Pentax Rumoured To Announce the K-3 Full Frame DSLR At Photokina


Smeggypants

Link Posted 20/06/2012 - 18:21
mecrox wrote:
I was recently standing next to some press photographers who had the whole full-frame thang with them to cover an event. The size of their kit was just ridiculous for any other purpose and must have weighed a ton. I reckon each one was carrying at least £10,000 or £15,000' worth of equipment (2x bodies, 3-4x top-end lenses).

Is this really what so many folks are alleged to want? Light and compact (and, er, not £15,000) is the way to go, imho. Pentax have always been very savvy about this, but I don't know how easy it is to keep it compact on FF. Going larger and more expensive is a very odd thing to do when the rest of the world is going for smaller, lighter, nimbler and often cheaper too - mobiles, laptops, etc. It could be that the whole Full Frame ballyhoo is about ten years behind the times. Come and gone already. Unless you are a press or media person who really really needs this stuff, the world's moved on.

I would agree, however if your brand is used by press/media/sports pro snappers ( as per Canon and Nikon ) then that presumably trickles down to more sales to hobbyists. Hobbyists who want more compact, cheaper, lighter equipment. I bet the vast majority of Canon and Nikon sales are APS-C models.

Good move by Pentax to move into more pro-markets I say. I'll probably be envious as I don't have the budget for a Pentax FF body at the moment, but I'm not sure if FF is the way I want to go anyway. I want better high ISO performance. That's goign to be the main factor that drives my next DLSR body purchase
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283

Pentaxophile

Link Posted 20/06/2012 - 18:46
mecrox wrote:
Is this really what so many folks are alleged to want? Light and compact (and, er, not £15,000) is the way to go, imho. Pentax have always been very savvy about this, but I don't know how easy it is to keep it compact on FF. Going larger and more expensive is a very odd thing to do when the rest of the world is going for smaller, lighter, nimbler and often cheaper too - mobiles, laptops, etc.

I think mirrorless camera systems are gnawing at APSC DSLR sales at one end, and FF cameras are sucking away consumers who have already upgraded to the top APSC model at the other. I think a lot of people want those smaller, lighter cheaper devices but many, onced sucked in to 'enthusiast' photography, they start upgrading. If you already have a Sony NEX or something like that, a K5 vs a 5D mkIII both look big cameras, yet the latter offers a more decisive image quality improvement.

Even if this hypothetical NEX user doesn't jump straight to a full frame camera, going to Canikon would make sense if there's aspiration of doing that a few years down the line. Pentax may be ruled out because this is something they do not currently offer.

Furthermore, Pentax has to encourage existing users to upgrade, and perhaps to part with a bit more cash when they do so. Offering a FF option might encourage more K5 users to upgrade, because it's hard to imagine an APSC camera much better than the K5 (in IQ terms at least).
[link=https://500px.com/will_brealey/[/link]
Last Edited by Pentaxophile on 20/06/2012 - 18:49

Pentaxophile

Link Posted 20/06/2012 - 19:23
vrapan wrote:
Also the D600 is fairly compact for FF standards but the lenses are just as massive and heavy as for the rest of the FF. So as far as FF is concerned even a K-5 sized/weighing camera is not going to make much of a dent if you still have to carry FF glass.

Of course on the other hand a K-3+FAltds is unmatched for size/weight compared to Canon/Nikon exactly like the K-5+DAltds is.

There are people out there who thought nothing of buying the X-pro 1, with it's three lenses, the minute it was released. The set up had a wallet-sucking sense of exclusivity and quality about it. The FAltds are what non-Pentax users tend to talk about whenever they are being remotely positive about Pentax. They are desirable. If Pentax were to release a 'unique' FF camera, they would surely wish to capitalise on that. Some people have deep pockets and just can't be without new 'shiny things'....
[link=https://500px.com/will_brealey/[/link]
Last Edited by Pentaxophile on 20/06/2012 - 19:27

Mike-P

Link Posted 20/06/2012 - 19:34
beakynet wrote:

Not unreasonable as I think a crop on a 24MP sensor would give 16MP.

The D700 has a 12MP sensor and gives 5MP files in DX mode.
Presumably that would mean a 24MP sensor would give 10MP files.
. My Flickr

Algernon

Link Posted 20/06/2012 - 20:27
Don't forget the FF market is minuscule and already overcrowded
and possibly on the decrease.

It was posted on here some time back that the only FF in the Top 20
Best Sellers (APS-C, MFT etc. ) in Japan last year was the Canon 5D
at No:20 with massive 1.5% of the market. So assuming Pentax's sales
to be 5% of Canon's they could pinch 0.075% of the market

Also do you honestly believe that they will use the same naming
system (K-5... K-3 etc.) for a FF
Half Man... Half Pentax ... Half Cucumber

Pentax K-1 + K-5 and some other stuff

Algi
Last Edited by Algernon on 20/06/2012 - 20:29

JAK

Link Posted 20/06/2012 - 21:40
beakynet wrote:
fatspider wrote:
unless of course the F/F has some gizmo which crops the sensor to APS-C and allows use of DA lenses.

Not unreasonable as I think a crop on a 24MP sensor would give 16MP.

I've just tried the maths on this:

Full Frame sensor size = 36mm x 24mm = 864 sq mm
APS-C (K-5) Sensor size= 23.7mm x 15.7mm = 372 sq mm
So with a bit of algebra

X =
372 x 24 = 10.4 MP
864

Where X = the MP component of a 24 MP sensor

Of course, though, a sensor can be made to give other resolutions to this they are usually only lower!

At best if the crop was to exactly half frame size (24mm x 18mm) the resolution would be 24 / 2 = 12 MP.

If someone can prove the APS-C component of a 24 MP sensor could be 16MP then I'll be curious to see that calculation!

John
John K
Last Edited by JAK on 20/06/2012 - 21:45

Pentaxophile

Link Posted 20/06/2012 - 23:53
Algernon wrote:
Don't forget the FF market is minuscule and already overcrowded
and possibly on the decrease.

It was posted on here some time back that the only FF in the Top 20
Best Sellers (APS-C, MFT etc. ) in Japan last year was the Canon 5D
at No:20 with massive 1.5% of the market. So assuming Pentax's sales
to be 5% of Canon's they could pinch 0.075% of the market

Also do you honestly believe that they will use the same naming
system (K-5... K-3 etc.) for a FF

It has to be K1

I don't know why we argue on this subject sometimes. Pentax will make the decision on commercial grounds. But they're not afraid of marketing niche items - the 645d comes to mind. I'm sure the percentage of sales of cameras it accounts for is minuscule, much smaller than they could expect for FF, but I think most people agree it was a worthwhile project and I believe sales exceeded their humble expectations (and at one point, their manufacturing capacity if I remember rightly).
[link=https://500px.com/will_brealey/[/link]

Smeggypants

Link Posted 21/06/2012 - 00:31
Algernon wrote:
Don't forget the FF market is minuscule and already overcrowded
and possibly on the decrease.

It was posted on here some time back that the only FF in the Top 20
Best Sellers (APS-C, MFT etc. ) in Japan last year was the Canon 5D
at No:20 with massive 1.5% of the market.
So assuming Pentax's sales
to be 5% of Canon's they could pinch 0.075% of the market

Also do you honestly believe that they will use the same naming
system (K-5... K-3 etc.) for a FF

Indeed, but top end pro products are always only going to sell a fraction of the mass market hobbiest products.
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283

K10D

Link Posted 21/06/2012 - 01:01
michaelblue wrote:
Gwyn wrote:
If it is to be a full frame it will be interesting to see how many people who have been demanding one actually buy one. It should be a major hit on it's launch day if all those full frame protagonists are to be believed. Of course whether they are willing to pay the price for it is another matter...
No doubt they'll all start moaning about the lack of FF lenses for it immediately too, just too give them something else to complain about :

Spot on.....they'll probably all be looking for excuses NOT to buy one.

If it happens, I will buy one as I have already bought the Ltd.ís.

It also means all my other Pentax FF lenses can be used properly, as designed. My Pentax wide angle lenses would be back to wide angle and not crippled on APSC. My Pentax shift lens will be able to be used properly.

As for the lack of FF lenses, how is that possible? The best Pentax lenses are FF, the top Ex Sigma's are FF, and the fast Chinese brands are FF.

I'd be more concerned about AF and flash systems for Pentax than who uses APS-C or FF.

This thread shows a marked split between the FF and APS-C camps. Each to their own.

Best regards
When something goes wrong in the circus, they send clowns into the arena to distract the audience.

Smeggypants

Link Posted 21/06/2012 - 05:14
K10D wrote:

It also means all my other Pentax FF lenses can be used properly, as designed.

Actually this is a good reason why I would like an FF Body.
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283

Algernon

Link Posted 21/06/2012 - 08:56
Pentaxophile wrote:
Algernon wrote:
Don't forget the FF market is minuscule and already overcrowded
and possibly on the decrease.

It was posted on here some time back that the only FF in the Top 20
Best Sellers (APS-C, MFT etc. ) in Japan last year was the Canon 5D
at No:20 with massive 1.5% of the market. So assuming Pentax's sales
to be 5% of Canon's they could pinch 0.075% of the market

Also do you honestly believe that they will use the same naming
system (K-5... K-3 etc.) for a FF

It has to be K1

I don't know why we argue on this subject sometimes. Pentax will make the decision on commercial grounds. But they're not afraid of marketing niche items - the 645d comes to mind. I'm sure the percentage of sales of cameras it accounts for is minuscule, much smaller than they could expect for FF, but I think most people agree it was a worthwhile project and I believe sales exceeded their humble expectations (and at one point, their manufacturing capacity if I remember rightly).

The 645D had been in development for years and they had a large
R&D Dept. for most of that time.

For a camera that's only going to get about 0.075% of the market
share they would have to use a large percentage of their production
facilities They haven't got a camera in the Top 10 at present
and they need to concentrate on rectifying that. Japan Top 10 Link

7 of the Top 10 are APS-C(ish) SLR's.
Half Man... Half Pentax ... Half Cucumber

Pentax K-1 + K-5 and some other stuff

Algi
Last Edited by Algernon on 21/06/2012 - 08:59

MrB

Link Posted 21/06/2012 - 09:01
We usually view a photograph when it is transmitted by a monitor or HDTV, or projected onto a screen, or displayed as a print. Each of those has its own limitations of characteristics such as resolution, contrast, dynamic range, etc. (as do our eyes). So I ask this question out of curiosity -

Would a person with normal vision, when viewing any of those from the optimum distance for the image size, be able to perceive any differences in quality between the same images of the same composition recorded by a high quality APS-C camera like the K-5 and by a full-frame dslr, assuming the use of similar quality lenses?

I suppose the question could also be - With cameras such as the K-5, when using good quality lenses, have we already passed the point at which the camera technology is capable of exceeding the image quality that is perceptible by the human visual system, when viewing by any of the available methods of display?

For many photographers the answer should one of the serious considerations, along with the advantages/disadvantages of the apparent shortened depth of field, and the low-light noise levels, in their choice whether to move to full-frame. Then, taken together, they can decide if the differences are enough of a perceptible improvement to justify the great increase in expense, as well as the extra size and weight, of a full-frame system.

But still, there will always be some people who simply want to own what they regard as the best!

Philip

Pentaxophile

Link Posted 21/06/2012 - 10:24
MrB wrote:
We usually view a photograph when it is transmitted by a monitor or HDTV, or projected onto a screen, or displayed as a print. Each of those has its own limitations of characteristics such as resolution, contrast, dynamic range, etc. (as do our eyes). So I ask this question out of curiosity -

Would a person with normal vision, when viewing any of those from the optimum distance for the image size, be able to perceive any differences in quality between the same images of the same composition recorded by a high quality APS-C camera like the K-5 and by a full-frame dslr, assuming the use of similar quality lenses?

After reading the 'Some Full Frame Shots and Thoughts' thread on the US Pentax forum, I'd say yes, in the many cases. The pictures just have slightly more depth and 'pop' for want of a better word. Images taken with pedestrian 50mm f1.8 lenses are better than the closest we can achieve on APSC IMO; and we have to resort to rather expensive, large 35mm lenses with huge apertures to get the same look.

But yep there are some examples where you wouldn't be able to tell. If you can't tell from a 1000px web image, it's not worth bothering about but as I say there is frequently a difference.
[link=https://500px.com/will_brealey/[/link]

Pentaxophile

Link Posted 21/06/2012 - 10:35
Algernon wrote:
For a camera that's only going to get about 0.075% of the market
share they would have to use a large percentage of their production
facilities They haven't got a camera in the Top 10 at present
and they need to concentrate on rectifying that. .

If Pentax did decide to pursue FF, I'm sure they could do the manufacturing in a way that didn't affect their production of APSC cameras. We're not talking about building the large hadron collider or putting a man on Mars here. Did the 645D affect their DSLR production? Or the K-01 The manufacturing set up for a FF camera is presumably much closer to their usual DSLRs too...

Algernon wrote:
7 of the Top 10 are APS-C(ish) SLR's.

All of those top-10 APSC cameras are from brands which offer a FF upgrade path. I'm not saying that's the only reason Canikon/Sony are more popular but I bet it doesn't hurt.
[link=https://500px.com/will_brealey/[/link]

cabstar

Link Posted 21/06/2012 - 10:42
Re press photographers you ussuallu find they have a ff body with a 24-70 attached and a crop sensor body with a 70-200 attached to take advantage of the crop sensor...
PPG Wedding photography Flickr
Concert photography

Currently on a Pentax hiatus until an FF Pentax is released
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.