Pentax FF DSLR - confirmed

they could solve the flash sync issue entirely by releasing a leaf shutter af teleconverter....
just mate the q to k adaptor to the old af 1.7 teleconverter....

I could live with that.....

Sadly, I fear that will be the case, people's eyes being bigger than their pockets

I hope I'm wrong

I would guess that they don't charge 2K plus as an APSC is not their top DSLR. It's a stop gap to the top models. The K5 II will no doubt be good value. It is also a stop gap camera.

Best regards

I'll buy one but not sure why you feel sad or in fear that others won't?

I might do, but I am watching the falling price of the d600 with interest. My next body is going to be the k-5 mkiis, I've got a currys voucher to spend so soon as they have it in stock my order will be in...

Well, we've seen this before when people cry out for something, then when it comes along it's too expensive or it's too little too late etc.

As I said though...I hope I'm wrong.

It will be too late in my case (although I have never cried out for a FF body). Most of my Canon lenses are FF compatible and I have the 5D MKIII firmly set in my sights atm.

Looking at my Pentax lens line up I really can't see much point in going full frame with the brand.

Funny - all the moaning at the moment seems to be coming from people who don't want one

People complaining that Pentax don't do this, that or the other. Or complaining that items are too expensive are actually good things. They are drivers to development, and drivers to price reductions. Of course those who didn't complain about the poor ISO capablities of the K20 or K7 won't appreciate the improvements on the K5. Guess some would rather pay launch price for a K5 than the current reduced price.

I've never moaned about what pentax do or don't, I've wished for stuff like the FA primes being made into a plastic fantastic version like the da 50mm or 35mm.

My own situation has changes significantly. I an wanting to do football and to do that the agencies will only accept images from canikon so unfortunately I can't wait until 2014 for ff, but the mkiis will be good for my concert work.

Because developing FF plus the mimimum 2 or 3 lenses which will be required to make it viable at lauch will require considerable investment from Pentax, and if they don't make an adequate return on that investment, they could be in financial difficulties, something that would affect all Pentax users regarless whether they're interested in FF or not.

Hmmm. I would hypothetically speaking be interested in a Pentax 2013 model FF camera.

I have quite a few lenses that would be well suited to FF, and had in any case decided to do nothing before the new generation of Sony sensors are introduced next year promising a major step up in capabilities.

However, trying to parse the comments in the OP’s quote I am far from convinced that a FF market introduction is ‘confirmed’. Of course these translated interviews are never masterpieces of clarity, but as far as I can see he confirms they have a development program in progress, albeit so far lacking in for example a sensor. He then seemingly goes on to say that it is a law of nature that this invariably leads to a market introduction, but of course that is complete nonsense.

We shall see. . .

Where were the 2 or 3 new lenses when the 645D was launched? There are already FF lenses from Pentax.

Is it just a case of sod the FF camp if it means impacting the cropped user base? Only three of my Pentax lenses are cropped/APSC.

Now it's time for Pentax to step up to the line. I think its safe to say that the K5 & K5 II are as good as an APSC body can be so what are you losing if Pentax launch a FF. I am sure they will sell more FF than they have the 645D.

I can't see Ricoh Pentax in financial difficulties over a FF body as they basically built a K7 into a 645D body so a FF body is not a show stopper.

Best regards

Lurking behind all this appears to be this undercurrent of fear about the continuing viability of the Pentax product, and the obvious personal concern about how those of us with such a 'stake' in it would be affected.

It was an easy choice for me as I was largely starting from scratch and the range of old manual lenses was very enticing, but I admit to having glanced at the current offerings from Samsung and wondered if one day the only (new) thing to attach my lovely lenses to will be called a NX-260 or something.

As far as the FF model is concerned, I imagine profits-wise it would be a fairly small part of the mix - isn't the main part of the market moving towards CSCs and bridge style cameras? Surely the financial viability of Pentax will be more tied to the success or otherwise of the successors to the Q, K-01 etc (and new lenses to go on them)?

It's part of the function of forums to speculate, so it will be interesting to see who is closest in a couple of years time.

There's little point in having a fear of what may or may not happen as fortunes of all companies can go up and down in unexpected ways. In 1964 you would have had you money on Nikon, Pentax, Minolta and Canon, possibly in that order, as the biggest names. By 1974 in might have been Canon, Nikon, Pentax and Olympus. Now, I guess it's Nikon, Canon, Sony and Pentax.

There are plenty of lenses and bodies still around for most options, so there will be I think plenty of Pentax for longer than we'll all care about it.

The FF segment of the market is small in volume terms but is much more important in terms of value and profit. More so because FF customers are additionally likely to sink a great deal of money into expensive FF glass, significantly enhancing the overall attractiveness of the segment.

But this is a serious problem for Pentax, who effectively stopped developing FF glass maybe 10 years ago. If they want to have even a rudimentary lens lineup I would have thought they need to introduce at least 3 zoom lenses to compliment the existing FF limiteds. Needless to say this significantly increases the financial risk of entering the FF segment, in terms of the investment required.

On the other hand if they go with just the existing Limited lenses as the Pentax guy appears to suggest is a possibility, the appeal of the FF offering to potential system switchers would IMO be greatly reduced, regardless of the wider issues regarding aftermarket service.

Furthermore, because of Pentax’s admirable if commercially suicidal commitment to backwards lens compatibility, there is a load of fairly high quality glass potentially available on the second hand market; again this reduces demand for new FF glass and the potential for Pentax to generate an acceptable return on investment.