[Duplo]

More (meaningless) comparisons:

Phase One P45+ back vs Canon G10
Kidding

Yep, well pretty much raise the question why anyone would ever consider anything but a G10 right

[Wheatfield]

Funny you should mention that...

Melting Icebergs...

The D3 was a great help shooting just that, not to mention the calving glaciers. focusing on light blue ice exploding off a lightblue ice wall is actually quite an AF test

I did not know that.
The closest I have been to an iceberg is the National Geographic channel on a large screen TV.
My comment was trying to be witty in describing big and slow moving.

[jgredline]

I called sigma today to get info on the 120-400 HSM lens and they told me they put it on the back burner for now,. They said that they are for the time being done with Pentax mount lenses.. When I asked why, they said they already have the largest selection of third party lenses and with Pentax NOT coming out with full frame, they need to turn their attention to the full frame market....I am glad I held on to my 135-400 LENS....

Now I know the full frame thing has been beat to death, but with Sony and Mamiya releasing full frame bodies this week, Pentax needs to do this if they want to survive.....

If I where a Pro and knew Pentax had no intentions of coming out with a full frame body, I would bail...I too would be a part of the Pentax exodus that seems to be going on...Even if at the end of the day of the day, the images between full frame and APS-C sensors are exactly the same, the fact is that the full frame body / images add credibility to the product...

oK, END of rant....

[*isteve]

If I where a Pro and knew Pentax had no intentions of coming out with a full frame body, I would bail...I too would be a part of the Pentax exodus that seems to be going on...Even if at the end of the day of the day, the images between full frame and APS-C sensors are exactly the same, the fact is that the full frame body / images add credibility to the product...

oK, END of rant....

When all three of them have left, Pentax sales will be down 0.00001%.

Quite a few (like Duplo) keep their Pentaxes for fun shooting.

I think a 645D would add a bit more credibility than a half-a*sed mistake like the A900.

[kenyee]

The D3 was a great help shooting just that, not to mention the calving glaciers. focusing on light blue ice exploding off a lightblue ice wall is actually quite an AF test

And don't forget about the increased dynamic range of the D3's sensor. It's not just for high ISO. That seems to be the main weakness w/ the K20D (lack of dynamic range so there's a lot of chroma noise in the shadows)...

p.s., the Sony A900 might be good for landscape photogs who want as many pixels as possible, but the rest of us, the bad high ISO performance would be a big letdown... :-P

[reeftool]

While everyone complains that Pentax isn't coming out with a full frame sensor camera, another question needs to be asked. In the present economic climate, who is going to buy these cameras? While we all want to have the latest and best it remains to be seen if everybody will suddenly mothball their smaller sensor cameras and the lenses they bought for them. Many of these new FF cameras appear to be aimed at the amatuer/hobbiest and not the pro who can write it off. If a lot of folks just decide to hold off on purchases for a few months and these new cameras sit in the warehouses, I could expect to see a couple of large camera companys in the bad news section.

[MikePerham]

I think a 645D would add a bit more credibility than a half-a*sed mistake like the A900.

....I agree!

[kristoffon]

If I where a Pro and knew Pentax had no intentions of coming out with a full frame body, I would bail...I too would be a part of the Pentax exodus that seems to be going on...Even if at the end of the day of the day, the images between full frame and APS-C sensors are exactly the same, the fact is that the full frame body / images add credibility to the product...

oK, END of rant....

If you WERE a pro, either you would need full frame and already have a C/N camera (I seriously doubt any pro would buy the alpha) OR you wouldn't need it, because in the end what matters are the results you have to show to your customers, not the equipment you use about which the average customer has no clue whatsoever.

[Pål Jensen]

p.s., the Sony A900 might be good for landscape photogs who want as many pixels as possible, but the rest of us, the bad high ISO performance would be a big letdown... :-P

After seeing the files from the A900 I realize you need a lot more than 24mp to make justice to landscapes. The A900 isn't even close to the Pentax 645 in resolution....

[deejjjaaaa]

While everyone complains that Pentax isn't coming out with a full frame sensor camera, another question needs to be asked. In the present economic climate, who is going to buy these cameras? While we all want to have the latest and best it remains to be seen if everybody will suddenly mothball their smaller sensor cameras and the lenses they bought for them. Many of these new FF cameras appear to be aimed at the amatuer/hobbiest and not the pro who can write it off. If a lot of folks just decide to hold off on purchases for a few months and these new cameras sit in the warehouses, I could expect to see a couple of large camera companys in the bad news section.

"К2000" crowd will be hit harder then "K20D" crowd ...

[Wheatfield]

If you WERE a pro, either you would need full frame and already have a C/N camera (I seriously doubt any pro would buy the alpha) OR you wouldn't need it, because in the end what matters are the results you have to show to your customers, not the equipment you use about which the average customer has no clue whatsoever.

Or, you could be a pro that has been using Pentax equipment for long enough that a brand change isn't financially viable, but would still like access to a camera that is in the same city as the pro camera's stadium.
Right now, Pentax isn't even in the same county, and they are driving in the wrong direction.
As an aside, if you think the average customer isn't brand aware, you obviously don't have any experience as a pro photographer.

[Duplo]

I did not know that.
The closest I have been to an iceberg is the National Geographic channel on a large screen TV.
My comment was trying to be witty in describing big and slow moving.

hehe... I actually made my reply mostly in jest as I just happened to have one it not very long ago.
I think the closest I have been to both glaciers and icebergs is what is call way too close by ordinary precaution standards, but that is a loong story...

When all three of them have left, Pentax sales will be down 0.00001%.

Quite a few (like Duplo) keep their Pentaxes for fun shooting.

I think a 645D would add a bit more credibility than a half-a*sed mistake like the A900.

Hi Steve,
Yep, the compact system and wonderful limiteds are too fun to let go of.
Now if they could just get that Km out in stores body only...

I would love to see a 645 too

And don't forget about the increased dynamic range of the D3's sensor. It's not just for high ISO. That seems to be the main weakness w/ the K20D (lack of dynamic range so there's a lot of chroma noise in the shadows)...

p.s., the Sony A900 might be good for landscape photogs who want as many pixels as possible, but the rest of us, the bad high ISO performance would be a big letdown... :-P

Yep the dynamic range advantage is definitely there and a much welcome one... But to be fairly honest if my D3 was not making money I would probably not have owned one... you really do pay quite a price for the performance it delivers.

[kristoffon]

Or, you could be a pro that has been using Pentax equipment for long enough that a brand change isn't financially viable, but would still like access to a camera that is in the same city as the pro camera's stadium.
Right now, Pentax isn't even in the same county, and they are driving in the wrong direction.

As an aside, if you think the average customer isn't brand aware, you obviously don't have any experience as a pro photographer.

You're right, I'm just an amateur. Yet since I'm the kind of person who researches things, I determined the Pentax system gave me more bang for the buck than C/N so here I am.

However I've seen some of my friends make a similar jump to DSLR and all of them went either C or N or A without doing ANY research, despite the advice I offered. Even yesterday I had the schadenfreude of laughing off one of them who just got a XSi and wants a long zoom like the S5 he had, but the Canon EF-S 18-200 is close to double the price of the Pentax 18-250 lens and doesn't really have better image quality to show for it. Not even USM. So he's just another mindless customer who's paying for the advertisement he sees on TV. I could point out to him that for the price of that EF-S 18-200 I might treat myself to the FA 77 limited but he doesn't even grasp the "concept" of primes yet.

I know directly four people other than me who use their DSLRs for personal purposes only. 2 Canon, 1 Nikon, 1 Alpha. In fact I'm pretty sure most of the DSLR market isn't for pros. Just compare the ratio of XSis to D1s on flickr, or Canon regular lenses to L.

it's really very unfortunate that Pentax isn't currently moving in that direction. I assume it's temporary though, God knows what kind of choices they have to make with limited resources. I'm a business owner myself and I sympathize, we have to go after the cash. It's frustrating to see how fast the Alpha system developed. But Sony just has money to burn and have the marketing machine to crank up the numbers so that their cameras look good on paper for, precisely, clueless customers without any real knowledge who walk into the store and grab the camera with the most megapixels or the one they saw the most ads for. Unfortunately there are many of those. I certainly don't regret my choice.

[KrisK10D]

Pardon my presumption but, this thread seems a little like a pissing contest to me. ISO ISO ISO... who really needs a camera that needs 6400 ISO? No... really? I'd like to know. Pre digital there was what... 1 or 2 films that could shoot at that kinda speed. Do correct me if I'm wrong. Now with digital SLR's it's this constant bitch fight about who gets the best image at the highest ISO. Get over it already.

If folks want to spend their hard earned on outrageous prices for a FF DSLR and VR glass, for no other reason than they can shoot .5% of their shots at 6400... frankly, you've got more money than sense! Me... I prefer to be able to take the same quality of shot, at typical ISO of course, on my ole K10, with lenses I bought before digital cameras were even contemplated, knowing I spent less on my entire kit than the vibration reducing lens they make a big deal out of

[dylansalt]

Here in SA Nikon D700 body only price R 36 000 - D300 R 22 000

Pentax k20D body only R 14 000

I will re-iterate.

Does the quantum increase in price for purchasing the above Nikon camera's or similar Canon
give you the same quantum leap in performance and IQ over the K20D or similar product from any other manufacturer. Please read carefully.

Up to ISO 800 and looking at results on a 17" monitor - I could not AND considering they were also using a lens that retails for R 25 000 (Making the Nikon D700 + 24-70 2.8 combo costing R 61 000!)- For that money I could lets say buy the K20D 16-50 2.8 50-135 2.8, the 200 2.8 AND the 300 F4 and still have plenty change left over.

Let's go back a few years - I have a cheap Minolta XPSI SLR with autofocus zoom lens (INCREDIBLY SHARP) which cost only R 2000- could shoot at 3fps, had a huge viewfinder an exposure system that was rarely fooled.

With this simple camera I won two comps which won me holidays to the Okavango.

I have had prints larger than A2 made which look brilliant.

I'm sure there a lot of members here that have similar experiences.

I wonder if an A2 print from the R 61000 Nikon combo at Iso 100 would best (IQ only) any cheap 35mm slr with a decent 50mm prime.

Just some thoughts