> From: John Sessoms <[email protected]> > > From: Larry Colen >> On Feb 3, 2013, at 10:17 AM, John Sessoms wrote: >> >>> From: David J Brooks >>> >>>> On Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 12:00 AM, David Savage >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> G'day All, >>>>> >>>>> Just popping back in to PDML land to see whats up. >>>>> >>>>> Anything new happening? A new FF Pentax on the horizon (with >>>>> hat sauce for Cotty). >>>> >>>> Apparently Pentax Forums is reporting a leaked memo that there is >>>> one in the works. But the source......... I myself am still eying >>>> the D600 at the moment >>>> >>>> Dave >>> >>> I've been looking at it too. It doesn't have a couple of things >>> Pentax does that I'd like to keep, but Pentax needs to move ahead >>> expeditiously toward getting a full frame body to market. >> >> >> There are a couple of problems with the D600. First of all it seems >> that for about the first 3,000 shutter actuations it splatters >> something onto the sensor that needs to be cleaned off. It also >> falls down in low light focus. In an informal test with similar >> lenses it was unable to lock focus on a scene that my K-5 was. >> >> But, damn! If I had a couple thousand dollars burning a hole in my >> pocket, I'd be very tempted. > > That's kind of where I am right now. I think Pentax should be able to > deliver a camera with all the good things the D600 has PLUS the good > things the K-5 is able to do at a competitive price. > > The D600 only looks attractive to the extent I can't get the full-frame > DSLR I want from Pentax. > > I don't expect to buy a D600. But if Pentax doesn't get off the dime, I > expect I will be buying whatever camera Nikon brings out to replace the > D600.
It's hard to be competitive when producing in the low volumes Pentax does. Most everybody wants a bargain and Pentax is viewed by many as the bargain brand, yet Pentax's per unit costs must trend higher than competitors because their volume is a mere fraction of, for example Nikon. That means per unit profit will tend to be lower. Add to that the aforementioned tendency of many Pentax users to 'wait until the price drops' and you can see the struggle they face. I expect that they'll need to produce a FF camera, regardless of profit margins, otherwise even their most die-hard proponents would have a hard time taking them seriously. Blah, blah, blah (all said before). I'm sure whatever they produce will be competent. Then the question becomes will they have the lenses to complement the increased resolution on a FF digital sensor? Right now there's nothing empiric to know how their best FF legacy lenses will work on a FF sensor. No doubt 'good enough' for web and smaller prints. So, following the way of APS-C and FF competitors, a new body will prompt many to purchase new, as of now, theoretical lenses. If that's true, then the question is, if I need new lenses to make the most out of the new body vs. accepting the likely limitations of legacy lenses, is there much difference between staying with Pentax and changing systems all together? Especially so, considering the glacial slowness at which they seem to be moving. I'm not anti-Pentax, simply pro-reality, wanting what I want in this lifetime and as far this side of the finish line as possible. Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
