Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-10-2015, 10:33 PM - 1 Like   #1
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 109
Pentax needs FF more than I do

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

01-10-2015, 10:57 PM   #2
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,958
QuoteOriginally posted by jonlg Quote
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.
You are totally right, which is why Pentax is eventually going to release a FF camera FF sensors used to be exponentially more expensive than their APS-C counterparts, but that's no longer the case, which allows for more competitive pricing while still securing nice margins.

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com's high server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover those costs by donating. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

01-10-2015, 11:40 PM   #3
Pentaxian
Edgar_in_Indy's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Indiana, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,554
QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
You are totally right, which is why Pentax is eventually going to release a FF camera FF sensors used to be exponentially more expensive than their APS-C counterparts, but that's no longer the case, which allows for more competitive pricing while still securing nice margins.
I kind of feel like if Pentax releases FF now, they might have already missed the boat to some degree. Sure, FF sensors have gotten cheaper, but a larger sensor is still more demanding of the glass, and requires more of it, hence, FF lenses will tend to be larger, heavier, and more expensive.

A few years ago I would have been more tempted to switch to a Pentax FF, but in the meantime APS-C sensors have gotten so good, I can't help but question the value of FF. APS-C sensors of today have surpassed FF sensors of just a few years ago, and now the image quality difference between most FF sensors and the best APS-C sensors amounts to splitting hairs. What would I gain in tangible benefits? A slightly better signal-to-noise ratio that is only significant at stratospheric ISO levels? But at what cost? Larger, heavier, more expensive lenses that give me less depth of field at any given aperture and (assuming megapixel count is fairly close) less reach? It kind of feels like taking one step forward, and one and a half steps back.

That being said, a lot of people obviously crave FF, and I think Pentax should release it, but I fear they have spent too much time checking which way the wind blows, and have missed a lot of potential sales that they can never get back.
01-11-2015, 12:44 AM   #4
Senior Member
Stickl's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Oulu
Posts: 262
FF is perfect for wedding photographers etc. You know, you can't have a lens like 50mm/1.2 in FF for APS-C. In APS-C it should be something like 35mm/0.2 for getting same DOF as within the 50/1.2 in FF so it's not possible. Hope you get my point. That's one big reason people wanting the FF.

01-11-2015, 01:49 AM - 2 Likes   #5
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,414
For the famous "only one eye in focus" look?
01-11-2015, 02:48 AM - 1 Like   #6
Administrator
Site Webmaster
Adam's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Arizona
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,958
QuoteOriginally posted by Edgar_in_Indy Quote
I kind of feel like if Pentax releases FF now, they might have already missed the boat to some degree. Sure, FF sensors have gotten cheaper, but a larger sensor is still more demanding of the glass, and requires more of it, hence, FF lenses will tend to be larger, heavier, and more expensive.
They've missed a lot of boats, but if their market researchers think something like the K-S1 is a good idea, then they shouldn't be opposed to the whole FF concept

Adam
PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide | Site Help | My Photography)



PentaxForums.com's high server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover those costs by donating. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

01-11-2015, 03:31 AM   #7
Site Supporter
dakight's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,137
It's not about technical advantages or features; any competent engineer can deal with those. It is about marketing and return on investment. From the outside looking in it looks like a no-brainer but there's a reason it hasn't happened yet and I believe the reason is that being a small company and until recently on the edge of viability, they have little to no room for error. If they sink money into the development of a product, they'd better get it right or it could well be a fatal error. With Ricoh at the helm they may have more breathing room but even deep pockets have their limits.
01-11-2015, 05:15 AM - 2 Likes   #8
Site Supporter
kenspo's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Oslo
Posts: 1,879
QuoteOriginally posted by Stickl Quote
FF is perfect for wedding photographers etc. You know, you can't have a lens like 50mm/1.2 in FF for APS-C. In APS-C it should be something like 35mm/0.2 for getting same DOF as within the 50/1.2 in FF so it's not possible. Hope you get my point. That's one big reason people wanting the FF.
And for me as pro concert photographer. Dark pics and high ISO. FF is way better then apc-s no matter what people say. Same with lifting out details in dark spaces on a pic. K-3 is the best apc-s on the marked, minus the AF. When Pentax contacted me to "buy" me from Nikon, i knew i would had to work much harder to gain same results. But after a few meetings with Pentax, i liked their vision, their goals etc. And allready then they promised FF would come (1 year ago). Pentax really need to get two things to get more pro's to come over; FF and a fast wideangel (both with and without zoom). I know when the FF is in the stores, but havent got updated on their coming lense lineup yet. But Pentax is going places, and im happy to be a part of this journey.

01-11-2015, 05:30 AM - 1 Like   #9
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2014
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 1,182
Do you guys wake up the morning thinking about FF, then go to sleep at night dreaming about FF ? just asking

Last edited by hjoseph7; 01-11-2015 at 10:22 AM.
01-11-2015, 05:50 AM   #10
Pentaxian
Edgar_in_Indy's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Indiana, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,554
QuoteOriginally posted by Stickl Quote
FF is perfect for wedding photographers etc. You know, you can't have a lens like 50mm/1.2 in FF for APS-C. In APS-C it should be something like 35mm/0.2 for getting same DOF as within the 50/1.2 in FF so it's not possible. Hope you get my point. That's one big reason people wanting the FF.
Do people really use the 50mm f/1.2 at f/1.2 on a regular basis? And does that mean that wedding photographers never shoot Nikon, since Nikon does not sell a competing lens? If the f/1.2 lens is such an important staple of a FF system, then it seems like Nikon would offer it.
01-11-2015, 06:17 AM   #11
Senior Member
Stickl's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Oulu
Posts: 262
QuoteOriginally posted by Edgar_in_Indy Quote
Do people really use the 50mm f/1.2 at f/1.2 on a regular basis? And does that mean that wedding photographers never shoot Nikon, since Nikon does not sell a competing lens? If the f/1.2 lens is such an important staple of a FF system, then it seems like Nikon would offer it.
It was only an example. 50mm/1.4 is enough and that kind of lens, once again, can't be made for APS-C.
QuoteOriginally posted by hjoseph7 Quote
Do you guys wake up in he morning thinking about FF, then go to sleep at night dreaming about FF ? just asking
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.
01-11-2015, 06:31 AM   #12
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Finland
Posts: 191
QuoteOriginally posted by Stickl Quote
FF is perfect for wedding photographers etc. You know, you can't have a lens like 50mm/1.2 in FF for APS-C. In APS-C it should be something like 35mm/0.2 for getting same DOF as within the 50/1.2 in FF so it's not possible. Hope you get my point. That's one big reason people wanting the FF.
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.
01-11-2015, 06:36 AM - 1 Like   #13
Pentaxian
Edgar_in_Indy's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Indiana, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,554
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.
I find that the focal plane is already razor-thin on my 85mm 1.4 when shot at 1.4. As far as I'm concerned having more DOF at large apertures is going to be an advantage much, much more often then it would be a disadvantage. I get it that some people seem to obsessed with the thinnest possible DOF, but I don't see where it is very practical on a regular basis.
01-11-2015, 06:37 AM   #14
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2009
Location: Finland
Posts: 191
QuoteOriginally posted by hjoseph7 Quote
Do you guys wake up in he morning thinking about FF, then go to sleep at night dreaming about FF ? just asking
Yes, each morning and night
01-11-2015, 06:44 AM - 1 Like   #15
Site Supporter
kenspo's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Oslo
Posts: 1,879
QuoteOriginally posted by Mr Bassie Quote
And when would that be?
Im not allowed to say But 2015
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 02:26 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