Pentax FF plans stolen!

**woodywesty** · 07-30-2014, 06:36 AM

Maybe Ricoh's marketing vision starts and ends within Japan. Obviously their goal is to make money and possibly they make way more money selling their mirrorless cameras than their DSLR's? Maybe their marketing folks aren't photographers or camera buffs but copier folks??

normhead · 07-30-2014, 06:47 AM

Originally posted by woodywesty

Maybe Ricoh's marketing vision starts and ends within Japan. Obviously their goal is to make money and possibly they make way more money selling their mirrorless cameras than their DSLR's? Maybe their marketing folks aren't photographers or camera buffs but copier folks??

Possibly.... maybe.... quit being so wishy washy, what are you trying to say?

**woodywesty** · 07-30-2014, 07:01 AM

Originally posted by normhead

Possibly.... maybe.... quit being so wishy washy, what are you trying to say?

Ah well... I'm neither hot or cold on a full frame camera. I'd be happy for those who desire it but for me I'll probably never master or surpass the capabilities of the K3. And Ricoh does come out with some very nice products for which I'm grateful but I get the feeling that Pentax is a tiny little piece of their operation and that it could disappear in a flash.

RonHendriks1966 · 07-30-2014, 07:08 AM

Well however funny also a little embarassing.

OregonJim · 07-30-2014, 08:14 AM

Originally posted by normhead

Wo... now you lost me. A 400mm lens on a K-3 gives you the same reach as a 600mm lens on a D610, how is that "not so much difference?"

He's right if he's talking about lens design, as the image circle of longer lenses is more likely to cover both APS and FF.

LFLee · 07-30-2014, 08:45 AM

it's OK.

FUJI is spending money hiring Pros to tell consumer that they "Don't need FF".
Ricoh is smart.

Ricoh FF GR is more realistic than Pentax FF DSLR.

normhead · 07-30-2014, 08:56 AM

Originally posted by OregonJim

He's right if he's talking about lens design, as the image circle of longer lenses is more likely to cover both APS and FF.

How does that change the fact that you use a 400mm lens on a K-3 to get what you would with a 600mm lens on a D610? Regardless of the image circle, the 600mm lens is still huge and a lot more expensive.

Last edited by normhead; 07-30-2014 at 09:03 AM.

BrianR · 07-30-2014, 09:05 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by normhead

Ya, but practically, that's pretty much irrelevant, since K-3 pixel density is not available on an FF. The fact that an FF with the same pixel density would have the same reach, but more of it, will only become relevant when one becomes available. For right now, it's a theoretical concept with no practical application.

So true. Even on a 36mp d800, the DX crop mode is a paltry 15mp. That's good enough for posting to Facebook, and even then you're pushing it.

VisualDarkness · 07-30-2014, 09:27 AM

Originally posted by normhead

Ya, but practically, that's pretty much irrelevant, since K-3 pixel density is not available on an FF. The fact that an FF with the same pixel density would have the same reach, but more of it, will only become relevant when one becomes available. For right now, it's a theoretical concept with no practical application.

I could also say my wide angle needs are met by my Sigma 8-16 and DA 10-17, but I wouldn't want to muddy the waters with statements that would lead people to believe equivalence exists as more than an extremely imperfect guideline. I do find it annoying when people imply an FF can outperform an APS-c in the short end, but ignore the APS-c advantage in the long end. In real life, often when you get something, you lose something else something else.

Again, these are practical not theoretical limitations. You can discuss what's theoretically possible until you're blue in the face, and not learn single useful piece of information.

Well, the gap is pretty close and for quite a while D800 had a crop mode roughly equal to what Pentax flagship brought. That is why the tele side is harder to make statements for than the wide end.

Originally posted by LFLee

Ricoh FF GR is more realistic than Pentax FF DSLR.

Well, Sony tested the waters with the RX1. The fixed lens road is safer as you don't have to gamble a complete system.

OregonJim · 07-30-2014, 09:44 AM

Originally posted by normhead

How does that change the fact that you use a 400mm lens on a K-3 to get what you would with a 600mm lens on a D610? Regardless of the image circle, the 600mm lens is still huge and a lot more expensive.

It doesn't. I wasn't disagreeing with you, just pointing out that the OP may have been referencing something other than 'reach'. But, since we're here, that 400mm lens doesn't give you the same depth compression that a true 600mm lens would, so it's not really an apples to apples comparison.

ElJamoquio · 07-30-2014, 10:01 AM - **1 Like**

The plans were delicious.

Buuurrrrrrrrrrrrrrp.

VisualDarkness · 07-30-2014, 10:31 AM

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

The plans were delicious.

Buuurrrrrrrrrrrrrrp.

I knew there were FF Alien trolls on the boards!

JimmyDranox · 07-30-2014, 11:15 AM

I don't know how those secretive people from Ricoh are felling if they are reading this article, but I, as a Pentax user, I don't laugh. And I can't blame NCN for this.

And I remember what those Ricoh people saying, that they will have a complete line of cameras. I hope that they remember too.

jsherman999 · 07-30-2014, 12:20 PM

Originally posted by BrianR

So true. Even on a 36mp d800, the DX crop mode is a paltry 15mp. That's good enough for posting to Facebook, and even then you're pushing it.

Indeed. It's pretty much the exact same output the K-5 was capable of, and we all know you can't get good results from that camera

Mazhe · 07-31-2014, 12:47 AM

Because the "100% K-3 crops" are so worth posting... The art of cropping a SLR result until it reaches cellphone levels is beyond me.

07-30-2014, 11:15 AM	#28
JimmyDranox Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Ploiesti, Romania Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,632	I don't know how those secretive people from Ricoh are felling if they are reading this article, but I, as a Pentax user, I don't laugh. And I can't blame NCN for this. And I remember what those Ricoh people saying, that they will have a complete line of cameras. I hope that they remember too. Last edited by JimmyDranox; 07-31-2014 at 03:19 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Stolen Pentax K-01 - SN: 4313429	Jan-61	General Talk	4	07-11-2014 04:40 AM
Pentax kit stolen, be on the lookout	jeffshaddix	General Talk	26	09-28-2013 01:02 AM
Pentax Confirms Full-Frame Plans at CP+ Inteview	Adam	Pentax Full Frame	810	04-14-2013 05:46 PM
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

07-30-2014, 06:36 AM	#16
woodywesty Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Northern Wisconsin Posts: 725	Maybe Ricoh's marketing vision starts and ends within Japan. Obviously their goal is to make money and possibly they make way more money selling their mirrorless cameras than their DSLR's? Maybe their marketing folks aren't photographers or camera buffs but copier folks??

07-30-2014, 06:47 AM	#17
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by woodywesty Maybe Ricoh's marketing vision starts and ends within Japan. Obviously their goal is to make money and possibly they make way more money selling their mirrorless cameras than their DSLR's? Maybe their marketing folks aren't photographers or camera buffs but copier folks?? Possibly.... maybe.... quit being so wishy washy, what are you trying to say?

07-30-2014, 07:01 AM	#18
woodywesty Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Northern Wisconsin Posts: 725	Originally posted by normhead Possibly.... maybe.... quit being so wishy washy, what are you trying to say? Ah well... I'm neither hot or cold on a full frame camera. I'd be happy for those who desire it but for me I'll probably never master or surpass the capabilities of the K3. And Ricoh does come out with some very nice products for which I'm grateful but I get the feeling that Pentax is a tiny little piece of their operation and that it could disappear in a flash.

07-30-2014, 07:08 AM	#19
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	Well however funny also a little embarassing.

07-30-2014, 08:14 AM	#20
OregonJim Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon Posts: 1,327	Originally posted by normhead Wo... now you lost me. A 400mm lens on a K-3 gives you the same reach as a 600mm lens on a D610, how is that "not so much difference?" He's right if he's talking about lens design, as the image circle of longer lenses is more likely to cover both APS and FF.

07-30-2014, 08:45 AM	#21
LFLee Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,292	it's OK. FUJI is spending money hiring Pros to tell consumer that they "Don't need FF". Ricoh is smart. Ricoh FF GR is more realistic than Pentax FF DSLR.

07-30-2014, 08:56 AM	#22
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by OregonJim He's right if he's talking about lens design, as the image circle of longer lenses is more likely to cover both APS and FF. How does that change the fact that you use a 400mm lens on a K-3 to get what you would with a 600mm lens on a D610? Regardless of the image circle, the 600mm lens is still huge and a lot more expensive. Last edited by normhead; 07-30-2014 at 09:03 AM.

07-30-2014, 09:05 AM - 1 Like	#23
BrianR Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Ontario Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,332	Originally posted by normhead Ya, but practically, that's pretty much irrelevant, since K-3 pixel density is not available on an FF. The fact that an FF with the same pixel density would have the same reach, but more of it, will only become relevant when one becomes available. For right now, it's a theoretical concept with no practical application. So true. Even on a 36mp d800, the DX crop mode is a paltry 15mp. That's good enough for posting to Facebook, and even then you're pushing it.

07-30-2014, 09:27 AM	#24
VisualDarkness Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Uppsala, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,439	Originally posted by normhead Ya, but practically, that's pretty much irrelevant, since K-3 pixel density is not available on an FF. The fact that an FF with the same pixel density would have the same reach, but more of it, will only become relevant when one becomes available. For right now, it's a theoretical concept with no practical application. I could also say my wide angle needs are met by my Sigma 8-16 and DA 10-17, but I wouldn't want to muddy the waters with statements that would lead people to believe equivalence exists as more than an extremely imperfect guideline. I do find it annoying when people imply an FF can outperform an APS-c in the short end, but ignore the APS-c advantage in the long end. In real life, often when you get something, you lose something else something else. Again, these are practical not theoretical limitations. You can discuss what's theoretically possible until you're blue in the face, and not learn single useful piece of information. Well, the gap is pretty close and for quite a while D800 had a crop mode roughly equal to what Pentax flagship brought. That is why the tele side is harder to make statements for than the wide end. Originally posted by LFLee Ricoh FF GR is more realistic than Pentax FF DSLR. Well, Sony tested the waters with the RX1. The fixed lens road is safer as you don't have to gamble a complete system.

07-30-2014, 09:44 AM	#25
OregonJim Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon Posts: 1,327	Originally posted by normhead How does that change the fact that you use a 400mm lens on a K-3 to get what you would with a 600mm lens on a D610? Regardless of the image circle, the 600mm lens is still huge and a lot more expensive. It doesn't. I wasn't disagreeing with you, just pointing out that the OP may have been referencing something other than 'reach'. But, since we're here, that 400mm lens doesn't give you the same depth compression that a true 600mm lens would, so it's not really an apples to apples comparison.

07-30-2014, 10:01 AM - 1 Like	#26
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	The plans were delicious. Buuurrrrrrrrrrrrrrp.

07-30-2014, 10:31 AM	#27
VisualDarkness Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Uppsala, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,439	Originally posted by ElJamoquio The plans were delicious. Buuurrrrrrrrrrrrrrp. I knew there were FF Alien trolls on the boards!

07-30-2014, 12:20 PM	#29
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	Originally posted by BrianR So true. Even on a 36mp d800, the DX crop mode is a paltry 15mp. That's good enough for posting to Facebook, and even then you're pushing it. Indeed. It's pretty much the exact same output the K-5 was capable of, and we all know you can't get good results from that camera

07-31-2014, 12:47 AM	#30
Mazhe Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2012 Photos: Gallery Posts: 139	Because the "100% K-3 crops" are so worth posting... The art of cropping a SLR result until it reaches cellphone levels is beyond me.