a cheap ff is what pentax should do

**RobA_Oz** · 07-03-2015, 02:52 PM

Originally posted by thibs

Well, since it is easier to out a body than a load of lenses, I'd say Pentax situation looks good IMO.

It's nearly two years since we had Thom Hogan saying that the K-3 was the D400 that Nikon should have released (and they still haven't given a hint that they will, from what I can gather). I guess that counts toward recognition Pentax has the best APS-C DSLR, ever.

If Ricoh sees a market for it, they could outdo Sony with a mirrorless 35FF body that can use adapted lenses. I don't believe the people who say that adapters will always be a second-rate system, just because others can't get their manufacturing tolerances correct. First things first, though.

kadajawi · 07-03-2015, 07:42 PM

Originally posted by RobA_Oz

It's nearly two years since we had Thom Hogan saying that the K-3 was the D400 that Nikon should have released (and they still haven't given a hint that they will, from what I can gather). I guess that counts toward recognition Pentax has the best APS-C DSLR, ever.

If Ricoh sees a market for it, they could outdo Sony with a mirrorless 35FF body that can use adapted lenses. I don't believe the people who say that adapters will always be a second-rate system, just because others can't get their manufacturing tolerances correct. First things first, though.

The Milbeaut processors Ricoh has access to are rather... slow. Ricoh may also not have access to top notch EVFs. On the other hand Sony and Samsung do have access to those, especially the Samsung processor is a beast. And if you want to have a good live view experience, that is what you need. Lots of processing in very little time.

In terms of body, ergonomics etc. I have no doubt Ricoh/Pentax can beat Sony. But performance... (how little lag there is in the EVF, etc.)

**monochrome** · 07-03-2015, 07:52 PM

I think Pentax users in America who became accustomed to Ned Bunnell prices (Hoya prices) will be disappointed by the FF regardless of its feture set and value. It won't be $1000. It won't be $2000. It probably won't be $3000 though.

**RobA_Oz** · 07-04-2015, 04:36 AM

Originally posted by kadajawi

The Milbeaut processors Ricoh has access to are rather... slow. Ricoh may also not have access to top notch EVFs. On the other hand Sony and Samsung do have access to those, especially the Samsung processor is a beast. And if you want to have a good live view experience, that is what you need. Lots of processing in very little time.

In terms of body, ergonomics etc. I have no doubt Ricoh/Pentax can beat Sony. But performance... (how little lag there is in the EVF, etc.)

I have no doubt you're correct, but it all depends on what Ricoh wants to do. Ricoh can't ignore the trend to EVFs in compact bodies for much longer, and if they want to contract a suitably faster processor, a better EVF or anything else, they can do it because they can leverage access with suppliers, out of proportion to the size of the Pentax part of the operation. The question is probably not so much whether they want to do it, but when. Every new Pentax camera body recently has shown incremental progress in other areas, in parallel with the new features. That's probably the way they'd approach a mirrorless ILC, too.

**monochrome** · 07-04-2015, 05:51 AM - **1 Like**

@kadajawi

Pentax has access to anything and everything that Ricoh is willing to pay for. The question will be whether we the Pentax User Base is willing to pay Ricoh to put those components in their Pentax cameras.

That's why my opinion is the FF will be highly spec'ed, use current or near-current components rather than older versions - but will be priced nearer $3,000 than $2,000.

kadajawi · 07-04-2015, 12:32 PM

Originally posted by monochrome

@kadajawi

Pentax has access to anything and everything that Ricoh is willing to pay for. The question will be whether we the Pentax User Base is willing to pay Ricoh to put those components in their Pentax cameras.

That's why my opinion is the FF will be highly spec'ed, use current or near-current components rather than older versions - but will be priced nearer $3,000 than $2,000.

Sort of... the problem I see is that
a) Samsung may decide that instead of giving their crown jewels to other companies for a small fee, it makes more sense to use them to gain marketshare, with the goal of eventually dominating the market, as they have done with TVs, monitors, phones/smartphones, ... Ricoh might not be able to get that tech no matter how much they pay (though fortunately Ricoh may be seen as a not big enough competitor to be deemed threatening).
b) Samsung's processor is quite different from what Pentax is using currently, it is running a smartphone OS (Tizen) instead of whatever OS Pentax is using (because their hardware is so limited). Is Pentax willing to write so much new code? Would Samsung hand over software too?

Similarly with Sony, though they have been more secretive AFAIK in what their OS and processor are.

I do expect the latest Milbeaut, a current-ish sensor, ... but the Milbeaut may still not be particularly fast, at least in comparison with the monster Samsung has created.

A maybe possible alternative could be using a Mediatek or preferably Qualcomm CPU, that has plenty of horse power (Samsung's processor has similar origins), and then either combine it with a Milbeaut for image processing or use the image processor the Qualcomm/Mediatek has (they have become rather powerful, though Samsung beefed theirs up considerably). Video encoding tasks could be done by the processor, stills, acquisition, JPEG rendering etc. by the Milbeaut. Maybe that is possible. But it costs more, consumes more space, perhaps more power, ... and new software will be needed too (IMHO Android might form a decent basis).

I agree with you that such a competitive camera won't come cheap, but that's what is needed. Lower end cameras derived from this can follow later.

Big Dave · 07-04-2015, 01:21 PM

Originally posted by michelec

I think I would add a feature: a viewfinder that does not make me sigh when I hold my ME-Super.
I would like a simple camera that would take my full frame lenses, like an M 1.4 50, A 1.8 20, A 2.8 28.
But ... the one thing I miss the most with my K-r is that I need to get back home to send a picture to my friends.
There should be a simple solution to get pictures inside photo.app on the iPhone and into Android.
Something like a simple Bluetooth connection to make the camera team up with a phone, even if it limited to "share last picture".

With an A7x you can send pictures to you phone. Maybe Pentax will offer that if the wi-fi card doesn't already.

tomtor · 07-04-2015, 01:33 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by Big Dave

With an A7x you can send pictures to you phone. Maybe Pentax will offer that if the wi-fi card doesn't already.

Yes, you can send pictures to your phone with the Pentax wifi memory card. This will also work with the K-r. The eye-fi wifi card is a cheaper option, but the Pentax card offers remote control for the k-3 and newer cameras.

**monochrome** · 07-04-2015, 02:41 PM

You still suffer from video confirmation bias. Everything you write is about video processing. Maybe Ricoh just doesn't care about video. That's what cell phones are for.

kadajawi · 07-04-2015, 05:04 PM

Originally posted by monochrome

You still suffer from video confirmation bias. Everything you write is about video processing. Maybe Ricoh just doesn't care about video. That's what cell phones are for.

A good live view/EVF requires beefy hardware, such as is used for video. After all you want a good video feed.

Also Olympus didn't care for video either... then they saw how many cameras they sold, and how many Panasonic. Within a year they did a 180 and now do care about video quite a bit. If Ricoh wants customers there are worse ways to spend money on than a bit of software for video.

Cell phones? They are also good for stills. I can get some pretty nice shots with my phone. There is a decent amount of dynamic range in the raw files, and the sharpness is very impressive, far ahead of my K-5. Oh, you mean you want better low light performance? Even better dynamic range? Control over depth of field and other settings? Video guys want that too.

**monochrome** · 07-05-2015, 03:42 AM - **2 Likes**

Your Honor, I rest my case.

thibs · 07-06-2015, 12:40 AM

Originally posted by monochrome

You still suffer from video confirmation bias. Everything you write is about video processing. Maybe Ricoh just doesn't care about video. That's what cell phones are for.

I agree but this is unimportant. The thing is: does the market agree?

I don't expect Ricoh to out an optimized for Video FF. Not now.
They will focus on photo and do it right. They need to.

But they will need to get Video up to standards, for market reasons, IMO.

**Rondec** · 07-06-2015, 02:27 AM

Originally posted by monochrome

You still suffer from video confirmation bias. Everything you write is about video processing. Maybe Ricoh just doesn't care about video. That's what cell phones are for.

Well, we know the new full frame camera will have video. The only question is how good it will be and whether or not Ricoh will use a decent Codec with a good bit rate.

As to the whole processor thing, in order for a full frame Pentax to have at least as good frame rate as the D810, it will need a good processor. So that is necessary for good still photography performance as well.

Video isn't important to me, but it feels like the sort of thing that will be silly to either leave off or, to do poorly. It might sell a few extra cameras if they do it right.

Clavius · 07-06-2015, 04:59 AM

It's Pentax's loooonnnggg awaited FF DSLR. The first Pentax digital on the FF market. Of which they said that it would appeal to the prosumer customers. Which is rumored to be around 3000 usd. Of which each and every (paid?) critic will be all over it, nitpicking on each and every shortcomming. I hate doing video and almost never do it, but even I recognize that you can't leave it out or do it sloppy in such a move!

Fogel70 · 07-06-2015, 05:23 AM

Originally posted by Rondec

Video isn't important to me, but it feels like the sort of thing that will be silly to either leave off or, to do poorly. It might sell a few extra cameras if they do it right.

The question is, do they have any engineers that understand what good video is and if focusing on that, or do they only see video as a "tickbox" feature? I guess it also depends on what priority the market dep set on video.

As most large sensors up until now have not had very good video capabilities, where a smartphone or a small sensor P&S could get the same or better IQ on video (or a small sensor video camera).
Now with BSI, where it is possible to read out the whole sensor area during video capture even on large sensors, the larger sensors will offer much better IQ in video and possibly be far beyond what any small sensor video capable camera can produce.

The quality ratio between different sensor size will soon be the same in video as for photography, which might make it even more important to put priority on video on large sensor cameras, as it can be a important feature that can sell lots of cameras.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Now that FF is here and what do we do with the cropped DA lenses?	pento57mm	Pentax Full Frame	63	04-11-2015 07:05 PM
What Should Pentax Do?	Cynog Ap Brychan	Pentax News and Rumors	1095	04-01-2015 05:10 AM
This is what Pentax should do	Rekusu	Pentax Medium Format	19	01-12-2015 01:10 AM
Sony A7ii -- what Pentax FF should look like?	MJSfoto1956	Pentax DSLR Discussion	59	11-25-2014 03:09 PM
Problem with (not cheap) eBay lens, what should I do?	StevePrime	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	26	12-08-2011 03:11 AM

07-03-2015, 02:52 PM	#181
RobA_Oz Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Tasmania, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,195	Originally posted by thibs Well, since it is easier to out a body than a load of lenses, I'd say Pentax situation looks good IMO. It's nearly two years since we had Thom Hogan saying that the K-3 was the D400 that Nikon should have released (and they still haven't given a hint that they will, from what I can gather). I guess that counts toward recognition Pentax has the best APS-C DSLR, ever. If Ricoh sees a market for it, they could outdo Sony with a mirrorless 35FF body that can use adapted lenses. I don't believe the people who say that adapters will always be a second-rate system, just because others can't get their manufacturing tolerances correct. First things first, though.

07-03-2015, 07:42 PM	#182
kadajawi Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 2,799	Originally posted by RobA_Oz It's nearly two years since we had Thom Hogan saying that the K-3 was the D400 that Nikon should have released (and they still haven't given a hint that they will, from what I can gather). I guess that counts toward recognition Pentax has the best APS-C DSLR, ever. If Ricoh sees a market for it, they could outdo Sony with a mirrorless 35FF body that can use adapted lenses. I don't believe the people who say that adapters will always be a second-rate system, just because others can't get their manufacturing tolerances correct. First things first, though. The Milbeaut processors Ricoh has access to are rather... slow. Ricoh may also not have access to top notch EVFs. On the other hand Sony and Samsung do have access to those, especially the Samsung processor is a beast. And if you want to have a good live view experience, that is what you need. Lots of processing in very little time. In terms of body, ergonomics etc. I have no doubt Ricoh/Pentax can beat Sony. But performance... (how little lag there is in the EVF, etc.)

07-03-2015, 07:52 PM	#183
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	I think Pentax users in America who became accustomed to Ned Bunnell prices (Hoya prices) will be disappointed by the FF regardless of its feture set and value. It won't be $1000. It won't be $2000. It probably won't be $3000 though.

07-04-2015, 04:36 AM	#184
RobA_Oz Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Tasmania, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,195	Originally posted by kadajawi The Milbeaut processors Ricoh has access to are rather... slow. Ricoh may also not have access to top notch EVFs. On the other hand Sony and Samsung do have access to those, especially the Samsung processor is a beast. And if you want to have a good live view experience, that is what you need. Lots of processing in very little time. In terms of body, ergonomics etc. I have no doubt Ricoh/Pentax can beat Sony. But performance... (how little lag there is in the EVF, etc.) I have no doubt you're correct, but it all depends on what Ricoh wants to do. Ricoh can't ignore the trend to EVFs in compact bodies for much longer, and if they want to contract a suitably faster processor, a better EVF or anything else, they can do it because they can leverage access with suppliers, out of proportion to the size of the Pentax part of the operation. The question is probably not so much whether they want to do it, but when. Every new Pentax camera body recently has shown incremental progress in other areas, in parallel with the new features. That's probably the way they'd approach a mirrorless ILC, too.

07-04-2015, 05:51 AM - 1 Like	#185
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	@kadajawi Pentax has access to anything and everything that Ricoh is willing to pay for. The question will be whether we the Pentax User Base is willing to pay Ricoh to put those components in their Pentax cameras. That's why my opinion is the FF will be highly spec'ed, use current or near-current components rather than older versions - but will be priced nearer $3,000 than $2,000.

07-04-2015, 12:32 PM	#186
kadajawi Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 2,799	Originally posted by monochrome @kadajawi Pentax has access to anything and everything that Ricoh is willing to pay for. The question will be whether we the Pentax User Base is willing to pay Ricoh to put those components in their Pentax cameras. That's why my opinion is the FF will be highly spec'ed, use current or near-current components rather than older versions - but will be priced nearer $3,000 than $2,000. Sort of... the problem I see is that a) Samsung may decide that instead of giving their crown jewels to other companies for a small fee, it makes more sense to use them to gain marketshare, with the goal of eventually dominating the market, as they have done with TVs, monitors, phones/smartphones, ... Ricoh might not be able to get that tech no matter how much they pay (though fortunately Ricoh may be seen as a not big enough competitor to be deemed threatening). b) Samsung's processor is quite different from what Pentax is using currently, it is running a smartphone OS (Tizen) instead of whatever OS Pentax is using (because their hardware is so limited). Is Pentax willing to write so much new code? Would Samsung hand over software too? Similarly with Sony, though they have been more secretive AFAIK in what their OS and processor are. I do expect the latest Milbeaut, a current-ish sensor, ... but the Milbeaut may still not be particularly fast, at least in comparison with the monster Samsung has created. A maybe possible alternative could be using a Mediatek or preferably Qualcomm CPU, that has plenty of horse power (Samsung's processor has similar origins), and then either combine it with a Milbeaut for image processing or use the image processor the Qualcomm/Mediatek has (they have become rather powerful, though Samsung beefed theirs up considerably). Video encoding tasks could be done by the processor, stills, acquisition, JPEG rendering etc. by the Milbeaut. Maybe that is possible. But it costs more, consumes more space, perhaps more power, ... and new software will be needed too (IMHO Android might form a decent basis). I agree with you that such a competitive camera won't come cheap, but that's what is needed. Lower end cameras derived from this can follow later.

07-04-2015, 01:21 PM	#187
Big Dave Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: San Antonio, Texas Photos: Gallery Posts: 547	Originally posted by michelec I think I would add a feature: a viewfinder that does not make me sigh when I hold my ME-Super. I would like a simple camera that would take my full frame lenses, like an M 1.4 50, A 1.8 20, A 2.8 28. But ... the one thing I miss the most with my K-r is that I need to get back home to send a picture to my friends. There should be a simple solution to get pictures inside photo.app on the iPhone and into Android. Something like a simple Bluetooth connection to make the camera team up with a phone, even if it limited to "share last picture". With an A7x you can send pictures to you phone. Maybe Pentax will offer that if the wi-fi card doesn't already.

07-04-2015, 01:33 PM - 1 Like	#188
tomtor Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: Netherlands Posts: 382	Originally posted by Big Dave With an A7x you can send pictures to you phone. Maybe Pentax will offer that if the wi-fi card doesn't already. Yes, you can send pictures to your phone with the Pentax wifi memory card. This will also work with the K-r. The eye-fi wifi card is a cheaper option, but the Pentax card offers remote control for the k-3 and newer cameras.

07-04-2015, 02:41 PM	#189
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	You still suffer from video confirmation bias. Everything you write is about video processing. Maybe Ricoh just doesn't care about video. That's what cell phones are for.

07-04-2015, 05:04 PM	#190
kadajawi Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Posts: 2,799	Originally posted by monochrome You still suffer from video confirmation bias. Everything you write is about video processing. Maybe Ricoh just doesn't care about video. That's what cell phones are for. A good live view/EVF requires beefy hardware, such as is used for video. After all you want a good video feed. Also Olympus didn't care for video either... then they saw how many cameras they sold, and how many Panasonic. Within a year they did a 180 and now do care about video quite a bit. If Ricoh wants customers there are worse ways to spend money on than a bit of software for video. Cell phones? They are also good for stills. I can get some pretty nice shots with my phone. There is a decent amount of dynamic range in the raw files, and the sharpness is very impressive, far ahead of my K-5. Oh, you mean you want better low light performance? Even better dynamic range? Control over depth of field and other settings? Video guys want that too.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

07-05-2015, 03:42 AM - 2 Likes	#191
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Your Honor, I rest my case.

07-06-2015, 12:40 AM	#192
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,001	Originally posted by monochrome You still suffer from video confirmation bias. Everything you write is about video processing. Maybe Ricoh just doesn't care about video. That's what cell phones are for. I agree but this is unimportant. The thing is: does the market agree? I don't expect Ricoh to out an optimized for Video FF. Not now. They will focus on photo and do it right. They need to. But they will need to get Video up to standards, for market reasons, IMO.

07-06-2015, 02:27 AM	#193
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,650	Originally posted by monochrome You still suffer from video confirmation bias. Everything you write is about video processing. Maybe Ricoh just doesn't care about video. That's what cell phones are for. Well, we know the new full frame camera will have video. The only question is how good it will be and whether or not Ricoh will use a decent Codec with a good bit rate. As to the whole processor thing, in order for a full frame Pentax to have at least as good frame rate as the D810, it will need a good processor. So that is necessary for good still photography performance as well. Video isn't important to me, but it feels like the sort of thing that will be silly to either leave off or, to do poorly. It might sell a few extra cameras if they do it right.

07-06-2015, 04:59 AM	#194
Clavius Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: De Klundert Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,150	It's Pentax's loooonnnggg awaited FF DSLR. The first Pentax digital on the FF market. Of which they said that it would appeal to the prosumer customers. Which is rumored to be around 3000 usd. Of which each and every (paid?) critic will be all over it, nitpicking on each and every shortcomming. I hate doing video and almost never do it, but even I recognize that you can't leave it out or do it sloppy in such a move!

07-06-2015, 05:23 AM	#195
Fogel70 Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Photos: Albums Posts: 3,062	Originally posted by Rondec Video isn't important to me, but it feels like the sort of thing that will be silly to either leave off or, to do poorly. It might sell a few extra cameras if they do it right. The question is, do they have any engineers that understand what good video is and if focusing on that, or do they only see video as a "tickbox" feature? I guess it also depends on what priority the market dep set on video. As most large sensors up until now have not had very good video capabilities, where a smartphone or a small sensor P&S could get the same or better IQ on video (or a small sensor video camera). Now with BSI, where it is possible to read out the whole sensor area during video capture even on large sensors, the larger sensors will offer much better IQ in video and possibly be far beyond what any small sensor video capable camera can produce. The quality ratio between different sensor size will soon be the same in video as for photography, which might make it even more important to put priority on video on large sensor cameras, as it can be a important feature that can sell lots of cameras.