Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-29-2014, 05:57 AM   #91
Pentaxian
hoopsontoast's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Oxfordshire
Posts: 822
The main reason I would like a FF (135) based camera as it would bridge the gap between the Pentax APS-C which stops at ~1k for the K-3 (and is unlikely to get much higher/better in the future), and there is nothing until just under 7k for the 645Z. Thats a massive gap, and for a new user (the kind that Pentax want to get) there is no real potential upgrade path to lure you into the brand, as the K-3 does not give you a massive amount over the entry K-50 ~500 for the average user other than the 24mp/better AF etc.

Even second hand, a K-5II is around the price of a new K-50, and a K-3 would be down to around 700 but other than that, the old 645D is still 2.5k+, and you would need to buy ALL new lenses.

A FF 135 camera would bridge this gap, give an intermediate step towards the 645 if you like, or as an upgrade path above the APS-C range that you can potentially still use a lot of your existing lenses with straight away.

07-29-2014, 06:31 AM   #92
Senior Member




Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Berlin
Posts: 104
QuoteOriginally posted by hoopsontoast Quote
. Thats a massive gap, and for a new user (the kind that Pentax want to get) there is no real potential upgrade path to lure you into the brand, as the K-3 does not give you a massive amount over the entry K-50 ~500 for the average user other than the 24mp/better AF etc.
But do you really think the "average user" would take that path (from FF to 645Z)? Maybe those driven by GAS and some pros, but surley not most; I would say most have got more than they ever need with an K-50/K-500
07-29-2014, 06:55 AM   #93
Pentaxian
hoopsontoast's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Oxfordshire
Posts: 822
QuoteOriginally posted by rullrich Quote
But do you really think the "average user" would take that path (from FF to 645Z)? Maybe those driven by GAS and some pros, but surley not most; I would say most have got more than they ever need with an K-50/K-500
Most would go from APS-C to FF, and possibly to 645 later, but at the moment, I would have thought most go from APS-C to FF (But Other Brands) or stay with their APS-C and don't go to 645. That's a guess.

For me, I have a S/H K-01, the K-3 does not offer much over a S/H K-5 that I would use, a FF on the other hand (low light/noise performance, bright OVF etc), should be enough of an upgrade that I would consider it.

The thing is, for Pentax, they need to get new customers. Now looking at the range compared to Canikon, there is no real upgrade potential, you see Pentax doing very well with its APS-C WR/Solid bodies, excellent range of primes (especially the DA Ltds), focus on lightwight/compact lenses etc. But there is nothing else there, Canon have the 6D at not much more than the K-3 to lure you, Nikon has the D610 as well to get you up towards their higher ranges.
Pentax has nothing, and the 645 range is far too high and different from the APS-C/FF potential ranges.

And don't call me Shirley.
07-29-2014, 07:07 AM   #94
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,707
QuoteOriginally posted by rullrich Quote
But do you really think the "average user" would take that path (from FF to 645Z)? Maybe those driven by GAS and some pros, but surley not most; I would say most have got more than they ever need with an K-50/K-500
No but for many users the path from APS-c to 645z is pretty clear.... in the Pentax world an FF is an orphan format. The advantages of APS_c over FF are pretty clear (look in the 300mm plus club or the macro lens club) and the advantages of the 645z in resolution and low light performance is pretty clear... the FF is a compromise between the two.

QuoteQuote:
The glass is not half empty with crop body ! To me, I believe I'll continue with it, and maybe in the future I'll get an illusive Pentax FF to compliment my crop body kit. But that FF had better blow my socks off, and maybe match or exceed the high ISO of the Canon 6D.
Canon 6D? The K-3 is already on par with the 6D, and has more resolution, if that's your concern buy a K-3.


07-29-2014, 07:14 AM   #95
Pentaxian
hoopsontoast's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Oxfordshire
Posts: 822
135 FF would be a compromise, but also fill a gap:

APS-C Entry - Prosumer
K-500 ~330 (Inc Lens Kit)
K-50 ~380
K-3 ~900

135 FF
Prosumer - Professional
K-1 ~2500 (for example)

645 Professional
645D ~4200 (while still in stock)
645Z ~6800
07-29-2014, 07:31 AM   #96
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,707
It comes down to whether you think it's a gap worth filling.
Obviously for some it is...
For others it's not....
As the video says... there's just not that much difference between APS_c and FF. You really have to be a nit picker with limited funds to appreciate FF over APS-c. And if you're that nit picky and niggling, you're going to want MF in the end anyway.

The only way I see FF as filling a gap, is if it's you're only system. It doesn't give you the portability or usability of APS-c and it doesn't give you the low light capacity or resolution of a 645z. But it is a great set of compromises for those who like that particular set of comprises. But there is no "preferred upgrade path that has to include FF. APS_c and MF is a perfectly acceptable kit, with no FF...and if you have those two, why would FF even be a consideration?
07-29-2014, 09:08 AM   #97
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,924
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
It comes down to whether you think it's a gap worth filling.
Obviously for some it is...
For others it's not....
As the video says... there's just not that much difference between APS_c and FF. You really have to be a nit picker with limited funds to appreciate FF over APS-c. And if you're that nit picky and niggling, you're going to want MF in the end anyway.

The only way I see FF as filling a gap, is if it's you're only system. It doesn't give you the portability or usability of APS-c and it doesn't give you the low light capacity or resolution of a 645z. But it is a great set of compromises for those who like that particular set of comprises. But there is no "preferred upgrade path that has to include FF. APS_c and MF is a perfectly acceptable kit, with no FF...and if you have those two, why would FF even be a consideration?
I think the big thing is that both would be k mount cameras, whereas the 645 has a separate mount. While it is better in some respects than a full sized k mount sensor, it might just as we'll be an EOS mount because I'd need to get all new glass for it, which I wouldn't with full frame k mount.

So, yes, I think it could fill a gap, particularly if Pentax picks the right sensor.
07-29-2014, 09:41 AM   #98
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,892
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
As the video says... there's just not that much difference between APS_c and FF. You really have to be a nit picker with limited funds to appreciate FF over APS-c. And if you're that nit picky and niggling, you're going to want MF in the end anyway.
In practice, FF has better low light ability than MF, which matters to a lot of people.

FF is about 60-70% of the way between APS-C and MF. There's nit pickers and nit pickers.

Of course, you're right, if you have limited funds, you're best best is FF over APS-C and MF, both more expensive.



07-29-2014, 09:47 AM   #99
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,707
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I think the big thing is that both would be k mount cameras, whereas the 645 has a separate mount. While it is better in some respects than a full sized k mount sensor, it might just as we'll be an EOS mount because I'd need to get all new glass for it, which I wouldn't with full frame k mount.

So, yes, I think it could fill a gap, particularly if Pentax picks the right sensor.
And I'm sure many will agree with you... but just saying... it's not a given that it will be that way. The assumption that it's right for one makes it right for all is to be avoided. And saying it's a necessary upgrade path, isn't necessarily so.

Buying a D810 is all new lenses, but better pro lens options available than on a Pentax. For those who have the lenses, a Pentax FF would be a great second body. But the likelihood of the system equalling what Canon and Nikon have in FF is unlikely. APS-c and MF are the Pentax niche.. the likelihood of them filling someone else's niche with superior product is extremely unlikely.

There is nothing in Pentax land that equals the Nikkor 14-24, 24-70 and 70-200. Pentax has a few great primes for landscape shooters. But, as has been frequently noted, for all but landscape, Pentax is probably never going to be up to speed, in FF.


But then you and I both shoot a lot of landscape.... it's a conundrum. If an FF with the equivalent of the D810 sensor came out, we might "have" to buy one.

It's a very small market... those with enough limited or DA* Pentax FF primes, who won't want the superior Nikkor zooms. The recent results of a DA*55 1.4 compared to other FF primes being currently released is not the slightest little bit encouraging.

It often pains me to see people avoiding buying what they need, because they think Pentax might make what they want. I think we're pretty much certain Pentax will release something.... but will it be what you want? If you have a 31, 43 and 77 ltd, and don't want top shelf FF zooms, I suspect it will. Anyone else is dreaming.

Last edited by normhead; 07-29-2014 at 09:54 AM.
07-29-2014, 09:57 AM   #100
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,406
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
There is nothing in Pentax land that equals the Nikkor 14-24, 24-70 and 70-200.
Hmm...
07-29-2014, 10:21 AM   #101
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,707
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Hmm...
I was speaking of currently available... I know the FA* 80-200 is a great lens....but, second hand, they are more than the Nikon 70-200 new. And whether it's a better lens, I'll leave that to the debaters.
07-29-2014, 10:25 AM   #102
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,406
I know and you are of course correct, Pentax has no 70-200mm. And the past doesn't matter. But, hmm...
07-29-2014, 11:17 AM   #103
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,924
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
And I'm sure many will agree with you... but just saying... it's not a given that it will be that way. The assumption that it's right for one makes it right for all is to be avoided. And saying it's a necessary upgrade path, isn't necessarily so.

Buying a D810 is all new lenses, but better pro lens options available than on a Pentax. For those who have the lenses, a Pentax FF would be a great second body. But the likelihood of the system equalling what Canon and Nikon have in FF is unlikely. APS-c and MF are the Pentax niche.. the likelihood of them filling someone else's niche with superior product is extremely unlikely.

There is nothing in Pentax land that equals the Nikkor 14-24, 24-70 and 70-200. Pentax has a few great primes for landscape shooters. But, as has been frequently noted, for all but landscape, Pentax is probably never going to be up to speed, in FF.


But then you and I both shoot a lot of landscape.... it's a conundrum. If an FF with the equivalent of the D810 sensor came out, we might "have" to buy one.

It's a very small market... those with enough limited or DA* Pentax FF primes, who won't want the superior Nikkor zooms. The recent results of a DA*55 1.4 compared to other FF primes being currently released is not the slightest little bit encouraging.

It often pains me to see people avoiding buying what they need, because they think Pentax might make what they want. I think we're pretty much certain Pentax will release something.... but will it be what you want? If you have a 31, 43 and 77 ltd, and don't want top shelf FF zooms, I suspect it will. Anyone else is dreaming.
I just don't see a future (until my kids move away from home and the youngest is three), where I can buy a medium format digital camera. But, I can easily see one in which I buy a Pentax full frame and in which I use the FA limiteds, DA *55, DFA 100, DA *200 on it. I would need a DFA * 24-70-ish zoom and a 20mm-ish prime (could be f4 like the DA 15 without any problem). As you say, I shoot landscape and shoot stopped down a lot and I just don't need to have Otus level of performance out of my lenses.

As to lenses, I am not a current market for Pentax. I have all the primes/zooms that I currently need and unless Pentax would release a new full frame camera or, update some of their current zooms (new motors/coatings) I am not particularly in the market for new lenses.
07-29-2014, 12:30 PM   #104
Pentaxian
mecrox's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,910
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
And I'm sure many will agree with you... but just saying... it's not a given that it will be that way. The assumption that it's right for one makes it right for all is to be avoided. And saying it's a necessary upgrade path, isn't necessarily so.

Buying a D810 is all new lenses, but better pro lens options available than on a Pentax. For those who have the lenses, a Pentax FF would be a great second body. But the likelihood of the system equalling what Canon and Nikon have in FF is unlikely. APS-c and MF are the Pentax niche.. the likelihood of them filling someone else's niche with superior product is extremely unlikely.

There is nothing in Pentax land that equals the Nikkor 14-24, 24-70 and 70-200. Pentax has a few great primes for landscape shooters. But, as has been frequently noted, for all but landscape, Pentax is probably never going to be up to speed, in FF.


But then you and I both shoot a lot of landscape.... it's a conundrum. If an FF with the equivalent of the D810 sensor came out, we might "have" to buy one.

It's a very small market... those with enough limited or DA* Pentax FF primes, who won't want the superior Nikkor zooms. The recent results of a DA*55 1.4 compared to other FF primes being currently released is not the slightest little bit encouraging.

It often pains me to see people avoiding buying what they need, because they think Pentax might make what they want. I think we're pretty much certain Pentax will release something.... but will it be what you want? If you have a 31, 43 and 77 ltd, and don't want top shelf FF zooms, I suspect it will. Anyone else is dreaming.
Well, on a self-interested note, what is driving me to eye up other brands increasingly strongly is the lack of a good APS-C wide-angle zoom at a sensible price (i.e. a fair bang/buck ratio even if expensive). In my book, the DA 12-24mm fails on both counts, at least here. It's very hard for an APS-C zoom at this focal length to match something like the FF 16-35mm class from Canonikon, but if it can't then that's one less reason to hang on, I guess. The new Canon 16-35mm f4 lens is one of their top performers, at least apparently, but while more expensive than the DA 12-24mm it is not outrageously so really, again at least here. The old value question doesn't really add up that well for APS-C at this level, I think. Fuji lenses seem even more expensive. I mean, one does have to ask at some stage "What am I really getting for my 500/750/1000 bucks with no upgrade path in many cases?"

If I was really wealthy I could run two systems. As it is, I'm finding it hard to ignore what is happening elsewhere. When all is said and done, I'm not comfortable with forking out between 500 and 1000 pounds per lens on what I'm not 100 per cent happy with.

i don't mind if Pentax do or do not come out with an FF camera, but whatever they decide, my feeling is that they really really have to sort out their lens offering or they will lose quite a few enthusiasts anyway. It's not only all about the DA Limiteds. For example, I've tried photographing the interiors of old country churches, a favourite subject, with the DA 15mm but beyond the centre of the frame I've found it simply too soft when there's a lot of detail around no matter what aperture I or framing point I choose.

Last edited by mecrox; 07-29-2014 at 02:50 PM.
07-29-2014, 02:45 PM   #105
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,524
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
There is nothing in Pentax land that equals the Nikkor 14-24, 24-70 and 70-200.
That's true but Pentax can easily produce any common optics they have already produced in the past with just enough improvements to get good picture quality and decent AF out of it. And if one is not available, we have the latest sigma/tamron that are really good challenger... Indeed the Pentax could be simply rebadged latest tamrons with better build quality!

---------- Post added 07-29-14 at 11:49 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by mecrox Quote
Well, on a self-interested note, what is driving me to eye up other brands increasingly strongly is the lack of a good APS-C wide-angle zoom at a sensible price (i.e. a fair bang/buck ratio even if expensive). In my book, the DA 12-24mm fails on both counts, at least here. It's very hard for an APS-C zoom at this focal length to match something like the FF 16-35mm class from Canonikon
Sigma 8-16 & Pentax 12-24 are very well seen and offer good quality. On alternative, Samyang is making one of the best wide angle prime in term of sharpness and apperture for a bargain... And here AF is not really needed.

It is not perfect, true, but that's not that bad. My main problem with theses zooms & primes is they are too big... And going FF will not help on this.

But yes, due to being mirrorless Fuji has no problem designing good and small wide angle for APSC.

---------- Post added 07-29-14 at 11:54 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I use the FA limiteds, DA *55, DFA 100, DA *200 on it. I would need a DFA * 24-70-ish zoom and a 20mm-ish prime (could be f4 like the DA 15 without any problem).
Many are dreaming also on DA lenses on FF. I mean only FA & DFA are FF compatible. Even if they work on film, they may have very low border quality & vigneting... And Pentax could legitimally limit them to APSC by design when mounted on their latest AF body. Would they do not, this would not make the borders good anyway.

Last edited by Nicolas06; 07-29-2014 at 02:56 PM.
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, aps-c, aps-c & ff, camera, cameras, canon, depth of field, ff, full frame, full-frame, gigs, girl, hobby, image quality, image quality comparisons, images, lenses, nikon, pentax, people, photos, post, print, reality, reason, sense, sensor
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Magnification with a FF lens on Pentax DSLR Pentax Bob Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 23 11-02-2012 10:42 AM
A Pentax FF idea, a unique take on the FF market... theperception2008 Pentax DSLR Discussion 20 10-03-2012 01:07 PM
Re-cycling another Pentax FF rumour/FF rumor from A German photography magazine rawr Pentax Full Frame 73 09-19-2012 01:12 PM
noob with a KX hadi Welcomes and Introductions 3 06-01-2011 11:52 AM
If pentax release a FF, wouldn't they have to release a FF wideangle. pcarfan Photographic Technique 10 12-26-2009 04:45 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:51 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