Pentax's pro users have been largely medium format for many years. Whether they can retain a share of this market is uncertain, but they probably have a better chance in MF than in pro grade FF SLR. Paul On Sep 28, 2006, at 3:16 AM, Digital Image Studio wrote:
> On 28/09/06, Gonz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Its pretty clear that Pentax does not have the either the resources or >> the incentive to pull off a FF camera. >> >> First of all it would require two different lens lines, one for the >> smaller image circle, one for the larger. Even Canon, with their much >> deeper pockets, is pretty stretched right now supporting lenses for >> the >> high end FF and the smaller consumer and semi-professional APS sized >> lines. >> >> Second, in body SR is not going to work in the FF because of image >> circle limitations. Canon has the upper hand here because of the lens >> based IS, which is independent of the sensor size. But have you >> priced >> an IS lens lately? >> >> Third, Pentax believes that they are going to address the higher end >> market through their MF offering, but that may be too little too late. >> They have traditionally let Canon and Nikon fight over the high end >> 35mm >> market, with the exception of the LX. Unfortunately much of the MF >> market seems to have gone to high end 35mm digital, such as the Canon >> 1DSMkII. >> >> Finally, I think Pentax pulled out of the MZD project because of two >> things: 1. chip cost and availability 2. image quality. Even if you >> fixed 1, the image quality problem with FF sensors is real. There >> might >> be a technological fix in the future, and Leica's approach seems >> promising, but it seems Pentax's sensitivity to this issue is an >> obstacle to FF adoption. Of course chip availability and cost is >> still >> an issue. >> >> With the advent of super wides to cover the hole left by 1.5x crop >> factor, its not much of an issue to me any longer. The 12-24 is an >> amazing lens. The only remaining problem is noise due to smaller >> photo >> site sizes. If Pentax has done a good job managing this in the K10D, >> there is not a whole lot more that the FF is going to offer for the >> considerable premium it would require. I think the K10D has the >> potential to be about as good as it gets for an APS sized camera. > > Substitute FF for 645 in your discussion above. They 645 is the camera > that should not have been developing, the resources that is has > consumed could have been better utilized in serving Pentax's core SLR > market. > > > -- > Rob Studdert > HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA > Tel +61-2-9554-4110 > UTC(GMT) +10 Hours > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ > Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
