Pentax and Full Frame

Surely they already cater for the needs of 99.999% of most photographers's needs with their existing product line.

Optio's for the P&S users, K-r for the beginner/amateur, the K5 for the advanced amateur/semi-pro, and the 645D for Pro's.

I very much doubt that many existing K5 users would want to pay the premium that a FF body will undoubtedly attract, even if they currently percieve that they 'want' or 'need' one. Any FF body from Pentax is going to cost somewhere in the region of £3500 to £4500. At that sort of price, I certainly won't be buying one.

I dont think Pentax are likely to release a FF model priced at £3500-£4500. Firstly it would be too close to the D3x and 1D and therefore the 645D to make sense. It is not likely that they well ensnare existing pro users away from Canikon. They make pro spec cameras and provide the support at key events.

Pentax lens line up would need a lot of revision if new customers were to be tempted. If they had a competitor for 5d/d700 then maybe that could work. But where are the lenses for new customers?

The range of 70-200 glass alone from Canikon is mind boggling. Pentax dont have a single lens here. And legacy glass isnt going to cut it really.

The Sony FF camera has not exactly been a success- i can see Pentax version going a similar route. Sony can swallow the cost but can Ricoh?

Perhaps developing mind blowing APSc is the way to go. I think the next body maybe a K5 mkii with all the glitches solved and the sensor form the new Sony alpha cameras (24MP apsc i think). Then the K3

The pixel race is set to continue regardless of real world benefit APSc with 40MP is coming to a camera shop near to you within 2 years I reckon.

By that time the iPhone 6 will have 20mp

I think with Canon new 1 DX the pixel race will stop & camera manufacturers will concentrate on frames per second & focussing speed.

The pixel race is almost dead in the water with larger file sizes & slower download to computer speeds users are beginning to realise the downside to the pixel race. The D3 was first to recognise the advantage of smaller pixel sizes...

I don't see what all the fuss about a full frame Pentax is, most amateurs probably don't even print the majority of their photos nowadays anyway and I doubt most of those that do don't print larger than A3 - which any modern DSLR can easily produce.
Professionals are not going to switch brands and have to 'start from scratch again'
How many of the "We want a full frame Pentax" brigade would actually buy one - considering the price would more than likely be well above £2000?
My K7 does everything I need it to.

I think the current market for a FF Pentax would be rather small in comparison to its already (relatively) small APS-C market, Pentax needs to gain more market share before pushing onto FF. The simple fact is the amateur market is a lot bigger than the pro, and Pentax needs to be in a stronger position before it can attempt to grab a bigger share of the latter.

Assuming that a large part of the market for FF cameras would be professional, the main thing pros would want would be a professional backup service, service facilities, equipment loan and so on at major events. I doubt that Pentax would be interested in doing that, given that it is a market sewn up by Canon and Nikon.

What would Pentax bring to the table that Nikon and Canon can't? Why, then, would a pro with batteries of specialised lenses that don't exist in the Pentax range change systems?

On the other hand, neither Nikon or Canon have a medium format camera. Pentax do, and lenses to go with it. Seems an entirely logical strategy to me, APS-C To MF.

What is the magic about FF? It was chosen as a format by Oscar Barnack because all that was available was cine film at the time with a width of 24mm. If the width had happened to be 16mm, then the APS-C sensor would have been FF.

There's no magic in 36x24!

But how many potential amateurs are influenced by seeing pros shooting at sporting events, news events, entertainments events etc??? That is more important than actual sales of FF equipment.

All those white lenses you see around football grounds & on the news probably sell more DSLRs than any advertising campaign...

It also breeds confidence in the brand, pros aren't going to use a brand that's not going to be around for very long...

That was a reply to fastspider... slow typing

645D is unaffordable for most users, 35mm gives a boost in quality and DOF without being crazily expensive. 645D doesn't make sense as an upgrade path from APSC. Wrong lens mount. Many DA lenses are already 'full frame ready' and then you have the FA ltds - a reason for Pentax to release a full frame body in themselves.

Seems to be a topic discussed mostly by those that either don't want a FF (which maybe due to investing in too many APS-C lenses and is therefore understandable) and those that can't afford one.

Pentax have a long way to go before they get to a FF. Many QC issues to resolve along with the need for new lenses, rather than dependency on third party or yesteryears offerings and also need an up to date flash system.

The decisions behind closed doors at Ricoh will be hard ones to make.

There are even rumblings that Ricoh may change the K mount in favour of a new mount. If that happens, the present line of K mount bodies will be worth a s much as a good Zenith. It may of course mean a new line of optics etc.

Interesting times ahead.

For those that do want a FF now, buy a second hand 5D and use your Ltd's as others have done. The 31mm is so much better with a FOV of a 31mm - as designed.

Alternatively, keep on producing great images with the kit you already use and ignore the wishful thinkers.

Best regards

Absolute suicide if they were to do that and pointless buying Pentax as well. Probably 80% of Pentax users would never buy into the new mount where that to happen and instead go with the remaining 3 makers. The rest would just carry on with the K-5 which is probably good enough for the majority of Pentax users anyway.

It wouldn't make any sense for Ricoh to buy Pentax so that they could expand their DSLR side of the market and then have to start from scratch by killing off the mount.

If they did change the mount i would never buy another new pentax product.

My K5 and current lenses would see me through for a good few years.

When the K5 is up for replacement I would very happily buy another brand.


Alienating a loyal customer base for no reason (the K mount isnt the problem is it?) makes zero sense. Stranger things have happened though.

If they changed the mount, not only would I never buy another Pentax product, I'd change brand now, not when my K-5 needed replacement.

If they changed the mount, an enormous number of Pentax users would jump ship, so there would be a huge glut of second hand lenses that would only get bigger.

I'd want to get as much back as soon as possible, to make the transition to another brand less painful.

I love the fact that I get a 450mm equiv lens when only paying for 300 so not bothered about FF. I just want a very accurate AF in poor light!!! Are you listening Pentax?

My K-5 will see me out I suspect - and I'll happily buy some of that glut of cheap lenses, and maybe even an extra body or two if Ricoh change the mount.

Not that they will - why bother forking out for Pentax if you are going to throw out the prime asset at the first opportunity?