From Pentax: Full Frame Camera in Development!

[Charles Self]

So they are actively in the process of developing a plan to develop a
FF camera, so the process of developing a FF camera has begun. How
is that not "in Development"?

Most governments have actively planned what to do in a major
earthquake. There's a flood plan, asteroid strike plan, virulent
athlete's foot infection plan.

Absolutely not true. There was no plan to cope of the flood of New
Orleans when it happened. There was no acknowledgement that there
was even a disaster from the head of the governmental agency dealing
with disasters.

Given the leadership, are you surprised?

Despite these horrifying prospects, we are mostly still alive and
many of our toes remain pleasing to the eye and nose. The disaster
plan turns out not to be the beginning of a disaster process.

Earthquakes and floods are rare, but they do happen. Just look at
the floods that affected the Midwestern US this year. What
governmental plan prevented the floods? There is no plan that can
prevent an earthquake and no plan that can prevent a flood.

No plan can prevent earthquakes or floods or hurricanes, but a plan can make dealing with the mess a great deal simpler and easier on the victims.

You plan so that you are ready in case something happens, such as a
decision to proceed. Without knowing what proceeding with a plan
might consist of, you can't even make a decision to proceed. So of
course you need a plan, for every possible turn your business might
take in the foreseeable future.

RP

It is better to hear that Pentax has a plan for a full frame than to
hear that it has no plan for a full frame. If Pentax has no plan,
then it would not be good news for Pentax users. It would probably
be disastrous for Pentax marketing because we may see people
switching to other brands en mass.

En masse? Good grief! Why? I don't want so-called full frame, so I'm not going anywhere to get it. From what I read here, Pentax MAY be planning to plan, which MAY be better than not even thinking about it, but mostly what we have to start off this thread is words from a guy who is close to psychotic about things Pentax.

I am interested in a possible K30D, and, maybe, a K1D--assuming it's not full frame, so all my lenses will work.

--
Charlie Self
http://www.charlieselfonline.com

 

[Charles Self]

We all know that the major players in the DSLR camera market are
thinking of marketing a FF DSLR soon or later.
Today, Canon and Nikon. Next Sony, Pentax/Samsung, Leica, Olympus,
Sigma, .... more?

Something new?

Not a thing. SOSDD.

--
Charlie Self
http://www.charlieselfonline.com

 

[ropen]

1) When K20D was out I saw a lot of whinning: "oh, only 3fps, same AF
system, same 1/4000 shutter, well for sure this isn't an upgrade only
a sensor change. I would of buy it and payied some more for those but
since it hasn't any I won't buy it". Now you can have the oportunity
to buy such a camera and with K20D hovering arround 1000 USD body
only a price of 1400-1500 USD is feasable.
2) Many people are heavily invested in APS-C lens and maybe wish for
a better camera to use all that glass with. Some other could enter
the Pentax system because of the fact that they can buy along with
medium priced / high quality glass a semi-pro body. Think about
weather sealing at a significantly lower price than C or N for
example. And even more so think about building a semi pro system with
a lower priced body and vastly lower priced quality lens. Yes, we
still have holes in the lens range but just wait for the next roadmap
and lens release.

I agree with the above but that is best done for the K20D
replacement; the K30D. Making a fast K20D along with the K20D will
just erode both cameras sales. Thats something Pentax can't afford.
Their current problem marketingwise, is that the K200D and K20D are
too close top each other. The least they need is another 14,6mp
camera unless it is dirt cheap. The need space between the model.
Besides, theres no room for a five model line-up Pentax K-mount
system. That will be spreading the resources too thinly. Note that
majority of Pentax users bought into Pentax nowadays because it was
cheap: not because it was identical to a Nikon body.

The reality doesn't support your previous assertion. Look no further than D200 and D80 which had the same Mps yet were different enough to be in 2 distinct categories. "Space" between models doesn't mean only Mps because soon you'll get to values where the noise and DR are better on lower end cameras. One more thing about this: if two cameras share a sensor they don't automatically produce the same image quality. When the K1D will appear for sure it will have new processing pipeline and maybe tweaks in convertors too. If they will extract a bit more DR and less noise from the sensor by that this could be by far the "space" you're talking about.

3) If FF is the pinnacle of digital photo what about MF then? Why
think that if you have no FF camera your system just sucks? I say
it's more of a personal complex than any technical related thing.

I don't think anyone have said FF is the pinnacle of digital so I
don't know why you bring it up. Les just agree that APS is certainlky
not the pinnacle of anything. Therefore Pentax pinnacle should be in
larger formats. Which is in tune with their heritage.

For many a compact p&s is enough, hell some are satisfied with their phone cameras ... what's your point? Do you honnestly believe that at low ISO a Canon 5D it's better than my K20D? Or is it twice as good being twice as expensive? All this are in the YMMV category don't you think? But technically I think the difference between a MF image and a FF one is much more than FF -> APS-C. My opinion!

4) Of course Pentax will not sell the volumes of D300 regardless of
their camera qualities because they simply are not Nikon in terms of
marketing, brand awareness and market share. But an upper than K20D
camera will solve very well two problems: one, will bring K20D's
price further down to battle the D90 and 40D and two, will provde an
upgrade path for many people (especially) with K10Ds and (less) with
K20Ds who want something better.

It will not bring the K20D further down. The Pentax sales are
sluggish already and lowering the price further mean losses. The last
Pentax need is a higher end model with slow sales, that in addition
erode sales of other models, and have zero marketing value. Pentax
need a top model that has maximum advertising and status value.
Pentax need to be seen as a player and to do that nowadays means FF
(or MF digital or preferable both)

Are you the Pentax CFO or else how do you know about where the losses begin? How come a slow sales model can erode sales of other models for God's sake? And you complain in the same paragraph that K20D doesn't sell that well and this can be because either is overpriced or underfeatured. BTW, IMO K20D had sluggish sales because not many K10D owners were ready to upgrade to something they percieve as similar except for the sensor. So, larger sales means less cost per sensor to make and this coupled with improving yields (as in all semiconductor processes which refines in time) means the possibility of a lower price. As for the "marketing value" I guess all those millions of D300 Nikon sold are zero marketing value compared with the 150K D3? Let alone the fact that they earned more income from D300 by far...

5) The dual launch in the next half year both on the lower end of the
range and in the top will provide for Pentax the best chance to
absorb new customers on price and quality/performance.

Absolutely, but one of them needs to be FF....

Say you ...

(cont in the next message for space limitation)

 

[ropen]

7) The mentality that Pentax cannot compete with the big guys is what
brought us to the under 5% market share. If they want to succede in
this they MUST CHANGE THAT and deliever the best cameras they can for
the lowest price possible.

True, but all the competition goes FF these days and Pentax needs to
do that too.

My friend, "competition" has FF from a lot of time. "Competiton" has a decent FF under 3k USD on the market from 2005. Don't you believe me ask Rice High he has one. The only thing that's changed it's the fact you want one now. Hell, "competition" as in Olympus which is above Pentax in sales doesn't even have an APS-C camera.

8) This higher end camera will be the testing ground for new systems
that will find place in the future FF camera too thus sharing R&D
costs and increasing the total number produced at lower costs.

Why not the other way around? An FF camera that can provides elements
for the K20D replacement late next year?

This one is simple. The data volumes from a 14,6Mp sensor is far less than arround a 25MP FF one. The AF system is more tolerant on the APS-C than FF due to greather DOF. All those could appear first in a APS-C camera and will be "tuned" for FF latter. Besides you still tend to think that a crude FF Pentax camera will sell like hot cakes ... I gues plenty others think it will sell 10K tops worldwide per year.

I have a deja vu feeling and I am not ready to continue this anymore. By any chance aren't you Pal from the other forum? You seem like a twin of his thinking.

Radu

 

[DLBlack]

Roland Mabo wrote:

[snip]

And we are still waiting for the K1D, which also is a camera in
development.
However, the new K1D flagship is NOT the 24x36. It is a new APS-C
pro-level.

That is your guess...

Back when the K20D came out Pentax Corporation (I believe Ned or John) did make statements that Pentax was working on a APC-S camera above the K20D that is going to be a pro-level camera and that it will be out late in 2008 or early in 2009.

I haven't heard any different from Pentax. Samsung did announce that they were working on a FF sensor. My guess is when the FF camera gets out it will have the guts of the pro-level APC-S camera, except for the sensor. So both pro-level cameras could be developed at the same time and released within a short time of each other.

[snip]

Dave

 

[Voff]

The reality doesn't support your previous assertion. Look no further
than D200 and D80 which had the same Mps yet were different enough to
be in 2 distinct categories.

But Pentax isn't Nikon! Pentax have 4% marketshare. Nikon have 10 times as much! They can afford to fill every niche; Pentax can't; they have to be selective are careful of autocannibalization.

"Space" between models doesn't mean only
Mps because soon you'll get to values where the noise and DR are
better on lower end cameras. One more thing about this: if two
cameras share a sensor they don't automatically produce the same
image quality. When the K1D will appear for sure it will have new
processing pipeline and maybe tweaks in convertors too. If they will
extract a bit more DR and less noise from the sensor by that this
could be by far the "space" you're talking about.

Space isn't about reality. It is about market perception. Canibalization doesn't bother Nikon and Canon. They can sell all their models in huge numbers in spite of being close to each other.

3) If FF is the pinnacle of digital photo what about MF then? Why
think that if you have no FF camera your system just sucks? I say
it's more of a personal complex than any technical related thing.

I don't think anyone have said FF is the pinnacle of digital so I
don't know why you bring it up. Les just agree that APS is certainlky
not the pinnacle of anything. Therefore Pentax pinnacle should be in
larger formats. Which is in tune with their heritage.

For many a compact p&s is enough, hell some are satisfied with their
phone cameras ... what's your point?

You ask me about point? You brought it up. I just answer your comment that FF was not the pinnacle.

Are you the Pentax CFO or else how do you know about where the losses
begin? How come a slow sales model can erode sales of other models
for God's sake?

All Pentax DSLR are slow sellers. Adding another slow seller that erode the other slow sellers is a recipie for disaster. It gets worse if you have drop prices on you most popular model to boot. Theres no profit left.

And you complain in the same paragraph that K20D
doesn't sell that well and this can be because either is overpriced
or underfeatured.

Neither. It is marketing, market penetration and market perception. Both the K200D and the K20D is widely praised for excellent value for money in tests. What Pentax needs is to be set on the map. Another mee too camera won't do.

BTW, IMO K20D had sluggish sales because not many
K10D owners were ready to upgrade to something they percieve as
similar except for the sensor. So, larger sales means less cost per
sensor to make and this coupled with improving yields (as in all
semiconductor processes which refines in time) means the possibility
of a lower price.

Sure it is too close to the K10D and K200D. A 14,6mp K20D turbo will face the exact same problem. Too close to let many of the K20D owners to upgrade. Pentax needs to come out of this circle.

As for the "marketing value" I guess all those
millions of D300 Nikon sold are zero marketing value compared with
the 150K D3? Let alone the fact that they earned more income from
D300 by far...

Nikon is in a completely differnt boat than Pentax. Without Nikons pro heritage (like Pentax), there would be no D300 success. But, Nikons forage into FF is far more important for the company, making the pros return in hordes further cementing the Nikon brand heritage.

 

[Voff]

My friend, "competition" has FF from a lot of time. "Competiton" has
a decent FF under 3k USD on the market from 2005. Don't you believe
me ask Rice High he has one. The only thing that's changed it's the
fact you want one now. Hell, "competition" as in Olympus which is
above Pentax in sales doesn't even have an APS-C camera.

So you don't count D700, D900, A700, 5DMKII and think they will have a impact on the market?

The old EOS 5D has a dated body and lower image quuality than some APS bodies; it is not competitive anymore.

In case you haven't noticed; the semi-pro and pro arena is now all about FF. If Pentax wants to go against the stream it is at their peril.

This one is simple. The data volumes from a 14,6Mp sensor is far less
than arround a 25MP FF one. The AF system is more tolerant on the
APS-C than FF due to greather DOF. All those could appear first in a
APS-C camera and will be "tuned" for FF latter.

..or the other way around....

Besides you still
tend to think that a crude FF Pentax camera will sell like hot cakes
... I gues plenty others think it will sell 10K tops worldwide per
year.

I don't. I also don't think that a high end APS camera will sell like hot cakes. That camear will affect the K20D sales negatively, and add very little to the overall Pentax marketshare. Whereas an FF camera, that could have the greatest resolving FF sensor on the planet, will show Pentax as a player and have much larger marketing power showing among other things that there is a upgrade path in the Pentax system.

I have a deja vu feeling and I am not ready to continue this anymore.
By any chance aren't you Pal from the other forum? You seem like a
twin of his thinking.

I'm certainly am. And when did you get out of the cave?

 

[Voff]

Back when the K20D came out Pentax Corporation (I believe Ned or
John) did make statements that Pentax was working on a APC-S camera
above the K20D that is going to be a pro-level camera and that it
will be out late in 2008 or early in 2009.

Did you expect them to say it was full frame? There certainly such a camera in the owrks. If it is APS, then its obvious that Pentax have lost the market trends.

What I think (and this pure guesswork) is that the camear started out as APS. Was in for a redesign into FF about 1,5 years ago; at the time the 645D was frozen.

 

[Roland Mabo]

I disagree completely.
Those that buys into the APS-C system would welcome a flagship model.
Many APS-C lenses won't be full frame on 24x36 body.
Nikon has the D300, Sony has the A700, Olympus has the E-3.
I don't see it as "suicide" if Pentax release a true competitior to those.
Neither Nikon, Sony nor Olympus has - yet - killed themselves by their attempts.

The K20D is the current high-end in the K serie yes, but it will not stop there. There is room for a K1D in the market. The K20D is semi-pro, but it is not considered to be professional on the market.

I don't find a conflict between a professional APS-C and a professional 24x36 from Pentax, especially since the pro 24x36 probably will be twice the price as the pro-level APS-C. There is room in the market for both.

APS-C is here to stay, wether you like it or not.

24x36 won't replace it. It is room in the market for both, and Pentax needs a true pro-level APS-C to offer an upgrade path for lower APS-C bodies.
--
Take care
R
http://www.flickr.com/photos/raphaelmabo

 

[tweedle]

If it is APS, then its obvious that Pentax have
lost the market trends.

Or maybe they are just a few years behind everyone, as usual?

What I think (and this pure guesswork) is that the camear started out
as APS. Was in for a redesign into FF about 1,5 years ago; at the
time the 645D was frozen.

So happy to see you calling this kind of speculation just 'pure guesswork' and not 'rumors' as so many other times before.

 

[richardplondon]

I don't. I also don't think that a high end APS camera will sell like
hot cakes. That camear will affect the K20D sales negatively, and add
very little to the overall Pentax marketshare. Whereas an FF camera,
that could have the greatest resolving FF sensor on the planet, will
show Pentax as a player and have much larger marketing power showing
among other things that there is a upgrade path in the Pentax system.

Just as an aside, I read a fair number of posts from people who like the features and value for money of Pentax cameras and lenses, but are put off because they don't perceive the Pentax range as technically suited to fast action and sports. These people are comparing against other APS cameras, by and large.

If Pentax can plug a "hole" where they know they are already losing prospective customers, that makes sound business sense to me. They probably know right now what it would do to market share, and what the costs would be, and whether or not these costs are likely to drive them out of business. They can only guess at these things for FF.

There's a lot of discussion and interest in FF, currently, but nobody has really demonstrated convincingly whether it's a massive groundswell, a niche fad, or anything in between. I suspect nobody knows the potential size of the FF market, even approximately.

It's all arguable. Price matters, technology matters, the pioneers will eventually get chomped by those who follow in their wake. We are all fickle. I need one I need one I need one... oh. It's heavier than I expected. Some of my lenses won't work? Hmmm. I'm definitely tempted, give me a second... er...

RP

 

[Roland Mabo]

I agree with the above but that is best done for the K20D
replacement; the K30D.

There is room in the market for a Pentax APS-C with 100% viewfinder, long life shutter up to 1/8000, magnesium alloy body, more dials and switches and more pocessing power.

And this is what the K1D is for. It is not a K20D, but it will most likely use the same sensor.

The K20D replacement won't be faster than the K20D, it will offer more features yes and more image processing power and probably a new AF system.

But it won't be faster than 3 fps and it won't have faster shutter than 1/4000 and flash syng won't be higher than 1/180 and it will not have a 100% viewfinder.

So there is room in the market for a K1D and a K30D. They won't kill each other.
Pentax needs more models.

Their current problem marketingwise, is that the K200D and K20D are
too close top each other.

Too close? They have much are more differencies than Sony A350, 300 and 200 bodies!

The need space between the model.

Pentax has this space already.

Besides, theres no room for a five model line-up Pentax K-mount
system. That will be spreading the resources too thinly. Note that
majority of Pentax users bought into Pentax nowadays because it was
cheap: not because it was identical to a Nikon body.

They bought it for cheap but they want upgrade options.

It will not bring the K20D further down. The Pentax sales are
sluggish already and lowering the price further mean losses. The last
Pentax need is a higher end model with slow sales

Neither the Nikon D300 or Sony A700 are slow sellers...
If they can, so can Pentax.

True, but all the competition goes FF these days and Pentax needs to
do that too.

The competition goes both 24x36 and APS-C.
There is room in the market for both systems.
Consumer level to pro level APS-C, and pro-level 24x36.

Pentax needs to be taken seriously and for this they need to expand their APS-C business and release a true high-end professional level APS-C, like Nikon and Sony has done.

The K20D, and it's replacement the K30D, will exist as a nice semi-pro model. No problem. K200D as advanced amateur/popular class and K1000D as the new low end model.

--
Take care
R
http://www.flickr.com/photos/raphaelmabo

 

[Voff]

I disagree completely.
Those that buys into the APS-C system would welcome a flagship model.

I'm sure they will. But there will no flagship effect of this camera. In todays market an flagship is by default FF...

Many APS-C lenses won't be full frame on 24x36 body.
Nikon has the D300, Sony has the A700, Olympus has the E-3.
I don't see it as "suicide" if Pentax release a true competitior to
those.

Pentax already have a competitor to those. It is called the K20D. In my (and your) part of the world it gets constantly compared to these models in tests. The only one thats arguably in another class is the D300, but that one is in a class of its own. Maybe theres a reason for that....

The K20D is the current high-end in the K serie yes, but it will not
stop there. There is room for a K1D in the market. The K20D is
semi-pro, but it is not considered to be professional on the market.

But the new professional and semi-pro models are FF.

I don't find a conflict between a professional APS-C and a
professional 24x36 from Pentax, especially since the pro 24x36
probably will be twice the price as the pro-level APS-C. There is
room in the market for both.

Neither do I. However, I cannot see Pentax with the following line-up unless they quadruple their market share:

K2000D (10mp)
K200D (10mp)
K20D (14mp)
K2D (14mp)
K?D (FF 28mp?)

A five model line-up. I don't believe it. It is either APS at the high end or FF. Not both.

APS-C is here to stay, wether you like it or not.

It is here to stay and I like it

24x36 won't replace it. It is room in the market for both, and Pentax
needs a true pro-level APS-C to offer an upgrade path for lower APS-C
bodies.

True, but I think the sensible thing to do is to upgrade the K20D in a more professional body (K30D). Then put the 14,6mp sensor into the K200D and add live view (K300D). Do this late next year when the K20D/K200D have had a decent lifespan.

 

[Roland Mabo]

Heading in that direction doesn't mean that other format will be
killed. The high-end is definitely heading towards FF. The D3, D700,
D900, A900, D5MkII will all soon be here. The interest of a high-end
APS will diminish quickly in this company, as all focus in the
high-end, among media and photographers alike is firmly at FF.

The competition has pro-level high-end APS-C.
There is room in the market for both pro-level APS-C and 24x36.

Sure. APS is here to stay in the low and mid end for the foreseeable
future.

And pro-level for those that can't afford or doesn't want a 24x36 pro level at twice the price of a pro-level APS-C.

24x36 digital replaces medium format film.

In the film days, it existed pro level medium format and pro level 24x36. No problem. In those days, Pentax answer to Canon pro 24x36 was medium format.
Today, a digital medium format would be too expensive.

For people buying into APS-C and buying pro-level APS-C lenses, a pro-level APS-C is important. Both pro-level APS-C and pro-level 24x36 can co-exist. Pro 24x36 won't kill pro APS-C, just like medium format didn't killed 24x36.

--
Take care
R
http://www.flickr.com/photos/raphaelmabo

 

[Roland Mabo]

Back when the K20D came out Pentax Corporation (I believe Ned or
John) did make statements that Pentax was working on a APC-S camera
above the K20D that is going to be a pro-level camera and that it
will be out late in 2008 or early in 2009.

This is true, and this information was also released by K D Torigoe and K Tatamiya of Pentax Imaging, back in fall 2006 when the K10D was released. They confirmed in an interview by DC Watch Impress that they were working on a new camera above the replacement for the K10D model, a true flagship high-end model in the current APS-C serie. Development has gone too far to cancel this because of some peoples prediction that pro-level 24x36 will kill pro-level APS-C.

I do believe users of K20D would welcome an upgrade path to a more professional model without breaking the bank, as an option to a pro level 24x36 at a price very few could afford.

--
Take care
R
http://www.flickr.com/photos/raphaelmabo

 

[Voff]

Neither the Nikon D300 or Sony A700 are slow sellers...
If they can, so can Pentax.

The A700 is a slower seller than the K20D. The D300 is a Nikon and consequently sell. Incidentally, if the K20D had been a Nikon it would have been their most sold model after the entry level ones, I suspect...

Pentax needs to be taken seriously and for this they need to expand
their APS-C business and release a true high-end professional level
APS-C, like Nikon and Sony has done.

Sony has not Their top of the line model will be FF. Anyway, most of the D300 air has gone out of the baloon with the D700 anoncement. Not to mention when they anounce the 24mp version....

Otherwise, I disagree with the point you have made. Pentax is a 4% marketshare player. They cannot fill every niche....

 

[Anastigmat]

There is a higher probability for an affordable full frame DSLR than
an affordabe 645D. Besides, you must first learn to walk before you
learn to run. Samsung has to first master the art of making full
frame sensors before attempting to deal with medium format sensors
and their huge files.

The FF cameras are already affordable. THe Nikon D700 is affordable
and it is not housed in a cheap body. The price is the same as for
the first mass market amateus Canon DSLR that sold in shiploads.
With todays low dollar, $3000 is peanuts. Besides, consumers are
willing to pay a lot more for digital camera gadgets...

$3,000 is peanuts for a billionaire, but it is not peanuts for the average person dealing with $4.50 per gallon gas prices. Unemployment rate in the USA is climbing. A lot of people are underemployed. Housing prices are falling and people cannot get out second mortgages as easily to spend on extravagant purchases. For now, full frame remains unaffordable for the average photographer.

Medium format cameras are great for macro and landscapes, because
they are not as limited by diffraction as smaller sensors. But they
are practically useless for wildlife and sports because of their slow
frame rates and awkward handling characteristics. A 645D is not a
substitute for a full frame.

I agree that MF digital is no substitute for FF, but Anbdy Rouse used
Pentax 645NII for wildlife and praised its AF system and metering;
the latter better than on any Canon according to his book...

Even if a 645D is usable for full frame, its price make make it out of reach of even more people than a Pentax full frame. Medium format cameras are good, but they are a totally different animal than a full frame DSLR.

 

[Voff]

If it is APS, then its obvious that Pentax have
lost the market trends.

Or maybe they are just a few years behind everyone, as usual?

Yes. Like Sony. No FF camera. Just waporware....

So happy to see you calling this kind of speculation just 'pure
guesswork' and not 'rumors' as so many other times before.

No. I always make a clear distinction between guesswork or speculation and rumors. The former is something I make up myself. The latter somethingin I heard from others (who may in turn have made it up).

BTW Have you ever considered being nice. It doesn't hurt.....

 

[Voff]

$3,000 is peanuts for a billionaire, but it is not peanuts for the
average person dealing with $4.50 per gallon gas prices.

lol Thats the civilzed worlds lowest gas price. It cost three times as much everywhere else....

Even if a 645D is usable for full frame, its price make make it out
of reach of even more people than a Pentax full frame. Medium format
cameras are good, but they are a totally different animal than a full
frame DSLR.

True

 

[Anastigmat]

2010 would be about right. Sadly that will spell the end of dedicated
APS lenses like the 50-135.

I'm equally sure that 2 years will give them plenty of time to assess
the success or otherwise of the current mid-range FF cameras and
Sony's offering.

That seems to be the problem. Pentax is spending way too much time assessing the success of other people's products, and by the time they enter the gold rush, all the easy gold has already been panned. By the time Pentax entered the 10mp APS-C semi-pro/enthusiast market with the K10D, Canon had introduced a 10mp Digital Rebel and Sony had introduced a 10mp A100. Nikon, too, had a 10mp D80. Pentax could no longer charge Nikon D200 level prices for the K10D, as it had anticipated 8-10 months earlier.

By the time Pentax finally enters the full frame market, competition may be as cut throat as the APS-C market is right now. Pentax has no one to blame but itself because it ignored the full frame market altogether for too long.