[JimmyDranox]

AFAIK, Canon 6D is one of the best selling FF camera, if not the best. 20Mpixels, AA filter, only 11 focusing points, but one of the best for high ISO, if not the best.

So, what is paramount for some people in the Pentax universe, is not for everyone. IMO, a 24 Mp, cleaner high ISO, high speed burst, and better in video FF Pentax makes perfect sense.

[Rondec]

The 6D sells well because it has a really cheap price, that's all. It's OK from a specs standpoint, but not great.

I am not sure why folks keep bringing up video and high iso. I don't think the 24 megapixel sensor from Sony is capable of doing top end video, is it? It certainly isn't better with regard to high iso. I think it is pretty much the same as the 36 megapixel sensor in that respect. The best sensors for video from Sony are the 42 megapixel sensor in the A7r II and the 12 megapixel sensor in the A7s. Both are better at high iso as well, but not as good at still photography and low iso situations. Both would also probably be more expensive than the current K-1, not cheaper, which is how this thread started.

If folks want Pentax to make cheap full frame, that's fine, but I wouldn't expect it any time soon. I think APS-C will fill that niche for the next year or two.

[Kunzite]

FTR, the 6D had a higher launch price than the K-1; it's cheap now because it's old (though it also was designed to be cheap).
Poit is talking IIUC about a brand new (launch price) Pentax which would "significantly undercut" the street prices of a 6D. That, I'm afraid, is impossible. Then, I see mentioned high frame rates (which the 6D cannot do) and improved video (ditto); as Rondec mentioned, the sensor is an issue (what? no 4K?).

We should not assume that if it works for Canon, it would work for Pentax, too. The K-1 works precisely because it's not another Canikon.

[JimmyDranox]

The 6D sells well because it has a really cheap price, that's all. It's OK from a specs standpoint, but not great.

I am not sure why folks keep bringing up video and high iso. I don't think the 24 megapixel sensor from Sony is capable of doing top end video, is it? It certainly isn't better with regard to high iso. I think it is pretty much the same as the 36 megapixel sensor in that respect. The best sensors for video from Sony are the 42 megapixel sensor in the A7r II and the 12 megapixel sensor in the A7s. Both are better at high iso as well, but not as good at still photography and low iso situations. Both would also probably be more expensive than the current K-1, not cheaper, which is how this thread started.

If folks want Pentax to make cheap full frame, that's fine, but I wouldn't expect it any time soon. I think APS-C will fill that niche for the next year or two.

I respectfully disagree. Yes, Sony 24 Mp is not a very good sensor for a future camera. We don't know what Sony has in their plans, but certainly, Pentax engineers has such informations much sooner than us,and they can their plans (if they didn't made it already by now). Would be somehow strange for Sony to make new, and better sensor of 42 and 12Mp, and let a big gap between.

Anyway, the future will set this dispute.

[Kunzite]

All very interesting, but right now Ricoh Imaging can't get enough sensors for the K-1...

[Dan Rentea]

I am not sure why folks keep bringing up video and high iso.

Video for me is not important, but high ISO is needed in a lot of scenarious: astrophotography, wildlife, weedings, sport, etc.

At ISO 8000 my 6D files are quite usable (see the image below).

https://s32.postimg.org/wf9ug7xlh/codros.jpg

If folks want Pentax to make cheap full frame, that's fine, but I wouldn't expect it any time soon. I think APS-C will fill that niche for the next year or two.

Canon 6D was sold very well and still is because it has: great high ISO, wifi, GPS, better dynamic range than 5D Mark III and it can focus down to -3ev with the center point af.

K1 has a lot more features than 6D at a reasonable price and this could be a good reason to buy it. But it also depends on where you live. Unfortunately, in Romania K1 will not have big sales because almost no one knows about Pentax. The oficial Pentax store is sleeping (no marketing, no Facebook page, no possibilities to rent lenses, no local service, etc.). Not to mention that K1 is quite expensive for enthusiastic photographers around here (K1 is sold for 2200$ while 6D is sold for 1360$).

So, a new Pentax full frame priced between K-3 Mark II and K-1 (with 22-26mp and 7fps) will probably sell very well.

[normhead]

Video for me is not important, but high ISO is needed in a lot of scenarious: astrophotography, wildlife, weedings, sport, etc.

At ISO 8000 my 6D files are quite usable (see the image below).

https://s32.postimg.org/wf9ug7xlh/codros.jpg



Canon 6D was sold very well and still is because it has: great high ISO, wifi, GPS, better dynamic range than 5D Mark III and it can focus down to -3ev with the center point af.

K1 has a lot more features than 6D at a reasonable price and this could be a good reason to buy it. But it also depends on where you live. Unfortunately, in Romania K1 will not have big sales because almost no one knows about Pentax. The oficial Pentax store is sleeping (no marketing, no Facebook page, no possibilities to rent lenses, no local service, etc.). Not to mention that K1 is quite expensive for enthusiastic photographers around here (K1 is sold for 2200$ while 6D is sold for 1360$).

So, a new Pentax full frame priced between K-3 Mark II and K-1 (with 22-26mp and 7fps) will probably sell very well.

Around here a 6D is $1800-$2000, a K-1 is $2500. You problem isn't that Pentax doesn't make a cheaper body, your problem is your Pentax distributer is trying to sell Pentax a s some kind of premium brand.

Personally, since I'd rather have a K-3 than a 6D, based on features and IQ, and have used it successfully up to 6400 ISO, with 3200 ISO being the top end, I'm not sure where something like a 6D fits into the picture. I guess for single body shooters, wide to normal lens shooters it's a good choice. Expand into macro and long lens shooting and you need another camera.

It does 1/2 of the job I'm looking for, but lacking resolution, APS-c magnification, and frame rate, it doesn't really offer enough.
A 24 MP FF would be no different in all likely hood. Unless they came up with a D750 type camera with great tracking AF and a deep buffer, it wouldn't stand a chance. Once the choice is between a second hand K-1 and a new 6D, for the same money, I doubt many will choose the new 6D.

[Dan Rentea]

Around here a 6D is $1800-$2000, a K-1 is $2500. You problem isn't that Pentax doesn't make a cheaper body, your problem is your Pentax distributer is trying to sell Pentax a s some kind of premium brand.

At 2500$ it looks like your distributer is trying to sell both K1 and 6D as some kind of premium brand.

Expand into macro and long lens shooting and you need another camera.

You forgot that I have 180mm f2.8 lens for macro and Sigma/Tamron 150-600mm for long lens shooting (while you will have 675mm equivalent with your 150-450mm on K3 Mark II).

[Kunzite]

Normhead is Canadian.

As for our distributor, the price is around 1960 euro - including VAT 20%, and excluding any possible discount. It's a good price for Europe. It doesn't matter, though, as they just can't get enough K-1s to cover the preorders.
The 6D is actually sold for about 1530 USD / 1380 euro (or 6200 ron, from our largest camera store - F64).

[normhead]

At 2500$ it looks like your distributer is trying to sell both K1 and 6D as some kind of premium brand.

It's exactly the same as the U.S. price if you take into account the Canadian exchange rate, so, no. A D810 is almost 4000 CAD.

You forgot that I have 180mm f2.8 lens for macro and Sigma/Tamron 150-600mm for long lens shooting (while you will have 675mm equivalent with your 150-450mm on K3 Mark II).

But a 150-450 is 5.6 as opposed to 6.3, and as such will use the 1.4 TC.
As it is I use a DA*200 with stacked converters, for 476mm or over 700mm equivalent on a 6D with a much smaller package.

And when I take the converters off, I have the equivalent of 300 ƒ2.8. You really should know better than to get into this kind of pissing match.

Especially with someone who looks at price portability and functionality with every purchase.

[Dan Rentea]

It doesn't matter, though, as they just can't get enough K-1s to cover the preorders.

They will probably sell around what, 30-40 cameras this year? Come on...it's embarrassing.

[Kunzite]

They can't fight the forces of nature. And I'm not kidding - Sony is rebuilding their sensor fab, damaged by the Kumamoto earthquakes. Full operation is expected to be restored in August.

[Rondec]

I respectfully disagree. Yes, Sony 24 Mp is not a very good sensor for a future camera. We don't know what Sony has in their plans, but certainly, Pentax engineers has such informations much sooner than us,and they can their plans (if they didn't made it already by now). Would be somehow strange for Sony to make new, and better sensor of 42 and 12Mp, and let a big gap between.

Anyway, the future will set this dispute.

The 24 megapixel sensor is pretty old. The 20.8 megapixel sensor in the D5 is probably the answer to your question, as it has really good high iso and really good read out speed and is capable of 4K video. The only problem is using that sensor probably would jump the price of the K-1 by over a thousand dollars.

In this market place, you usually get what you pay for. And if you use an old, somewhat out dated sensor, you will have a cheap, but soon out dated camera. That is probably fine for some Pentaxians, but not necessarily a hit in the market place, unless you can figure out how to get a full (and cheap as well) lens line up and undercut 6D and D610 prices. I doubt that Pentax would sell enough cameras to allow their price to go that low.

Video for me is not important, but high ISO is needed in a lot of scenarious: astrophotography, wildlife, weedings, sport, etc.

At ISO 8000 my 6D files are quite usable (see the image below).

https://s32.postimg.org/wf9ug7xlh/codros.jpg



Canon 6D was sold very well and still is because it has: great high ISO, wifi, GPS, better dynamic range than 5D Mark III and it can focus down to -3ev with the center point af.

K1 has a lot more features than 6D at a reasonable price and this could be a good reason to buy it. But it also depends on where you live. Unfortunately, in Romania K1 will not have big sales because almost no one knows about Pentax. The oficial Pentax store is sleeping (no marketing, no Facebook page, no possibilities to rent lenses, no local service, etc.). Not to mention that K1 is quite expensive for enthusiastic photographers around here (K1 is sold for 2200$ while 6D is sold for 1360$).

So, a new Pentax full frame priced between K-3 Mark II and K-1 (with 22-26mp and 7fps) will probably sell very well.

There are definitely places where a K-1 is sold for better prices and others where it isn't. Kunzite is right when he says that the 6D is pretty old, the K-1 is about the newest full frame on the market and has some features that aren't present in any other full frames. In the US, where I am, the K-1 comes in at a price that is between the D610 and the D750, which is probably about right.

My comments on the 6D were mainly that it doesn't bring anything to the marketplace that other full frames don't as well, except a cheap price. The same is true of the D610 in the Nikon camp. If folks could buy a 5D MK III or a D810 for the same price as the 6D and D610, there wouldn't be any question about which most folks would opt for.

[JimmyDranox]

If I remember well, Ricoh said some years ago they want to make Pentax one of the three big camera makers in 5 years (or something like this, I can't remember word by word). This means not one, not two, but three FF camera if they want to compete with the others. And of course, advanced video.

And I think that they are capable to do it, with some efforts. How long will take, did they had changed the plan or they keep that goal, I don't know. But I'm confident that at least one FF will come not to late, probably next year. Will be a cheaper model, or will be a profi camera, will see.

The lenses are a bigger problem than a 20+Mp FF, but there is a side way, already used.

[Dan Rentea]

But a 150-450 is 5.6 as opposed to 6.3, and as such will use the 1.4 TC.

For BIF you would need fast shutter speed and accurate af. I'm pretty sure the af is very fast and accurate at f8 when you use a TC on K3 with 150-450mm mount on... Not to mention how much you have to rise the ISO... Where is your portability when you use K3 + 150-450mm + TC?

As it is I use a DA*200 with stacked converters, for 476mm or over 700mm equivalent on a 6D with a much smaller package.

And when I take the converters off, I have the equivalent of 300 ƒ2.8. You really should know better than to get into this kind of pissing match.

Especially with someone who looks at price portability and functionality with every purchase.

Again, 150-600mm is pretty close to DA*200 + 2x TC. But with any TC added, the image quality and the af accuracy is dropping. I have a friend with K-3 II and DA*300mm + 1.4x TC and this combination is "amazingly fast".

And Sigma is 45% cheaper in Romania than 150-450mm if you want to talk about spending money...