[DavidWasch]

non-DA lens are obsolete today. They're missing features and were designed years ago for film. If you have a digital camera, why on earth do you think that a film lens can ever possibly be a better solution? It makes no sense.

Speed: Unnecessary
Size: Too big
Price: They're more expensive. Why do you want to waste money on old technology?
In-camera Corrections: Not supported on non-DA lenses

I would assume the 35mm format was initially developed because it was the largest format that could be conveniently carried around. Up to the point of producing fatigue and camera shake, the bigger, the better. The 35mm format allows for 50% more light to hit the sensor than the the current standard, which means more resolution and quicker exposures.

If Pentax is not going to produce a FF camera, I agree-- FF lenses loose their inherent advantage. BUT, I have a feeling I will love my new 50mm f/1.7 SMCP-FA, and it was very cheap. I'm not sure what advantage a similar DA lens would provide (I'd rather do my processing on a large pc screen than in-camera), but it probably wouldn't provide it for less than $135.

[DavidWasch]

Since the early 80's, Pentax don't seem to get a grip on the market trend. Now I am not suggesting APS-C will disappear in the future, but it being replaced by FF totally is not entirely impossible, just nobody knows when or ever.

Right now, there are a lot of improvements that can be made on the chip (noise reduction, higher sensitivity, etc.). At some point, increasing the size of the sensor may be the least expensive way to improve image quality. Until then, APS-C will reign.

My thoughts are:

Buy equipment and put them to good use

You already bought the K20D, why is FF bothering you?

IMHO, you will benefit more investing your time thinking about how best you can put the K20D ( a APS-C camera) to good use :ugh:

You are a novice. I am sure the K20D can serve your needs for years to come. If you choose not to invest in premium (good) DA lenses, you are just depriving yourself the chance to enjoy this hobby to it's fullest. You may not bother, but poor poor K20D

The FF issue is not so much a bother for me as an extra consideration behind my purchases. I was currious how much weight I should give that consideration, and it seems like it should not be much.

Along the way I am greatful to have learned a couple of things:
- Pentax is not going to release a FF body any time soon
- The old vs. new argument is alive and well among Pentax users

[redpigeons]

Right now, there are a lot of improvements that can be made on the chip (noise reduction, higher sensitivity, etc.). At some point, increasing the size of the sensor may be the least expensive way to improve image quality. Until then, APS-C will reign.



The FF issue is not so much a bother for me as an extra consideration behind my purchases. I was currious how much weight I should give that consideration, and it seems like it should not be much.

Along the way I am greatful to have learned a couple of things:
- Pentax is not going to release a FF body any time soon
- The old vs. new argument is alive and well among Pentax users

welcome to the Pentax family!
I promiss you that you will change your mind about three times every month .
that is guaranty + free LBA + addiction to this forum .
at the end its all fun and you will enjoy your camera either way

[robjmitchell]

well I am considering the MF voigtlander 20/3.5 vs the da 21, due to the aps-c/ff issue. I will wait and see weather the samsung NX to K adapter can AF screwdrive lenses since i might also go smaller

[ll_coffee_lP]

Given the choice between a FA lens and a DA lens I will always choose the FA. Whether the DA's are optimized for the current camera line might be important to some, it isn't anything of major importance to me. My workhorse lenses (FA x3) have been purchased to last a lifetime - and at some point in time they will be usable on a FF digital Pentax body (which I will purchase if it is made).

There's nothing wrong with the DA line (I love my 10-17FE). If you like the lens get it and enjoy shooting. Cropped sensors will be around for a long time still and if you don't think you'll ever be in the market for a FF (when/if released) then they are solid purchases.

c[_]

[Marc Sabatella]

Not sure about your analogy of Full-Format to Medium-Format-- if I purchase a FF lens it will work with my K20D body now PLUS be able to work with future FF bodies.

True. Just like if you buy a medium format lens (645, say), it will work on your FF bodies now PLUS be able to work with future 645 bodies. But I don't see people rushing out to buy 645 lenses to use with their FF bodies just in case someday they decide to move up to 645. That's because these lenses they are unnecessarily large and expensive unless you're in the tiny minority of people who will actually move from FF to 645 some day.

Similarly, 35mm lenses are unnecessarily large and expensive (new ones, anyhow) unless you're in the tiny minority of people who will actually move from APS-C to 35mm some day. The mere fact that there might someday be an FF DSLR from Pentax is no more significant than the fact that there might someday be a 645 DSLR for the systems that currently offer FF - or the fact that there are *already* 645 film bodies for systems than currently offer 35mm.

So if you're thinking your one of the people who will eventually abandon APS-C, why stop at FF? Why not start stocking up on 645 lenses now? Are you not worried that the eventual introduction of 645 camera will make your FF lenses obsolete?

[wlachan]

OMFG 645 & K mounts are so different they cannot be even compared. Unless I am missing something, The majority of DA lenses aren't exactly smaller or lighter than FA lenses.

[cwood]

APS-C is not going anywhere. There is nothing wrong with the format and it will always be smaller and cheaper than FF no matter how the gap begins to close. These are differences that matter to both pro's and consumers. If Pentax ever releases a FF I will add a DFA*24-70/2.8 to my lens collection and use it as a primary body at weddings but I will continue to bring an APS-C camera with my 50-135mm because it takes awesome pictures and it will be half the size.

[cwood]

OMFG 645 & K mounts are so different they cannot be even compared. Unless I am missing something, The majority of DA lenses aren't exactly smaller or lighter than FA lenses.

That could be because some of them are based on FA designs (like 200/2.8)

Compare DA*16-50 to either Canon or Nikon FF equivalent (24-70mm) ... FYI the Canon lens is 2.1 lb
same with 50-135mm (70-200)

[ll_coffee_lP]

...
So if you're thinking your one of the people who will eventually abandon APS-C, why stop at FF? Why not start stocking up on 645 lenses now? Are you not worried that the eventual introduction of 645 camera will make your FF lenses obsolete?

I might as well stock up on DA lenses now then, just in case cropped sensors only go out of style and come back again in 30 years...

c[_]

[Sailor]

I would assume the 35mm format was initially developed because it was the largest format that could be conveniently carried around. . . . . . .

I may be wrong, but IIRC, 35 mm film was developed for the movies and adapted to still cameras.

Somebody correct me if I have this wrong, but I don't think 35 mm film was introduced to produce a small still camera.

Jer

[redpigeons]

There are many reason to get older Pentax lenses.. FF is only one of them

Lets start with the fact the most DA lenses are just slower ,
also if you like me and have two film bodies .
as I said before size is not an issue with Pentax either way, as the FA lenses are very small as well.

[Steve Beswick]

I may be wrong, but IIRC, 35 mm film was developed for the movies and adapted to still cameras.

Somebody correct me if I have this wrong, but I don't think 35 mm film was introduced to produce a small still camera.

Jer

You are 100% correct. That's why 35mm has the square holes along the edges.

[GLXLR]

I think FF will die faster than cropped sensors. Eventually someone will produce a sensor which cools itself after each shot and has reflectors on parts of the camera to reflect more light into the sensor (20 years from now maybe?) Olympus has been doing great with improving ISO performance especially with the new Lumix GH1.
IMHO, I think the only reason why FF was made was b/c there was so many old Canon/Nikon/Minolta FF glass. Everyone with APS-C sensors dream of having FF, but its just a trend and I think it will die eventually.
JUST MY OPINIONS

[wlachan]

I think the technology would advance so much aps-c would disappear and replaced by 1/2.5" ccd.