Friday, September 26, 2008

Interview with Senior Pentax Official at Photokina

Here is the latest interview with the Assistant Head of the Business Division and Head of Product Development and Co-ordination Division of Pentax, Mr. 北沢利之, by the Japanese DC Watch:-

http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/other/2008/09/26/9317.html
(Article in Japanese)

I summarise below and try my best to translate the key points as follows, with reporter's questions in green, answers by the Pentax official in blue, and my remarks and comments in red:-

Warning 1: Well, do beware of those boring sales talks and quite some contradictions and disorders thereafter . I just wonder if this guy is actually a sales rep or an engineer? :-))


Warning 2: The questions raised are quite acute, to-the-point and of huge concerns by quite some Pentaxians. For those easily-angry blinded brand fanboys. Please don't read on! A heart-attack may result! ;-)


Okay, let's go!

Q1: The K20D and K200D have already been marketed this year. The K-m as the 3rd product lanuched in 2008, what are Pentax's intentions and targets?

A1: T
he aim and purpose of developing the K-m is to seek more DSLR market share so as to secure our business. By considering that the number of entry level DSLRs constitutes around 70% of all the DSLRs in the market whereas up-market models are only at about 5% where the K20D belongs to, in which actually the number of this type of potential buyers is actually uncertain, it's important to make a "mid-level" entry level Pentax DSLR as now the K200D is an "upper-level" entry level DSLR model of Pentax.

My Comments: First, I really find it funny that he dared to tell the world that the K20D is an up-market model of the top 5%. In fact, the latest sales price of the K20D already says it all. Second, the innovative terms of "upper-level" and "mid-level" entry level DSLRs are really amazing! Well, to use his innovation in using words, I would say the K20D is either an "entry level" mid-grade APS-C DSLR Or an "upper-level" entry-level DSLR! .. for whatever anyone like to call it! ;-) Which one you like and choose btw? ;-D


Q2: The market positioning of the K-m is obvious. But actually what are the targets and the reasons behind, for a camera with that specifications?

A2. T
he specific target buyers for the K-m is for ladies and younger persons. Now that the dominant age group of DSLR users is in the age range of 40 to 60. However, in 3 to 4 years time, it is predicted that the age group of 20 to 30 will become dominant. For the gender share, ladies are now at round 10% and in 1 to 2 years time, it might come up to around 20 to 30%.


Q3: It is absolutely not a new idea and concept for targeting for the female market and younger persons. Afterall, it is just a concept, tell us more specifics about (the design concepts of) the K-m?

A3. The K-m was designed and made with the main goals of minisation and weight decreasing. And more importantly, to make it easy to use and to increase picture quality as well as to raise shooting performance. And, with the kit lens and batteries installed, the K-m kit is amongst the world 3 lightest APS-C DSLR and the world's smallest.

My Comments: So, it's a "perfect" camera then? But in fact, the above are mostly unimportant pure sales talk in my eyes. Everyone knows about the specs on weight and size. What're actually special and unique in the current market, actually? The K-m has no Live View which beginners and novices or even advanced amateurs love. And in fact it's not the smallest nor lightest. It has in-body image stabilisation, though. But then Sony entry level counterparts also have.


Q4: The "Help" Button?

A4. T
he most easily accessible place for the index finger has been reserved and allocated for the new "Help" button which provides handy and useful detailed descriptions of functions and operations on-the-go.

My Comments: Well, I agree that this somehow new idea and feature is nice and quite user friendly. (Well, the *ist DS firmware 2.0 first introduced LCD "online" guidance when the user operates the camera.) Btw, I bet new users will not need to bring any user manual with them as it has just been bulit into the camera body with this factility. Nonetheless, I think this feature is important and useful just for beginners, but not for any advanced shooters.


New AF Algorithms:

Q5: For quite a while, there have been strong voices for seeking improvements on the AF system of Pentax DSLRs. How about that?


A5: Although basically the AF sensing hardware used in the K-m is the same as that used in the K20D and K200D, newly improved software and calculation algorithms will make it different, in various ways.


My Comments: Well, that's a good thing and I feel good for what Pentax have *finally* done something to deal with their infamous slow and inferior AF system of their DSLRs for years. However, I have some reservations if it's *merely* the software could do the magic. Let's wait and see. And, will the AF accuracy decreased or we really can get the best of both worlds? Time will tell and users will tell ! But, if it is really so, it just means that the bottom of the line K-m will blow the "flagship" K20D out of the water in the AF department, just like what many other entry level DSLRs of other brands could do long ago! Don't believe? Just try a 450D, Sony A350 or Olympus E-420!

And, how about the metering/exposure accuracy improvement for the current unreliable Pentax DSLR exposure system which usually gives inconsistent results and great errors? No Improvement of any kind or by any means?



Q6: Last time the hot and popular DSLR model of Pentax was the K10D which was announced in Photokina 2006. The K10D seeked quite some attentions and received lots of good reviews and appraisals. How about the response for the K-m this time?

A6: The responses from the dealers have been very good so far. It is actually even faster than what K10D did of which the demand was built up gradually. We are now prepared and ready for high volume production so as to meet the demand.

My Comments: Well, just believe it OR not! (There is nothing that can be verified)


Q7: Any plan for expanding the current 3 hierachy of product lines? Any Full Frame body?

A7: The DA lens lineup supports fully the current 3 hierachies of bodies. Basicially, we shall keep updating the products with the current configuration of 3.

My Comments: Well, did he actually answer the question? Yes, but indirectly! The answer is there will be no more upper model above the K20D, not even an APS-C KxD. And of course NO Full Frame body! Oh, well, my God! NOOOOOooooooooooo!!


Q8: So, it means that the K20D and K20D will be replaced. But When?

A8: Before Summer 2009, so as to meet the dates of major Awards and to meet the shipment and delivery dates of Christmas which is of high hopes and expections.

My Comments: Really strange - are Pentax making products for the sake of getting Prizes and Awards? And, how do they know they can get the Awards even if they catch in the dates? (That's *Silly* IMHO). Finally, what's the 6 months in between the Summer to Christmas to do? (Am I really missing something and (yet again) "fail to understand" all those. l think YES, I *must* admit!). In short, I just find the answers and "logics" are just so miraculous!


Q9: Really No Lineup Expansion and no Full Frame?

A9: No. Full Frame sensors have actually been adopted in many competitors' products. The Full Frame products will come down in prices and so do the prices for the mid-range products. Nevertheless, we are always carrying out feasilibility studies on the adoption of Full Frame sensor. However, no actual project for the development of Full Frame product has started.

My Comments: In his words, he unintentionally expressed the facts and what he thinks in heart actually - Full Frame products are up-market products but they are becoming cheaper even. It's the trend. But didn't he forget that he had mentioned that the K20D is the 5% up-market product? Anyway, what are actually the points he want to raise? I really don't get it! You?


Q10: The Viability of 645D for Commercial Usage? 645D current project status (in PIE 2007 Pentax said that "we must do the 645D)?

A10: The project was suspended for a few times owing to the lack of resources but it has not been stopped. The 645D is targeted for artists and landscape photographers for professional usage and for the highest possible picture quality.

My Comments: Actually, he just said that Pentax are uncertain for how many K20D target customers could be secured for the top 5% of "upper class" *mainstream* DSLR buyers/users. How dare they could go ahead on the 645D project, even considering the "lack of internal resources". IF I were HOYA, I must stop and abandon this dead-end project immediate and just put all the remaining (already limited) resources on an upper class Pentax DSLR body. At least ONE ABOVE THE Kx0D, even it is STILL APS-C (as he also said about for what the DA lens lineup (just) supports in the above).


Q11: 35mm Full Frame Vs APS-C??

A11: A full frame body and system must incorporate a Full Frame lens lineup and a ful review is required. Currrently, the image circle of the APS-C lenses and 35mm Full Frame lenses are different and the different image circles are both made tightly with the sensor size. It is therefore it is difficult for 35mm full frame to meet the most demanding commercial use owing to the limitation in size.

My Comments: I think this reporter was really troublesome! :-) He asked question repeatedly in somehow different ways until he could get more information! So, how about APS-C. 645D is not coming soon and in Pentax land there is even no "35mm Full Frame". What was that Pentax Head actually talking about? And, did he know what he was talking about himself, at that time??


Q12: Full Frame DSLRs have been popular and prices are coming down. This would certainly pull down the prices of the APS-C DSLRs below and marketing postions of different DSLRs will become less differentiated. Any worry?

A12: Yes but we have to face it. But possibly, APS-C has the advantages of being compact and lightweight. Moreover, if we can achieve in making close to ordinary Full Frame image quality with APS-C DSLRs. We do know that if the image quality is not high enough and the DSLRs are not small enough, we are difficult to survive.

My Comments: Well, how can they do that *actually*? Do anyone of us actually believe *miracles*? They want to and aimed to do *miracles*?? How can the picture quality of APS-C to meet the "ordinary" (typical?) picture and image quality of the Full Frames???


Q13: So, the new two replacement models in the next summer will target at the ordinary picture quality of the 35mm Full Frame?

A13: Yes, it is.

Q13a: But since it is generally known that the Signal-to-Noise (S/N) bottle neck is at the sensor, without using 35mm Full Frame sensor, it is difficult to improve the overall S/N ratio, with the same current generation of technology. How to do it?

A13a: We cannot disclose more detailed information at this stage. But we shall do it. There are a lot of opportunities to achieve better image quality and we are now jointly developing sensor(s?) with other sensor manufacturer(s? Remarks: all nouns in Japanese are not countable).

Q13b: Do post-processing in camera and (enhanced) A/D conversion could help in improving overall image quality? How about Noise Reduction?

A13b: Yes, both. And those are what we are exploring. Just for example, for the reproduction of greens and tonal response..

Q13c: For what you have just said about the joint development with sensor manufacturer. Is it the newer generation of the K20D Samsung sensor under the pipeline?

A13c: We chose the best sensor for different products at different times. Just say the K20D has the Samsung 14.6MP sensor but the K200D and the K-m both use the Sony 10MP sensor. Anyway, the technologies and techniques we have mastered in developing these products will help us to realise higher picture quality close to Full Frame in the future.

My Comments: Well, I have no more to say. The reporter had asked all the questions which are in the brains of many digital Pentaxians and now we have known more official directions of Pentax now. In short, they have already completed their lineup and there will be no more upper model nor another product hierachy to come. And, they will not have Full Frame even in 2009 and no actual project of any for Full Frame system (nor body nor lenses) has started!

I opt not to translate the last pair of Q and A in the last two paragraphs as I think the incredible, amazing and miraculous answers of that Pentax highly ranked official have been more than enough and it seems that even he himself had been in a big loss in the second half of the interview when he nerves were touched repeated by the reporter on the Full Frame issue and the cruel market reality!

Finally, sorry for the poor translations as it is somehow difficult for me but I do hope you guys/gals find it useful and interesting. The interviewer had actually asked very good questions and in fact we do get quite some new information, putting aside the contradictions shown and other typical sales talks (which any rep must be promoting). But if I were him, I think I would answer even worse - how can he answer for all those questions with no answer by Pentax actually at all?!

(Afterall, I feel for him!)

34 Comments:

Anonymous said...

If no FF is event in the horizon, it's time to move away from Pentax. How a compagny expect to keep an user base without proposing an upgrade path ??

And come'on, they is no way to achieve FF IQ with aps-c, even if that was possible, do they believe others manufacturers will not update theirs sensors in such a way too??

That's all BS and prove there is not much to wait from them. Keep your money and spend it in a brand you can grow.

Anonymous said...

Don't forget that they are still working on 645D, which will have even better quality than the FF. So there you go. That's the upgrade path. The DA lineup is designed for the APS-c, thus you cannot use those lenses on a FF camera.
I am quite confident that they will be improving the K20D and K200D quality further.
I don't undersant why is FF format so important to some of the people? Why not go directly to MF or large format if you need every bit of quality? They are even better than FF, right?

Anonymous said...

upgrading to an MF is not what people want / need cos it's way too expensive; The FF format is just beginning to be an affordable solution. If you don't understand why a bigger sensor improve IQ at high iso, others do. The question is more likely : Why should I stay with a brand that doesn't fill ours need ? All the others do, then the question is a non-sense

Anonymous said...

Well going FF would enable elder Pentax glass to vanish from the shelves even quicker than is happening right now.
I started to use Pentax-M and A lenses with my K100D and get pretty good results. My old glass would definetely shine on FF. Price for old glass has risen in the last year.
Would look forward to use these lenses on a FF camera. It is obvious that Pentax's big chiefs use Canon and Nikon for taking pictures on ....

Anonymous said...

The 645 would be a great camera i hope they go for it!!!!
The difference between APS-C and 35mm is marginal! They have to improve AF (especially low-light) to be competitive.
645D for a competitive price would really shake the market no one cares about another 35mm!

But if the go for the 645D the only thing i hope that they also introduce a leaf shutter wide-angle lens. And maybe better support for leaf shutter lenses (like Mamyia or the new Leica).

Anonymous said...

I do understand that there is an increase in high iso performance as the sensor size increases. The advantage is marginal however (just abou 1 f stop). I also do understand that the most people won't take better pictures just because of that. High ISO performance will improve in the APS-c sensors as well, that's what we should ask for, a better performance of the current system (and that includes AF, exposure, etc., and not just the ISO).
I also noticed that the people who demand FF body, actually intend to use it with the old Pentax lenses from film era. While those might have been excellent lenses in the film days, nobody knows how well they would perform on the digital FF sensor. Lack of digital coatings, poor edge sharpness, and vignetting might be some of the problems that are not that pronounced on the APS-c. Also Pentax want to make money from selling new lenses, they are not interested in selling just the body, so you could use your $50 Pentax-m lenses on it and then complain about poor image quality.
If you really do need high iso performance switch to one of the other manufacturers, which is also expensive BTW. Most of these people somehow also think that Pentax could make a FF camera for around $1000 or so...
All I am saying is that there is plenty to be improved in the APS-C format, and it is a better strategy to do that (especially for Pentax, which lacks current FF lenses), than making over half of your system incompatible with the new camera.
So if you do need a FF performance and have cash for it, then buy one of the systems that is out there right now. What's the problem? Does it have to be Pentax lens, or pentax body for you to take good pictures?

Anonymous said...

Thanks for translating the interview. Good news from Pentax! They are not dead as often supposed. FF isn't the holy grail. You should keep an eye on your comments. Sometimes you sound like a smart-ass.

Anonymous said...

Thank God they're ditching Samsung. Samsung said they want to develop a FF sensor. Ya just what I want: a big, expensive camera that will require all new lenses. Good luck with that...
I guess Koreans do have little dicks.

Anonymous said...

Fuji-Film seems to think they have created a new cropped sensor which will have high low light sensitivity, high definition, and low noise. Perhaps Pentax is in contact with them or is working along similar lines with other sensor manufacturers. Cropped sensors have some value -- greater reach, deeper dof, etc.

Anonymous said...

Bye PENTAX!!

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the translation.
However, I don't understand your FF related comments at all. FF really doesn't make a lot of sense in general. Please check out this article. http://www.digitalsecrets.net/secrets/FullFrameWars.html
It is a very educational and entertaining read. There might be a very small market for FF but I think Pentax is wise to stay out of it. Not having a (pseudo) flagship model can be a problem of course, but I hope that the brand will survive without playing the insane FF game.

Anonymous said...

The blog messed up the URL. Please assemble it from

http://www.digitalsecrets.net
/secrets/FullFrameWars.html

robin said...

RiceHigh, your comments make you sound so sad. Why must you keep chastising Pentax for not going full-frame? Just buy a Nikon or Canon if youreally want to waste your money on marginal improvements in your kit. Or if you want an incredible image, get a Hasselblad. Move on with your life and stop sounding like a jilted lover.

The rest of us will save the megabucks and use the Pentax digital line to take incredible photos.

Photography: You should try it some time.

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the translation. Shame about all the red text. What a load of absolute rubbish. You sound like a disgruntled ex-employee. Its pathetic.

Anonymous said...

The Pentax K10D is a very fine camera that I still own. Personally, I do not need a very fast AF, as I do mostly static portraiture, interior and product photography. Other than that it has no equals price wise. And I never needed to enlarge a single picture so as to need FF.
Nevertheless, it is logical to think that nobody would by an APS-C camera if the price of FF cameras drops in time to an acceptable level of about 1000$. Otherwise, I will stay with APS-C, whatever camera maker.
Cudos, Pentax for the excellent and cheap K10D!

Anonymous said...

Thanks for the translation.

I personally would want a viable upgrade path witin the Pentax line to move to beyond K10 and K20. If FF prices of the competitors are starting to go dwon, I wouldn't pay an equal amount of money for a semilarly specced Pentax APS-C. But the price of offloading Pentax equipment is to high for me at this point and for now I'm more than happy with the IQ I get out of my K10.

Since the K20 prices are coming down fast, I think I'll buy one within the next couple of months, as the K30 (?) seems to be a incremental upgrade. I can do without 1/8000 shutter speeed (although I liked on the famous Z-1) and faster AF would be nice, but AF is okay for most of my applications (landscape, travel, portraits).

Anonymous said...

Fuji S5Pro has better DR than Canon 5D, for example and not worse in noise.
To make APS-C sensor with good quality and low noise till ISO3200 is real. SuperCMOS or SuperCCD...
or SuperNMOS...

Anonymous said...

so, per this dumbass, without factual documents but only assumtions, Mr. RiceHigh is predicting the future with the FF. why is the micro four thirds system got the most interests from certain people in photokina 2008 ?? why??? it's even smaller than the APS-C.
http://www.dpreview.com/articles/Photokina2008/

Dpreview.com's Top 10 Products of the show
1. Micro Four Thirds System and Panasonic G1

another stupidity that RiceHigh proved himself once more....
"bigger the better"... welcome to 21 century..shits are flying in the sky..

I am not a fan boy of anything but the facts. I am just amazed how one person can be so stupid yet still yepping about how stupid himself is.

jarda said...

Our friend RiceHigh again got it wrong. For Nikon and Canon 95% DSLR sales are APS-C. So would be for Pentax.
FF is just a little carrot on the end of the stick to keep the stupid donkey customer pulling their car.
Our Pentax car is easier to pull, because there is no burden of FF.
I do not need FF, I do not want FF and I'm very happy for Pentax expanding selection of APS-C lenses beyond the choices available with N/C.

nlx said...

FullFrame is not stupid : 5% market share doesn't mean these people are wrong. And think those 5% are really more profitable than the 95% market of cheap cameras… Comon, if 5D was not good business Canon wouldn't upgrade it (with Nikon and Sony on the same boat).

For the rest what is frightning in this interview is the 'lack of resources' the guy is talking about.

There is the FullFrame trend, the LiveView trend, the video trend, the micro 4/3 trend… you can say it's trends or you just say it's the near future and its happening without Pentax. I think micro 4/3 should have been the Pentax idea, but i'm afraid they're not developing any new original projects now because of the 'the lack of resources'.

It's i think the problem with pentax, not that they do bad camera nore lenses, but they have nothing orginal or really new/excting about them : they just follow the trends… VERY SLOWLY.

It's clear to me that Pentax is where Apple was some times ago : in the dark. If they don't invest in the future they will just vanished, beeing bought by a bigger fish. They have to invest NOW they don't have time to waste. I think they can do it, but for now there is no sign they're working on it. They need someone new, someone like the Steve Jobs of Photography…

Anonymous said...

I am not sure if this is the same, but it follows the same theme.
http://www.photographyblog.com/index.php/weblog/comments/pentax_and_samsung_partnership_not_perfect/

this said...

http://www.photographyblog.com
/index.php/weblog/comments
/pentax_and_samsung_partnership_not_perfect/

Anonymous said...

All I hear in the comments is a lot of semi-pro photographers bitching about why they can't have the next latest-greatest technology to wave at the Canon and Nikon users.

Let 'em wave.

No, Pentax doesn't have any plans to introduce full frame at this time. Is that bad? Absolutely not. The K20D currently meets the feature sets of the best APS-C sensor-equipped Nikon and Canon models. If they claim they can pull better detail and more FF like pictures out of a mini-sensor, let them try before you lambaste them.

Pentax has always been an against-the-grain company; sometimes this has worked out for them, sometimes not. I agree with one thing: people who have purchased and been amazed at the quality of the pictures using DA* lenses would piss themselves if they had to go and buy FF versions of this equipment. They're catering to their existing market.

This gives them three model lines: the Km, which is a D40/XS, the K200D, which is a D60/80/XSi/40D, and the K20D, which is a 5D/D300 fighter.

What pissed me off most is not the news, but your reactions. When did photography become all about the specification sheet? There are people out there that can outshoot 1DS owners with a Spotmatic manual SLR if they know what they're doing.

The K20/200 are excellent rigs, with excellent lenses available, and more on the way. If you want to be able to brag about your camera, don't buy a Pentax. If you'd rather be taking pictures than bragging about your hardware, buy a Pentax.

Pfft.

Anonymous said...

In digital, unlike film, the size of the print depends not upon the size of the sensor but upon the number of pixels in the sensor. In film era that was different because, whatever format, size of silver crystals was the same (given the same film sensitivity), so the number of crystals (or "pixels" in modern language) depended ONLY on the size of the film frame. Now that factor is gone, because more pixels can be crammed into a sensor by making them smaller. A practical example of how misserable is the difference between FF and APS-C can be seen here: http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d3/sharpness-1.htm

RiceHigh said...

To generalise what you have pointed out: If the technology used is the same, then the sensor size does matter. Films are using the same technology but why digital sensors can be different?

The Ken Rockwell comparison test shots were taken at ISO 200. I am sure the differences will become larger and larger when the ISO goes up. The rule of Physics can't be violated afterall!

Anonymous said...

I was not talking about sensitivity-guality issues. Only about resolution. Ken Rockwell samples are also only about resolution.

I am a guy who uses the lowest sensitivity of 100 maybe 90 percent of the time, 200 - maybe 9 percent and higher sensitivities probably about 1 percent of the time, because I shoot MOSTLY in a studio or in another prepared environment with 400 Ws and higher studio strobes.

For those rare cases in my work when I take photos "on-the-go", like wedding photos (which I do not specifically like to do, as this is way boring), sensitivities do not matter, as photos are printed in small sizes. Those few shots that are to be enlarged I prepare carefully, mostly with powerful flash lighting, lowest sensitivities.

Up till this day, resolution wise, there is no PRACTICAL difference between FF and APS-C.

Anonymous said...

One more proof that the difference between FF and APC-S is practically nonexistent in normal (that means low) sensitivities:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/nikond700/page29.asp

RiceHigh said...

How about to use P&S DCs for low sensitivity shootings, then? :)

Btw, new D700 users knew very well why to buy a D700. One of the main reasons for the old users is compatibility and the ability to re-alive all the old film lenses.

Anonymous said...

Rice High, you are funny. P&S cameras are fine - easy to have in one's pocket and pull out whenever desirable, good for casual toying. When quality comes into play, why to care about P&S, when there are ample CHEAP APC cameras available! And they do practically the same as EXPENSIVE FF. I agree that nobody would by an APS camera (including myself) when the price for FFs drops to an acceptable level (less than $1000). But for now, looking at the fast development of cameras and at the miserable quality difference between FF and APC, buying an FF camera is a waste of money.

RiceHigh said...

Have you actually counted the costs of re-purchasing many lenses for the APS-C body just because of the crop factor, if you are just an old Pentax user who shot film before?? (If not, why Pentax now, frankly?)

Anonymous said...

Yes, I already use a bunch of FA and FA* lenses on my K10D (mainly, 50/2.8 Macro, 28-70/2.8, 135/2.8, and 300/4.5). Limited lenses are good but way too expensive. To have the wider angle I bought JUST TWO lenses - DA 14/2.8 and DA 16-45/4. Together with K10D it was just over $1500. Moreover, if FF ever comes, these lenses will still be usable, as the camera will most probably use a smaller part of the sensor when shooting with them. So what are really the costs, when the fact is that there is NO NEED to buy telephoto DAs? Miserable in comparison to an FF camera alone.

Anonymous said...

Lots of great comments, but when all is said and done, some of us
would just like a faster focusing camera for shooting things like Birds in Flight and a few more fps, say a total of 6 fps, without switching to Nikon or Canon. Let's face it, Pentax has put lots of quality into their K10D & K20D cameras, and if you are like me, I don't want to jump ship, but I am waiting patiently for focusing and fps improvements. Come on Pentax, show Nikon and Canon that you'll be shooting for the top spot.

Anonymous said...

full Frame - Full on

Hoya owns Tokina , Tokina makes 2.8 half price versions of Nikon and Canon 2.8 Lens' Not a hundred or more versions like sigma just about 8 - 10 at the most (20-35 2.8 28-70 2.8 700 200 2.8 300 2.8) they now make them in the digital APS-C size focal lengths ( 16-50 50-135 ect)
The only problem for Tokina and Hoya is the photographers who buy 2.8 zoom lens' are the ones with the top end cameras and they have now gone full frame EOS 1DS 5DMK2 (POSS FULL FRAME EOS 55 as the 50 is not selling and the 5mk2 is flying out of the shops) F3X F700 (poss f400 more pixels f700 body, the way I see it Tokina (and therefore Pentax)needs to go Full Frame as soon as poss or forget the Lens Business

Anonymous said...

Rice High said: "What was that Pentax Head actually talking about? And, did he know what he was talking about himself, at that time??"

I think what the Pentax Head said is very clear to me.

What he meant was: "Pentax has found SR is the feature they have to keep. Neither FA nor DA can produce image circles large enough for SR to function correctly in a FF Pentax. Therefore, if Pentax would like to bring out a FF, they would have to bring out a new lens line which is more expensive than DA line. And he hinted Pentax fears it wouldn't generate good sales."

Post a Comment

Related Posts

 
Creative Commons License
RiceHigh's Pentax Blog by RiceHigh is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.