[Canada_Rockies]

I already have the FA 50 1.7, Tamron 90 , SIgma 70 and DA 35, so it's not like I'd be bereft of shooting options if I bought nothing. But since I'd see the ff as a landscape system, not having the 31 just wouldn't make any sense. Just looking at images on the forum there are a host of gorgeous 31 Ltd landscapes, DA 35, not so much. (One of my reasons for not completely trusting photozone/ DxO type technical analysis.) And the Rokinon 24 tilt shift just entered the Picture as well.

You could also pick up an M 28/3.5. It's surprisingly good, and I guarantee it is full frame -- I've never used it on APS-C and gave it to my daughter in law years ago.

[normhead]

I have taken so many DSLR landscapes the last 10 years, it doesn't matter what lens I use.. I'm just not happy with them. I'm counting on the Rokinon 24mm tilt shift to get me fired up again here. It's a lens designed for FF, but having both an APS-c body and an FF body would mean it was effectively two different focal lengths. Right now that's pretty much all I'm dreaming about. For wildlife and macro, I'm quite happy with what I have. After shooting the Snowy owl beside a Canon and Nikon shooter, and showing them the images I was getting with my K-3 and 60-250, I think either of them would be happy with what I have too. Niether of them was able to track the owl the way I was. I shot the one sequence, and said, "The camera really tracked that well," and started packing up to leave, The other guys looked at me with exasperated expressions on their faces and one said "Lucky you."

To me, the K-3 is finally the camera that takes advantage of APS-c's strengths. Unfortunately it's also the pixel size where APS-c starts to show the theoretically predicted noise issues. I personally suspect the K-5 is a better alls round camera, if you're just going to carry one system.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/12-post-your-photos/246683-nature-xmas-sn...adventure.html

The problem with having worked with tilt shift is, you grow to expect that level of control. And every landscape you see, you start calculating the angles in your head, before you realize that there's nothing you can do. It's a mental function I can't seem to turn off, and only a tilt-shift lens is going to give me some level of relief. Even then, not being able to rotate the front lens axis is still going to leave me feeling a bit crippled.

[Canada_Rockies]

The problem with having worked with tilt shift is, you grow to expect that level of control. And every landscape you see, you start calculating the angles in your head, before you realize that there's nothing you can do. It's a mental function I can't seem to turn off, and only a tilt-shift lens is going to give me some level of relief. Even then, not being able to rotate the front lens axis is still going to leave me feeling a bit crippled.

When I was in Chicago, I owned a Pentax 28/3.5 shift. Invaluable for tight spaces and architecture. Not much use for one in pine forests. The trees aren't parallel, anyway.

[normhead]

When I was in Chicago, I owned a Pentax 28/3.5 shift. Invaluable for tight spaces and architecture. Not much use for one in pine forests. The trees aren't parallel, anyway.

When I was in Chicago, I was between 1 and 4 years old, so i didn't use a tilt shift much there either.
Although I did start using my dads twin lens reflex 6x6 at a young age.

Where a tilt shift is essential, is in making those vertical rock faces look as impressive in your picture as they do in real life. Here in Algonquin, there are a lot of vertical rick faces, and without tilt shift, there's not much you can do to make them appear in a picture the way they do in real life. Shooting from the base without tilt shift, the crown of the rock face almost fades away to nothing because of perspective, and the wider the lens, the worse it is. I probably have a hundred images I'll be shooting over, once I get the tilt shift.

[jsherman999]

It does cover the FF circle, it's pretty much established by now... same for the da 50 1.8.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/10-pentax-slr-lens-discussion/119054-da-3...ny-photos.html

Oh, thought we were talking about the DA 35ltd macro.

[jsherman999]

You could also pick up an M 28/3.5. It's surprisingly good, and I guarantee it is full frame -- I've never used it on APS-C and gave it to my daughter in law years ago.

Very sharp lens.

[Canada_Rockies]

When I was in Chicago, I was between 1 and 4 years old, so i didn't use a tilt shift much there either.
Although I did start using my dads twin lens reflex 6x6 at a young age.

Where a tilt shift is essential, is in making those vertical rock faces look as impressive in your picture as they do in real life. Here in Algonquin, there are a lot of vertical rick faces, and without tilt shift, there's not much you can do to make them appear in a picture the way they do in real life. Shooting from the base without tilt shift, the crown of the rock face almost fades away to nothing because of perspective, and the wider the lens, the worse it is. I probably have a hundred images I'll be shooting over, once I get the tilt shift.

The cheap guy's tilt shift might work for you. Use a 12mm with the camera focal plane vertical and crop off the bottom. It won't make a 24x36 that you can view from a foot away, but does keep the perspective at bay.

[ChristianRock]

Oh, thought we were talking about the DA 35ltd macro.

Oh you might very well be right...

I did find some photos of the DA 35 2.8 Macro Ltd on film. There's some vignetting on corners on wider apertures, but it could still be useful on a full frame. Vignetting gets very light after f4.5 and is supposed to be gone by f11. Here's some tests a guy did up to f8: vjacesslav: SMC PENTAX DA 35MM F2.8 MACRO LIMITED vs FULL FRAME

But I agree with you that if it's the 35 Ltd, then it shouldn't be classified as FF...

[alarwiida]

I was thinking about getting the DA* 60-250 mm lens but should I wait until the new lens come out or just buy it now.

[ElJamoquio]

The cheap guy's tilt shift might work for you. Use a 12mm with the camera focal plane vertical and crop off the bottom. It won't make a 24x36 that you can view from a foot away, but does keep the perspective at bay.

Indeed, I was doing that yesterday. Not perfect, not a 'real' tilt-shift lens, of course, but a 18x24mm sensor still makes an OK 20x30" print.

[Canada_Rockies]

Perhaps not exactly on topic, but I just picked up c't Digital Photography #14 and in it they do tests with Canon, Nikon and Sony using APS and 24x36 lenses (normal zooms) to see if the stories about "FF" lenses on APS-C being better than the APS-C lenses. The verdict was, on page 38:

At the end of the day, there are no real arguments for using full-frame lenses with an APS-C camera.

They tested three lenses with each of three APS-C cameras. Here's the test gear. The only standout among the nine lenses was (surprise, surprise) the Vario-Sonnar, but even then was quite close.

Canon EOS 7D:
- Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM
- Canon EF 24-70mm f/4.0L IS USM
- Tokina AT-X 17-35mm f/4 Pro FX
Nikon D7100
- Nikon AF-S DX Zoom Nikkor 17-55mm f/2.8G ED-IF
- Nikon AF-S Nikkor 24-70 f/2.8G ED
- Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD
Sony SLT-A77
- Sony 16-50mm f/2.8 DT SSM
- Sony 24-70mm f/2.8 ZA SSM Vario-Sonnar T*
- Sigma 24-70mm f/2.8 EX DG HSM

[Class A]

Unfortunately it's also the pixel size where APS-c starts to show the theoretically predicted noise issues.

Pardon, what "theoretically predicted noise issues" are you talking about?
What theory predicts them and how do they manifest themselves?

BTW, in another thread you wrote

But you aren't going to pull detail out of the depths of the shadows like you could on the K-5. Proper exposure is more critical.

I have responded with the question whether you could be so kind and post examples of both the K-3 and the K-5 demonstrating your claim.

To be honest, I think you must be comparing apples to oranges. But I could be wrong. Please share your results.