jky
Well-known
I would love to see Pentax release a FF camera. I've always been a big fan of a few of their dslrs (*ist D, DS, K7, K5). Their cameras just seem to fit my hand and, speaking specifically of the DS, K7, are very ergonomic.
why doesn't pentax have a full-frame?
- Thread starter msbarnes
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 49
- Views 9K
Right, the Kodak CCD sensor is 33x44mm with 40 Mpx. And it was a years-long and teasing gestation. I was pretty excited when it came out, as I have a bunch of P645 lenses.
By comparison, the Leica S2, at twice the cost, has a 30x45mm Kodak sensor with 37.5 Mpx... and a form-factor more like a large 35mm dSLR in contrast to other MF digitals. This is an important issue, as I have preferred the handling of the similarly-arranged Pentax 67 over that of the boxy P645.
I'd be happy to see a 24x36mm sensor Pentax dSLR for more usage of the great Pentax primes, but I wonder if the closest we'll get is the coming Leica M with EVF on top and a K-mount lens adapter...
denizg7
Well-known
is pentax going bankrupt in the next 4 years or so
Smaller companies often need to find a market niche with little/no competition to find some profit. As with Leica. The Pentax 645D hits a niche, as do the recent smaller Pentax releases.
A 24x36 version of the K7 might have to be slightly larger to still allow room for sensor shake reduction, but this puts them in direct competition with the big boys. Add a further couple of mm and there might be a new niche created between FF and MF... Say Pentax (now with a bit more steam from the Ricoh merger) could slide a new model in that niche if they could find someone to make them a sensor of about 26x39mm and 30+ Mpx. Well, there goes lens compatibility 🙁
charjohncarter
Veteran
Maybe they don't want to. Entering the pro-level isn't really all that profitable. Even Sony which has more money than God isn't working really that hard at FF DSLR. The world is changing SLR style cameras may be on there way out except for specialty situations. Mirrorless is the future even though it had a slow start.
I also read that the potential for better quality photos is not that great when stepping up from APS-C to FF. The real quality increase is when you jump to MF sensors. So why spend to money on FF when they are obsolete the minute you buy them (plus they break down). You could just buy a box DSLR APC-S and dispose of it with very little outlay.
ChrisN
Striving
With the notion of "niche market" in mind, I still think the idea of a square sensor, at 24mm x 24mm, could be a success*. Tha Pentax APS-C sensor is 23.7 x 15.7mm. A 24 x 24 square sensor could utilise just about all the Pentax DA series lenses designed for the APS-C sensor.
Anyone else want a square sensor? Long live the square! 🙂
* Edit: This idea was floated on the Pentaxforums site a few years ago.
Anyone else want a square sensor? Long live the square! 🙂
* Edit: This idea was floated on the Pentaxforums site a few years ago.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
Mirrorless did not sweep the market in a month, but I wouldn't say it was a slow start. If we consider the span of photographic history its acceptance has been rather swift, in fact. Particularly when one considers the 40+ year dominance of the 35mm SLR standard.
jky
Well-known
I'd LOVE a square sensor. Yes, that's it - Pentax should release a square sensored faux-flex camera: a Penta-faux-flex with a 24x24 sensor, a 3.5" lcd on top for the reflex feel without the mirrored (backward) view. It'll look like a Rollei 6006/8 with a nice 35mm f2 in front.
They'd be the only one in the market.
Sorry for veering off topic.
zuiko85
Veteran
What is the "magic" of full frame. Why should a digital sensor conform to a frame based on the limitations of 100+ year old double perforated 35mm movie film!
It is digital folks. It can be any shape. The optimum is probably square to take maximum advantage of a lens image circle. No need for a 'vertical grip'. All cropping done on sensor. Or even *GASP* square pictures. (Worked for years for Rolleiflex and Hasselblad shooters)
I know, I know.....legacy lenses and lens mounts. "I want my existing wide angle lenses to be wide angle!" Etc, etc, etc.
What if, when roll film came out the photographers (the few there were) started complaining ".....no, no, no, you have to make it the same size as my full plate camera!"
It is digital folks. It can be any shape. The optimum is probably square to take maximum advantage of a lens image circle. No need for a 'vertical grip'. All cropping done on sensor. Or even *GASP* square pictures. (Worked for years for Rolleiflex and Hasselblad shooters)
I know, I know.....legacy lenses and lens mounts. "I want my existing wide angle lenses to be wide angle!" Etc, etc, etc.
What if, when roll film came out the photographers (the few there were) started complaining ".....no, no, no, you have to make it the same size as my full plate camera!"
denizg7
Well-known
zuiko85
Veteran
Come to think of it, I like small cameras. I have been a fan of 35mm half frame for years because the Pen f gave me interchangeable lenses with through the lens viewing in a compact form. If I had the money a OMD would be my choice. That and a small set of compact primes.
btgc
Veteran
I'm so satisfied my first DSLR were istD not 300D 🙂 Only minus I can think of is placement of resolution, WB and ISO options on same dial with shooting modes.
Major increase in IQ I saw were going from small sensors to APS-C (much much more then between 1/2.5" and 1/1.8" or 1/1.6"), so 4/3 even being smaller than APS-C plays in same league. Well, IQ isn't sensor size alone, there come circuits and algorithms, too. Probably benefit in IQ using FF sensor vs APS-C is similar to using APS-C compared 4/3. Sure, FF is good for owners of legacy lenses.
Major increase in IQ I saw were going from small sensors to APS-C (much much more then between 1/2.5" and 1/1.8" or 1/1.6"), so 4/3 even being smaller than APS-C plays in same league. Well, IQ isn't sensor size alone, there come circuits and algorithms, too. Probably benefit in IQ using FF sensor vs APS-C is similar to using APS-C compared 4/3. Sure, FF is good for owners of legacy lenses.
Lss
Well-known
I like the idea of putting an LCD screen in the middle of one of the control wheels. Is this done in any production camera? It would certainly open up some great customization possibilities.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Ricoh has bought Pentax recently. So my crystal ball says 'no'.
denizg7
Well-known
o i did not know this..
maitani
Well-known
I even read some pre-photokina reports in some official newspapers, that they are finally showing the K-3 full frame dslr, pretty sure they will but most probably in spring, 2013.
steveniphoto
Well-known
after owning APS-C cameras and them moving to full frame i can honestly say that i was extremely underwhelmed. the extra shallow DOF is great for portraits but thats about it (keep in mind i also shoot film so i do have "full frame cameras"). honestly i dont need the extra high ISO, DR, FPS, etc etc and i doubt most people need them too (unless you're a professional and make a living with the camera).
i dont think pentax needs to enter the FF market. there's already too many options from Sony/Canon/Nikon so unless it was extremely affordable i just dont think it would sell. i personally would be perfectly happy with a K5 or a K30 and some limited glass.
i dont think pentax needs to enter the FF market. there's already too many options from Sony/Canon/Nikon so unless it was extremely affordable i just dont think it would sell. i personally would be perfectly happy with a K5 or a K30 and some limited glass.
gavinlg
Veteran
35mm sensors are way easier on lenses than aps-c sensors (imo). When I went from an aps-c camera (30d) to a 35mm camera (5d), all my lenses at the time (35mm f2, 50mm f1.2L, 85mm f1.8, 17-40mm f4L) suddenly felt like they had been sprinkled with magical pixie dust and had become sharper, with better contrast and optical performance overnight. If anything, aps-c sensors are harder on lenses - they're magnifying one little portion of the glass which is magnifying any weak points.
Here's a flickr search of images taken with FA limited lenses adapted to a 5d:
http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=FA+limited+5d&ss=2&s=int
Looks pretty good to me....
charjohncarter
Veteran
Maybe I should have said, 'a slow start considering today's appetite for all things technologically new.' Samsung, I think, had a mirrorless four or five years ago.
I also wonder and wondered why they didn't come up with it before. Maybe, misplaced loyalty to the mechanical past.
jett
Well-known
This is probably a naive question, but did Pentax compete with Nikon/Canon in the pro market in the 35mm days?
I'm youngish so I mostly know who the top camera makers are in digital (usually the full-frame guys) but I'm not sure about film.
I know that Nikon and Canon have been making a fleet of professional cameras with tons of accessories but everyone else seems muddled.
I'm youngish so I mostly know who the top camera makers are in digital (usually the full-frame guys) but I'm not sure about film.
I know that Nikon and Canon have been making a fleet of professional cameras with tons of accessories but everyone else seems muddled.