[beaumont]

I'm the first to admit that I know very little technically re the current digitals and the potential full frame camera's. I have been giving this some thought though with regards to investing in new lenses. One question though (and forgive me if it comes out incorrectly)...
If you have two camera's, say a 10D with 10 megapixels, and a comperable full frame with 10 megapixels (disregarding the fact that by the time the full frame Pentax is out it will of course be in excess of this 10 meg example)..my understanding is that you'll get a wider angle of picture with a 31LTD on the full frame than you would with the 31LTD on the 10D. Assuming that is true, wouldn't both pictures be equally clear, 10 meg results, and therefore the only real benefit is being able to use more of the glass in the 31?
Put another way, if you're using a 40LTD on the 10D and a 77LTD on the full frame, wouldn't both pictures be the same resolution (albiet with a focal difference of less than 77-44), therefore the potential of just as good a quality picture?

Again, not sure if I've worded this correctly, but hopefully someone gets my drift...
thx

[Pål Jensen]

Yes. But will all things equal you'll get better noise performance and hence can shoot at higher ISO values with FF.
However, FF opens the possibility of having 20~30+ mp cameras that will be resolution kings...

[Pål Jensen]

Put another way, if you're using a 40LTD on the 10D and a 77LTD on the full frame, wouldn't both pictures be the same resolution (albiet with a focal difference of less than 77-44), therefore the potential of just as good a quality picture?
thx

This part: No, not really. For a certain output size; ie a print of a certain size, you have to magnify the APS image 50% more than the FF image, magnifying the lens flaws by equal amount.
This means that an APS lens really need to be sharper to be "equal".

[JJJPhoto]

There are several arguments for or against Pentax going full frame. However, there is only one reason that matters to me:

BIG FREAKIN' VIEWFINDERS.

You might think the viewfinder in our K10D and K20D bodies is big (and it is, for a sub-$4,000 DSLR) but just take a look through the viewfinder on the Nikon D700 or D3 sometime.

Those viewfinders are HUGE.

I would LOVE to have a great viewfinder like that paired with the Pentax Limited primes.

[stevebrot]

And the other argument is...(drum roll)...

Fast, low-distortion wide and super-wide angle lenses.

Back in the day...a 28mm was wide and a 20mm was superwide. A good 28mm would be rectilinear and would be adequate for most landscapes and almost too wide for interior shots. A 20mm or 24mm was used for extreme landscapes, architecture or for a special effects, though distortion might be an issue.

It is a rotten shame that I am using a 16mm Russian-made fish-eye or my 18-55mm kit lens for landscapes and have to deal with distortion, bow-shaped horizons, and various degrees of chromatic aberration as the price for working at these focal lengths. Oh, speaking of price...has anyone priced a high quality prime in the range of 17-20mm or a 16-whatever wide-angle zoom lately? In contrast, good 28mm lenses have traditionally been an excellent value, usually about the same money as a 50mm lens of similar quality and performance. In addition, most 28mm lenses were also about the same size/weight as a 50mm and sported relatively fast apertures (f/2.8 or better). Both factors sound pretty good considering the high price and bulk of most f/2.8 wide-angle zooms.

Bring on the FF detectors and give us some lens options again for high quality wide angle and landscape photography.

Steve

BTW...I like my Zenitar and my kit lens, but neither gives me the same combination of performance, small size, light weight, and ease of use as my Tamron 28/2.5 on a 35mm film camera.

[beaumont]

Thx for the feedback. Lot's to learn at this end...

[Alan 2]

I'm the first to admit that I know very little technically re the current digitals and the potential full frame camera's. I have been giving this some thought though with regards to investing in new lenses. One question though (and forgive me if it comes out incorrectly)...
If you have two camera's, say a 10D with 10 megapixels, and a comperable full frame with 10 megapixels (disregarding the fact that by the time the full frame Pentax is out it will of course be in excess of this 10 meg example)..my understanding is that you'll get a wider angle of picture with a 31LTD on the full frame than you would with the 31LTD on the 10D. Assuming that is true, wouldn't both pictures be equally clear, 10 meg results, and therefore the only real benefit is being able to use more of the glass in the 31?
Put another way, if you're using a 40LTD on the 10D and a 77LTD on the full frame, wouldn't both pictures be the same resolution (albiet with a focal difference of less than 77-44), therefore the potential of just as good a quality picture?

Again, not sure if I've worded this correctly, but hopefully someone gets my drift...
thx

You may want to carefully read this article to begin to get a handle on sensor size, resolution etc.

Digital Camera Sensor Sizes: How it Influences Your Photography