I did expect it to be not that cheap, but it's surprised me how much more it is. I thought it might hit £1500 odd, scary how prices have gone
BTW you don't get a charger or hot shoe cover either for your 2 grand
Hot shoe cover is £50! Wow we are in crazy land for camera prices in 2021
- Emperor of a Minor Galaxy
- Posts: 2214
- Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 5:04 pm
- Location: Ironton, Missouri, USA
It's the first DSLR with a top ISO speed of over 1 million! That's just what you need to take a photo of a whole stadium at night lit only by a single candle!
Aren't you going to need that?
https://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/ ... 204800.HTM
And here is one ISO 1,600,000
https://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/ ... 600000.HTM
Neither are pretty, the last one is bordering some 60's psychedelic blob of colours
Full gallery is here:
https://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/ ... ALLERY.HTM
To me looks as I would expect from APS-C, and a modern sensor. I would say ISO 1600/3200 no problem, maybe 6400. Above that it's not something I would use. It's just silly marketing nonsense from Pentax. Nobody is going to use ISO 1,600,000 in any circumstances. It's not even good enough for a tiny web thumbnail. I have no idea why they even include some of the ultra high ISO levels, other than something to put on the spec sheet.
Pentax have not had a good owner for a long time. Hoya nipped in there, only to keep the profitable medical division - then sold off the not doing much photo side to Ricoh.
I have no idea why Ricoh bought Pentax, they only had a minor interest in photo stuff. The modular GXR was an obvious, not going to work concept. The GR has a bit of a cult following, and they are quite good. What they're not is, "spend almost a grand good". The prices on those have increased a lot. Hence the same is going to apply to Pentax from now on.
This one at 2 grand, no doubt if they do a new full frame you can expect a very large price tag. Far higher than the K1
Some of the lenses are also sky high prices, though it would be hard to say MILC lenses are cheaper - they are also pricey to my eyes.
I don't regret trying Pentax, a few years back. They had some nice ideas, and at the time offered excellent, "bang per buck". I found their used AF selection to be tiny, even compared to Minolta. Nowhere near the same quantity around, nor dare I say quality (some are good, many are meh)
I would never consider Pentax as a viable system, with a long term future. I'm not sure many would either. That makes it fairly unlikely they will get many new users. It's true A Mount is a dead end, still at least there is a sizeable used market - and some kind of adapter route even if it isn't very appealing.
There is nothing wrong keeping at the SLR game, offering something different. Let's be honest here, a crop body at full frame prices, isn't likely to appeal even to many of their current users. I think the price is absurd, being blunt. Pentax were far too late to the full frame game, way behind the others. I wouldn't be too sure it will be around in 10 years, but I might be wrong. If you wanted to do that retro vibe digital thing, Fuji seem to have that side covered pretty well. Where does it leave Pentax? Who knows, the only company I think is 100% secure is Canon. Nikon seem to be flapping around, with oddball ZFC designs, Sony I can't say - they have invested a lot. However they have a history of abandoning platforms/products, and not just A Mount.
If Pentax were doing anything really interesting, I'd take a look. They're not though, hence the problem
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests