[aleonx3]

It never fails. If you go the canikon sites, the new owners of the 7D Mk II as well as the D750, can't stop complaining about one thing or another. Almost reminds of certain Pentax owners.

But yeah, the D750 would have been a great camera if Pentax designed and built it and not the D650 that it is.

One big difference here is that the Pentax FF will be the only model that the Engineering design team has to concentrate on without worrying about ripping off its other product lines - and no crippling of features. OTOH, the Nikon design team has to make sure that it fits right in between the two existing models D610 and D810.

[neostyles]

lol there is no indication that pentax will have a ff camera.

Just think how good the D750 would be if Pentax had made it.

Yeeaahhh uhm. Something tells me that that wouldn't be the case. I get the feeling that they wouldn't be able to resists slapping some bizarre color combo on it (why do i get the feeling that pentax doesnt understand color theory.) The af on the d750 which is even better than the 810 (which impressed me quite a bit when i tried it out) wouldn't be there. It is fairly well known that this is one of, and still continues to be one of their weakest spots. Instead of built wi fi, we would have a flu card which eats up one of the card slots. The amazing ergonomics wouldnt be there either. And design isnt exactly pentax's strong suite (cue drtv reiew of pentax kr.) Even the camera store has commented on how well.. quirky pentax is as far as design goes.

But yeah, the D750 would have been a great camera if Pentax designed and built it and not the D650 that it is.

You do realize that the 750 has alot in common with the 810? Im drawing a blank here. I mean, everything that the 750 has pentax isn't exactly a class leader in... Plus, they kind of kind of cripple the movie mode in the $8,000 645z so frankly i wouldnt let pentax within a hundred yard of a high end camera that someone will be shelling out a couple grand for...

[Rondec]

I really like Pentax ergonomics -- K-01 isn't great, but that's Marc Newsom's fault. Other cameras fit nicely into the hand. As to colors, what colors have they released the K3 in? Black, I believe is the main color. They had a couple of special editions in silver and gun metal that actually looked pretty sweet. Multiple colors have been reserved for the low end cameras.

I do think a Pentax full frame would be really sweet to use. I'm sure it won't have great video -- that seems to be an after thought with them -- but it will be a nicely built camera with image stabilization on the sensor and all the things that brings to the table.

[rawr]

I'm sure any Pentax FF will also be built like a rock, in the class of the D800/ D4 series. Nikon bodies of the D610/D750 class are flimsy and have nothing that approaches Pentax weather sealing or solid magnesium body build. If Pentax can offer that build quality at the D750 price point, they will gain many friends.

Plus I suspect that any Pentax FF will drop the anti-aliasing filter, just like the K-3 and 645Z have (especially now that Pentax has it's SR derived anti-alias filter simulator).

I really don't know why Nikon bothered putting such a filter in the D750/D610, but left the filter out in the D810.

[normhead]

lol there is no indication that pentax will have a ff camera.


You do realize that the 750 has alot in common with the 810? Im drawing a blank here. I mean, everything that the 750 has pentax isn't exactly a class leader in... Plus, they kind of kind of cripple the movie mode in the $8,000 645z so frankly i wouldnt let pentax within a hundred yard of a high end camera that someone will be shelling out a couple grand for...

You say that like it's a good thing... you forget, most of us on this site didn't go for a D810. I guess the things we didn't like about the D810 we still won't like about the 750. Is that what you're saying?

After doing shots with a couple guys this year my comment on the D800/D810 is, same pictures, much higher price. My K-3 pictures stack up quite nicely. Plus I didn't have the focus issues they were experiencing. They were using tripod and a remote etc. trying to eliminate body shake. meanwhile I forgot my tripod head and shot everything hand held or braced on rocks of trees, but mostly just hand held. Those guys had more blur after going through all that trouble than I did hand held, which totally negated any advantage in resolution their pictures might have had.

My problem with reading posts like this is, I live in the real world , with real people who use cameras. The real world where in most cases, there's a bunch of people with cameras and everyone seems to be getting some pictures... and there doesn't seem to be a lot of difference between what everyone comes home with. SOMetimes the Canon guy gets the best image, sometimes the Nikon guy, sometimes the Pentax guy... with all these bad things about Pentax, how is that possible? Don''t even try and say it's easier for those guys than it is for me. That would be a complete misrepresentation of the truth. Just like your fable about the weaknesses of Pentax gear.

Sometimes it's hard to stomach how much time people spend nattering on like a bunch of old ladies about minor differences in gear, that make practically no difference in the field either for handling, ease of use or IQ.

[wtlwdwgn]

I think we all forget that the images we get have more to do with the eye behind the viewfinder than the box in front of the eye. Ansel Adams would likely put most of us to shame using an iPhone. There's an interesting set of videos over on DigitalRev with pros shooting with cheap cameras.

[B Grace]

You say that like it's a good thing... you forget, most of us on this site didn't go for a D810. I guess the things we didn't like about the D810 we still won't like about the 750. Is that what you're saying?

After doing shots with a couple guys this year my comment on the D800/D810 is, same pictures, much higher price. My K-3 pictures stack up quite nicely. Plus I didn't have the focus issues they were experiencing. They were using tripod and a remote etc. trying to eliminate body shake. meanwhile I forgot my tripod head and shot everything hand held or braced on rocks of trees, but mostly just hand held. Those guys had more blur after going through all that trouble than I did hand held, which totally negated any advantage in resolution their pictures might have had.

My problem with reading posts like this is, I live in the real world , with real people who use cameras. The real world where in most cases, there's a bunch of people with cameras and everyone seems to be getting some pictures... and there doesn't seem to be a lot of difference between what everyone comes home with. SOMetimes the Canon guy gets the best image, sometimes the Nikon guy, sometimes the Pentax guy... with all these bad things about Pentax, how is that possible? Don''t even try and say it's easier for those guys than it is for me. That would be a complete misrepresentation of the truth. Just like your fable about the weaknesses of Pentax gear.

Sometimes it's hard to stomach how much time people spend nattering on like a bunch of old ladies about minor differences in gear, that make practically no difference in the field either for handling, ease of use or IQ.

I originally added Nikon AF film gear to my Pentax manual focus gear back around 2000 or so because, well, take a good look at the Pentax AF cameras available in the year 2000, and there was no positive Pentax news on the horizon. I've purchased some nice Nikon lenses over the years which have pointed me in the direction of Nikon FX gear. If I were making that original move today I see a lot of great Pentax digital options available and they are with the exception of a few older lenses all APS-C format - I could capture everything I want by using the current Pentax gear just as I can with my current Nikon gear. So I don't understand why anyone wants Pentax to offer a 35mm-format DSLR camera system in this day and age. Granted, there are many folks still shooting older Pentax lenses as was my case, but why not continue building on the system which currently offers the K-3? Less expense, better control of image correction, continued support of older lens systems, excellent quality lenses offered at lower prices, etc. The only negative I can think of is the limitations on the ultra-wide angle options. With the amateur market moving away from high-end 35mm-format DSLR cameras and toward mirrorless camera systems the need for a 35mm-format Pentax DSLR system seems obsolete.

[neostyles]

Pentax isnt the only one with shake reduction though. Nikon/canon have had it for a long time and now so does sony. I guess pentax's is in body but i "live in a real world with real cameras" and anyone who is serious about photography isnt going to take a 30 year old lens over the the latest and greatest advancements in technology i presume. Maybe its just because i was born in the digital age and film was long before my time, but beyond trying things one time and going "oh thats cool i guess", but i cant really see myself taking a lens twice as old as i am over my awesome 24-85 which actually has vr now that i look at it. On top of that, they also have the benefit of full frame which provides another few stops of advantage. Pentax is putting alot of their energy into fancy things like an aa simulator (dont get me wrong this isnt without merrit) but they are losing track of the basics alot of the time and i think this is what is biting them more than anything. Marketing s important i guess. And if more stores carried pentax, ran promotions, etc it could help. But we live in the age of social media ,which imho would make up for Ricoh's poor marketing.

I'm sure any Pentax FF will also be built like a rock, in the class of the D800/ D4 series. Nikon bodies of the D610/D750 class are flimsy and have nothing that approaches Pentax weather sealing or solid magnesium body build. If Pentax can offer that build quality at the D750 price point, they will gain many friends.

Uhhhhhmmmm you havent actually owned a nikon have you? I took my d600 out in the rain a few weeks ago and it couldn't care less. Pentax arent the only ones that have weather sealing either. They are kind of like apple, who used to basically be the only one on the market with a good smart phone. Much the the same, pentax has long since boasted that their durability and weather sealing make them stand out from the crowd. These advantages are kind of moot at this point.

You Tube

You Tube

"But pentax gives you weather sealing in in an entry level camera" oh really? And which beginner is going to want to shoot in the rain? I might have no problem with it now but the last thing i would want to do in my intro to photography class was figure out the exposure triangle in the middle of a thunderstorm. I dont know, dude. I went to my local camera store the other day and the d750 feels pretty damn solid. Have you ever held a 5dkmk3? It feels like you could knock out the incredible hulk with it

Don''t even try and say it's easier for those guys than it is for me. That would be a complete misrepresentation of the truth. Just like your fable about the weaknesses of Pentax gear.

This is exactly why i made the jump. Real world matters way more to me than some spec sheet because i shot with models for around two years (in fact, i didnt shoot in a studio until much later.) Pentax still cant get their af to be in the same league as the other big names. I mean, theres a weakness Nikons/canon's have phenomenal hit ratios for moving objects/sports. Thats why pro sports photographers use cameras like the d4s in their "real world" jobs. How about the fact that 95% of pentax users are limited to aps c sized cameras because no one but the top few percent can afford an $8500 medium format camera? Sounds like a weakness to me. Full frame has allowed me to go further then ever in "real world" conditions by continuing to grab shots for probably an hour (hand held) after when i would have to end the shoot. Maybe the biggest weakness is video for pentax. From what i've read video with pentax is still a little well.. Even their newest, the K3, still leaves alot to be desired in this regard. The K3 doesnt even have focus tracking in video from what ive read. Dude, i mean, this is like leaving out power steering on a car.. I dont understand why pentax would leave out something that every camera has had for the last 10 years on their flagship model.. And what about wi fi hm? If a client wants to have the files transferred to their mobile device this is basically impossible with every pentax camera aside from the k3 where it eats up one of your memory cards and thus the ability to store more images. And apparently, wow, there isnt even an app to use the wireless functionality. You have to open a web browser and access it via ip. Not very up to date pentax. Even the fans dismiss it as a "gimmick" (look in the comments.) I guess having a wireless remote for your camera is a gimmick lol.

I've gotten good shots with pentax. I would argue with you there. Some of them are even up on my portfolio. But i would disagree with you when it comes to the "fable."

Still, very nice images you on your site, normhead.

[normhead]

I guess you don't know how stupid you sound saying half of this stuff. Look, I don't care if you stay this way the rest of your life, I don't have to read you. But in my world, A D600 has no advantages over a K-3 and costs a lot more. Going to a D600 I'd lose magnification, frame rate, two stops of low light focussing, depth of field, and I'd need much longer , heavier and more expensive lenses to do what I do now, for pretty much the same resolution and IQ. And it would cost me a lot more. Taking a K-3 over a D600 is pretty much a no brainer. I did play a bit with a D600 before I bought my K-3. Thanks but no thanks. I have aflucard, I have a remote trigger, I just can't relate to what you post, because you don't know enough about Pentax, or you're hung up on the marketing hype, that camera sellers use to sell cameras, but that most people don't need and don't use.

[neostyles]

I used pentax for 2 years and went through 3 cameras. You would lose magnification, right but for someone who does landscapes, it would also be seen as getting even wider which wold be a good thing. Plus, there is also dx crop mode. Not sure if you forgot about that. Not really much point in those extra frames if the hit rate isn't there and pentax cant hold a candle to their competitors for af. I have no clue what you mean with dof. Full frame has given me amazing subject isolation view dof. In fact, that's one of the coolest things but i assume you dont really shoot alot of models like i do. The weight is well.. overrated. My d600 with the 24-85 weighs only 5 lbs. I mean, i may have worked out quite a bit for my last year of college, but i havent been to the gym in around 5 months and even after carrying the d600 around for a few hours, its not exactly like i feel like my arm is about to fall off or anything. As for cost, i was able to get the d600 + 2 lenses on my financial aid and ive seen people who have quite an impressive collection of lenses, so i seriously doubt that a price tag of $2000 is gonna stop anyone... Its funny that you mention price.. Pentax has some of the most expensive lenses around, so if and maybe when the ff pentax shows up, i doubt it will be much cheaper.

Now think about what you would gain. A modern, full frame system that is a joy to use. Several stops of iso performance (in addition to better color sensativity and all that stuff that comes with full frame.) Better battary life. A camera that feels good in the hand. Pentax has honestly some of the most awkward to use controls of any camera that i have ever used. Better yet, it just does what it is supposed to do. My pentax cameras frequently acted up and did strange things. My k20 would stop uhm.. exposure compensating consistently during a shoot. Some of the shots would come out noticeable darker for whatever reason. The shooting experience on a nikon is 100%. The usability is just there and it's bang on. Everything falls into place. Most of the switches on said k20 were so awkward/cumbersome to use that i didnt even bother with them and it doesnt look like pentax has improved (one look at the af selector switch in the k5ii was enough for me to the know that pentax hasnt exactly improved the their handling. Much better autofocus? Better image quality? A huge fan base? The other day i got some third party picture controls for my d600 for d600. One of the benefits of being part of a user base that is like 30% of the camera market out there. What about a camera that can actually be used for film making. There is a huge community of nikon videographers around the net on sites such as vimeo. There is a ton of third party gear available of for nikon film makers. Nothing for pentax.

tl:dr version - There is a just a unique look to full frame that is fantastic

[normhead]

I used pentax for 2 years and went through 3 cameras. You would lose magnification, right but for someone who does landscapes, it would also be seen as getting even wider which wold be a good thing. Plus, there is also dx crop mode. Not sure if you forgot about that. Not really much point in those extra frames if the hit rate isn't there and pentax cant hold a candle to their competitors for af. I have no clue what you mean with dof. Full frame has given me amazing subject isolation view dof. In fact, that's one of the coolest things but i assume you dont really shoot alot of models like i do. The weight is well.. overrated. My d600 with the 24-85 weighs only 5 lbs. I mean, i may have worked out quite a bit for my last year of college, but i havent been to the gym in around 5 months and even after carrying the d600 around for a few hours, its not exactly like i feel like my arm is about to fall off or anything. As for cost, i was able to get the d600 + 2 lenses on my financial aid and ive seen people who have quite an impressive collection of lenses, so i seriously doubt that a price tag of $2000 is gonna stop anyone... Its funny that you mention price.. Pentax has some of the most expensive lenses around, so if and maybe when the ff pentax shows up, i doubt it will be much cheaper.

Now think about what you would gain. A modern, full frame system that is a joy to use. Several stops of iso performance (in addition to better color sensativity and all that stuff that comes with full frame.) Better battary life. A camera that feels good in the hand. Pentax has honestly some of the most awkward to use controls of any camera that i have ever used. Better yet, it just does what it is supposed to do. My pentax cameras frequently acted up and did strange things. My k20 would stop uhm.. exposure compensating consistently during a shoot. Some of the shots would come out noticeable darker for whatever reason. The shooting experience on a nikon is 100%. The usability is just there and it's bang on. Everything falls into place. Most of the switches on said k20 were so awkward/cumbersome to use that i didnt even bother with them and it doesnt look like pentax has improved (one look at the af selector switch in the k5ii was enough for me to the know that pentax hasnt exactly improved the their handling. Much better autofocus? Better image quality? A huge fan base? The other day i got some third party picture controls for my d600 for d600. One of the benefits of being part of a user base that is like 30% of the camera market out there. What about a camera that can actually be used for film making. There is a huge community of nikon videographers around the net on sites such as vimeo. There is a ton of third party gear available of for nikon film makers. Nothing for pentax.

tl:dr version - There is a just a unique look to full frame that is fantastic

\

You really don't have a clue... but I'll do this for you. If you can go through your whole post, and highlight every inaccuracy, irrelevant bit of information and and artful dodge, I'll try and give you a little feedback. Where you are right now there's no point in talking to you. take care buddy.

[rawr]

Uhhhhhmmmm you havent actually owned a nikon have you?

Ummm, you haven't looked at some of the photos I've recently posted here, have you?

D600/D610 weather sealing does not impress. Open the battery or SD card doors and look at the poor sealing - thin gaskets, gaps in the gasket coverage, almost no pressure applied by the flimsy doors to maintain the seal.

[Rondec]

I used pentax for 2 years and went through 3 cameras. You would lose magnification, right but for someone who does landscapes, it would also be seen as getting even wider which wold be a good thing. Plus, there is also dx crop mode. Not sure if you forgot about that. Not really much point in those extra frames if the hit rate isn't there and pentax cant hold a candle to their competitors for af. I have no clue what you mean with dof. Full frame has given me amazing subject isolation view dof. In fact, that's one of the coolest things but i assume you dont really shoot alot of models like i do. The weight is well.. overrated. My d600 with the 24-85 weighs only 5 lbs. I mean, i may have worked out quite a bit for my last year of college, but i havent been to the gym in around 5 months and even after carrying the d600 around for a few hours, its not exactly like i feel like my arm is about to fall off or anything. As for cost, i was able to get the d600 + 2 lenses on my financial aid and ive seen people who have quite an impressive collection of lenses, so i seriously doubt that a price tag of $2000 is gonna stop anyone... Its funny that you mention price.. Pentax has some of the most expensive lenses around, so if and maybe when the ff pentax shows up, i doubt it will be much cheaper.

Now think about what you would gain. A modern, full frame system that is a joy to use. Several stops of iso performance (in addition to better color sensativity and all that stuff that comes with full frame.) Better battary life. A camera that feels good in the hand. Pentax has honestly some of the most awkward to use controls of any camera that i have ever used. Better yet, it just does what it is supposed to do. My pentax cameras frequently acted up and did strange things. My k20 would stop uhm.. exposure compensating consistently during a shoot. Some of the shots would come out noticeable darker for whatever reason. The shooting experience on a nikon is 100%. The usability is just there and it's bang on. Everything falls into place. Most of the switches on said k20 were so awkward/cumbersome to use that i didnt even bother with them and it doesnt look like pentax has improved (one look at the af selector switch in the k5ii was enough for me to the know that pentax hasnt exactly improved the their handling. Much better autofocus? Better image quality? A huge fan base? The other day i got some third party picture controls for my d600 for d600. One of the benefits of being part of a user base that is like 30% of the camera market out there. What about a camera that can actually be used for film making. There is a huge community of nikon videographers around the net on sites such as vimeo. There is a ton of third party gear available of for nikon film makers. Nothing for pentax.

tl:dr version - There is a just a unique look to full frame that is fantastic

There aren't any bad cameras out there at this point. Pentax doesn't make any bad ones, Nikon doesn't either, nor does Canon. Current APS-C cameras are pretty good, but one stop worse with regard to high iso performance and dynamic range compared to full frame options (not sure where that "several stops" you mention comes from). If, as you say, you are into shooting landscape, then you are best off using a tripod and low iso. It doesn't matter what size sensor you have, you should be shooting stopped down and at low iso.

In body image stabilization is handy and makes the overall size of your gear smaller. There is no way that you could get a 40mm prime the size of the DA 40 that was stabilized in the Canon or Nikon universes. It just won't happen. And as far as I know very few Canon and Nikon primes are stabilized.

In the end, I like Pentax, most of all for the lenses. It just gives me results that satisfy me. I looked at your photos and didn't see anything that required full frame to shoot. I am fine you choose to shoot a full frame camera and lens, but it doesn't seem particularly necessary based on your portfolio.







Just a few recent photos shot with my not so good Pentax APS-C cameras and lenses.

[Mikesul]

There aren't any bad cameras out there at this point. Pentax doesn't make any bad ones, Nikon doesn't either, nor does Canon. Current APS-C cameras are pretty good, but one stop worse with regard to high iso performance and dynamic range compared to full frame options (not sure where that "several stops" you mention comes from). If, as you say, you are into shooting landscape, then you are best off using a tripod and low iso. It doesn't matter what size sensor you have, you should be shooting stopped down and at low iso.

In body image stabilization is handy and makes the overall size of your gear smaller. There is no way that you could get a 40mm prime the size of the DA 40 that was stabilized in the Canon or Nikon universes. It just won't happen. And as far as I know very few Canon and Nikon primes are stabilized.

In the end, I like Pentax, most of all for the lenses. It just gives me results that satisfy me. I looked at your photos and didn't see anything that required full frame to shoot. I am fine you choose to shoot a full frame camera and lens, but it doesn't seem particularly necessary based on your portfolio.







Just a few recent photos shot with my not so good Pentax APS-C cameras and lenses.

Seriously, how could any one looking at the posts Rondec attached above tell whether they were FF or ASP-C? They couldn't, especially the second one. There may be advantages to FF, I am sure there are, but our forum is full of photos like these which are indistinguishable from what a FF could do. When, if, Pentax comes out with FF we can take a close look and judge. For now let's just enjoy the wonderful, impressive work being done by people like Rondec with K-5s and K3s.

[Christine Tham]

Where you are right now there's no point in talking to you. take care buddy.

Based on your advice last time, I have added this poster to my Ignore list.

Now if you guys will just stop responding to posts life will be sweet