Why Are Pentax with Prime Selection Grabbing Some of Mirrorless Market?

Started Aug 10, 2013 | Discussions
Richard
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,776
Like?
Re: Cherry picking
In reply to Alex Sarbu, Aug 13, 2013

Alex Sarbu wrote:


I would agree with you. I don't think they are behind in tech. In camera IS is a pretty modern concept neither Canon or Nikon have. Thus my question as to why they are not mainstream

It has nothing to do with their current products.

Their current products are still niche market, so it has everything to do with current products.

Except they are behind like you said and have no FF, and do not have a lens selection like Canon like I said. I agree, I don't like the big pro bodys but Canon and Nikon offer semi pro like the 5d3,7d or the D800,D300.

How many people are actually buying FF cameras, compared with the APS-C user base? Most would be perfectly happy with an APS-C only system...

The only reason people do not buy FF is because of cost. It is the reason APS-c exists. FF back when it first came out was too expensive for the average person. As the price drops more people are getting FF, it is the natural progression, it would not exist if the price of a FF cameras were $1500

Since the market for sub-$1500 IL cameras is huge compared with the more expensive ones, you should rethink this.

Regardless of what you think, as prices come down on FF, more people will buy them.

Yet some Canikon users are overusing the "upgrade path" cliche to scare people away from buying Pentax.

I think as the price of FF comes down, it becomes and even more persuasive argument

Another cliche; the FF prices are pretty much constant since the A850.

Not true, they will continue to fall as the price of the sensor falls.

Indeed, one should think if he would want to buy a FF kit in the future and if so, avoiding Pentax would be a rational choice (for now). But most of the times, the answer is no.

Right now the D600 is $1999. If it dropped to $1499, why would anyone consider an APS-C. Unless they are entry level wanting a Rebel 650 which is at 700 dollars with a lens. It was not long ago that lowest priced FF DSLRs were $3300 the price of the original 5d.

Ifit does. Until then, it's all talk

As I said, it is getting lower all the time. Your assumption is it will not get cheaper, mine is that it will. A good reason to buy FF lenses.

Most people are not willing (or able) to spend that much only on the camera. Of course, I would be happy to have a K-5-class FF camera for $1500 (if this price point will be reached, Pentax surely will have FF products - to protect their margins)

If this were true, then Pentax would outsell Canon and Nikon, but it does not, it is still niche market and not main stream.

Cherry picking, again? My turn: I want a stabilized 35mm lens, not extremely fast (I'm not into paper thin DOF)

You cherry pick because narrow DOF does not appeal to you, but that is one of the main reasons for fast glass, it is you who cherry pick.

I am glad you are happy to buy a niche market system. I am happy to buy pro level stuff that comes from Canon and Nikon. Neither of us have the masses mentality and neither of us are going to buy low end stuff the masses do.

Canon an Nikon will continue to lead and Pentax will continue to be niche market until it decides to get a FF and pro level lenses and sell low end, it will never leave niche market. But perhaps being a player in the camera market is what they are after, if they are content with their current standings then you should be happy they make products you like and buy.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Alex Sarbu
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,480Gear list
Like?
Re: Oh you value IQ so little.
In reply to Richard, Aug 13, 2013

Richard wrote:

Alex Sarbu wrote:

Not as huge a difference as the Canon SL1 which is much smaller.

The best "test" is to grab the cameras and see for yourself. The much smaller and lighter Canon entry-level build comes at a price.

Already have, that camera is much smaller and almost half the weight.

Yes, and with an awful plastic build which I personally hate.

Give me the K-5's weight and quality any time.

The K-5 II has comparable or better features (better sealing, metal body) and a much lower price than even cheap FF's. Don't pretend the D600 ($2000) is near the cost of K-5 II ($1000)

I didn't say that. I said as prices come down on FF, less people will want APSC. APSC did not exist for size difference, it was cost.

Sony A850: $2000 MSRP.

Still it is not down to 1499. That is where I think the magic number is, it may be lower like 1399 but will will see when they get down that low I think APSc will start going away, unless they add features like pro level AF FPS will it survive.

That was the point - that since then the FF prices didn't decrease.

I don't want a FF DSLR. All cameras are compromises. APS-C is the sweet spot for me, in cost, features and performance.

But if they made a FF in the SL1 body for less money you would buy it right? So would I, but I agree it is all compromise, as FF comes down in price the differences become very much smaller.

I wouldn't touch it with a 10-foot pole.

Doesn't matter what you and I touch, it is the masses and as prices come down, that is what they will buy.

I could buy a properly built camera, though. You see, I'm spoiled by Pentax - in build quality and ergonomics. And I can put the camera, my biggest lens - the 60-250 and 3 DA Limiteds (because I don't have more) in a LowePro Nova1. No need to go smaller

I am spoiled by Canon and Nikon, best lenses, best system and I don't have to half step getting a Pentax.

And that's the trick, to find the system which would make you feel spoiled (be it Canon, Nikon, Pentax or another)

-- hide signature --

Dan

Alex

Alex

 Alex Sarbu's gear list:Alex Sarbu's gear list
Pentax K20D Pentax K-5 Pentax smc DA* 60-250mm F4.0 ED (IF) SDM Pentax smc DA 21mm F3.2 AL Limited Pentax smc DA 70mm F2.4 AL Limited +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Gary Martin
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,065Gear list
Like?
Re: Oh you value IQ so little.
In reply to Richard, Aug 13, 2013
Still it is not down to 1499. That is where I think the magic number is, it may be lower like 1399 but will will see when they get down that low I think APSc will start going away, unless they add features like pro level AF FPS will it survive.

Funny, the OP asked about a small kit consisting of a $500 K-30 ( or 1/3 the cost of your proposed FF Holy Grail) and a few small lenses. Instead, you've drifted pretty far off-topic and turned this into a FF advocacy thread. I didn't know we needed more of those!

 Gary Martin's gear list:Gary Martin's gear list
Pentax K-01 Pentax K-30 Pentax smc DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited Pentax smc FA 50mm F1.4 Pentax smc DA 21mm F3.2 AL Limited +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Alex Sarbu
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,480Gear list
Like?
Re: Cherry picking
In reply to Richard, Aug 13, 2013

Richard wrote:

Alex Sarbu wrote:

I would agree with you. I don't think they are behind in tech. In camera IS is a pretty modern concept neither Canon or Nikon have. Thus my question as to why they are not mainstream

It has nothing to do with their current products.

Their current products are still niche market, so it has everything to do with current products.

Wrong; market share is not determined solely by the products, and is not instantly gained with a new product launch.

Except they are behind like you said and have no FF, and do not have a lens selection like Canon like I said. I agree, I don't like the big pro bodys but Canon and Nikon offer semi pro like the 5d3,7d or the D800,D300.

How many people are actually buying FF cameras, compared with the APS-C user base? Most would be perfectly happy with an APS-C only system...

The only reason people do not buy FF is because of cost. It is the reason APS-c exists. FF back when it first came out was too expensive for the average person. As the price drops more people are getting FF, it is the natural progression, it would not exist if the price of a FF cameras were $1500

Since the market for sub-$1500 IL cameras is huge compared with the more expensive ones, you should rethink this.

Regardless of what you think, as prices come down on FF, more people will buy them.

I think let's see the prices coming down first.

Yet some Canikon users are overusing the "upgrade path" cliche to scare people away from buying Pentax.

I think as the price of FF comes down, it becomes and even more persuasive argument

Another cliche; the FF prices are pretty much constant since the A850.

Not true, they will continue to fall as the price of the sensor falls.

A850: $2000 MSRP.

D600 and 6D: $2100 MSRP, street price $2000.

Indeed, one should think if he would want to buy a FF kit in the future and if so, avoiding Pentax would be a rational choice (for now). But most of the times, the answer is no.

Right now the D600 is $1999. If it dropped to $1499, why would anyone consider an APS-C. Unless they are entry level wanting a Rebel 650 which is at 700 dollars with a lens. It was not long ago that lowest priced FF DSLRs were $3300 the price of the original 5d.

Ifit does. Until then, it's all talk

As I said, it is getting lower all the time. Your assumption is it will not get cheaper, mine is that it will. A good reason to buy FF lenses.

Take a look at the prices above, and tell me what is getting lower.

Most people are not willing (or able) to spend that much only on the camera. Of course, I would be happy to have a K-5-class FF camera for $1500 (if this price point will be reached, Pentax surely will have FF products - to protect their margins)

If this were true, then Pentax would outsell Canon and Nikon, but it does not, it is still niche market and not main stream.

Getting into a price war would not help Pentax. Undercutting their competitors by $500, with a significant R&D investment and no volume to support it? Nope, can't work.

FF for $1500 has to wait, until everyone together would go there. So far we're still at $2000...

Cherry picking, again? My turn: I want a stabilized 35mm lens, not extremely fast (I'm not into paper thin DOF)

You cherry pick because narrow DOF does not appeal to you, but that is one of the main reasons for fast glass, it is you who cherry pick.

In other words, your preferences are the norm and mines are cherry picking? You're funny.

By the way, that lens is the 35mm f/2.8 Limited macro, and is a gem. Not suitable for sports shooters, though

I am glad you are happy to buy a niche market system. I am happy to buy pro level stuff that comes from Canon and Nikon. Neither of us have the masses mentality and neither of us are going to buy low end stuff the masses do.

Canon an Nikon will continue to lead and Pentax will continue to be niche market until it decides to get a FF and pro level lenses and sell low end, it will never leave niche market. But perhaps being a player in the camera market is what they are after, if they are content with their current standings then you should be happy they make products you like and buy.

FTR, Ricoh said they're targeting a solid 3rd place, in the camera market.

Alex

 Alex Sarbu's gear list:Alex Sarbu's gear list
Pentax K20D Pentax K-5 Pentax smc DA* 60-250mm F4.0 ED (IF) SDM Pentax smc DA 21mm F3.2 AL Limited Pentax smc DA 70mm F2.4 AL Limited +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Leandros S
Senior MemberPosts: 1,090Gear list
Like?
I thought you'd had your last word
In reply to Richard, Aug 13, 2013

Richard wrote:

Leandros S wrote:

I've explained the maths, and others have provided examples, but you are stubbornly refusing to evaluate the new info we have given you.

Nikon and Canon have upgrade paths to FF.

Well, I hope you enjoy ruminating in your upgrade path anxiety while everybody else runs through the golden fields with the wind in their hair.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Richard
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,776
Like?
Re: Oh you value IQ so little.
In reply to Alex Sarbu, Aug 13, 2013

Alex Sarbu wrote:

Richard wrote:

Alex Sarbu wrote:

Not as huge a difference as the Canon SL1 which is much smaller.

The best "test" is to grab the cameras and see for yourself. The much smaller and lighter Canon entry-level build comes at a price.

Already have, that camera is much smaller and almost half the weight.

Yes, and with an awful plastic build which I personally hate.

Give me the K-5's weight and quality any time.

That is your choice but whether it be cars or cameras, plastic is used to reduce weight whether you like it or not.

The K-5 II has comparable or better features (better sealing, metal body) and a much lower price than even cheap FF's. Don't pretend the D600 ($2000) is near the cost of K-5 II ($1000)

I didn't say that. I said as prices come down on FF, less people will want APSC. APSC did not exist for size difference, it was cost.

Sony A850: $2000 MSRP.

Still it is not down to 1499. That is where I think the magic number is, it may be lower like 1399 but will will see when they get down that low I think APSc will start going away, unless they add features like pro level AF FPS will it survive.

That was the point - that since then the FF prices didn't decrease.

The Canon 5d2 was 3299. Nikon answered with the D700 it was $3000 dollars. It was replaced by the D800 which had more resolution and features. The the D600 came out in Aug of 2012. We are seeing the prices decrease. We will have to wait for the next generation before we see if there is another price drop as a result of better less expensive technology. The Sony had 3fps and was a super low end camera, I don't think it could have sold for more than 2k at the time and I don't think it sold that well.

I don't want a FF DSLR. All cameras are compromises. APS-C is the sweet spot for me, in cost, features and performance.

But if they made a FF in the SL1 body for less money you would buy it right? So would I, but I agree it is all compromise, as FF comes down in price the differences become very much smaller.

I wouldn't touch it with a 10-foot pole.

Doesn't matter what you and I touch, it is the masses and as prices come down, that is what they will buy.

I could buy a properly built camera, though. You see, I'm spoiled by Pentax - in build quality and ergonomics. And I can put the camera, my biggest lens - the 60-250 and 3 DA Limiteds (because I don't have more) in a LowePro Nova1. No need to go smaller

I am spoiled by Canon and Nikon, best lenses, best system and I don't have to half step getting a Pentax.

And that's the trick, to find the system which would make you feel spoiled (be it Canon, Nikon, Pentax or another)

Agreed.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Richard
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,776
Like?
Re: I thought you'd had your last word
In reply to Leandros S, Aug 13, 2013

Leandros S wrote:

Richard wrote:

Leandros S wrote:

I've explained the maths, and others have provided examples, but you are stubbornly refusing to evaluate the new info we have given you.

Nikon and Canon have upgrade paths to FF.

Well, I hope you enjoy ruminating in your upgrade path anxiety while everybody else runs through the golden fields with the wind in their hair.

I enjoy Canon because I know it has all the lenses I could every want or not want and will produce the best cameras in the world used by pros.

I also enjoy that you finally admitted you were wrong Canon and Nikon have upgrade paths and Pentax doesn't which you were in denial about earlier.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Richard
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,776
Like?
Re: Oh you value IQ so little.
In reply to Gary Martin, Aug 13, 2013

Gary Martin wrote:

Still it is not down to 1499. That is where I think the magic number is, it may be lower like 1399 but will will see when they get down that low I think APSc will start going away, unless they add features like pro level AF FPS will it survive.

Funny, the OP asked about a small kit consisting of a $500 K-30 ( or 1/3 the cost of your proposed FF Holy Grail) and a few small lenses. Instead, you've drifted pretty far off-topic and turned this into a FF advocacy thread. I didn't know we needed more of those!

I didn't advocate anything. My question was, if Pentax was great, why isn't it mainstream and a main player in the field of photography. All I said was it was possible that because Pentax did not have a full frame camera it was not taken seriously by many photographers including pros.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Alex Sarbu
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,480Gear list
Like?
Re: Oh you value IQ so little.
In reply to Richard, Aug 13, 2013

Richard wrote:

Alex Sarbu wrote:

Richard wrote:

Alex Sarbu wrote:

Not as huge a difference as the Canon SL1 which is much smaller.

The best "test" is to grab the cameras and see for yourself. The much smaller and lighter Canon entry-level build comes at a price.

Already have, that camera is much smaller and almost half the weight.

Yes, and with an awful plastic build which I personally hate.

Give me the K-5's weight and quality any time.

That is your choice but whether it be cars or cameras, plastic is used to reduce weight whether you like it or not.

The K-5 II has comparable or better features (better sealing, metal body) and a much lower price than even cheap FF's. Don't pretend the D600 ($2000) is near the cost of K-5 II ($1000)

I didn't say that. I said as prices come down on FF, less people will want APSC. APSC did not exist for size difference, it was cost.

Sony A850: $2000 MSRP.

Still it is not down to 1499. That is where I think the magic number is, it may be lower like 1399 but will will see when they get down that low I think APSc will start going away, unless they add features like pro level AF FPS will it survive.

That was the point - that since then the FF prices didn't decrease.

The Canon 5d2 was 3299. Nikon answered with the D700 it was $3000 dollars. It was replaced by the D800 which had more resolution and features. The the D600 came out in Aug of 2012. We are seeing the prices decrease. We will have to wait for the next generation before we see if there is another price drop as a result of better less expensive technology. The Sony had 3fps and was a super low end camera, I don't think it could have sold for more than 2k at the time and I don't think it sold that well.

The D600 is lower class than D700 and D800. The A850 wasn't a "super low end camera" at all, with a solid, magnesium alloy body, 1/8000 shutter and a large pentaprism viewfinder. It was simply a cheaper version of the A900.

I don't want a FF DSLR. All cameras are compromises. APS-C is the sweet spot for me, in cost, features and performance.

But if they made a FF in the SL1 body for less money you would buy it right? So would I, but I agree it is all compromise, as FF comes down in price the differences become very much smaller.

I wouldn't touch it with a 10-foot pole.

Doesn't matter what you and I touch, it is the masses and as prices come down, that is what they will buy.

I could buy a properly built camera, though. You see, I'm spoiled by Pentax - in build quality and ergonomics. And I can put the camera, my biggest lens - the 60-250 and 3 DA Limiteds (because I don't have more) in a LowePro Nova1. No need to go smaller

I am spoiled by Canon and Nikon, best lenses, best system and I don't have to half step getting a Pentax.

And that's the trick, to find the system which would make you feel spoiled (be it Canon, Nikon, Pentax or another)

Agreed.

Alex

 Alex Sarbu's gear list:Alex Sarbu's gear list
Pentax K20D Pentax K-5 Pentax smc DA* 60-250mm F4.0 ED (IF) SDM Pentax smc DA 21mm F3.2 AL Limited Pentax smc DA 70mm F2.4 AL Limited +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Gary Martin
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,065Gear list
Like?
Re: Oh you value IQ so little.
In reply to Richard, Aug 13, 2013

Richard wrote:

Gary Martin wrote:

Still it is not down to 1499. That is where I think the magic number is, it may be lower like 1399 but will will see when they get down that low I think APSc will start going away, unless they add features like pro level AF FPS will it survive.

Funny, the OP asked about a small kit consisting of a $500 K-30 ( or 1/3 the cost of your proposed FF Holy Grail) and a few small lenses. Instead, you've drifted pretty far off-topic and turned this into a FF advocacy thread. I didn't know we needed more of those!

I didn't advocate anything. My question was, if Pentax was great, why isn't it mainstream and a main player in the field of photography. All I said was it was possible that because Pentax did not have a full frame camera it was not taken seriously by many photographers including pros.

Yes, and what the OP asked is why Pentax, with their smallish bodies and primes, are not taking sales from the mirrorless market - of which its players like Olympus and Fuji *also* do not have a full frame camera to be "taken seriously," which makes your point irrelevant.

 Gary Martin's gear list:Gary Martin's gear list
Pentax K-01 Pentax K-30 Pentax smc DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited Pentax smc FA 50mm F1.4 Pentax smc DA 21mm F3.2 AL Limited +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Richard
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,776
Like?
Re: Oh you value IQ so little.
In reply to Alex Sarbu, Aug 13, 2013

Alex Sarbu wrote:

The D600 is lower class than D700 and D800. The A850 wasn't a "super low end camera" at all, with a solid, magnesium alloy body, 1/8000 shutter and a large pentaprism viewfinder. It was simply a cheaper version of the A900.

Lets see what DPR said about this camera.

"Obviously something had to be done to justify the price difference to the flagship A900 (and not completely annoy existing A900 owners), so Sony decided to differentiate the A850 from its bigger brother by slightly reducing the viewfinder coverage and the buffer size (the latter resulting in a 3.0 fps vs 5.0 fps continuous shooting rate)."

The Cons of this camera were...

  • Noise reduction settings applied to raw as well as JPEG files - cannot be 'turned off for raw but left on for JPEGs' (as is normal practice)
  • Relatively high levels of noise at anything over ISO 400 (ISO 6400 is of very, very limited use)
  • JPEGs a little soft by default (some loss of detail due to NR visible even at ISO 200) - you really need to shoot raw (and use ACR or similar) to get the best out of the sensor
  • Top panel LCD very limited compared to all competitors
  • Less customizable than most competitors (though a lot less confusing for it)
  • No live view
  • No movie mode
  • Focus speed not up to other cameras in this class (though it is very accurate)

So, do I want this camera even at 2k? NO!

Noisy over iso 400, raw noise reduction, No live view, no video, slow focus speed.

I can see why this camera did not sell even at 2k.

So yes, this is a super low camera, it does not compete with the D600 or the 6d.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Richard
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,776
Like?
Point made.
In reply to Gary Martin, Aug 13, 2013

Gary Martin wrote:

Richard wrote:

Gary Martin wrote:

Still it is not down to 1499. That is where I think the magic number is, it may be lower like 1399 but will will see when they get down that low I think APSc will start going away, unless they add features like pro level AF FPS will it survive.

Funny, the OP asked about a small kit consisting of a $500 K-30 ( or 1/3 the cost of your proposed FF Holy Grail) and a few small lenses. Instead, you've drifted pretty far off-topic and turned this into a FF advocacy thread. I didn't know we needed more of those!

I didn't advocate anything. My question was, if Pentax was great, why isn't it mainstream and a main player in the field of photography. All I said was it was possible that because Pentax did not have a full frame camera it was not taken seriously by many photographers including pros.

Yes, and what the OP asked is why Pentax, with their smallish bodies and primes, are not taking sales from the mirrorless market - of which its players like Olympus and Fuji *also* do not have a full frame camera to be "taken seriously," which makes your point irrelevant.

Makes my point DSLRs are staying the same, mirrorless market lower volume, Pentax still niche market. That is the point. I also drove home why. Pentax has no FF migration path because it has no FF camera.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Gary Martin
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,065Gear list
Like?
Re: Point made.
In reply to Richard, Aug 14, 2013

Richard wrote:

Gary Martin wrote:

Richard wrote:

Gary Martin wrote:

Still it is not down to 1499. That is where I think the magic number is, it may be lower like 1399 but will will see when they get down that low I think APSc will start going away, unless they add features like pro level AF FPS will it survive.

Funny, the OP asked about a small kit consisting of a $500 K-30 ( or 1/3 the cost of your proposed FF Holy Grail) and a few small lenses. Instead, you've drifted pretty far off-topic and turned this into a FF advocacy thread. I didn't know we needed more of those!

I didn't advocate anything. My question was, if Pentax was great, why isn't it mainstream and a main player in the field of photography. All I said was it was possible that because Pentax did not have a full frame camera it was not taken seriously by many photographers including pros.

Yes, and what the OP asked is why Pentax, with their smallish bodies and primes, are not taking sales from the mirrorless market - of which its players like Olympus and Fuji *also* do not have a full frame camera to be "taken seriously," which makes your point irrelevant.

Makes my point DSLRs are staying the same, mirrorless market lower volume, Pentax still niche market. That is the point. I also drove home why. Pentax has no FF migration path because it has no FF camera.

Yes, you've made your completely off-topic point (which is debatable). Too bad you derailed the OPs thread to do so, but it's very important to be *right* on the internet, yes?

 Gary Martin's gear list:Gary Martin's gear list
Pentax K-01 Pentax K-30 Pentax smc DA 15mm F4 ED AL Limited Pentax smc FA 50mm F1.4 Pentax smc DA 21mm F3.2 AL Limited +3 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Tim A2
Senior MemberPosts: 1,099
Like?
Re: Oh you value IQ so little.
In reply to Gary Martin, Aug 14, 2013

Gary Martin wrote:

Still it is not down to 1499. That is where I think the magic number is, it may be lower like 1399 but will will see when they get down that low I think APSc will start going away, unless they add features like pro level AF FPS will it survive.

Funny, the OP asked about a small kit consisting of a $500 K-30 ( or 1/3 the cost of your proposed FF Holy Grail) and a few small lenses. Instead, you've drifted pretty far off-topic and turned this into a FF advocacy thread. I didn't know we needed more of those!

Exactly, I read the original post  and happened to jump back here and wondered how did this thread get here from there? I look ahead to see if I want to spend time with  a thread. In this case definitely not. It looks like it went south.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Alex Sarbu
Veteran MemberPosts: 3,480Gear list
Like?
Re: Oh you value IQ so little.
In reply to Richard, Aug 14, 2013

Richard wrote:

Alex Sarbu wrote:

The D600 is lower class than D700 and D800. The A850 wasn't a "super low end camera" at all, with a solid, magnesium alloy body, 1/8000 shutter and a large pentaprism viewfinder. It was simply a cheaper version of the A900.

Lets see what DPR said about this camera.

"Obviously something had to be done to justify the price difference to the flagship A900 (and not completely annoy existing A900 owners), so Sony decided to differentiate the A850 from its bigger brother by slightly reducing the viewfinder coverage and the buffer size (the latter resulting in a 3.0 fps vs 5.0 fps continuous shooting rate)."

The Cons of this camera were...

  • Noise reduction settings applied to raw as well as JPEG files - cannot be 'turned off for raw but left on for JPEGs' (as is normal practice)
  • Relatively high levels of noise at anything over ISO 400 (ISO 6400 is of very, very limited use)
  • JPEGs a little soft by default (some loss of detail due to NR visible even at ISO 200) - you really need to shoot raw (and use ACR or similar) to get the best out of the sensor
  • Top panel LCD very limited compared to all competitors
  • Less customizable than most competitors (though a lot less confusing for it)
  • No live view
  • No movie mode
  • Focus speed not up to other cameras in this class (though it is very accurate)

So, do I want this camera even at 2k? NO!

Richard, the point was not that you want this camera or not. The point was that in 2009, the entry level FF camera was launched at $2000 (lower than the D600 and 6D).

Noisy over iso 400, raw noise reduction, No live view, no video, slow focus speed.

I can see why this camera did not sell even at 2k.

This is irrelevant.

So yes, this is a super low camera, it does not compete with the D600 or the 6d.

Of course a 2009 model is not competitive with the latest ones. That's not the point.

Alex

 Alex Sarbu's gear list:Alex Sarbu's gear list
Pentax K20D Pentax K-5 Pentax smc DA* 60-250mm F4.0 ED (IF) SDM Pentax smc DA 21mm F3.2 AL Limited Pentax smc DA 70mm F2.4 AL Limited +4 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Gerry Winterbourne
Veteran MemberPosts: 7,676
Like?
Re: Oh you value IQ so little.
In reply to Richard, Aug 14, 2013

Richard wrote:

My question was, if Pentax was great, why isn't it mainstream and a main player in the field of photography.

That answer is simple: towards the end of the 20th century Canon and Nikon achieved market dominance for a number of reasons that have nothing to do with film/sensor size.  In any market the dominant players aren't displaced: they remain dominant until something changes.

That something might be external (like the invention of digital and its effect on the film market) or internal (some sort of corporate stupidity).  Until something like that happens C and N will remain dominant; as long as they do, every other make will remain niche.

All I said was it was possible that because Pentax did not have a full frame camera it was not taken seriously by many photographers including pros.

Obviously anything is possible.  But even if Pentax had three levels of FF bodies and a host of suitable lenses it wouldn't alter the truth of my first paragraph.

-- hide signature --

Gerry
_______________________________________
First camera 1953, first Pentax 1985, first DSLR 2006
http://www.pbase.com/gerrywinterbourne
gerry.winterbourne@ntlworld.com

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Leandros S
Senior MemberPosts: 1,090Gear list
Like?
Full-frame upgrade paranoia
In reply to Richard, Aug 14, 2013

Richard wrote:

Leandros S wrote:

Richard wrote:

Leandros S wrote:

I've explained the maths, and others have provided examples, but you are stubbornly refusing to evaluate the new info we have given you.

Nikon and Canon have upgrade paths to FF.

Well, I hope you enjoy ruminating in your upgrade path anxiety while everybody else runs through the golden fields with the wind in their hair.

I enjoy Canon because I know it has all the lenses I could every want or not want and will produce the best cameras in the world used by pros.

I also enjoy that you finally admitted you were wrong Canon and Nikon have upgrade paths and Pentax doesn't which you were in denial about earlier.

Once again, untrue. The point is that you're at pains to keep your eyes closed to the beautiful truth that Pentax makes the best APS-C bodies, and a selection of small, sturdy, reasonably lightweight APS-C lenses to match, many of them fast primes.

You, too, could be living in APS-C wonderland with Pentax. Instead you're grumbling in your corner about what might have been. Well, guess what - some people never upgrade to full frame. Isn't that amazing?

Live in the now. Enjoy your Fujifilm, Olympus, Panasonic, Pentax, Samsung - whatever takes your fancy. Fun is found in many places.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
REShultz
Senior MemberPosts: 1,108
Like?
Re: Why Are Pentax with Prime Selection Grabbing Some of Mirrorless Market?
In reply to REShultz, Aug 14, 2013

Thread JACKED!

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Richard
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,776
Like?
Re: Oh you value IQ so little.
In reply to Gerry Winterbourne, Aug 15, 2013

Gerry Winterbourne wrote:

Richard wrote:

My question was, if Pentax was great, why isn't it mainstream and a main player in the field of photography.

That answer is simple: towards the end of the 20th century Canon and Nikon achieved market dominance for a number of reasons that have nothing to do with film/sensor size. In any market the dominant players aren't displaced: they remain dominant until something changes.

That something might be external (like the invention of digital and its effect on the film market) or internal (some sort of corporate stupidity). Until something like that happens C and N will remain dominant; as long as they do, every other make will remain niche.

All I said was it was possible that because Pentax did not have a full frame camera it was not taken seriously by many photographers including pros.

Obviously anything is possible. But even if Pentax had three levels of FF bodies and a host of suitable lenses it wouldn't alter the truth of my first paragraph.

What would you say about Sony who has recently entered the fray. They surpassed all the other non dominant brands and are making sensors for Nikon and others. They have FF, DSLR, mirrorless. They are moving up the ladder and maybe even someday displace Nikon. Their market share is growing, Pentax and the other brands are still niche market as Sony becomes more dominant

Cars, Chevy Ford Dodge. Along comes Toyota.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Richard
Veteran MemberPosts: 4,776
Like?
Re: Full-frame upgrade paranoia
In reply to Leandros S, Aug 15, 2013

Leandros S wrote:

Richard wrote:

Leandros S wrote:

Richard wrote:

Leandros S wrote:

.

I enjoy Canon because I know it has all the lenses I could every want or not want and will produce the best cameras in the world used by pros.

I also enjoy that you finally admitted you were wrong Canon and Nikon have upgrade paths and Pentax doesn't which you were in denial about earlier.

Once again, untrue. The point is that you're at pains to keep your eyes closed to the beautiful truth that Pentax makes the best APS-C bodies,

No they really don't and if they did, they would begin to dominate the class.

and a selection of small, sturdy, reasonably lightweight APS-C lenses to match, many of them fast primes.

Nothing that outshines Canon

You, too, could be living in APS-C wonderland with Pentax. Instead you're grumbling in your corner about what might have been. Well, guess what - some people never upgrade to full frame. Isn't that amazing?

They will once the price comes down. It is inevitable.

Live in the now. Enjoy your Fujifilm, Olympus, Panasonic, Pentax, Samsung - whatever takes your fancy. Fun is found in many places.

I agree, but there is a better brand and a something dominance, and these are words Pentax has never known, hopefully you will admit this and move on.

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads