# Pentax FF DSLR for under 1499$ at release.



## RLPhoto (Nov 29, 2012)

If Pentax Released a FF DSLR for for under 1499$, Would it take them back to the top like they used to be? Pentax has some great glass but lack-luster bodies. They are cheaper than other options though.

What would it take to consider a pentax system again?


----------



## Sporgon (Nov 29, 2012)

I wouldn't call the Pentax K5 lack luster, it's probably the best general purpose aps in the market.
I remember in the '70's cameras like the K2, ME and MX were so beautiful you could put  them in a display cabinet and just look at them ! 
But....they weren't as robust as Nikon, and Canons in those days were.......well just a bit plasticy really 
Just after the K7 was announced I thought I'd try a Pentax as a small lightweight travel camera, so bought the much cheaper K20 which had the same chip to try it out. Boy was it lousy, talk about poor DR and general latitude on anything above ISO 100. However to give Pentax credit they quickly secured the new Sony chip and produced the Sony powered K7 - the K5.
Looking at Pentax pricing, if they did introduce a FF I don't think it would bs much under the D6 - 600D initially, but then would drop substantially, and there's the problem. Pentax have had to really drop the price of the very good K5 to tempt buyers away from Canikon, and so I don't think the company will see it as worthwhile.
And the problem is really - everything about Canon works well, from the bodies to lenses to software etc. If I bought another Pentax it would just be a nostalgic purchase.


----------



## bycostello (Nov 30, 2012)

it through price and innovation these smaller companies are gonna take on canon and nikon


----------



## PVS (Dec 4, 2012)

> Pentax FF DSLR for under 1499$ at release.



Neverneverland. 
Though I'd get it in a heartbeat (coupled with 43/1.9+31/1.8 )


----------



## Sunnystate (Dec 4, 2012)

Would really hope so!
Beside Pentax, I can think of few other brand names that may have good chance to come back, if planned properly, especially because they often used others great optics. 

If Sony was smart enough and kept name "Minolta" even if they have to somehow pay more (don't know the story behind) things may look bit different now for them.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Dec 4, 2012)

I'd need some reason to believe that they were going to stay in business. Selling cameras at a loss doesn't give much hope for that.


----------



## garyknrd (Jan 9, 2013)

I have the K-5. It is a POS period. Buttons falling off, shutter a joke and the time for viewing your shots after a burst is a joke. Nice photos, but a very poor camera compared to others.
I bought because of the fanboys on Pentax forums. And did not know better. Even if they make a FF for 1400 dollars I would not buy anything from them. Junk parts and QC make it a nightmare.
They burned there bridge years ago. IMO


----------



## dickgrafixstop (Jan 13, 2013)

I don't have much faith that a new Pentax offering will ever have much more that the current diehard following.
I like the concepts - in body image stabilization, decent weather sealing, variety of lenses if a somewhat odd
choices in focal lengths, but I'm not convinced it's a good long term investment. Even with Ricoh's financial
strength behind them, playing with the big boys is still a different league. 
If I had to prognostigae, I''d put my money on Fuji, Panasonic or Samsung as a more viable candidate for strong
full frame competition three years down the road.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Jan 13, 2013)

No. 
Lenses, not bodies are where your investment should be. Saving $500 on a body is peanuts compared to $!0K - $20K in lenses. How many would want to invest that much in lenses from a company that may possibly go away in the coming year or next.


----------

