[jsherman999]

Will my k5 take good pictures in 3-5 years? Yes. Will my *ist DS take good pictures in 3-5 years? I hope so! Will they be photographically relevant? Enough for me.

I don't think that's the point... I think the point is, "Will a company that sells primarily APS-C DSLRs be able to sell as many of those units in 2016 as they did in 2010, or even enough to keep their aps-c-only mount viable?"

I hope we won't have to find out. I hope our favorite camera maker has a roadmap to a lucrative and safe future that includes our favorite mount, front and center.

[JohnBee]

Most of the time, I can't tell the difference between a photo taken on APS or FF or M/43rds - or even some P&S cameras, but I can tell if the photo was incorrectly exposed, out of focus or just plain boring. I can tell the difference between all these formats and MF cameras especially for architecture or portraits. MF just looks REAL in a way that 35mm does not, so I think Pentax has it right to pursue MF. Besides, I for one am not looking forward to seeing 35-70 f/3.5-5.6 kit lenses again.

I can't wait for MF(digital) to become affordable like APS-C.

[philbaum]

...
What has Pentax done with ILC, non-DSLRs? We've gotten the very cute but photographically irrelevant Q system. We've gotten the K-01, which totally misses the point of smaller and lighter, as well as being an ergonomic mess. That its autofocus system is a couple of generations behind the competition and that it lacks the ability to add an EVF make it an oddity at worst and a very small niche camera at best. This camera does not appear to be designed by or for photographers. That Pentax, with its limited resources has invested in two clearly non-mainstream ILC cameras and hasn't appreciably updated its flagship K-5 gives me serious doubts viability about the company's strategic plans, or lack thereof.

I agree totally. To find out during the photokina exhibit that Pentax was shelving the K01 in favor of the Q, shook my confidence in the decision making process at Pentax. It seems very clear to me that there is much more long-term potential in a mirrorless APS camera than an ILC with a PS size sensor. Pentax apparently has decided not to compete in either the aps mirrorless market segment or the FF segment. I can see not competing in both areas, but not to compete in one or the other is sad.

[Winder]

I agree totally. To find out during the photokina exhibit that Pentax was shelving the K01 in favor of the Q, shook my confidence in the decision making process at Pentax. It seems very clear to me that there is much more long-term potential in a mirrorless APS camera than an ILC with a PS size sensor. Pentax apparently has decided not to compete in either the aps mirrorless market segment or the FF segment. I can see not competing in both areas, but not to compete in one or the other is sad.

I don't think shelving the K-01 means they are giving up on mirrorless. Rich already has a lot invested in the GXR and that may be the technology that they want to pursue for mirrorless, or they may have a new concept in mind that merges the technologies of the two companies. They are not abandoning the APS-C EVIL market.

[Macario]

Pentax has been a conservative company. It seldom offers cutting edge tech, rather it focuses on building with proven technologies and constructing more control rich cameras with very high build quality. When buying a Pentax camera we can generally be assured of getting a quality product that will function well and hold up under continued use. I admire these qualities and have gotten a lot of use out of my Pentax cameras. The K-5 I'm currently using consistently produces good images an is a piece of gear that I rely on.

That said, I've give considerable thought to where the camera industry is headed. My conclusions may be totally off target or even delusional. I don't have a crystal ball or connections in the industry. Here goes.

It's quite possible that APS-C sensor DSLRs are becoming dinosaurs doomed to extinction. Originally the crop sensor was introduced because full frame sensors for 35mm equivalent cameras were too expensive and temperamental for regular production. So, we got crop sensors and full frame lens mounts. That gives the worst of both worlds. It means that the cameras are bigger and heavier than necessary for the sensor size but don't offer the image quality, depth of field, and pixel number advantages of full frame cameras. We still use many lenses that cover full frame sensors, which increases both the size and weight of the lenses.

Sony, Samsung and Fujifilm have all produced APS-C interchangeable lens cameras (ILC) that produce high image quality in considerably smaller and lighter bodies than those of APS-C DSLRS. The cameras aren't DSLRs, even though some of them look as if they are. They offer interchangeable lenses without the penta-mirrors or prisms that DSLRs require. Some offer electronic viewfinders (EVF), some only live view screens. Currently the EVFs don't provide the same quality image preview as an optical viewfinder, but they are getting close. With video, the lack of mirrors and prism's greatly simplify the cameras and offer decided advantages.

Are APS-C sensors even necessary for image quality? The newest micro four thirds cameras from Olympus and Panasonic come very, very close to the best APS-C sensor cameras in image quality while offering smaller and lighter bodies and lenses. With lenses, smaller usually means less expensive, too. They are also arguably better video cameras than DSLRs of any size.

All this gets me to wondering if APS-C sensor DSLRs will even be relevant in 3-5 years. Viewfinder style non-DSLR cameras are convenient and the lens selection for these cameras are growing quickly, more quickly than Pentax is expanding its aging and limited lens line. I'll offer more thoughts on lenses in the next installment.

With roughly equivalent lenses, Pentax 35mm f/2.4 on the K-5 and Sigma 30mm f/2.8 on the NEX, I can't see any image quality difference between the cameras, even when pixel peeping the images at 100% in Lightroom. Guess which camera gets taken when I'm doing street or tourist shooting? The NEX at less than half the weight of the K-5 comes along. Is the 5n as versatile as the K-5? No. Is it good enough for a lot of shooting? Absolutely. Obviously, your mileage will vary. With two systems I have to wonder where to invest my limited funds for new lenses. I'm wondering if the new NEX 6 will give me enough functionality to sell the K-5. It may not be there yet, but maybe next NEX 7 or the Fujifilm X-E1 will. Fujifilm is certainly putting out a number of quality lenses quickly, and its non-Bayer array sensors produce great photos. Zeiss and Schneider have committed to offering lenses for both platforms as have Sigma and Tamron for the NEX cameras, so there should be quality lenses available within the next year or two, even if Sony has its head shoved up where it doesn't belong when it comes to lens production for the NEX camera line.

What has Pentax done with ILC, non-DSLRs? We've gotten the very cute but photographically irrelevant Q system. We've gotten the K-01, which totally misses the point of smaller and lighter, as well as being an ergonomic mess. That its autofocus system is a couple of generations behind the competition and that it lacks the ability to add an EVF make it an oddity at worst and a very small niche camera at best. This camera does not appear to be designed by or for photographers. That Pentax, with its limited resources has invested in two clearly non-mainstream ILC cameras and hasn't appreciably updated its flagship K-5 gives me serious doubts viability about the company's strategic plans, or lack thereof.

Did you realise that you wrote something very ridiculous.

On one hand you say that APS-C cannot match the IQ of a FF sensor because of size.
On the other hand you are saying that the 4/3 sensor comes close to IQ with a APS-C sensor in IQ.

It is either, a smaller sensor has less IQ than a bigger sensor (therefore 4/3 less than APS-C less than FF sensor IQ). Or APS-C also comes close to FF sensor, because the technology of the APS-C also has evolved.

But all this what is better talks should stop, the best system is what you feel most comfortable to make phhoto's with. will it be an ILC or APS-C DSLR or FF DSLR. It all doesn't matter, it is the end product that does matter.
For me, I would be verry happy with a Fuji XE-1 for 90% of my photography, just can't afford one. But will I sell my Pentax DSLR? No, because I also take pictures with a 400mm big-ass lens. and for that, a DSLR is the most handy one, the quickest one.

ps, an NEX with one of those big zeiss lenses on it, isn't much smaller than a pentax witha ltd lens on it

[Clavius]

I thought the general concensus already was that APSC cameras are headed towards irrelevance. Even right from the very beginning it was a temporary solution to begin with. So why does this all come as a surprise to so many?

The FF format is now slowly gaining momentum. As more and more of the general public will buy them, the lower the prices of those sensors can become. Which in turn makes them more available again to the general prublic which... You get the point... At the same time APSC DSLRs will increase in price, for the opposite reason. There will be less and less demand for them, driving their prices up instead of down. At the same time sensor sizes and quality in phones will eat at the APSC DSLR market too. So APSC truck is driving towards a cliff, whilst being attacked from left and right.

Pentax should make some drastic, very impopular, decisions to save themselves. Like dumping the K-mount for their FF format camera in favor of SR. Or the other way round. Or dumping the mirror in favor of affordability.

Maybe Pentax will just keep expanding their 645-line more and more and just forget about APSC and FF alltogether in the future? Why try to break into the FF market when you already have a strong foothold in the 645? They could split that line in a high-end, low-end and EVIL version?

[rawr]

Is it what I want to build a system on?

I hear this a lot.

No-one seriously plans to buy every lens, flash, remote control, macro accessory, focus screen, underwater housing, cable and camera case that forms a manufacturer's branded 'system'. Most people will probably buy three lenses and a flash, if that, and have everything they need for a few years or more, and that's gonna be the extent of their 'system' needs. Often those items won't even be original equipment, but third-party items anyhow.

Plus it's not always an either/or decision. With your NEX you can also 'share' your Pentax system (lens only) with your NEX via K to E mount adapters. So some 'systems' can easily co-exist. It works for me.

[Lowell Goudge]

There is a great article in this months popular photography, abut a guy that leads workshops withi an 8x10 view camera, and who takes anyone with any camera, including cell phones and a pink plastic Barbie camera. His comment on format. Format is irrelevent. It is the person behind the camera that makes the picture. The camera is just a tool in the toolbox.

From that perspective, I would agree that APS-C is already irrelevent, because all formats are

[psychdoc]

Wait for the iPhone 8...

I hope not. I have never owned one!

Edit: Oops! I meant to answer the reply to that quote where it said " Will the iphone save the world"

[psychdoc]

I don't think that's the point... I think the point is, "Will a company that sells primarily APS-C DSLRs be able to sell as many of those units in 2016 as they did in 2010, or even enough to keep their aps-c-only mount viable?"

I hope we won't have to find out. I hope our favorite camera maker has a roadmap to a lucrative and safe future that includes our favorite mount, front and center.

That is a very valid point.

[TaoMaas]

The FF format is now slowly gaining momentum. As more and more of the general public will buy them, the lower the prices of those sensors can become. Which in turn makes them more available again to the general public...

The problem is that FF will most likely never be popular enough with the general public to be purchased in sufficient numbers to drive down the cost of the sensors. Photography enthusiasts spend large amounts of money on cameras, but the average person does not. For the average person, even spending $1000 on a camera that doesn't include a lens seems to boggle their mind.

[TaoMaas]

What has Pentax done with ILC, non-DSLRs? We've gotten the very cute but photographically irrelevant Q system.

I think you're selling the Q short and obviously haven't been following the Q discussions on this board. People seem to like it quite a bit.

[TaoMaas]

I don't think shelving the K-01 means they are giving up on mirrorless. Rich already has a lot invested in the GXR and that may be the technology that they want to pursue for mirrorless, or they may have a new concept in mind that merges the technologies of the two companies. They are not abandoning the APS-C EVIL market.

I think you're right. It makes no sense to have the K-01 and the GXR in the Pentax/Ricoh line. The GXR seems to have been designed with much greater flexibility so it would be the better path to follow, I think.

[rawr]

For the average person, even spending $1000 on a camera that doesn't include a lens seems to boggle their mind.

Indeed. And even the 'affordable FF' D600 at about $2400 (body only) is still twice the price of a D7000 at about $1200 (body only). [In Australia, at a popular online store like DCW]. That's a big hurdle to overcome for mass-market penetration.

[Clavius]

The problem is that FF will most likely never be popular enough with the general public to be purchased in sufficient numbers to drive down the cost of the sensors.

...Untill a manufacturer somewhere issues a NEX-like EVIL camera with an FF sensor. Then suddenly FF becomes ultra-portable. For lots of people outthere, the size of the FF camera alone is the dealbreaker.

Photography enthusiasts spend large amounts of money on cameras, but the average person does not. For the average person, even spending $1000 on a camera that doesn't include a lens seems to boggle their mind.

So? Photography enthusiasts are also the ones that are currently buying K5's, because for the average person that K5 is already to mind-boggling expensive. I mean, Pentax doesn't do point and shoots anymore. Their entire source of income comes from those photography enthusiasts. And those enthusiastic customers are begging to see more gear to spend their cash on. What manufacturer doesn't love to be in that position??