full frame..

Just my two cnts,
Where is written that Pentax should make a FF dslr to keep on with the big two : The marketing boys are laughing their ...ss off with this kind of statements. Does Pentax want to keep up with the big two The R & D cost involved in producing a FF camera are so huge, that it would mean the end of Pentax, as we know it. All the Pros in the world today have enough choice between Canon and Nikon. It's not only the camera, but also the system backup, service points available during big sports events, etc,etc.......Even if Pentax would make and sell a FF Dslr costing no more then 50% of the D3 or Canon eqiuvalent, that still would not convince the Pros to step over to Pentax. There is nothing to win there for pentax. Only to lose It's better the invest there sources in a better lens system and service. There they can win a lot new costumers. And don't forget....,How many of us would really need a FF camera in the 12 to 14 MP range. Opening a 16 bit Tiff would mean 100 mb files. So start replacing your PC first. It just like buying the most expensive Sportscar from Benz or BMW. After a long period of saving and denying yourself all those little pleasures that make your life fun, you could perhaps buy one. But you still won,t manage to drive it every day.(insurance, service cost, etc......)
But hey Just MO.
Happy dreams in FF color.
Martin.

Why must it be one OR, the other? Canon have been making FF and APS side by side for years. Nikon are doing so now. As sensors get cheaper, manufacturers could offer us both. My desire for a FF Pentax has nothing to do with my thinking it will make me a better photographer, and everything to do with the fact that there are millions of high quality K and S mount lenses in the world (I own many) that will still be in existance, long after the last camera they were made for has worn out and long after the last roll of film has been made. All of those lenses are waiting in kit-bags, drawers and dealers shelves, just waiting to give many more years of service, At their intended focal length. such a waste. At a time when big corporations are falling over themselves to show us how much they care for the environment and banging on about climate change, it would do Pentax no harm to produce a camera that is capable of fully utilizing lenses it made decades ago. Who knows, maybe Al Gore would buy one to go with his Toyota Prius.

Wow.
Lengthy, busy thread.
I wish I had time to read this thread.
Been busy and happy taking pictures, this week........
javascript:emoticon('')

So was i. Still had some spare time to kill
Martin

No time to make pictures this weekend , too busy with a rush translation job. This discussion makes a nice break (along with the rest of the forum ).
Off to the zoo tomorrow with my grandson so hopefully I can at least take some happy snaps then.

May I ask you guys some questions?

Why do Sony want a full frame body considering their position is quite a bit lower than what Pentax is enjoying? You may argue that Sony is an electronics giant and have enormous power on sensor developing but don't forget Pentax is backed up by Samsung. I don't think Samsung want to be any less than Sony.

Also, why camera makers don't mark the actual FOV on their digital only lenses? Do they want to challenge our maths knowledge by forcing us to do some multiplication everytime we mount a digital only lens???

Trouble is, in this digital age nothing lasts forever. Oneday something newer will come. I rather stick with something that has become standard than just temporary solution.

Just my 2cents

They are marking the actual focal length and giving us the credit that we have brains.

Different formats have always been marked with the actual focal lengths, so we know a standard lens is 15mm on sub-miniature, 24mm on 110, 50mm on 35mm, 80mm on 6x6cm and so on.

To be honest, I'd find it irritating to have everything marked as "35mm equivalent".

Lets remind ourselves that Pentax's aim is to become no 3! I.e. they are not intending taking on Canon and Nikon. Lets face it, there are many more ameteur photographers then pros!

pros are nice but not worth going after as amateurs like us make more funds for the company and let's try and keep them happy.

as for SONY some of their ideas have been nuts but then again every company can be considered nuts because some before the ipod why would anyone be interested in an MP3 player today they all over, and giving us more choices etc.

as once upon ICI made every chemical under the sun, and before they became part of a DUTCH firm they made very limited to their original plans but then again they still made money unlike FORD which is losing more money than most companies are worth.

so it's sometimes best to try and get a point and move from their as who would think when the MINOLTA 7000 came out AF would become normal, and yet they are no longer around, okay SONY but not the same as MINOLTA for once was considered a high tech firm.

and finally everyone have a great and safe week.

Don't wanna start a fire but frankly, if Pentax are not after the pros I can hardly see the reason for a digital 645.

For my side, I can only say that I think the future of Pentax is so bright with recent developments with Samsung. Whether or not the pros are worth trying for, only Pentax can answer.

Neither can Pentax, they've shelved the project.

someone above suggested that Pentax would need to go FF to get 3rd place behind Canikon.

Last time I checked, Olympus currently hold that spot (on sales figures anyway) and they don't EVEN have an APS-C size sensor.

Well said! I think they need better marketing and more store front shelf space, not a full frame product.

I dont actually want a FF camera for those who targetted some replies at me; I just wanted to see the views

Personally, I dunno, yeah it would be good if Pentax could fit FF features and IQ into a APS-C camera, but the question is whether this would be recognised by pro's too

If they want to attract pros, they need longer range lenses, more flashes, high IQ, generally, good everything, and also good marketing

It would be a hope of mine that Pentax start advertising more; Canon is a household name almost, because of their advertisement.

Please don't take this as a dig at you ('cos that's not how it's meant) but stop for a moment and ask yourself why Pentax would want to go for the "pro" market?

Pros probably make up less than 1% of the market as a whole and the good ones (the ones that you want your brand associated with) don't pay for their equipment - they expect the manufacturers to provide this for free. Pros also demand a level of service and back-up (think same day replacements of expensive glass in far flung war zones etc) that Pentax doesn't currently provide and that would almost certainly bankrupt it if it tried to. Amateurs are the ones that fund the company and it's amateurs who (through inflated prices) subsidise all those pros at Canon and Nikon - would you really want to pay a premium on your camera just to have the bragging rights to say, "Oh yes, XXXXX used one just like this to take that photo of Charlotte Church with her norks out on the beach that was in the News Of The World last Sunday...". No, nor would I.

A professional photographer is - by definition - someone who gets paid to take photos, and there seem to be just as many (pro rata) that do so with Pentax equipment as with anything else. All the cameras from the major manufacturers (Pentax, Canon, Nikon, Olympus, Sony, etc) are capable of making you a pro as long as you look past the labels and accept that it's just a tool of your trade.

Pentax has a nice niche as a maker of quirky but high quality cameras with excellent IQ and ergonomics to die for. Why chase a market that's already covered by others and almost guaranteed to lose them money? I think Pentax will outlive many of the others in the market today - remember the tortoise beat the hare in the end!