Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-11-2015, 07:37 AM   #16
Senior Member
Stickl's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Oulu
Posts: 262
QuoteOriginally posted by Jyrkira Quote
35mm/0.2??

Huge miscalculation here. 33mm/0.85 it the exact lens if you want the same FOV and DOF. In practice you can get almost the same results from 35mm/1.4 than from 50/1.4 in FF if you attend to background distance etc. It is not hard to blur background with APS-C sensor camera if you know what to do.

There is a difference i do not deny it and I dream about Pentax FF too. Not beacause I imagine than my photos would be different after getting FF but because most of my lenses are designed to FF.
Haha sorry still there can't be that kind of lens. Haha no I'm not saying it's hard, within 35/1.8 and 50/1.8 it is actually pretty easy even with the APS-C.
FF is so different what the APS-C, everyone who has tried the FF knows that

01-11-2015, 08:36 AM   #17
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,413
QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
They've missed a lot of boats
The Universe is full of doors, erm, boats. FF just happens to be more popular than others.
01-11-2015, 09:09 AM   #18
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 817
QuoteOriginally posted by jonlg Quote
I'm loving my recently acquired K3 and am staggered by the sharpness of the images I'm seeing even compared to the K5. I'm watching the full frame possibility with interest although in truth I'm getting better results from the K3 than any camera I have ever owned - including full frame film cameras shooting high quality slide film. So the reality is that as a photographer I might not actually need anything better than this. Worth noting I said need, not want - of course if Pentax do launch a full frame camera then I will no doubt want to upgrade to it at some point and in truth I probably will.

The truth is though that in many ways Pentax needs full frame more than I do. As a company they can only charge so much for a DSLR camera with an APSC format sensor. That price level is driven by the market principally but I would suggest doesn't extend much beyond 1000 body only whereas full frame cameras are more expensive in the marketplace and thus a Pentax full frame DSLR can command prices in the 1500-2000 range in my view. This is a big win for Pentax when the production cost of a pro orientated APSC body is likely not very different to a pro orientated full frame sensor one. In short if the production costs are similar but you can sell one product for 50%+ more than the other then as a company making the product with the higher market value makes absolute sense.

Will I or many others take significantly better pics with a full frame body - probably not - or at least only in certain circumstances. Will Pentax make more money/profit - probably yes. I thus do not understand why they haven't done it already!!

Views?

Saxon
As far back as I can remember, Pentax was a company that took the road less traveled so to speak. 645Z for its price and capability was a stroke of genius catching everyone off guard. At this point, in the FF DSLR world, as it were, Pentax is way behind the other guys. Just introducing a FF camera is not going to be enough. My guess is that they are up to something big or they better be if they want to stay relevant.

Cameras are not developed overnight. If they are up to something, then there are prototypes floating out there. I wish someone would leak some info for us to drool over.

OP I agree with you, for now, I am thoroughly enjoying my K3 and my prime lenses. The combo reminds me of my Pentax MX which I loved. I also agree on the better profit margin on the FF vs. APS-c point.
01-12-2015, 01:06 AM   #19
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 112
QuoteOriginally posted by kenspo Quote
Im not allowed to say But 2015
Like I've said before, the reveals at CES are just the beginning......I'm definitely looking forward to what they reveal at CP+ ......although you will have to wait a while for it to be available!!

01-12-2015, 03:44 AM   #20
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,944
Full frame is the sort of thing that could be a benefit for Pentax, but if it is done wrong, it could damage the brand as well. The thing is that Pentax needs to have a camera that has specifications that are at or better than current full frame offerings from other companies and sells for a price at which Pentax can make a profit. The biggest enemy of this sort of a camera is cheap APS-C. If a camera like the K3 is selling for 600 dollars, how many people are going to rush out to buy a 2000 dollar K-1? I am afraid the number is small. I probably would and there are probably fifty or a hundred people on the forum like me, but there are a lot more who are pretty happy with APS-C.
01-12-2015, 04:46 AM   #21
Pentaxian
mecrox's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,912
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
Full frame is the sort of thing that could be a benefit for Pentax, but if it is done wrong, it could damage the brand as well. The thing is that Pentax needs to have a camera that has specifications that are at or better than current full frame offerings from other companies and sells for a price at which Pentax can make a profit. The biggest enemy of this sort of a camera is cheap APS-C. If a camera like the K3 is selling for 600 dollars, how many people are going to rush out to buy a 2000 dollar K-1? I am afraid the number is small. I probably would and there are probably fifty or a hundred people on the forum like me, but there are a lot more who are pretty happy with APS-C.
Better for what? Better for sports? Better for weddings? Or for landscapes, or low-light, or street, or in the studio, or video or ... ?
01-12-2015, 04:46 AM   #22
Site Supporter
kenspo's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Oslo
Posts: 1,879
QuoteOriginally posted by fuzzyfelt30 Quote
Like I've said before, the reveals at CES are just the beginning......I'm definitely looking forward to what they reveal at CP+ ......although you will have to wait a while for it to be available!!
CES is for consumers. CP+ is in Asia, CP+ is more for pro's then CES, so 2+2 is 4.
01-12-2015, 04:56 AM   #23
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,944
QuoteOriginally posted by mecrox Quote
Better for what? Better for sports? Better for weddings? Or for landscapes, or low-light, or street, or in the studio, or video or ... ?
They need a camera with similar auto focus capabilities and lenses that can take advantage of it. Similar burst modes, D810 level metering, etc. There should not be a specific area where people can say "the Pentax K-1 just can't keep up with x NIkon camera."


Last edited by Rondec; 01-12-2015 at 07:24 AM.
01-12-2015, 07:22 AM   #24
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,453
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
The need a camera with similar auto focus capabilities and lenses that can take advantage of it. Similar burst modes, D810 level metering, etc. There should not be a specific area where people can say "the Pentax K-1 just can't keep up with x NIkon camera."
Absolutely true. There can't be a single one - because the rabid reviewers will nail the deficiency and never talk about anything else.

No amount of 'Landscape Camera' rebuttal will assuage 'Independent Testing Standards' sites, whatever underlying biases they all have.
01-12-2015, 07:42 AM   #25
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,944
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Absolutely true. There can't be a single one - because the rabid reviewers will nail the deficiency and never talk about anything else.

No amount of 'Landscape Camera' rebuttal will assuage 'Independent Testing Standards' sites, whatever underlying biases they all have.
We already know there will be a significant difference that folks at DP Review will pound: lack of a full lens line up. I can just see the faint praise: "this is a reasonable camera if you can deal with the lack of a well developed lens line up. As of present, Pentax has several old prime lenses and two new DFA zooms in their line up..."
01-12-2015, 08:49 AM   #26
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,556
QuoteOriginally posted by mecrox Quote
Better for what? Better for sports? Better for weddings? Or for landscapes, or low-light, or street, or in the studio, or video or ... ?
Well it should be doing all these things in a reasonable way.
01-12-2015, 09:04 AM   #27
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,729
QuoteOriginally posted by Stickl Quote
It was only an example. 50mm/1.4 is enough and that kind of lens, once again, can't be made for APS-C.

Well, not I just wanted to come out with that thing cuz it feels like many of you who are not needing the FF doesn't understand the reason(s) why some people wants the FF so badly.
.....pffft... you dodged the question....do wedding photographers actually make use of those really narrow DoF images that couldn't be done on APS-c. I don't know but it sounds like a case is being made that they do.

http://121clicks.com/inspirations/the-best-wedding-photographer-portfolios-for-inspiration

I guess there are a couple there that possibly use extreme narrow DoF, but that they are and what lenses are used isn't available. Most of it looks within the capabilities of APS-c.
01-12-2015, 09:57 AM   #28
Pentaxian
mecrox's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,912
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
Well it should be doing all these things in a reasonable way.
Well, a $500 P&S should also do all these things in a reasonable way, so saying that a typical camera should be competent at handling a typical range of photographic situations doesn't doesn't get us very far. The question "Why Pentax?" still looms frighteningly large over everything. I don't think this as easy as many seem to think, whether or not moving to FF is an economic necessity for any major camera company which wants to be around in 3-5 years' time (and I don 't know the answer to that one either).
01-12-2015, 10:12 AM   #29
Site Supporter
dakight's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,137
There is a sizeable number of people who will buy Pentax simply because it *is* Pentax as long as it's not a complete dog. Likewise there are numbers od those who won't give it a second look because it's not a Nikon, Canon or Sony. You can't underestimate the influence of brand loyalty. A successful launch will keep the loyal customers while convincing others who are honestly undecided. It's not a lot different from a political campaign in that respect.
01-12-2015, 10:39 AM   #30
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,556
QuoteOriginally posted by mecrox Quote
Well, a $500 P&S should also do all these things in a reasonable way, so saying that a typical camera should be competent at handling a typical range of photographic situations doesn't doesn't get us very far. The question "Why Pentax?" still looms frighteningly large over everything. I don't think this as easy as many seem to think, whether or not moving to FF is an economic necessity for any major camera company which wants to be around in 3-5 years' time (and I don 't know the answer to that one either).
Being around in 3-5 years is a good question for more companies with the current decline in sales that is looking to stretch out well into 2016 (after starting the decline in the end of 2012). A FF K-3 would be the safest choice for Pentax.

QuoteOriginally posted by dakight Quote
There is a sizeable number of people who will buy Pentax simply because it *is* Pentax as long as it's not a complete dog.
This is why it can only be a K-3 like model with a FF sensor. A concept very well accepted within the K-mount usergroupe (after K-7/K-5/K-5II/K-5IIs and K-3) with only differences for the larger sensor.
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, body, camera, density, diffraction, finder, frame, full-frame, luddite, market, pentax, pixel, product, production, sensor, sony, sony nex, truth
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FF could be as (or more) silent as (than) K-3 RuiC Pentax Full Frame 7 12-02-2014 02:16 PM
Why are FF images so much more pleasing than APS-C? chaza01 Pentax Full Frame 217 09-04-2014 07:50 PM
FF - more than photos, Ricoh take notice! Ben78 Pentax Full Frame 7 01-08-2014 06:52 PM
Do I need FF??? Shanti Pentax Full Frame 94 11-15-2013 06:32 PM
More Pentax gear than I can recall Marktax Welcomes and Introductions 3 06-18-2013 12:33 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:34 AM. | 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