Interview Ricoh's John Carlson (Pentax)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7PQJK8XcDFo

Pentax person...presentation?

He remains tight -lipped about future development ... Lets hope their just planning to spring a surprise with FF The obvious interpretation of his wafflings about it is that they don't think there's the market for it Lets hope its all a cruel trick.

One good clear positive message is about the sharing of technologies both upwards and downwards in the range, eg the K-S1 has the AA filter simulator, that was introduced not that long ago on the top end K3 ... That makes increasing value in newer products over time.

For being ' head of marketing' I would have thought he would have a stronger sales pitch, and a slicker delivery ... Surely a guy like him has to stand up regularly and give high powered presentations and really convince others? Did he actually list the focal range available as from 14 to 300 mm?? Did he just forget some lenses?

I think you just might be spot on there. Is there really a significant hole between the K3 and 645Z that could profitably be filled by a Pentax FF - or would it just take sales from them?

Andrew

That's a valid viewpoint and fear, if you limit the potential purchasers to the group of people who already are happy with a K3 or a 645d/z, (which Ricoh may well be doing ...) . But the potential opens up, surely, if you consider those who are not completely satisfied with the best that aps-c can offer, but for whom the 645 is overkill (or not flexible enough) ... Those people, if they can afford it, are choosing the competitors 'FF' offerings ....

I think it's a big hole and it needs to be plugged!


We need a FF Pentax to compete with the Nikon 610d & Canon 6d - they would sell like hot cakes!

If that was the case though, don't you think it would have been done already? As it hasn't, perhaps that means that the case for doing it is not as clear cut as we think. The key is probably profitability, plus of course the immense cost of development and tooling.

The 645D was a very well developed camera, very long in the making, and based on a sound original principle with the film 645 models.

If Canon release the rumoured under $4000 50mp FF DSLR in 2015. Then thats potentially a game changer for the 645

Isn't that just yet another smaller sensor (smaller than the 645) cramming more pixels on board ... why would that lead to comparable performance?

Sensors move on Nigel. Why is the K3 reputed to stand up fairly well against the current Canon 6D?

I was thinking about the never-ending debate over 'the megapixel race', and the argument that the additional megapixels on the K3 had not lead to gains in certain areas of IQ, as compared to the K5II ... higher ISO noise and Dynamic Range performance are the ones mostly referred to.

Could we expect a 50mp FF sized sensor to rival a 40mp 645 size one in these IQ aspects ?

Re the K3 v K5. Well that depends if you're in the same camp as the likes of me and Mike P. Or in the same camp as David Storm and Jules. All about opinions.

Price will come into it as well, as well as not having to buy lenses for a specific MF system http://www.dailycameranews.com/2014/12/50-megapixel-canon-eos-3d/

Having seen the stunning results of a full frame I would be seriously tempted to change brands if Pentax don't produce. I can hear the siren call of a Nikon D610!

Although I am early into DSLR it strikes me that the camera can be treated a loss leader because once you have bought into a system then the money is in the lenses and accessories which will inevitably follow. A brand switch is an expensive business so it follows that a manufacturer should really look at the wider implications of brand loyalty rather than just analysing how competitive the full frame market is. Who knows, in ten years maybe APS-C will be just for compacts.

I'm sure we've all seen stunning images from FF cameras, but then again we've all seen stunning images from compacts. It's still the photographer, not the camera, that makes the picture.

Good point, John