[rawr]

You can't handle the truth, now show me a smaller 36mp camera.

I'll show you two 46MP > 36MP

[mee]

You can't handle the truth, now show me a smaller 36mp camera.

The fact that your Sony is or is not the smallest 36MP camera on the market currently was never my concern. You've switched the conversation to it, however, and have avoided what I've actually said. Why are you so focused on getting me to confirm such? It was never argued by me, yet you are seeming to want to disprove my view with it. This is a strawman fallacy.

[jogiba]

The fact that your Sony is or is not the smallest 36MP camera on the market currently was never my concern. You've switched the conversation to it, however, and have avoided what I've actually said. Why are you so focused on getting me to confirm such? It was never argued by me, yet you are seeming to want to disprove my view with it. This is a strawman fallacy.

Spit it out, what exactly is your view ? Is this a silly game you are playing or what ?

---------- Post added 06-29-14 at 10:05 AM ----------

I'll show you two 46MP > 36MP

Really, so you like to play silly games too I see.

[mee]

Spit it out, what exactly is your view ? Is this a silly game you are playing or what ?

I've already stated my view ..multiple times.. if you'd actually take the time to read my posts. I admit they are lengthy but there are no games. It seems though you are not reading my posts then arguing something I never claimed. Not sure there is really much more to say?

[kadajawi]

I think if Ricoh want to be a serious competitor in the pro/semipro market with the Pentax brand, which they have shown they are by redeveloping the 645, then they need FF SLR. After all what brands do people see the professionals using, "Canon" or "Nikon" which helps drive those brands across all segments.

Professional users are shifting to mFT as far as I can see. At least quite a few of them. For example those that speak on This Week in Photo. And they can influence others as they give workshops, speak on podcasts etc.

Smaller sensors are getting better and better. Heck, someone did a shoot with a medium format camera and an iPhone, and normal people could not distinguish/did not care. It was a very controlled shoot, but it is quite telling. Absolute perfection is not necessary. And APS-C is enough.

A friend in Malaysia shoots APC-C, and I have seen a company doing wedding photography and events using Pentax. I'd say most that I have seen at weddings use APS-C.

Pentax joining the FF market would be trying to compete in a very competitive market where the 3 major brands with lots of resources put a lot of effort into, with a system that is quite lacking (how many FF lenses does Pentax have in production?), with users that have grown into their brands and already have plenty of gear. And a market that does not necessarily continue growing, as smaller sensors become good enough, with plenty of benefits to using them (like the size and weight of the gear).

How on earth can Pentax compete in that market, and should it even? To produce things for a competitive price, you need economies of scale. But the expected sales of a FF Pentax are minimal. Realistically you're not getting Canikon shooters to switch to something that is nearly the same. You would need something that is A LOT better. AND that has all the lenses the person could want to buy. At a good price. Pentax can't do something that is a lot better, when the competitors already produce great cameras. And for many pros, video is important. But Pentax has no clue whatsoever about video, and does not give a f*** according to interviews. On the other hand, Canon has great video equipment, and Nikon has good video equipment when it comes to APS-C, and pretends to care when it comes to FF.
By having poor economies of scale the price tag for a FF Pentax would be higher than for a similar FF competitor (besides the lack of lenses), which would make even Pentax users wishing to go to FF consider switching brands. Which leads to even worse economies of scale. In the end Pentax could handcraft their FF cameras. Maybe strip Nikon DSLRs by hand and put them into a K mount Pentax body...

[normhead]

Pentax could simply ask Sony to make an A7r and A7s camera in a K mount and license them the way they did with the Tamron 18-270. All we need here is some camera with a Pentax mount. Pentax doesn't have to do a thing but show them how to spell their name.

After all the years of pointless arguments, most of which are a waste of time that stands out from it all, the one point that won't go away, is many Pentax users who own expensive full frame glass, want to use it on a full frame sensor. For almost everything else there's a counter argument. At least in my opinion, not for that, if Pentax doesn't want to do it themselves, they should at least licenses one one else's system to do it.

I never spent money on Pentax FF glass, I don't have a horse in this race, I'm just saying, after all the arguments on this board, to me that's why Pentax should have an FF. Because they are still selling high end FF glass.

And that is the reason I probably wouldn't buy an FF, I would want at least a 31 ltd, a 43 ltd and a 77 ltd. IN the end, it would cost me 7k if the camera costs 3 k. I'm happy with what I have the way things are, I don't need a whole new level of "I have to have this and this and this " starting all over again.

[Na Horuk]

Pentax could simply ask Sony to make an A7r and A7s camera in a K mount and license them the way they did with the Tamron 18-270. All we need here is some camera with a Pentax mount. Pentax doesn't have to do a thing but show them how to spell their name.

hahaha that would be awesome
And Pentax often seems to squeeze more out of the Sony sensor than Sony cameras with the same sensor (at least with the K-5, IIs)

[eyeswideshut]

In the end Pentax could handcraft their FF cameras. Maybe strip Nikon DSLRs by hand and put them into a K mount Pentax body...

Hmmm, not bad. I'll take the D800 with a little bit of extra sauce, pepperoni and don't forget to put in a 1.0 magnification finder...

[normhead]

Hmmm, not bad. I'll take the D800 with a little bit of extra sauce, pepperoni and don't forget to put in a 1.0 magnification finder...

And a drink dispenser.

[Kunzite]

Professional users are shifting to mFT as far as I can see. At least quite a few of them. For example those that speak on This Week in Photo. And they can influence others as they give workshops, speak on podcasts etc.

What you're seeing is - most likely - mFT companies pushing hard the image of professionals shifting to mFT, maybe even paying some of them to promote their products. The hype is strong with the mirrorless side.

Smaller sensors are getting better and better. Heck, someone did a shoot with a medium format camera and an iPhone, and normal people could not distinguish/did not care. It was a very controlled shoot, but it is quite telling. Absolute perfection is not necessary. And APS-C is enough.

For whom?
For Ricoh Imaging, unlikely. They would probably try to protect their margins by adding higher-end K-mount products (i.e. "full frame").
For the Pentaxians wanting something more than APS-C, nope. They are fewer, but high-spending customers and should not be ignored and pushed towards other systems.

And to the "How on earth can Pentax compete in that market" question, the answer is: exactly how they're doing it with APS-C products.

Pentax could simply ask Sony to make an A7r and A7s camera in a K mount and license them the way they did with the Tamron 18-270. All we need here is some camera with a Pentax mount. Pentax doesn't have to do a thing but show them how to spell their name.

I strongly disagree.

[normhead]

I strongly disagree.

OK, what do you strongly disagree with?

While I agree they could ask them and Sony might say no, so it might not work. I see no reason they couldn't ask. With the number of people that have bought A7 cameras to use with their FF glass, I find it hard to imagine you're arguing that their wouldn't be a market. It would be exactly the same market that now buy K-mount adapters for Sony systems, only there would be more of them because the lenses could be made to use AF and AE functions.

If Sony can make money on adapters why not on a whole camera? Sony would make money selling cameras, Pentax would make money selling the k-mount and K-mount glass... what's not to like?

[Kunzite]

With everything from that quote:
- that Pentax could ask a competitor to make them a flagship camera. That's a bit insulting to them, you know, because it implies Pentax cannot make capable cameras on their own.
- that "all we need is some camera with a Pentax mount". Who are "we", anyway? People with no desire to buy Pentax "full frame" products? I want Pentax products, and I'm ready pay for them. I don't want Sony cameras, even relabeled.
- that what matters is a 6 letters brand.

[normhead]

With everything from that quote:
- that Pentax could ask a competitor to make them a flagship camera. That's a bit insulting to them, you know, because it implies Pentax cannot make capable cameras on their own.
- that "all we need is some camera with a Pentax mount". Who are "we", anyway? People with no desire to buy Pentax "full frame" products? I want Pentax products, and I'm ready pay for them. I don't want Sony cameras, even relabeled.
- that what matters is a 6 letters brand.

This is starting to get pointless...

- that Pentax could ask a competitor to make them a flagship camera. That's a bit insulting to them, you know, because it implies Pentax cannot make capable cameras on their own.

That didn't stop them from adopting the Tamron 18-270. What? Pentax can't make a lens?

- that "all we need is some camera with a Pentax mount". Who are "we", anyway? People with no desire to buy Pentax "full frame" products? I want Pentax products, and I'm ready pay for them. I don't want Sony cameras, even relabeled.

All those people who have bought A7x cameras to use their Pentax FF glass. The Christine Thams of the world, I guess you haven't been following those threads.

- that what matters is a 6 letters brand.

Again, if you been following the threads, you know, what people want is a camera that uses their Pentax FF glass, with AF, and AE and with all the capabilities built into those lenses. The brand doesn't matter at all.

I'm not even an FF advocate and I know these things, you should too.

Are we feeling a little grouchy today?

[Na Horuk]

- that Pentax could ask a competitor to make them a flagship camera. That's a bit insulting to them, you know, because it implies Pentax cannot make capable cameras on their own.

Nah, the A7 wouldnt be a flagship. I read here that a lot of people prefer the K-3 in every way. But the A7 rebrand would be FF, so it would give an option to those who now don't have an option of a native K-mount FF. And hey, even the sensors in Pentax cameras are already Sony brand. And isn't the shutter mechanism also made by some other company? And Pentax worked with Tamron on a couple lenses (going both ways). Some people are already using Sony cameras for K-mount glass. They would probably switch back just to get AF and all the automation with their Pentax glass (and Pentax could improve the Menus, interface, add green button..)
Because the lenses are the true investment, camera bodies come and go, especially digital ones

[Kunzite]

Pentax rebadging a consumer-level superzoom lens because they couldn't be bothered to make one, and Pentax asking Sony to hack a K-mount into one of their mirrorless cameras and sell it as a "flagship" K-mount product are different things. Very different things.

What would be the message, "Buy a Pentax; it's just a Sony A7, but more expensive and with K-mount"? Way to build a strong user base...

The people who bought A7x cameras to use their K-mount lenses:
- would - most likely - not buy another A7x camera, but this time with K-mount. I'm guessing that $2000 (est.) is too much to pay just for AF with K-mount lenses.
- would - most likely - not buy new, expensive Pentax K-mount "full frame" lenses because they already jumped ship.

My bad, I assumed at least the brand matters. But:
- the Pentax products don't matter, just hack a K-mount on something, on anything.
- the Pentax brand doesn't matter.
- all that matter is to have the cheapest way of mounting already bought lenses on a "full frame" camera, preferably with auto exposure and auto focus (but not if it's too costly).
It appears to me you're arguing against a Pentax "full frame" product line

OTOH:
- I want Pentax products (cameras and lenses)
- preferably Pentax branded (I'm OK with the Ricoh under the back LCD)
- I'm willing to pay what they're worth (similar to what the competition is asking)

Which kind of customer should they target, I wonder?