[JanG]

I think the inevitability is being dictated by the market, as can be seen by Nikon moving to Full Frame despite "commitments" to stay with APS-C. As for larger still (i.e., medium/large format) being better, no argument - but 35mm struck the right image quality/portability balance and hence its popularity. The dSLRs Pentax currently makes use the same lens mount as old film (i.e., Full Frame) bodies, so it's not as if they'll have to grow by that much to accommodate Full Frame sensors. Bigger sensors are more expensive, but it's not as if we're talking Hyundai vs. Rolls Royce here, and the prices will continue to decline. The Canon 5D's "street" price is about $2100. The new 20D is going to retail for $1300. No way to know what the "street" will be, but that's not that big an incremental price increase to pay for a return to distortion-free wide angles and world-beater image quality (because you know Pentax/Samsung are capable of it), especially with those 24,000,000 Pentax and umpteen million third party lenses out there just dying to take advantage of it!

I disagree. I think improving the sensor has much more potential than building FF cams that are heavy, bulky, extremely expensive and required a completely new line up of heavy, bulky, extremely expensive lenses.
Keep in mind that even the new K20D sensor uses only 40% of the incoming light. So there is enormous potential for improvement. And remember that doubling the sensor size much more than doubles the costs per chip because the number of chips with faults will much more than double due to the statistical spread of faults on the wafers. Waste is still very high. Plus: there are very few occasions when you really need resolutions in the Hassy range. So my guess is: FF is dead (at least for Pentax). Probably you will have to go C/N/Hassy for that.
A much faster pro aps-c cam is of course a different story. That we will see probably "soon" (next year?) for half the price of the C/N FFs.

Jan

[noblepa]

Pentax can do that; however, I don't think Pentax wants to do that.

I doubt that there will be any more firmware updates for the K10D. I can only see it happening if a major bug were discovered (unlikely, since the K10D has been out for over a year), or if Pentax were to introduce a new lens or flash that required it, ala the support for SDM lenses or wireless flash.

IOW, I believe Pentax will only update the firmware on out-of-production cameras if they feel it may generate new sales. Since the camera is no longer being made, firmware can't generate new camera sales. It might generate new lens or flash sales to K10D owners.

Why would Pentax give K10D owners a firmware update to add a feature like AF adjustment? Such an update can't possibly generate new revenue. In fact, it can only have a negative impact on sales, as there may be some K10D owners who would be willing to pay for a K20D in order to get the feature. If Pentax gave it away, those owners might not buy a K20D. The only possible reason for such a move is to keep existing customers happy and hope they will remember it when the K30D (or whatever) is released. There are limits to such generosity.

Paul Noble

[RMabo]

I doubt that there will be any more firmware updates for the K10D. I can only see it happening if a major bug were discovered (unlikely, since the K10D has been out for over a year), or if Pentax were to introduce a new lens or flash that required it, ala the support for SDM lenses or wireless flash.

IOW, I believe Pentax will only update the firmware on out-of-production cameras if they feel it may generate new sales. Since the camera is no longer being made, firmware can't generate new camera sales. It might generate new lens or flash sales to K10D owners.

But Pentax did release a firmware upgrade for the *ist DS when the DS was replaced by the DS2, and the *ist DS got many of the functions of the DS2.
It is about keeping the users happy so that they stays with the brand.

[Arpe]

Yes that Ds firmware upgrade was fantastic. Another pro for staying with the brand if they keep that support up. I don't beleive the other brands are that good, they just fix bugs.

[24X36NOW]

I disagree. I think improving the sensor has much more potential than building FF cams that are heavy, bulky, extremely expensive and required a completely new line up of heavy, bulky, extremely expensive lenses.
Keep in mind that even the new K20D sensor uses only 40% of the incoming light. So there is enormous potential for improvement. And remember that doubling the sensor size much more than doubles the costs per chip because the number of chips with faults will much more than double due to the statistical spread of faults on the wafers. Waste is still very high. Plus: there are very few occasions when you really need resolutions in the Hassy range. So my guess is: FF is dead (at least for Pentax). Probably you will have to go C/N/Hassy for that.
A much faster pro aps-c cam is of course a different story. That we will see probably "soon" (next year?) for half the price of the C/N FFs.

Jan

At some point, the manufacturing technology will reduce the waste or come up with different methods of making the chips (piecing them together from smaller ones, perhaps; I read somehwere that Canon actually does piece together the chips now, but don't know if that is accurate or not). That is the nature of technology. When that happens, the cost differential will be reduced and FF cameras easier to make at lower cost. Sony has joined the fray since your comment, so looks like there's some steam building in the FF market now. Any potential for improvements will impact chips in either format, so that isn't really the issue, and others have opined that we've already reached the resolution limits of the lenses anyway, which would also point to the next upgrade path (beyond enhancements to functional items like autofocus and fps) to be one of format increase to full 35mm.

[JanG]

At some point, the manufacturing technology will reduce the waste or come up with different methods of making the chips (piecing them together from smaller ones, perhaps; I read somehwere that Canon actually does piece together the chips now, but don't know if that is accurate or not). That is the nature of technology. When that happens, the cost differential will be reduced and FF cameras easier to make at lower cost.

Well we have more or less four decades of chip production now, and still there is the waste problem (because better production technology is racing higher integration of circuitry - in fact this in large parts an economical race: how much waste can you afford and still be profitable; integration in itself is not the problem: scientist can move single atoms today and have built (working!) motors at the size of a larger molecule).

Sony has joined the fray since your comment, so looks like there's some steam building in the FF market now. Any potential for improvements will impact chips in either format, so that isn't really the issue, and others have opined that we've already reached the resolution limits of the lenses anyway, which would also point to the next upgrade path (beyond enhancements to functional items like autofocus and fps) to be one of format increase to full 35mm.

I am sure Sony is following an image strategy. That's not necessary for Pentax. It's a way you can follow if you have a lot of money and need for image.
And resolution limit? It's still a long time before we will have reached it with APS-C. The K20D has just proven it. The import point is: resolution for what? Ben says he hardly ever needs nowadays Hassy resolution, and he is a pro. Could you explain to me why you or me should need 35 MP images (that's roughly the new sensor scaled up to FF) and why Pentax should spent a hell lot of money on it? I simply don't get it, sorry. (Please don't come with cropping - I don't want to use a scissor but a camera.)

Regards,
Jan

[WMBP]

The import point is: resolution for what? Ben says he hardly ever needs nowadays Hassy resolution, and he is a pro. Could you explain to me why you or me should need 35 MP images (that's roughly the new sensor scaled up to FF) and why Pentax should spent a hell lot of money on it? I simply don't get it, sorry. (Please don't come with cropping - I don't want to use a scissor but a camera.)

I think Jan has a terrific point and one that needs to be emphasized.

As I have been thinking (hard) about whether to buy a Nikon D300 or wait for the Pentax K20D, the fact that the latter's resolution is going to be 14+ MP has been, in my book, a negative for Pentax.

What's the point of 14 MP? As far as I can tell, it's completely about marketing. But I think some time soon, either the public is going to wise up, or the marketers are going to change their tune and start selling the idea that lower resolution is an advantage (writes faster, uses less space on your storage card, etc.). I am seldom optimistic about the public's ability to wise up on any subject, but I think it really could happen here. It's already the case that an awful lot of people have purchased dlsrs only to discover that their photos are not as good as the ones they took with their old compact, fixed-lens camera.

Will

[jms698]

As I have been thinking (hard) about whether to buy a Nikon D300 or wait for the Pentax K20D, the fact that the latter's resolution is going to be 14+ MP has been, in my book, a negative for Pentax.

What's the point of 14 MP? As far as I can tell, it's completely about marketing. But I think some time soon, either the public is going to wise up, or the marketers are going to change their tune and start selling the idea that lower resolution is an advantage (writes faster, uses less space on your storage card, etc.).

You could say the same about the D300's 14-bit RAW files. No reviewer has been able to tell the difference to 12-bit and it increases the file size, makes the camera slower, etc. Is that also just about marketing?

[WMBP]

You could say the same about the D300's 14-bit RAW files. No reviewer has been able to tell the difference to 12-bit and it increases the file size, makes the camera slower, etc. Is that also just about marketing?

Haven't you answered your own question? I mean, if no reviewer can tell the difference--if, to put it differently, if no reviewer can see the point--then what's the point?

I don't think I'm simple-minded about this. I'm certainly not saying that megapixels don't matter at all. I'm saying that there seems to be a point of diminishing returns, a point at which the advantage gained by more megapixels is outweighed by the cost and other disadvantages of those extra megapixels. I'm not sure, but it looks to me like the point of diminishing returns is reached somewhere around 12 MP.

Will

[anomaly]

You could say the same about the D300's 14-bit RAW files. No reviewer has been able to tell the difference to 12-bit and it increases the file size, makes the camera slower, etc. Is that also just about marketing?

The point of 14mp is cropping. For me anyway.

I can cut that sucka in half and still have 7 megapixels.

[24X36NOW]

And resolution limit? It's still a long time before we will have reached it with APS-C.

You've misread; others have opined that we have reached the resolution limits of the lenses with the latest sensors. That being the case, an upsize of the sensor format would seem a logical next "upgrade" path, since if you're improving resolution beyond the limit of the lens, you won't get any benefit from it.

As for the point, the point would be a much larger/brighter viewfinder, and a 24mm lens that sports the field of view of a 24mm lens, rather than the field of view of a (yawn) 36mm lens. Going to a 16mm lens is NOT a solution, since that introduces tons of fisheye distortion.

[KungPOW]

Eventually I expect all the major DSLR builders will offer a FF sensor. And, yes I like to think of Pentax as a major player.

Sure I might be a fence sitting, strike a balence, everyone wins, Canadian liberal...But there are true advantages to both sensor formats. The K20D looks to be a real winner. The early reports of the sensor performance promises extrodinary image quality. The fact that it is not a FF body, in no ways diminishes it as a capable photography tool.

There have been rumors and inuendo on this forum that Pentax will have a FF sooner then later. I saw it on one post to be hinted to less then 2 years.

Does anyone know if any of the third party lens makers (voitlander, zeiss etc) are making lenses that would work on a FF pentax? That might hint at the future.

Photokina 2008 is the next big show (I think..). Pentax will have something to show. Personally, I expect another APS-C, but then maybe Photokina 2008 is sooner then later?

Eric.

[Photomy]

Thanks for the great description Chris.

I shoot HDR panoramas. I use PTGui to stitch these panoramas. It needs each set of images to be shot with the same f-stop with varying shutter speeds. I want to shoot in manual mode with auto bracketing for speed reasons. My K10D will do that but it changes both the shutter speed and f-stop. Will the K20D shoot in manual mode with auto bracketing but only vary the shutter speed? If not, this needs to be pointed out to Pentax for a future firmware update.

Thanks,
Larry from Prescott

"My K10D will do that but it changes both the shutter speed and f-stop." << This does not make sense for auto-bracketing. How can the exposure change over three shots if both parameters are changing each shot? My K10d does not do this. A camera has to change either the speed or aperture during auto-bracketing but does not change both. In manual mode the K10d designers elected to fix the shutter speed and vary the aperture. If you need to fix the aperture setting go to aperture priority mode and it will fix aperture and vary shutter speed over the bracket range. If you wish to lock exposure prior to firing so you know what the settings will be press AEL first. You can still use exposure compensation as well for this. 1) set aperture you desire and check meter reading 2) adjust exposure compensation if you deem necessary 3) press AEL 4) fire shutter (maybe focus before step 1). Hope this works for you.

- Photomy

[meremonkey]

Look in the K20/K200 online brochure: http://www.pentaxslr.com/pdf/k20.k200brochure.spread.pdf

On page 16 in the section about the K200 under customization there is a screen shot of the menu with "AF Adjustment" highlighted. Whether this is a misprint and the screen shot is really from the K20D, I don't know, but it does make me think it will have that feature. Now it could be dumbed down and only allow one lens to be adjusted....

Mike

The brochure states that you can save adjustment for up to 20 different lenses. There's even a screenshot showing the front/back focus adjustment.

Very cool.

[24X36NOW]

Does anyone know if any of the third party lens makers (voitlander, zeiss etc) are making lenses that would work on a FF pentax? That might hint at the future.

Not that it's necessarily a hint at the future, but Sigma makes an extensive line of FF lenses in Pentax mount, and also some Digital only lenses. You could pretty much outfit yourself with Sigma lenses in FF from very wide to long tele today if need be.