Originally posted by savoche You and me both. Is there anything an FF does better than APS that MF doesn't do even better?
If your question is not theoretical, then the answer is "yes". I think the D800 for example does just about
everything better than the 645D at a much lower cost/size tax.
Here's a question for the "aps-c is good enough for Pentax to continue" crowd: FF DSLR is, now, for all intents and purposes, very close to the same size and cost that upper-end aps-c DSLR was a few years ago. How does a company keep folks buying upper-end aps-c DSLR in that world, without sacrificing margins or volume, or both?
Remember, the "even a small size difference is important to me" crowd can now get their needs met better with aps-c or m43 MILC or even fixed-lens.
How does a company who's mount (K) needs a longer register distance move big into MILC without changing the mount?
Think about this ^^. Pentax needs FF to survive - or, more accurately, for K-mount to survive. Thinking otherwise isn't thinking, it's
wishing.
.
Last edited by jsherman999; 12-27-2013 at 05:34 PM.