[jatrax]

This puzzles me for years. So I put a lens on my camera, look true the viewfinder or my rearscreen on the K-01 and see what it is bringing to me. No zoom's, so I just either take a different lens or take some steps forward or backwards if it's not really what I want in my image. I know a thing or two about photography so I know what will work and what not. And then apparently there are people who sit at home, think of what they could make with their fantastic zoomlens if they only had the right sized sensor inside their camera. But unfortunately they haven't got the FF Pentaxcamera so they end up with no image (or so).

^^^roflol^^^ Glad it is not just me! I see all these arguments that the 'glass' has to look right on the 'original format'. Seriously? Look through the freakn viewfinder. What you see is what it is. Don't like it? Change lens or move your feet. Are we making images or just using 'no FF Pentax' as an excuse?

My personal opinion is that most of the enthusiasts who would consider to buy a Pentax full frame have some (often plenty of) good old glasses, and that would be the main reason to buy one.

So your whole argument for adding a FF camera to the line is that some enthusiasts with 20 year old glass might buy it so they can use their old glass? If I'm sitting on the Ricoh product development committee that argument is not going to make me jump up and cheer for adding yet another format to the line.

There are I think valid reasons to add a FF camera, but 'so we can use our old glass the way it was intended' is not one of them.

[Winder]

Pentax needs to decide what they are going to do. They don't have to make a FF body to be successful, but if they are going to be an APS-C only they need to step it up an produce some better glass. Fuji an Olympus are both rolling out some really attractive glass, and ultimately people buy into systems for the glass. When I decided that 4/3 was dead and I wanted to sell off my 4/3 gear before it became official, a fellow photographer talked me into a K-7. He was all about the DA limited lenses and the compact package. The irony is that he has now moved over to a Fuji XT1. The 14mm, 23mm, 35mm, & 56mm are all really good lenses. The 56mm F/1.2 is what made him switch. The K-3 is a better body and he had a nice collection of DA Limited lenses, but the faster, quieter Fuji glass was more appealing. He swore he would never use and EVF camera, now he talks about how good the XT1 EVF is. Fuji has a couple OIS F/2.8 constant aperture weather sealed zooms coming soon. Organic sensors and better bodies appear to be right around the corner.

Does Pentax still have the ability to make premium glass? Hoya gutted the talent pool and after Pentax released the rather pedestrian DA 20-40mm as a "Limited" lens, I'm not sure they still have what it takes. The key to the system is the glass, and Pentax is falling behind IMO.

[pinholecam]

TS, you don't need to be loyal to a company (worse : who isn't making what you want and giving very non-committal answers )
You just need to be good to yourself.
Of course some of us think that a FF is part of the package to Pentax doing better than now.
But, as you can see, the opinion on this is very diverse.
IMO, just get a A7/r and move on for now.
You get to use your lenses on FF, get to keep the nice lenses (as good as if not better than other makes too; and smallish compared to most) and perhaps will still be able to get a Pentax FF if it ever comes out after Ricoh/Pentax has finally made all the concise evaluations/readiness to make one (like in 10yrs from now.... ) .

Pentax needs to decide what they are going to do. They don't have to make a FF body to be successful, but if they are going to be an APS-C only they need to step it up an produce some better glass. Fuji an Olympus are both rolling out some really attractive glass, and ultimately people buy into systems for the glass. When I decided that 4/3 was dead and I wanted to sell off my 4/3 gear before it became official, a fellow photographer talked me into a K-7. He was all about the DA limited lenses and the compact package. The irony is that he has now moved over to a Fuji XT1. The 14mm, 23mm, 35mm, & 56mm are all really good lenses. The 56mm F/1.2 is what made him switch. The K-3 is a better body and he had a nice collection of DA Limited lenses, but the faster, quieter Fuji glass was more appealing. He swore he would never use and EVF camera, now he talks about how good the XT1 EVF is. Fuji has a couple OIS F/2.8 constant aperture weather sealed zooms coming soon. Organic sensors and better bodies appear to be right around the corner.

Does Pentax still have the ability to make premium glass? Hoya gutted the talent pool and after Pentax released the rather pedestrian DA 20-40mm as a "Limited" lens, I'm not sure they still have what it takes. The key to the system is the glass, and Pentax is falling behind IMO.

I agree.
Come clean if no FF and work on the faster/better aps-c dedicated lenses.
The non-commitment on both fronts has prevented me from wanting to buy lenses for the past 2years. (though I did buy Q7 and a few of its lenses)
Fuji X system has snapped at the advantage of Pentax being a smallish system. (in fact, they done the same to Canikon)
They have added on that with what appears to be nice fast lenses (though some are centre sharp than evenly sharp at larger apertures).

On the FF front, it has been getting cheaper.

So all competitors are not sitting on their laurels.

[dadipentak]

if they are going to be an APS-C only they need to step it up an produce some better glass.

Or even if they want to be serious competitors in the APS-C market (FF or no).

[mecrox]

Pentax needs to decide what they are going to do. They don't have to make a FF body to be successful, but if they are going to be an APS-C only they need to step it up an produce some better glass. Fuji an Olympus are both rolling out some really attractive glass, and ultimately people buy into systems for the glass. When I decided that 4/3 was dead and I wanted to sell off my 4/3 gear before it became official, a fellow photographer talked me into a K-7. He was all about the DA limited lenses and the compact package. The irony is that he has now moved over to a Fuji XT1. The 14mm, 23mm, 35mm, & 56mm are all really good lenses. The 56mm F/1.2 is what made him switch. The K-3 is a better body and he had a nice collection of DA Limited lenses, but the faster, quieter Fuji glass was more appealing. He swore he would never use and EVF camera, now he talks about how good the XT1 EVF is. Fuji has a couple OIS F/2.8 constant aperture weather sealed zooms coming soon. Organic sensors and better bodies appear to be right around the corner.

Does Pentax still have the ability to make premium glass? Hoya gutted the talent pool and after Pentax released the rather pedestrian DA 20-40mm as a "Limited" lens, I'm not sure they still have what it takes. The key to the system is the glass, and Pentax is falling behind IMO.

I don't know what Fuji equipment costs around the world, but where I am it is horrifically expensive. Cost grounds alone would rule it out for huge numbers of folks. Almost anything is cheaper, including an FF kit, over a spread of Fuji's priciest offerings. I can see it's fine stuff indeed but it has its limitations too and I wonder whether their stock isn't seriously overrated, as they say. I'm not convinced myself and I'm sceptical about whether the hullabaloo has translated into strong sales. Pentax mostly look like a bargain by comparison. It may be old tech even ye olde tech in some cases, but it can still deliver pretty nicely, it isn't so costly and in the case of many Pentax lenses there is less to go wrong. But the pricing comparisons may not be valid elsewhere ...

As for lenses, I'd wager that items like the Zeiss Otus or the new Nikon 58mm would never happen in any company where box-tickers and bean counters are allowed to run riot. You need inspiration and a corporate vision for that, as well as talent and financial acumen. Both companies likely see their creations paying off handsomely as marketing wins and halo products in addition to whatever they make from sales, even if that's not very much (though I suspect there are still enough high-rollers around to make that point moot). And Sigma's 50mm, 35mm and 18-35mm Art lenses must have hit both sides of the equation equally well.

I think the "FF? Yes No Maybe" saga has done more damage to Pentax's rep as a brand for enthusiasts than everything else added together. I don't mind whether they produce one or whether they don't. But the one thing all markets hate is drift and uncertainty - and, arguably, that's now impacted their APS-C portfolio too. For the antidote, see under lenses above.

[jatrax]

I think the "FF? Yes No Maybe" saga has done more damage to Pentax's rep as a brand for enthusiasts than everything else added together. I don't mind whether they produce one or whether they don't. But the one thing all markets hate is drift and uncertainty - and, arguably, that's now impacted their APS-C portfolio too.

Well said!

[Winder]

I don't know what Fuji equipment costs around the world, but where I am it is horrifically expensive. Cost grounds alone would rule it out for huge numbers of folks. Almost anything is cheaper, including an FF kit, over a spread of Fuji's priciest offerings. I can see it's fine stuff indeed but it has its limitations too and I wonder whether their stock isn't seriously overrated, as they say. I'm not convinced myself and I'm sceptical about whether the hullabaloo has translated into strong sales. Pentax mostly look like a bargain by comparison. It may be old tech even ye olde tech in some cases, but it can still deliver pretty nicely, it isn't so costly and in the case of many Pentax lenses there is less to go wrong. But the pricing comparions may not be valid elsewhere ...

Just because Pentax releases high grade glass doesn't mean the existing value priced offering disappears. Pentax needs to expand its offering. Contractions in the market have taken place in the lower end, but higher end products have been selling well. The growth in the premium products is why we are seeing lenses like the Otus line and why Sigma is pushing the Art line up stream.

In my market Fuji is doing well. They are not replacing Canon/Nikon DSLRs, but I now know several who have added Fuji bodies and those expensive lenses to their bag. Last year I only knew 1 person using an XP1 for wedding receptions, I know know 3 in my rather small market who use different Fuji bodies as part of their professional kit. The local pro-shop carries Canon, Nikon, & Fuji. No Sony and no Pentax. It was just 2 months ago that they were able to put an X-T1 body out for display. Up until that point they had a waiting list of pre-orders they were trying to fill, so none were available for display bodies.

I think the "FF? Yes No Maybe" saga has done more damage to Pentax's rep as a brand for enthusiasts than everything else added together. I don't mind whether they produce one or whether they don't. But the one thing all markets hate is drift and uncertainty - and, arguably, that's now impacted their APS-C portfolio too. For the antidote, see under lenses above.

The unwillingness to commit to a plan or communicate that commitment to the market has definitely hurt their sales. I was looking at the sale on lenses that ends today and seriously considering adding a 77mm LTD to the bag, but I will wait. There are other companies that seem to have a clear vision of where they are going and who are actively moving in that direction. If I am going to invest into a system , it will be with a company that I think has a clear vision and the willingness to communicate that vision to its customers. I think the K-3 is the best APS-C body on the market when you consider all of the features, but its of little value without a strong system around it.

I have never really minded the screw drive lenses until recently. I had some baby pictures to take with a client as part of a 1 year contract. The baby was sound asleep and we shot 100 or so frames with the Sigma 85mm. Changed lenses to the 31mm LTD for a different perspective and as soon as the AF motor screamed she woke-up. I love the 31mm, but for professional use, Pentax has to do better, or just send everyone to Sigma for premium glass. Now I'm considering buying the Sigma 35mm Art or just pick up a Fuji XT1 and a Fuji 35mm or Zeiss 31mm just for a second body. I'm can't afford for my equipment to get in the way of the work.

On a side note. I have always viewed face detection as somewhat of a gimmick feature. I was shooting some newborn pictures with a friends X-T1 and the 56mm and the face recognition feature was actually pretty handy. The Fuji X-T1 easily locked on to the newborns big clear eyes and maintained focus as I moved around and changed composition. No changing AF points, no recomposing. Same with shooting the couples 3 year old who refused to stay still. As she moved around the camera kept lock on her face. She was in a rocking chair with her cat, and wouldn't stop rocking back and forth. With the K-3 and the 31mm I had to lock focus either at the front or the back of range of movement and time my shot, but the X-T1 maintained lock on her face surprisingly well as she moved.

---

Last edited by Winder; 09-08-2014 at 03:03 PM.

[jsherman999]

Fuji X system has snapped at the advantage of Pentax being a smallish system.
They have added on that with what appears to be nice fast lenses (though some are centre sharp than evenly sharp at larger apertures).

On the FF front, it has been getting cheaper.

So all competitors are not sitting on their laurels.

I like all the various ways The Squeeze can be discovered/articulated

MILC (m43 or aps-c) -------> apsc DSLR <------- Lower-end FF DSLR (or MILC FF)

.

[Chris Mak]

I've read with interest and attention the post titled "Dear Pentax: Never Build a "Full Frame" Camera", linked on this site homepage. It is an interesting article, well written, but extremely subjective.
It should have no place on the home page. I am asking myself why it does...
The experiences of the author are in no way special. I have the same: I don't have the A* 135mm, but i do have the 85mm, the 200mm, the 300mm, and most of the best A glasses. Many of those who would actually buy a full frame body have high performance old lenses, with a wonderful build quality. But i suspect that the active posters on pentaxforums.com do not represent a statistically credible example of the advanced amateurs who are still interested in a FF body (many gave up already).
After reading many, many forum posts, with a reasonable level of attention, i've made up my mind: a good part of the active users is made by fanboys, newcomers, and old farts loyal to the brand. For example i am of the latter type, i am just 56 but i started taking pictures when i was 10 y.o., and sold my Nikkormat for a Pentax, as soon as it was possible to find the first MX bodies second-hand. Then i purchased the LX, the Super Program, the K2, the 6x7, all of them second-hand. The only two new bodies i ever bought (Sfx-n and Z-1p) were brought from the USA at a price competitive with a good used body in Italy!.
After that i waited for the digital. When it came i deemed it not good enough... i wanted the full frame, to use all my fantastic wides!
I got so fed up of waiting, that i decided that if i had to use analog, at least i had to get the maximum quality, so i restarted with large format (4x5" and 5x7") and lately embraced 8x10".
A big change in my private life brought me back to small cameras, usable for travel photography.
I finally bent to Pentax, and got a K10D and K200D (both used).Since then, i added a K-5 II and a K-01, bought at 1/4 the original price. I guess i'm not an impulsive buyer, or a big spender... but i do love lenses!
During all this time i took advantage of every occasion i found, exchanging old K and M glasses for more ergonomic (and often better) A and F/FA ones. The only DA i own is the pancake Limited... which happens to cover the FF
My personal opinion is that most of the enthusiasts who would consider to buy a Pentax full frame have some (often plenty of) good old glasses, and that would be the main reason to buy one. Some of them already own different equipments, but some have enough money to invest in a body which will allow them to shoot with the lenses they kept for all this time, those old wonderful glasses they didn't feel to sell.
I've posted a comment to the original post (maybe it's more an article), but there is a limit in the allowed characters. That's why i'm posting here a more articulated reply.
I've browsed all the comments, a great number of them, and i have been impressed by them. I think i decided to write about my personal view on the matter, after reading some of them.
Most of the comments i've read are unrealistic, or just "pour parler". That's true about both sides, i guess. Pentax FF is a divisive issue...
I'd really want to know how many people would really want (and afford) to buy a decently complete 645 digital outfit. Com'on, please!
There was a time when Asahi Pentax was the second player, very innovative, and sold the best affordable cameras for reportage. Canon was in no way at the same level.
Now, after two horribly wrong choices (late switch to bayonet; no pro camera after the LX), Pentax is struggling to remain relevant, after the disaster of the Hoya tenure.
Now Pentax is smaller than ever, there have been insufficient investments in R&D, and most of the inventory had been sold. I have some hope, but i don't think Ricoh has enough cash to compete with the big players, at least not at any level of the market. When Pentax concentrated on compact cameras, at least you could see them in supermarkets. I don't see them since long, and the choice has proven totally wrong. If it sounds vaguely familiar... it's because Kodak and Polaroid tried to compete in the low end market as well!
There was a time when Apple was in real danger, Steve Jobs was called and the trend changed in a short amount of time. It can happen only in a way. Building on your assets and innovating, thinking out of the box.
Pentax has a base, a signature: SR and WR bodies, plus camera menus and ergonomics conceived for real photographer's needs (well... not the K-01!). Then it has an asset, just one. Fortunately is huge: an immense number of good (and sometimes very good) lenses in K mount, built during a long span of time and diffused in any corner of the world. Most of the good ones are primes, some are fast, and some have an optical signature which sets them apart from the mass of AF zooms sold today.
It is NOT true that Pentax has to invest a huge amount of money in the project of a brand new full line of lenses made for FF. Some cover already, many zooms could be provided by third parties (Canikon owners buy wonderful Tokina lenses, which we call Pentax... Tamron could be the ideal substitute of Tokina), and a few specialty lenses could be assigned to Cosina (they have the know-how, just think about the price/performance ratio of the fake-Voigtlanders in M/LTM mount!).
The big money is made with amateurs nowadays. The real professional is broke. They get less and less money, big stock agencies shut down, and many good professionals quit their job to do something else or to retire before time. How many pros buy the new digital medium format? Very, very few, trust me, other way the used 645 lenses made in the film days would cost four time their price.
What makes a FF camera desirable? The sensor and the glass. The glass is already there, plenty of it. Those who are so happy with APS-C can't be as happy to see the best new third party lenses made in any other mount but Pentax! I don't. It's my MAIN complaint. No Tokinas at all. Not the best new Sigmas. The Tamrons are available only in their old version... when the stock will be emptied, do you really think they will make a new batch for PKAF?
I am happy with my K-5 II and (for a particular use) with my K-01, but i would never buy Pentax if i had to start afresh, today. When i purchased the K10D i had already a dozen of the best MF Pentax lenses ever. That was my reason. I would have been crazy to buy any other brand!
So the glass is already there... if a sensor allowing in-body SR is already available, better move your ass Pentax! Tomorrow is too late.
No need to be extremely innovative, just copy what the others did well. Nikon has different level of compatibility with vintage glasses, the more expensive bodies are more flexible. A down-to-earth FF version of the K-3, with limited improvements and an UNCRIPPLED mount, would sell by itself. Provided that the price is competitive... but at this stage even selling under cost could be an option, at least initially. It would be more effective than a planetary advertising campaign, it would get all the interest of the main sites, the attention of the growing numbers of MF vintage lenses enthusiasts (especially the new crowds from the countries of the rising sun), of collectors of K and M42 lenses, and would get the Pentax name once again in the radar of third party lens makers. I think it would also sell to all those rich old farts who shoot Canon/Nikon/Sony but still own their old Takumar or SMC Pentax glasses.
You don't have to trust me cause i've been a pro, or because i'm a collector and have 250/300 lenses at home... i'm nobody. It's just common sense. The advanced amateur, the one who makes the fortune of Leica, Nikon and Canon, buying highly profitable products, consider APS-C a second choice. Most of them would never spend good money on something perceived as inferior. The fact that this kind of user don't care about Internet, or just lurks every now and then, means nothing. The market speaks, and speaks volume.

cheers

Paolo

Paolo,
You raise some valid arguments, and I also found the article about Why Pentax should not produce a FF camera overly subjective for a front page article.
Personally, I think Ricoh has put the FF project on a back seat due to the reception of the very competitive MF camera, so I'm afraid those who would very much like to see a FF camera released have little to look out for this year, and most likely next year as well, as building a professional and complete MF system will take up a lot of resources.

Chris

[normhead]

Norm you seem to be internalizing the discussion and taking things personally. Three thoughts:

Just 3?

1) This is an internet forum where such things are discussed, and in the current environment of photo-tech disruption, it might make a great deal of sense for Pentax to strengthen it's bread-butter product by offering a FF body or two.

OK, or it might not.. no one knows, acting like it's a done deal and it would be that way for sure is just as unlikely as likely. I'm not betting one way or the other.

2) From a shooter's perspective, it's completely normal to want 'more', or at least have the option of buying more that doesn't strand your past lens purchases.

I don't think so. I think it's perfectly natural to want what you need and stop there. I think people who always want more are out of control.

3) If you don't like these dicussions, why do you read this subforum? It's like walking into a Ford dealership and loudly announcing that everyone needs to stop talking about Fords because it bothers you.

As you said it's an internet forum, I like hearing what others have to say, if I think someone has the wrong take on things, it's OK if I say it.
More to the point, why does jsherman who owns no Pentax's and does nothing to support the company, gives all his business to other companies think he has something to offer to the topic of what direction Pentax should take? SHouldn't that discussion be more of interest to actual Pentax users than to a Nikon guy. Are you trying to help the company, or subvert it? It's a legitimate question.

I have never suggest you stay off the forum, even though you own no Pentax gear and already own your FF, but yet you suggest I stay out of these threads?
Your statements about me getting personal... where? DO you understand what personal means? It means directing your argument at the person making the argument, rather than the argument.

Norm you seem to be internalizing the discussion and taking things personally.

Now that's personal.. but I'm going to take the high road here.
I will point out it's a case of accusing the other person of doing what you're doing, at the same time you're doing it.
Just because I don't agree with your point of view doesn't make it personal, unless I call you out by name. I did mention you in this thread, but in the context of being able to back up my claim that despite the theory of equivalence 50mm FF was artistically quite different than 35 on APS_c.

I thought you might post the images you have that demonstrate what I was talking about. I'm saddened that you chose instead to turn it into a personal attack. The goal is education, not silly psych analysis of people who you mistakenly believe don't agree with you.


.

[JimmyDranox]

I have also read a big number of threads and post about FF Pentax. And I don't want to talk about what Pentax-Ricoh should do. I have already posted my opinion, that they must do a FF, and my arguments.

What I have seen is that there is a number, I consider a small number of PF members which are very vocal against FF, and a much bigger number, but not so vocal, people that post their opinions once or twice, and that's all, who are in favor of FF.

That can create a distorted image, that the number of people who don't want FF is equal or even bigger.

Many of those anti-FF posters have the same arguments. Buy a Sony A7x, and this is a good solution for Pentax lenses. How useful is non-AF camera system this days, I don't want to say, because anybody knows for himself.

What I want to say, is that Pentax, IMO will make his business plan mostly for the Asian market, which grows very quickly, and together with Japan, has more than 51% of the whole world sales, both for DSLR and mirrorless. So, if the China Pentax forum, if there is something like this, will ask for a FF Pentax, Ricoh will do it quickly.

And the form of K-S1 is a glimpse of this situation.

[GlassJunkie]

Word.

....And more often than not , a pro is using an APSc when he/she can for cost and crop. Other than the sporties and subsidized wildlifers, fewer and fewer are lugging it around...

[jatrax]

What I have seen is that there is a number, I consider a small number of PF members which are very vocal against FF, and a much bigger number, but not so vocal, people that post their opinions once or twice, and that's all, who are in favor of FF. That can create a distorted image, that the number of people who don't want FF is equal or even bigger.

I think there are very, very few posters who are vocal against Pentax having a FF. There is a larger number that argue that having a FF is not really all that important, or maybe in today's market no longer important. I don't see how that can be a "distorted image", are you saying a majority want FF? I find that difficult to believe since even with brands that do have FF less than 10% of sales are for FF. Many of those you describe as "against FF" are not. They simply try to point out that a FF is not the holy grail.

There is also a vocal minority that complain without a FF the Pentax brand will not succeed. And a larger number that might like a FF but do not feel it is necessary for the brand to survive.

And then there is the vast majority in the middle that would just like to take good images and will buy whatever gear is within their budget that let's them do that to the best of their ability.

Fortunately for Pentax I think Ricoh is focused on the 80% in the middle and not the extremes.

[GlassJunkie]

Just 3?

I will point out it's a case of accusing the other person of doing what you're doing, at the same time you're doing it.
Just because I don't agree with your point of view doesn't make it personal, unless I call you out by name. I did mention you in this thread, but in the context of being able to back up my claim that despite the theory of equivalence 50mm FF was artistically quite different than 35 on APS_c.

I thought you might post the images you have that demonstrate what I was talking about. I'm saddened that you chose instead to turn it into a personal attack. The goal is education, not silly psych analysis of people who you mistakenly believe don't agree with you.


.

Gee Norm. Glad you took the high road so I don't have to....

This forum is loaded with Enthusiasts (God bless 'em), some pros (MOST NOT , some Wannabes... and many don't have a clue about technology, manufacturing, R&D industrial or materials engineering, the list goes on). The Pros want good output product and to make a buck, and In my 40 years of working with professional photographers, they could care less about brand. Most want lenses and toughness, and equipment support.

Of the enthusiasts (pro or not), many espouse opinions that defy basic physics, optics, electromechanical engineering, materials capabilities, manufacturing and robotic production line capabilities, that they clearly have NO idea of what they are talking about.For me, it is entertaining and informative about the technology and what contributors feel is important (minus the few CaNikon trolls, and Yes, they are here).... Often the opinions/tips from the non-tech savvy members are the best. I learn from everyone, more from the ones I may not agree with. As long as they are not dispensing tripe... Many work-around tips are gold...

FF is the best, what a crucible. Opinions are like @$$#o<<z, everyone has one. No problem, even the unskilled innovate. History is full of that. Out of all of the passion, someone on here will be right, likely not me... I don't really care whether Pentax makes a FF DSLR. If I needed one, or felt it would benefit me, I'd buy it, just as I moved to MF under film when I needed the quality for certain projects. Digitization has obsoleted sensor size. Output quality can be tweaked by the lens, camera or post production. Question is where, how big, how fast, how much rework, how much does it cost...

Now for my Blunt opinions... Is FF good for the brand? Maybe to Probably, seems intuitive. Risky investment? Absolutely. Salve for the loyal Pentaxian that is passionate about their gear and wants to be allied to a "Winner"? 100% a Home run, and in that regard, well deserved by the loyal "Pentaxians". It's like your Alma Mater: Your education is perceived to be better if your school isn't a shell of prior glory or "Ridgemont High or Faber College". My learning here is Camera brand loyalty makes car clubs and NCAA football look surprisingly weak.

Business calculus is about risks. Winners learn from their own mistakes and others, and big winners aren't "also ran".... I want a strong Pentax that supports what they make and improves it. A wise person (IMHO) once said,"It is better to be a want creator than a need fulfiller"... Apple, Facebook, Fashion Houses, luxury goods manufacturers, BMW/ Benz, Starbucks, etal... Want Creators... Not IBM/DEC or a SONY Walkman or Flip Phone, Scrap books or electronic picture frames, DayRunner, Fruit of the Loom, Timex, Chevy/Pontiac, SAAB, etc. Need Fulfillers all.... Want creators lead the pack.... 645z will disrupt a Market. K-3 sent APSC makers to hustle up with something better and impaired their ability to upsell to FF from blah APSC offerings.... A7R... Nice move, problem is EVF's aren't ready for prime time. At least not for all or DSLRS would be immediately obsolete... Not yet... Just like 6mp was a yawn for the old EKTAR and Velvia users...

Post processing makes ALL sensor discussion academic. 4/3, 1:1.7, FF, APSc, APSh, whatever.... Capture pixels, tweak 'em, and tweak or capture enough to evoke a human response.... I for one do not miss film, or smelly darkroom chemicals.... Fixer was good for cleaning fairway clubs when obsoleted... Sensor size is fun to listen about... Your 50/35mm statement said it all...

Your critics on this thread have not read your other posts, I have. TODAY. Your presentation is meant to illuminate and It does. There are about 20 posters in these forums that have real value to read, and even if I don't agree with them, I learn from all... I look for yours...

I have read some of your critics' threads/posts. Some are snarky, ok, Some I don't agree with.... ok.... I appreciate everyone's passion and interest in the brand... That said:

Some, including your quoted critic have been debunked regularly by the better contributors, including me... Somebody might buy his/her arguments, not me... Weak and uninformed at best.....

Posting/ sharing in forums should not be a Blood sport..... They should go hang out with the politicos, more of that with them....

[jsherman999]

Your statements about me getting personal... where? .

Here?

"Quit crying in your beer feeling sorry for your pathetic selves and get on with your lives."

You often take these discussions as a personal affront, for some reason, and lash out in ways like that. Not sure why, and it's not consistent - sometimes you seem to be in a good mood, sometimes not. I'd suggest you try to stick to equipment discussions in other parts of the forum if it gets you so worked up to be in here...


.

---------- Post added 09-08-14 at 07:56 PM ----------

Some, including your quoted critic have been debunked regularly by the better contributors, including me... .

So, for the record, glassjunkie, if Pentax comes out with a FF body and lenses... how will you reconcile that? Are they making a huge, huge mistake? Should they have consulted you?