[Class A]

I am aware of Falk's work (and i deeply respect him) but the behavior of digital is different than film.

This is true for lenses which produce a large variety of incident angles, such as wide angle lenses. Some micro lens designs then produce colour shifts towards the corners (but others do not, see the NEX-5 vs NEX-7).

This is the only complication I can think of and no short-tele, tele lens has that problem.

For instance the DA* 200/2.8 reuses the optical design of the FA* 200/2.8. Why should the former not be compatible with a FF sensor then?

[gazonk]

Who is going to want to fubar their DA* 300 or 200 to test it ion a FF canon digital body?

Not necessary, they could be tested on the Sony NEX-VG900!

[Blue]

Not necessary, they could be tested on the Sony NEX-VG900!

That's a video camera plus it isn't a dSLR. Plus, a DA* 300 on their isn't exactly going to be "handy."

[gazonk]

That's a video camera plus it isn't a dSLR. Plus, a DA* 300 on their isn't exactly going to be "handy."

Facepalm

I talked about testing the lenses on a full format sensor, I'm not suggesting it's a good setup for still photography.

[Blue]

Facepalm

I talked about testing the lenses on a full format sensor, I'm not suggesting it's a good setup for still photography.

The facepalm stuff is not necessary. Doesn't it occur to you that the video camera may not be optimized for stills? I don't think you are going to get anything more conclusive than full frame film due to that. We already know the DA* 300 and DA* 200 were designed for digital plus it fits the full frame.

[macTak]

POSTED BY Class A "And there are further lenses, like the DA* 300mm F4 ED [IF] SDM, DA* 200mm F2.8 ED, DA* 55mm F1.4 SDM, DA 35mm F2.4 AL which either have already been confirmed or are fully expected to work a 100% on a FF camera."


I am aware of Falk's work (and i deeply respect him) but the behavior of digital is different than film. Thus my request to take a few lenses which are claimed to be FF and test on a digital FF body through an adapter. (eg DA 200 or 300)

If the image circle on some DA lenses was greater than APS-C to accomodate anti-shake movements of the sensor (per the IR interview), then it is possible that a future FF camera, were Pentax planning for it to have sensor anti-shake (and I do hope that, as Sony, then would do this), would require an image circle a little larger than the 35mm film image circle. Hopefully, though, most FF lenses would be adequate for this small increase of the image circle.

[gazonk]

The facepalm stuff is not necessary. Doesn't it occur to you that the video camera may not be optimized for stills?

Sure, it may not be conclusive, but there's still no need to write this off, since it's an easy test to do as long as it's possible to bring together a VG900 owner, a Pentax lens owner and a NEX-K-mount adapter.

No lenses will be harmed during the making of that movie

[french_mike]

I read once that because of the "SR", the sensor have to moove a bit, so if your DA is ok on film camera, on modern SR FF camera, the cercle of the lense need to be a bit larger.
Dont really know if it is true, but it does make sense.

[Winder]

I read once that because of the "SR", the sensor have to moove a bit, so if your DA is ok on film camera, on modern SR FF camera, the cercle of the lense need to be a bit larger.
Dont really know if it is true, but it does make sense.

Just published IR Interview:
DE: Speaking of the lenses, this was another reader question: There are rumors that many of your APS-C lenses might actually have full frame circles but they’re not advertised as such. Can you shed some light on that?

John Carlson: All the tests I’ve seen, if you put those lenses on a film body, you get vignetting. So they’re bigger than if it were just an APS-C without shake reduction, but that added image circle is just to accommodate the shake reduction, it doesn’t accommodate full-frame.

[french_mike]

Now, that a good answer

[Winder]

Now, that a good answer

It wont do any good. There is a core group of Pentax users who will continue to be in denial over the ability to use certain DA lenses on a FF sensor. Even my FA 31mm shows significant vignetting and moderate edge distortion on the K-5 at wide apertures. The distortion is not really noticeable until you use the lens profile adjustment in LR and you see how much of a difference it makes. I have seen people using the FA 31mm on a Canon 5DII, but the images I have seen are all stopped down for landscapes so I have not been able to see if wider apertures will be usable.

One reason I think we will see the 36MP sensor in a FF is so that Pentax can do what Nikon did and allow for a DX mode (DA mode) for these lenses.

[french_mike]

I understand and agree on what you say, a part for the 36 MP, the new D600 allow the DX crop to, same for the "old" D3

[french_mike]

And what about Sony, is the old Minoltat lenses allright mount on they alpha FF ? Because they hare shake reduction to

[Blue]

Just published IR Interview:
DE: Speaking of the lenses, this was another reader question: There are rumors that many of your APS-C lenses might actually have full frame circles but they’re not advertised as such. Can you shed some light on that?

John Carlson: All the tests I’ve seen, if you put those lenses on a film body, you get vignetting. So they’re bigger than if it were just an APS-C without shake reduction, but that added image circle is just to accommodate the shake reduction, it doesn’t accommodate full-frame.

That is from Carlson so it is suspect out of the gate. That said, one could turn of SR on a ff body for a DA* 300 or use SR and crop mode if there was a problem. However, if the DA* 200 is a problem, I would suspect that the FA* would also be a problem with SR on a FF digital body. Nikon bodies have a crop feature to allow the use of Dx lenses.

[Winder]

And what about Sony, is the old Minoltat lenses allright mount on they alpha FF ? Because they hare shake reduction to

I tried the A900 and SR works, but no where near as good as Olympus.. I was looking at replacing my 5D original. The old Minolta mount may have a larger image circle with allows for more movement. I only used it with the CZ 85 and 135, and only for a couple of indoor events. I can't say It gave me more than 2 stops. It definitely did not give me 3-4. I also had an E-3 at the time and the E-3 was noticeably better.

You need a system that can give you 4 stops to be competitive, and I don't know if Pentax can get that with a FF in the K-mount. The way Pentax people are talking, they don't think they can either.