[gtl]

LOL - And when a Pentax FF DSLR arrives you won't even buy it. Why? Because if FF was that important to you then you would have bought a Canikon version.

Just hot air

Hmm, I can't say I will buy a Pentax FF immediately after it releases but I would definitely get it when the price drops. FA limiteds are the closest thing to Leica in size that the other manufacturers don't offer yet.

[glennbp]

So much is being made of FF sensors vs APS-C sensors, that I feel the need to put in my 2c. I have owned and shot with both and it is my humble opinion that FF is a waste of money for the vast majority of us. Many of the reasons have been discussed here, not the least of which is the glass necessary to take advantage of FF. For me, the only real advantage to FF used to be greater resolution and more importantly studio portrait use with controlled lighting, conditions, etc. Today with 24MP APS-C sensors, those advantages have greatly if not completely diminished. Give me a Pentax K-5 with a 24MP APS-C sensor and I will be happy as hell!

[Alizarine]

oday with 24MP APS-C sensors, those advantages have greatly if not completely diminished. Give me a Pentax K-5 with a 24MP APS-C sensor and I will be happy as hell!

For me I'm actually happy with 16MP. Reason why I didn't buy the K-5 despite the tempting prices is because I'm checking to see if the AF development is worth it! I'll get a full 135 when I can afford one. And I'm sure I won't buy one just to be happy to have one, but because work will dictate that I need one!

[ElJamoquio]

You need very good glass these days to see the difference.

I disagree completely. In fact the difference is more apparent with cheaper glass; but with any lens it is easy to tell the difference in moderate to large size prints.

[RonHendriks1966]

But if we find Nikon new FF D600's price will not much higher than K-3 (APS-C).
Do we still insist to stay in this ship (in this non-aggressive company) or a company who ignore it's supporters' hope ?

Well that the K-3 is aps-c, is expected (by me), so I still expect a FF K-1 coming in march 2013.

[fuf]

Many of the reasons have been discussed here, not the least of which is the glass necessary to take advantage of FF. For me, the only real advantage to FF used to be greater resolution and more importantly studio portrait use with controlled lighting, conditions, etc. Today with 24MP APS-C sensors, those advantages have greatly if not completely diminished. Give me a Pentax K-5 with a 24MP APS-C sensor and I will be happy as hell!

AF should be better (more precise) on FF because of the shallower DOF. You can happily use higher ISO and still get away with a reasonably clean image. And I would very much prefer to have 16MP than more -- again because of the noise (larger photosites), less storage & processing time and higher sharpness in real life.

[glennbp]

AF should be better (more precise) on FF because of the shallower DOF. You can happily use higher ISO and still get away with a reasonably clean image. And I would very much prefer to have 16MP than more -- again because of the noise (larger photosites), less storage & processing time and higher sharpness in real life.

These arguments no longer hold true as the production techniques and in camera processing has become so good that APS-C sensors can now mimick their FF counterparts in virtually every area. If you need proof, rent or borrow a D800, 5D Mk III, and a Sony a77 (or NEX-7). Set them up for identical pics under identical conditions and compare the results at the same resolutions. You will be amazed! On paper specs are one thing, but real world photography is often very different.
Please bear in mind I am NOT putting down FF cameras; I'm just sayin' the difference in IQ is becoming a very narrow window indeed and also becoming more dependent on the lens being used.

[fuf]

I'm just sayin' the difference in IQ is becoming a very narrow window indeed and also becoming more dependent on the lens being used.

Are you also saying that with all those MPs you don't have to e.g. stabilize better to have the equal resulting sharpness? The technology is advancing for sure though.

[glennbp]

Are you also saying that with all those MPs you don't have to e.g. stabilize better to have the equal resulting sharpness? The technology is advancing for sure though.

You sort of answered your own question. Yes, you're right, with high MP sensors all kind of parameters become exaggerated including stabilization issues, but in camera and lens stabilization methods as well as microprocessor jobbing is so good that even 36MP are no longer a problem for high end cameras. The Nikon D800 is the latest example of this, but more are sure to follow.

[fejker]

You sort of answered your own question. Yes, you're right, with high MP sensors all kind of parameters become exaggerated including stabilization issues, but in camera and lens stabilization methods as well as microprocessor jobbing is so good that even 36MP are no longer a problem for high end cameras. The Nikon D800 is the latest example of this, but more are sure to follow.

Have you actually used one and compared results with let's say the K5? Forget what you've read on the internet.

For me, the difference in the AF system and the viewfinder alone justifies buying a FF body (be it Canon or Nikon ... ok Sony, you can tag along here).

[glennbp]

Have you actually used one and compared results with let's say the K5? Forget what you've read on the internet.

For me, the difference in the AF system and the viewfinder alone justifies buying a FF body (be it Canon or Nikon ... ok Sony, you can tag along here).

Yes, but please don't misunderstand what I'm saying. I am by no means putting down FF, rather I am saying APS-C is catching up to FF advantages very rapidly. IMO, a couple more generations down the road and APS-C sensors will be where FF sensors are today. Of course, who knows where FF will be years from now! Stay tuned; this is part of what makes photography so exciting!

[Quicksand]

Stay tuned; this is part of what makes photography so exciting!

Not a very big part, IMHO.

(Nonetheless, I am reading these threads!)

[Ash]

Not a very big part, IMHO.

(Nonetheless, I am reading these threads!)

Agreed. The exciting part of photography is the adventure of getting the shots using skill and technique of the user. The tool is the means to this end. And for the majority of us, more than we probably recognise, this can be achieved with the K-5 or K30 (perhaps even with their predecessors).

Having said that, if Pentax did release a FF camera, I'd buy it, but not in a hurry. It'd have to be a significant functional advance to the K-5 - and this type of camera would take time to develop, and Ricoh came on board not too long ago to shake things up in this way. We'll have to wait and see.

[glanglois]

Hmm, I can't say I will buy a Pentax FF immediately after it releases but I would definitely get it when the price drops. FA limiteds are the closest thing to Leica in size that the other manufacturers don't offer yet.

Interesting comparison I don't have data to make:

* Percentage of Pentax users who are unwilling and/or unable to pay close to MSRP

* Percentage of Pentax users who want FF

* Percentage of Pentax users who fall into both categories.

Wild guess: Pentax introduces FF and 75% of the FF unruly and vocal mob supporters will wait until the price drops considerably. I suspect that Pentax would see its DSLR revenues perform a dead cat bounce. I suspect (again) that the natural progression for a majority many is "I need FF and will wait for it." ===> "It's here but too expensive." ===> "Price is going down but not there yet - hurry!" ===> "Drat. Features are getting old. Better wait for the really good FF."

I'm often wrong so please put down and step away from the pitchforks .....

[fejker]

Yes, but please don't misunderstand what I'm saying. I am by no means putting down FF, rather I am saying APS-C is catching up to FF advantages very rapidly. IMO, a couple more generations down the road and APS-C sensors will be where FF sensors are today. Of course, who knows where FF will be years from now! Stay tuned; this is part of what makes photography so exciting!

We've been hearing this argument year after year.
I recently switched brands (Nikon) and for me it's quite a big change for the better. Pentax is still great, but the step to 645 was a bit too much for me and I opted for FF. After about two weeks shooting with the new camera I picked up my K-7 and couldn't believe how I was even able to compose shots through that little dark viewfinder ... well yes, it works but it's so much easier with a bigger and brighter viewfinder (to all the mirror-based viewfinder users: what sorcery u using to be able to see through that?!).
AF ... it was OK-ish on the K-7 for most occasions (K-5 is a bit better) but Canon and Nikon on the new models are a couple of years ahead (at least on the FF bodies). At work (not professional photography work, just shots in the workshop/on field) I'm forced to use a Canon 550D with a kit lens and it's still beter in AF than the K-7/K-5 - these two get there, but the Canon is just faster. I do like how the 11 points are laid out on the Pentax tho (love it actually and hate the Canon 550D layout).

I get that for most people these things don't matter and I'm perfectly fine with that, just expressing my opinion.

Ash has a point that the camera is just a tool, but who said you should use tools that you don't like.