[Angevinn]

There was a rumor awhile back that Pentax was going to make the 35mm Limiteds (31mm, 43mm and 77mm) into D-FA WR lenses in time for the launch of a full frame DSLR. This seems to make sense now that stock is running out on some of them.

The lens factory does not sit idle everyday. Hoya/Pentax has been up to something since no new DA lenses have been rolled out since 2009. Remember the leak on the Pentax Canada web page a few months back? It showed that a number of the DA lenses were discontinued. The page was quickly taken down.

I believe when Hoya/Pentax closed the Japanese lens plants and moved production entirely to Vietnam (like the FA 50 1.4, 50mm A 1.2 and the 31mm limited) it gave them a chance to focus on and improve quality control and some other kinks before production of more modern D-FA lenses are rolled out. I believe the D-FA WR 100 was the beginning even though it's based on an older lens design. It's still a beautiful lens and on my purchasing list.

It's sad that the 50mm Nikon 1.4 G is close to $500.00 and entirely "Unfantastic Plastic". Hoya/Pentax has the right idea with metal lens bodies. I hope they keep this up in the future! Please give us back aperture rings!!!

Please Pentax give us D-FA's WR in the following focal lengths: 15-16mm 2.8, a 50mm 1.0-1.2, an 85mm 1.4 and a 135mm 2.0-2.8. Of course some tele & wide zooms too!

Sure, but they don't cost the same or weigh the same... And what happens at the wide end of things?

Don't get me wrong, I'd love a full frame camera with a good choice of lens.
But Pentax seems to be hinting in the opposite direction: the FA limiteds are in short stock, and lots of APS-C lens are released.

The only new FF lens release is the 100mm macro (which i admit, in itself is a little confusing).

[mattdm]

There was a rumor awhile back that Pentax was going to make the 35mm Limiteds (31mm, 43mm and 77mm) into D-FA WR lenses in time for the launch of a full frame DSLR. This seems to make sense now that stock is running out on some of them.

That's not really a rumor, at least not one based in any evidence. It's wishful thinking. Hopefully true wishful thinking, but shouldn't be repeated as more than that.

[Angevinn]

I wouldn't call it wishful thinking. If Pentax is bringing out a FullFrame camera it makes complete sense to give the Limited trio special digital coatings and the Weather Resistant treatment. Is the fact that the 31mm Limited is out of stock in many places wishful thinking also? Was it wishful thinking that Pentax Canada let slip that certain DA lenses are discontinued?

That's not really a rumor, at least not one based in any evidence. It's wishful thinking. Hopefully true wishful thinking, but shouldn't be repeated as more than that.

[wizofoz]

i remember hearing that too.. i'm wondering if you're the guy who was waiting with me when someone took out their (pink) canon P&S to take a shot of it..

I'm the one with the handgrip and missing strap lug on my K7

I'm the guy who was waiting. I made the wry comment about taking a photo of the 645D with a canon p&s.

My recollection is that the sales guy said that the 645D would be released in Australia in 4 - 6 weeks (just after Japan) and would be $14 -$16k with lens.

He indicated that Australia would be the 2nd release place because of CRK's 'extra special' relationship with Pentax.

You really need to get that lug fixed, before the warranty runs out.

[dosdan]

Bring on the Megapixels!

As regards resolution – more MPs are better. Current sensor pixel density is still limiting resolution if you're using good glass and are not stopped down too far into diffraction territority.

As regards noise, with the current high fill-factors (micro-lenses; backside illumination), with the same sensor technology, noise is mostly dependent on the total amount of light falling on the total sensor area which should be the same for similar APS-C format sensors. Take a 10MP & a 40MP APS-C format sensor. The 40MP version would have sensels (the photosensitive part of a pixel) that are ¼ the area of the 10MP version (assuming a fill-factor approaching 100%). However the same amount of total light would fall on the two APS-C sensors, and if the resultant picture is printed out the same size, both images would appear to have the same noise level at mid-ISO levels, but the 40MP version should be sharper, unless either on-sensor NR (if CMOS) or PP NR was strong enough to wipe out the resolution advantage.

There is a noise difference between the two sensors which see-saws at low & high ISOs as mentioned in the summary below.

See http://theory.uchicago.edu/~ejm/pix/20d/tests/noise/index.html,
particularly http://theory.uchicago.edu/~ejm/pix/20d/tests/noise/noise-p3.html#pixelsize

His summary:
Among the important measures of image quality are signal-to-noise ratio of the capture process, and resolution. It was shown that for fixed sensor format, the light collection efficiency per unit area is essentially independent of pixel size, over a huge range of pixel sizes from 2 microns to over 8 microns, and is therefore independent of the number of megapixels. Noise performance per unit area was seen to be only weakly dependent on pixel size. The S/N ratio per unit area is much the same over a wide range of pixel sizes. There is an advantage to big pixels in low light (high ISO) applications, where read noise is an important detractor from image quality, and big pixels currently have lower read noise than aggregations of small pixels of equal area. For low ISO applications, the situation is reversed in current implementations — if anything, smaller pixels perform somewhat better in terms of S/N ratio (while offering more resolution)
...
Rather than having strong dependence on the pixel size, the noise performance instead depends quite strongly on sensor size — bigger sensors [i.e. larger than APS-C] yield higher quality images, by capturing more signal (photons).


This recent, interesting paper looks at the optical challenges of going below 2μm pixels. Sony has already introduced one of the recommendations: Back-Side Illumination. While increasing sensitivity, BSI also reduces the dielectric stack height, paving the way for more pixels per mm2. The paper can't be hyper-linked to directly. You can get it by googling for

""Microlens performance limits in sub-2μm pixel CMOS image sensors".

It's at the Optic InfoBase site and there's a link in the Abstract section to a full text pdf.





Dan.

[ogl]

Smaller pixels = worse and bad-balanced colours. It's hard to correct.
7D is bad camera in terms of IQ. IMO.
Resolution? 15 MP at APS-C is enough for 95% of amateurs. I'm satisfied with 10 MP.


BSI sensor is not the cure. This sensors are tiny now and could give only small EV advantage.

[Voe]

I was at the PMA on Saturday and when I asked the Pentax rep about eventual full frame camera, he used the word "Never". He said Pentax will stick with APC and further develop the 645D series.

[ogl]

I was at the PMA on Saturday and when I asked the Pentax rep about eventual full frame camera, he used the word "Never". He said Pentax will stick with APC and further develop the 645D series.

After K-7 - any Pentax high-end APS-C cameras won't be too interesting and have very good selling. Only something cheap - like K-x. But, it's not good way for a big boy. IMO.

If Hoya doesn't want to offer FF camera, it's а BIG mistake.
A lot of Pentaxian will buy FF from another brand.

[thibs]

After K-7 - any Pentax high-end APS-C cameras won't be too interesting and have very good selling. Only something cheap - like K-x. But, it's not good way for a big boy. IMO.

LOL... you'll eat your hat... IMO

[ghelary]

After K-7 - any Pentax high-end APS-C cameras won't be too interesting and have very good selling. Only something cheap - like K-x. But, it's not good way for a big boy. IMO.

If Hoya doesn't want to offer FF camera, it's а BIG mistake.
A lot of Pentaxian will buy FF from another brand.

Ogl, whatever you think of FF necessity for Pentax, Pentax/Hoya have another opinion. Amateurs wanting FF have already 3 options (4 with Leica), why compete in such a narrow marketplace ? APSC is still the vast majority of the market and will remain for the years to come, it provides excellent quality (better than 35 film is capable of), it allows for compact cameras which is a quality for many shooters.

DOF is not an argument for me as APSC already allows for narrow DOF.

Pentax have made the choice for the moment to sell few models, to have high volume in order to be competitive while still earning money. They apply this strategy for APSC, and see no room for it with a FF.

If you don't agree with this strategy just change system, Nikon D700 and Canon 5DmkII are very capable cameras. At the end of the day, a camera is just a tool, the important is the pictures.

And I'm yet to see breathtaking pictures from you.

[miles]

I was at the PMA on Saturday and when I asked the Pentax rep about eventual full frame camera, he used the word "Never". He said Pentax will stick with APC and further develop the 645D series.

Sadly, i am afraid this makes more sense... Though I have to say that if Pentax intends on launching a FF camera their best bet would be to reissue the 3 FA limiteds at the same time. So indeed, retiring them would have to precede. But this is only a mix of speculation & wishful thinking. I guess we'll find out at Photokina.

I'm still betting that Pentax is proposing the 645 for pros and high quality APS-Cs for pro-sumers!

As for future APS-Cs not being interesting, surely we've come a long way, but there's still room for improvement!

[gazonk]

Pentax have made the choice for the moment to sell few models, to have high volume in order to be competitive while still earning money. They apply this strategy for APSC, and see no room for it with a FF.

I think that where they need to act fast, is in the "small system" (evil etc.) category. I see a lot of GF1s and E-PL1s around town these days.

[thibs]

Sadly, i am afraid this makes more sense... Though I have to say that if Pentax intends on launching a FF camera their best bet would be to reissue the 3 FA limiteds at the same time.

It would make sense even without FF IMO. Make them WR with QSF (and probably without aperture ring) and you have winners, even for those who already have them. A couple users from this forum did upgrade from DFA100 to DFA100 WR.

[Peter Zack]

I think that where they need to act fast, is in the "small system" (evil etc.) category. I see a lot of GF1s and E-PL1s around town these days.

Unfortunately I agree. I want a High ISO killer, FF model. But Sony has the NEZ-3 and 5 models because they targeted a possible 10 million customers that want to move up from P&S but don't want the bulk of a DSLR. if Pentax is looking at the numbers FF<>EVIL the EVIL camera wins IMO.

The thing I think that Sony messed up on was they chose size over lens mounts and the new lens mount can't take Alpha lenses.

[Class A]

And I'm yet to see breathtaking pictures from you.

IMHO, no one needs to prove that they are a great photographer to post here.

I'm sure that Pentax (nor any other manufacturer) doesn't require their customers to deliver breathtaking pictures either.