36mp full frame mirrorless with native small compact full frame Zeiss lenses is much sharper than my Pentax 6x7 ever was and much smaller than even my APS-C DSLRs.

06-25-2014, 05:13 AM   #122
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2013
Photos: Albums
Posts: 128
QuoteOriginally posted by mecrox Quote
First, how far up the scale do you have to go before you can produce a camera which is unquestionably far superior to and more versatile than anything a mobile phone can offer, present and over the next 5-7 years.
Hmm, my wife wanted a point and shoot; she has the cybershot Sony. It clearly took better pictures than phones when it was new. Now, she wants my K1, because she's seen the pictures it takes. Even at an entry level a dedicated camera produces much better pictures, and gives the photographer way more options, than a phone. It's true, there are some phones that are specifically all about the pictures, but they're not cheap; for the same price you could buy a camera that's in a higher class. So far, the rate of advance in the phones and the cameras have seemed to be about the same. When phones can do what cameras can do now, cameras will be shooting 8k video at resolutions and sensitivities that I wouldn't dare predict. The standard phone will be phenomenal, no doubt, but people with that creative impulse, that image impulse, that tech/gear impulse, are going to want more than what's standard.
06-25-2014, 06:32 AM   #123
Pentaxian
philbaum's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA
Posts: 3,659
Sometimes we forget that PF and similar forums are reaching out to members in many different countries and cultures. While FF may be popular in one city, one country, it may not be popular in others. Debating who's right and ignoring cultural differences is one of the funny phenomena of the internet.

We still have one professional photog in our club thats shooting with a spotmatic film camera, FF Although he did write me an email the other day committing to 2015 as the year when he makes the transition to digital. I don't personally care what individuals are doing for cameras, its the larger market changes that i find interesting. Of course there will be dslrs out there for some time to come. But change in the numbers of mirrorless is happening right now, and at a much faster rate than I figured it would a year ago.

For my own use, I'm using a K5 and a K3, both around my neck, using one or the other depending on whether i want to shoot wide or narrow at theater rehearsals. Outside the theater, i carry Nex cameras over 90% of the time and the dslrs sit on the shelf.

Whatever floats your boat - but change is happening quite fast now.
06-25-2014, 07:20 AM   #124
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,576
QuoteOriginally posted by philbaum Quote
I'm using a K5 and a K3, both around my neck, using one or the other depending on whether i want to shoot wide or narrow ... Outside..., i carry Nex cameras over 90% of the time and the dslrs sit on the shelf.
Are you me?

Add 'RX-100' alongside NEX and that's very close to how I do things. Low-light indoors and outdoors, places where I need quiet shutter, bad weather, or sports/wildlife: K-5/K-3. Walkabout, casual street or family snaps: NEX-F3 or RX-100.

06-25-2014, 08:00 AM   #125
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Eureka, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,828
QuoteOriginally posted by mecrox Quote
Er, compact mirrorless cameras already outsell DSLRs by about 100 to 1 - in the form of the mobile phone
We're talking about ILC mirrorless here, not cell phones (which aren't even cameras, but merely devices that happen to take pictures).

QuoteOriginally posted by mecrox Quote
Second, what kind of camera will work best in the broad middle of the market where the volume sales are: pros and enthusiasts already have their DSLRs, but how do the companies cater to everyone else, in fact the majority of camera buyers.
It's precisely in that middle "volume" market that mirrorless is floundering. Olympus' only (mild and relative) successes have been with the OM-D EM-5 and EM-1. Far too many of the PENs have suffered from extensive fire sales, which, while they inflate sales of compact mirrorless, lead to huge losses. Panasonic has admitted that they will focus primarily on the higher end. Sony's had the most success with their A7-- series of cameras. Fuji started out on the high end and has only dabbled a little in lower end stuff. The lower end, the "volume" market, is hosed right now. It's where compact mirrorless ILC has lost most of its money. The action is on the higher end: prosumer and professional.

And one thing else. Those who think that it's mirrorless vs. DSLR are not paying close enough attention. Among ILCs, it's not mirrorless vs. DSLRs, it's compact mirrorless vs. SLR mount cameras. That's why mirrorless does not constitute a threat to Canon, Nikon, or even Pentax. The one potentially decisive advantage mirrorless has over SLR tech is that someday it may be more economical. But if and when that day comes, there's a very easy solution for the DSLR companies: simply start making mirrorless cameras with SLR mounts. Pentax has already done a trial run with such a camera with the K-01. So even if the future is mirrorless, it won't be, as I wrote in my previous post, compact mirrorless.

---------- Post added 06-25-2014 at 08:22 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by philbaum Quote
Whatever floats your boat - but change is happening quite fast now.
Really? Compared to what we saw ten years ago, when we experienced the transition from film to digital, there was quite a bit more change than I'm seeing now. I know probably about 60 or so serious photographers. My sister, who's a semi-pro photographer based in Chicago, knows dozens or more photographers. There's no great change happening among the photographers my sister and I know. Most of the photographers we know are happy with the gear they currently have. Of the ~60 photographers I'm acquainted with, two have moved entirely to mirrorless ILCs, and three more have added mirrorless ILCs to their DSLR kit as back-up/travel cameras. So whatever change may be happening, I'm not seeing it, nor is it happening fast. Moreover, given the weakness of the economy and consumer debt, I don't see how fast changes are possible. There's just not enough consumer dollars out there to pay for it.
06-25-2014, 08:39 AM   #126
Site Supporter
jimr-pdx's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: 1hr north of PDX
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,480
My PK-FF* dream would be minimalistic but not (Df) retro. Find the best value sub-24Mpx sensor, use a current body design but thicker for SR module. Allow video but don't work to add 4k unless it can be done for minimal extra cost. Use what you already have for SAFOX and K-3 AF module. Remove the internal flash but keep sync cord ability and sell a package with a decent TTL bounce flash. Keep costs low and let it fly at the lower price point - and don't push further with FF for a couple of years. Don't pretend it's the best SLR out there, a pro-FF killer, and don't fight for 'cheapest' label since that changes every 4 months. This would be just another excellent and high-value dSLR camera from R/Pentax but with a FF sensor.

* or shall we go with the old Ricoh-compatible KR instead of PK now?
06-25-2014, 02:20 PM   #127
Pentaxian
mecrox's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,911
QuoteOriginally posted by northcoastgreg Quote
We're talking about ILC mirrorless here, not cell phones (which aren't even cameras, but merely devices that happen to take pictures).


It's precisely in that middle "volume" market that mirrorless is floundering. Olympus' only (mild and relative) successes have been with the OM-D EM-5 and EM-1. Far too many of the PENs have suffered from extensive fire sales, which, while they inflate sales of compact mirrorless, lead to huge losses. Panasonic has admitted that they will focus primarily on the higher end. Sony's had the most success with their A7-- series of cameras. Fuji started out on the high end and has only dabbled a little in lower end stuff. The lower end, the "volume" market, is hosed right now. It's where compact mirrorless ILC has lost most of its money. The action is on the higher end: prosumer and professional.

And one thing else. Those who think that it's mirrorless vs. DSLR are not paying close enough attention. Among ILCs, it's not mirrorless vs. DSLRs, it's compact mirrorless vs. SLR mount cameras. That's why mirrorless does not constitute a threat to Canon, Nikon, or even Pentax. The one potentially decisive advantage mirrorless has over SLR tech is that someday it may be more economical. But if and when that day comes, there's a very easy solution for the DSLR companies: simply start making mirrorless cameras with SLR mounts. Pentax has already done a trial run with such a camera with the K-01. So even if the future is mirrorless, it won't be, as I wrote in my previous post, compact mirrorless.[COLOR="Silver"]
I guess that 99 per cent of cell phone owners might be surprised to learn that their phone doesn't have an onboard camera even when it does. To redefine cell phones as "merely devices that happen to take pictures" is possibly a little ridiculous? The fact is that compact mirrorless cameras, mostly though not exclusively in the form of the cell phone, are the picture-taking phenomenon of our times and outnumber conventional cameras by 100 to 1 or so. One only has to look at a site like Flickr to get the message. Or sometimes at iPhone artwork in galleries, for example. And as time goes by, the cameras in cell phones will only get better. So far as their users are concerned, in their hundreds of millions, that is often what a camera now is.

I think of one the problems with a forum like this is that the DSLR becomes normalized. This means that folks can easily think that the DSLR is the definition of a camera and any deviation from the classic DSLR is unusual if not downright unacceptable. In fact the truth is the reverse: it is the DSLR that is the rarity. In most cases, folks on here are talking about equipment far, far to one end of the market - specialized, not easy to operate, requires considerable skill and experience to extract good results, not usually connected to anything digital by way of workflow or network, and very expensive. Only a few people - enthusiasts and professionals - are in the frame for this. That's absolutely fine of course, but to project from this that if anyone wants anything more capable than a cell phone then the future is the DSLR it isn't going to fly.

Of course this doesn't mean that the DSLR is about to vanish or that the current crop of mirrorless ILCs are necessarily the answer, but I am sure that answer there will be. Perhaps the DSLR is simply too big, too unwieldy, too complicated, too not connected, maybe even too old-fashioned to make it attractive to more than a fairly special group of buyers (which includes most of us on here). For example: my next camera will likely be a DSLR but I would not recommend one to someone who clearly wasn't particularly committed to photography and/or wanted something good but simple. There are a host of excellent choices out there now and none is a DSLR. A DSLR is simply overkill in many situations.

Last edited by mecrox; 06-25-2014 at 04:01 PM.
06-25-2014, 02:39 PM   #128
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,892
QuoteOriginally posted by mecrox Quote
not easy to operate, requires considerable skill and experience to extract good results, and very expensive.
Wait, are you talking about DSLR's or smartphones?

06-25-2014, 02:43 PM   #129
Pentaxian
ChristianRock's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Marietta, GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,048
Yes, cell phones can take pictures and everybody's got one. But does that have anything to do with full frame cameras?
06-25-2014, 03:09 PM   #130
Pentaxian
mecrox's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,911
QuoteOriginally posted by ChristianRock Quote
Yes, cell phones can take pictures and everybody's got one. But does that have anything to do with full frame cameras?
Yes, very much so indeed. People grow up with things that change their perception of what something is - the camera - and their expectations of how it should be used and what it can do. That leads directly to the question: what kind of full frame camera?
06-25-2014, 03:52 PM   #131
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Hamburg
Posts: 287
QuoteOriginally posted by mecrox Quote
Yes, very much so indeed. People grow up with things that change their perception of what something is - the camera - and their expectations of how it should be used and what it can do. That leads directly to the question: what kind of full frame camera?
Those such as you describe (and that is a fast growing segment of the market indeed) will scream MILC! in unison.
06-25-2014, 10:25 PM   #132
Pentaxian
philbaum's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA
Posts: 3,659
QuoteOriginally posted by northcoastgreg Quote
---------- Post added 06-25-2014 at 08:22 AM ----------

[/COLOR]

Really? Compared to what we saw ten years ago, when we experienced the transition from film to digital, there was quite a bit more change than I'm seeing now. I know probably about 60 or so serious photographers. My sister, who's a semi-pro photographer based in Chicago, knows dozens or more photographers. There's no great change happening among the photographers my sister and I know. Most of the photographers we know are happy with the gear they currently have. Of the ~60 photographers I'm acquainted with, two have moved entirely to mirrorless ILCs, and three more have added mirrorless ILCs to their DSLR kit as back-up/travel cameras. So whatever change may be happening, I'm not seeing it, nor is it happening fast. Moreover, given the weakness of the economy and consumer debt, I don't see how fast changes are possible. There's just not enough consumer dollars out there to pay for it.
I can't speak to the transition from film to digital since i wasn't an enthusiast at the time, and paid no attention to photography.

What prompts my conclusion of rapid change currently are these symptoms:

a) The recent on-going collapsing of the compact point and shoot camera market. Which by the way, even the major manufacturers were apparently caught by surprise, judging by the sharp reductions in shipments per the CIPA reports.
According to the first quarter report of 2014, compact PS shipments are now 53% of what was shipped in 2013 - the collapse continues. http://www.cipa.jp/stats/documents/e/d-201403_e.pdf

b) Nikon's current share price is the lowest its been in 3 years, and their sales forecasts are notoriously incorrect. CIPA also shows for 2014 first quarter, that dslr shipments are down 13% from 2013. So now its just not PS that are in jeopardy, its the whole camera market that seems to be sliding in large numbers. http://petapixel.com/2014/05/18/nikons-financial-woes-relentless-prompt-restructuring/

c) What we are seeing as the market slide continues is an effort by manufacturers to come out with more attractive and compelling cameras for consumers to buy. Sony came out with the Nex 5n and Nex 7 in August of 2011, which was the first time an aps sensor has been put in such a lightweight and small volume shell. For their part, Nikon came out with the Nikon D4 in Jan 2012, and followed that achievement with the D800 and the D600 and Df, not to mention variants like the D4s, D800e, and the D810. For their part, Sony didn't let the flood of Nikon FF cameras go unchallenged, with the issued of fixed FF cameras, and the newer A7 models. I think these model introductions are quite remarkable in a soft market condition.

Meanwhile, smart phone variants with photo processing aps keep selling like hotcakes.

If you don't consider that this will lead to the change in other areas - then we will just have to agree to disagree.

BTW, your statement that no rapid change is happening because your pro-photographer sister's friends and acquaintances all agree with you, even though you haven't met or talked to them concerning this subject, seems to be strange logic indeed. :-(

Last edited by philbaum; 06-25-2014 at 10:41 PM.
06-26-2014, 04:52 AM   #133
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2013
Photos: Albums
Posts: 128
QuoteOriginally posted by ChristianRock Quote
- It will allow Pentax/Ricoh to sell image-stabilized full frame lenses - so at least a portion of the user base wouldn't be people just buying a FF camera to use with their old lenses; people could still use the old lenses but they wouldn't be stabilized. I think that's a current concern - that a lot of people would want to just buy the FF body since there's so many FF Pentax lenses out there. This way I think most people will want at least one stabilized lens.
- It would allow the size of the camera to be the same as the K-3, as far as I know! The mirror box is already the size it needs to be, and the bigger sensor would use the space used up now by the SR system.
- All "comparison" websites rate Pentax lower in the stabilization categories because they say in-lens stabilization is better than in-body stabilization. Pentax FF would rate higher. I know it's a frivolous concern but a lot of people look at these ratings and decide what to buy based on them.
—Hmm, the in camera stabilization is a major part of the Pentax video platform. Getting rid of it gives Sony a huge advantage in this area.
—I don't know the full history here, but I believe that Pentax has tried in-lens stabilization before. I've seen lots of old, broken, lens stabilized Pentax lenses. More mechanics in the lens means less glass, literally less glass, and more to get broken. Here's a pic of the in-lens mechanics.
—"All comparison sites"? Not true. They're different systems, each system with its own pros and cons. Here's the first google hit, which of course touts the Sony.
—If you don't want SR you can turn it off. Nobody uses every component on their camera.

All that said, if Pentax comes out with a mirrorless FF, in-lens stabilization could allow for a thinner camera, more along the lines of an A7. There's been quite a bit of talk of two cameras—ha, wildly optimistic talk—but in lens stabilization is an interesting option for mirrorless.

Last edited by easyreeder; 06-26-2014 at 05:21 AM.
06-26-2014, 05:56 AM   #134
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,406
The only/first Pentax interchangeable lens featuring optical stabilization is the D FA645 90mm f:2.8 macro.

In-lens stabilization would allow for a thinner camera, but the lens would be larger and more complex.
06-26-2014, 06:21 AM   #135
Pentaxian
ChristianRock's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Marietta, GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,048
QuoteOriginally posted by mecrox Quote
Yes, very much so indeed. People grow up with things that change their perception of what something is - the camera - and their expectations of how it should be used and what it can do. That leads directly to the question: what kind of full frame camera?
Honestly, it seems like you know what a full frame camera is according to this forum, and you are going off topic...

The thread is about whether a full frame camera for Pentax is practical in the long run. It has nothing to do with cell phones or the fact that you don't agree with everybody else's definition of full frame.

Edit: sorry, quoted the wrong post at first... corrected now.

Last edited by ChristianRock; 06-26-2014 at 06:34 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!
24x36mm, adapter, af, aps-c, bodies, body, cameras, ergonomics, film, frame, full frame camera, full-frame, k-01, lcd, lenses, market, micro four thirds, mirroless camera, mirrorless, pentax, people, ricoh, sensor, shutter, size, struggle, time
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Full Frame NEX is going to be announced in October ! jogiba Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 30 09-15-2013 03:23 PM
Pentax does not care about Full Frame Watson Pentax Full Frame 88 08-19-2013 04:53 AM
Are Any of The 17-50 (or in that range) Lenses Full Frame? reivax Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 12 02-04-2013 07:38 PM
Do you think in the long run, DA lenses are a bad buy? Size of CCDs in the future Capslock118 Pentax DSLR Discussion 28 11-07-2010 06:46 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:06 PM. | See also: NikonForums.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