Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

zapp · 12-29-2014, 01:39 PM

5 years ago I would have bought 500 FF Pentax cameras, today I am intersted in one, not unlikely to sell my Pentax gear and buy some oversized Nikon or Canon.

lesmore49 · 12-31-2014, 03:08 PM

I'm not sure anymore. A few years ago, I would of gone for a FF Pentax. But I'm pretty happy with my K-5. I've got a total of three Pentax ASP-C bodies and 11 digital lenses, most of which are ASP-C and not suitable for a full frame.

I'm an older fellow, so think at this point in my life will keep what I have. If it's all stolen, or most of it breaks down and is too expensive to fix....then I might consider full frame. If not, I may just hope that what I have will last the rest of my lifetime.

If for some reason I had to buy a new system....I might go Nikon. I really like both the Full Frame...dF and D750 models. If Pentax had a full frame DSLR and a suitable lineup of new FF lenses...I might go Pentax.

Wouldn't go Canon.

disconnekt · 01-04-2015, 04:16 PM

Weather sealed as usual.
I think anywhere between 16 to 21MP would be a good range.
A Vari-angle tilt screen would be nice.
Duel memory card slots would be a plus.
Wifi
A native ISO range of 50 to 6400 (expandable to 25,600, mainly because I don't think that many people go higher than that, though I could be wrong).
Leave out video.

FantasticMrFox · 01-05-2015, 04:37 AM

Originally posted by disconnekt

X

Weather sealing and dual SD card slots are self-evident, 16-21 MP probably not enough. Most competitor FFs are 24 or 36, the K3 delivers great image quality with a 24 MP APS-C sensor, so there is no reason why a possible Pentax FF shouldn't sport 24 MP too.

I consider Video to be not very important too, but reviewers will go all crazy if it's left out and there are enough people who care about it to make leaving it out a very bad move.

**jatrax** · 01-05-2015, 10:53 AM

Originally posted by FantasticMrFox

I consider Video to be not very important too, but reviewers will go all crazy if it's left out and there are enough people who care about it to make leaving it out a very bad move.

Yep, regardless of whether it is wanted or needed, leaving it out would be suicide for the model. Reviewers would trash it and no one would ever notice any of the good features, only that it was so antiquated it had no video.

disconnekt · 01-05-2015, 11:55 AM

Up until 2008 DSLR's did not offer video (until Nikon's D90), and everyone who had a DSLR at that time without video did just fine.
I would say "they could have two models (like the k5/k5ii), one with video and one without" but I'd don't think they'd that, I think it would cost to much to do rework the sensor/hardware to have one without video.

FantasticMrFox · 01-05-2015, 12:35 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by disconnekt

Up until 2008 DSLR's did not offer video (until Nikon's D90), and everyone who had a DSLR at that time without video did just fine.

Up until the late 1970s cameras did not offer autofocus, and everyone did just fine. Up until about 1300 BC people didn't even use iron, and everyone did just fine using bronze

**mattb123** · 01-05-2015, 02:18 PM

Originally posted by disconnekt

Up until 2008 DSLR's did not offer video (until Nikon's D90), and everyone who had a DSLR at that time without video did just fine.
I would say "they could have two models (like the k5/k5ii), one with video and one without" but I'd don't think they'd that, I think it would cost to much to do rework the sensor/hardware to have one without video.

If they did do that I bet the hardware would be identical and the video feature would just be turned off on the non-video one. But I agree that sounds unlikely.

**monochrome** · 01-05-2015, 05:25 PM

Originally posted by mattb123

If they did do that I bet the hardware would be identical and the video feature would just be turned off on the non-video one. But I agree that sounds unlikely.

If I'm not mistaken on my K-3 I can choose to turn video off myself - or rather I must choose to turn it on.

mee · 01-05-2015, 05:37 PM

I don't fall into any of the polling options.

I'd love to buy a digital K mount FF body if it is 1200 USD or less and the lenses are only 0-30% more than their DA counterparts. I'm not looking to double or triple cost involved to get FF. Right now, if I sold all my APS-C gear I could get a D610 body and kit lens... and that is all. The cost for a recent FF system is currently enormous over similarly aged APS-C systems.

disconnekt · 01-05-2015, 05:42 PM

Originally posted by mee

I don't fall into any of the polling options.

I'd love to buy a digital K mount FF body if it is 1200 USD or less and the lenses are only 0-30% more than their DA counterparts. I'm not looking to double or triple cost involved to get FF. Right now, if I sold all my APS-C gear I could get a D610 body and kit lens... and that is all. The cost for a recent FF system is currently enormous over similarly aged APS-C systems.

I'd see it being priced around 1800 to 2k. FF lens wise I agree, they'd be priced a bit more than their current lens lineup but not that much.

**jatrax** · 01-05-2015, 06:40 PM

Originally posted by disconnekt

I'd see it being priced around 1800 to 2k. FF lens wise I agree, they'd be priced a bit more than their current lens lineup but not that much.

I think the body will be in the $2,500 range at introduction though will drop reasonably quickly, that's based on past releases. They definitely like to start high and let the market dictate the street price.

Lenses, well Asahiman already stated the new FF 'previewed' zooms will be over $2,000. He has generally been quite reliable as a source. So it seems Ricoh is placing FF at the high end of the price range going against D810 and high end glass. I guess we have to wait to see how that plays out.

The missing lens would be a 24-70 f/2.8 and the Nikon and Canon ones run over $1,800 so I don't see Ricoh coming out with anything much below that.

I suspect the FF crowd is going to get their dearest wish, a top notch FF camera with great glass. And a super premium price.

LensBeginner · 01-06-2015, 03:25 AM

Originally posted by monochrome

If I'm not mistaken on my K-3 I can choose to turn video off myself - or rather I must choose to turn it on.

The point was rather not to include video in order to lower the price/keep the price the same and add photo-oriented features.
That's how I understood it, at any rate...

Kunzite · 01-06-2015, 04:14 AM

Except that it doesn't work that way. Removing "required" features can make a product niche, thus increasing its end price - see the Nikon Df, is it cheaper?
And if the hardware (i.e. production cost) is identical... where's the gain?

**monochrome** · 01-06-2015, 07:48 AM

Originally posted by LensBeginner

The point was rather not to include video in order to lower the price/keep the price the same and add photo-oriented features.
That's how I understood it, at any rate...

'Removing' an electronic feature already developed makes both cameras more expensive.

View Poll Results: Will you buy a FF Pentax, if one was available?
Yes, if it is a Pentax branded camera.	79	18.20%
Yes, if it is a Pentax and/or Ricoh branded camera.	100	23.04%
Yes, if it had the sort of specs you mention.	60	13.82%
Yes, but only if it's priced no higher than, for instance, the D750.	57	13.13%
No, I've bought a FF made by a different supplier.	17	3.92%
No, I don't need or want FF.	83	19.12%
No - I would like to, but I cannot afford to buy a new camera.	27	6.22%
Yes, but only if it's available in forty-seven color combinations.	11	2.53%
Voters: 434. You may not vote on this poll

01-05-2015, 11:55 AM	#216
disconnekt Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: SoCal/I.E. Photos: Albums Posts: 1,702	Up until 2008 DSLR's did not offer video (until Nikon's D90), and everyone who had a DSLR at that time without video did just fine. I would say "they could have two models (like the k5/k5ii), one with video and one without" but I'd don't think they'd that, I think it would cost to much to do rework the sensor/hardware to have one without video. Last edited by disconnekt; 01-05-2015 at 12:02 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Would you buy a Pentax Full Frame DSLR? extended poll	i83N	Pentax Full Frame	113	04-02-2015 07:12 AM
Would you buy a Pentax FF?	ozlizard	Pentax News and Rumors	119	12-12-2009 05:29 AM
How many forum members does it take to change a lightbulb?	Gooshin	General Talk	24	12-02-2008 08:29 AM
Would you buy a FF Pentax?	bymy141	Pentax DSLR Discussion	52	04-14-2008 09:50 PM
How many forum members does it take to change a light bulb?	photo_mom	General Talk	11	04-28-2007 04:50 AM

12-29-2014, 01:39 PM	#211
zapp Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 2,389	5 years ago I would have bought 500 FF Pentax cameras, today I am intersted in one, not unlikely to sell my Pentax gear and buy some oversized Nikon or Canon.

12-31-2014, 03:08 PM	#212
lesmore49 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Western Canada Posts: 12,350	I'm not sure anymore. A few years ago, I would of gone for a FF Pentax. But I'm pretty happy with my K-5. I've got a total of three Pentax ASP-C bodies and 11 digital lenses, most of which are ASP-C and not suitable for a full frame. I'm an older fellow, so think at this point in my life will keep what I have. If it's all stolen, or most of it breaks down and is too expensive to fix....then I might consider full frame. If not, I may just hope that what I have will last the rest of my lifetime. If for some reason I had to buy a new system....I might go Nikon. I really like both the Full Frame...dF and D750 models. If Pentax had a full frame DSLR and a suitable lineup of new FF lenses...I might go Pentax. Wouldn't go Canon.

01-04-2015, 04:16 PM	#213
disconnekt Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: SoCal/I.E. Photos: Albums Posts: 1,702	Weather sealed as usual. I think anywhere between 16 to 21MP would be a good range. A Vari-angle tilt screen would be nice. Duel memory card slots would be a plus. Wifi A native ISO range of 50 to 6400 (expandable to 25,600, mainly because I don't think that many people go higher than that, though I could be wrong). Leave out video.

01-05-2015, 04:37 AM	#214
FantasticMrFox Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2014 Location: Munich Posts: 2,339	Originally posted by disconnekt X Weather sealing and dual SD card slots are self-evident, 16-21 MP probably not enough. Most competitor FFs are 24 or 36, the K3 delivers great image quality with a 24 MP APS-C sensor, so there is no reason why a possible Pentax FF shouldn't sport 24 MP too. I consider Video to be not very important too, but reviewers will go all crazy if it's left out and there are enough people who care about it to make leaving it out a very bad move.

01-05-2015, 10:53 AM	#215
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,992	Originally posted by FantasticMrFox I consider Video to be not very important too, but reviewers will go all crazy if it's left out and there are enough people who care about it to make leaving it out a very bad move. Yep, regardless of whether it is wanted or needed, leaving it out would be suicide for the model. Reviewers would trash it and no one would ever notice any of the good features, only that it was so antiquated it had no video.

01-05-2015, 12:35 PM - 1 Like	#217
FantasticMrFox Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2014 Location: Munich Posts: 2,339	Originally posted by disconnekt Up until 2008 DSLR's did not offer video (until Nikon's D90), and everyone who had a DSLR at that time without video did just fine. Up until the late 1970s cameras did not offer autofocus, and everyone did just fine. Up until about 1300 BC people didn't even use iron, and everyone did just fine using bronze

01-05-2015, 02:18 PM	#218
mattb123 Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Colorado High Country Photos: Gallery Posts: 10,874	Originally posted by disconnekt Up until 2008 DSLR's did not offer video (until Nikon's D90), and everyone who had a DSLR at that time without video did just fine. I would say "they could have two models (like the k5/k5ii), one with video and one without" but I'd don't think they'd that, I think it would cost to much to do rework the sensor/hardware to have one without video. If they did do that I bet the hardware would be identical and the video feature would just be turned off on the non-video one. But I agree that sounds unlikely.

01-05-2015, 05:25 PM	#219
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Originally posted by mattb123 If they did do that I bet the hardware would be identical and the video feature would just be turned off on the non-video one. But I agree that sounds unlikely. If I'm not mistaken on my K-3 I can choose to turn video off myself - or rather I must choose to turn it on.

01-05-2015, 05:37 PM	#220
mee Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 7,403	I don't fall into any of the polling options. I'd love to buy a digital K mount FF body if it is 1200 USD or less and the lenses are only 0-30% more than their DA counterparts. I'm not looking to double or triple cost involved to get FF. Right now, if I sold all my APS-C gear I could get a D610 body and kit lens... and that is all. The cost for a recent FF system is currently enormous over similarly aged APS-C systems.

01-05-2015, 05:42 PM	#221
disconnekt Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: SoCal/I.E. Photos: Albums Posts: 1,702	Originally posted by mee I don't fall into any of the polling options. I'd love to buy a digital K mount FF body if it is 1200 USD or less and the lenses are only 0-30% more than their DA counterparts. I'm not looking to double or triple cost involved to get FF. Right now, if I sold all my APS-C gear I could get a D610 body and kit lens... and that is all. The cost for a recent FF system is currently enormous over similarly aged APS-C systems. I'd see it being priced around 1800 to 2k. FF lens wise I agree, they'd be priced a bit more than their current lens lineup but not that much.

01-05-2015, 06:40 PM	#222
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,992	Originally posted by disconnekt I'd see it being priced around 1800 to 2k. FF lens wise I agree, they'd be priced a bit more than their current lens lineup but not that much. I think the body will be in the $2,500 range at introduction though will drop reasonably quickly, that's based on past releases. They definitely like to start high and let the market dictate the street price. Lenses, well Asahiman already stated the new FF 'previewed' zooms will be over $2,000. He has generally been quite reliable as a source. So it seems Ricoh is placing FF at the high end of the price range going against D810 and high end glass. I guess we have to wait to see how that plays out. The missing lens would be a 24-70 f/2.8 and the Nikon and Canon ones run over $1,800 so I don't see Ricoh coming out with anything much below that. I suspect the FF crowd is going to get their dearest wish, a top notch FF camera with great glass. And a super premium price.

01-06-2015, 03:25 AM	#223
LensBeginner Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2014 Photos: Albums Posts: 4,696	Originally posted by monochrome If I'm not mistaken on my K-3 I can choose to turn video off myself - or rather I must choose to turn it on. The point was rather not to include video in order to lower the price/keep the price the same and add photo-oriented features. That's how I understood it, at any rate...

01-06-2015, 04:14 AM	#224
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Except that it doesn't work that way. Removing "required" features can make a product niche, thus increasing its end price - see the Nikon Df, is it cheaper? And if the hardware (i.e. production cost) is identical... where's the gain?

01-06-2015, 07:48 AM	#225
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Originally posted by LensBeginner The point was rather not to include video in order to lower the price/keep the price the same and add photo-oriented features. That's how I understood it, at any rate... 'Removing' an electronic feature already developed makes both cameras more expensive.

Poll to gauge how many members would buy a FF Pentax

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!