Almost Positive about FF Pentax...I think...

CreV · 05-02-2008, 03:36 PM

Pentax has to aquire Tamron 70-200 design and make it a DFA* lens.

Then 17-70 and 70-200 may be a killer setup for FF.
If 17-70 is a FFlens.

I hope pentax 645 will have K-mount so you can use all your lenses for all systems.

Lance B · 05-02-2008, 06:00 PM

Originally posted by lol101

The only problem being that Pentax is now promoting nothing but DA lenses, most of which don't cover FF.

In other terms, if you want recent glass for your new Pentax gear, you HAVE to buy DA and, according to the roadmap, it will remain so for at least a year.

If these are FF compatible, why not make them D-FAs?

My guess is that Pentax didn't plan to have a FF camera for too long and that they developped an array of DA lenses thinking they would only have APS-C cameras to fit.

If they are now thinking to develop a FF cam, they must also be planning to release their new DFAs ... we'll see in the next month/years if something like D-FA* 24-70f2.8, D-FA* 70-200f2.8 comes around but that would mean dumping the nice DA* for the people wanting to go FF: quite an investment!

Pentax are promoting DA lenses because they are selling APS C cameras only. The only FF compatible lenses are the DA300 and DA200. They do not need to make them DFA lenses as DFA signifies an aperture ring which FF cameras do not really require.

You can still get the FA lenses listed above and I am sure Pentac will re-release them in bigger quantities if FF ever eventuates. They will more than likely re-introduse them for digital ready purposes.

The same has happened to Canon and Nikon users. Those that invested in APS C lenses would have to dump them *if* they decide to go to FF. Do not forget that FF is more for advanced amateurs, semi-pros and pros or amateurs with big wads of cash and you can also sell off your DA lenses and purchase FF lenses.

I would more than likely go to a FF camera simply because I like the larger VF and that I can use my FA* lenses as they were intended. At the moment, the K20D's resolution is more than enough, but that big bright VF is a major draw card.

philmorley · 05-03-2008, 02:10 AM

big viewfinder. 28mm lens has less distortion /ca/pf etc than 18mm x 1.5

lol101 · 05-03-2008, 03:44 AM

Originally posted by Lance B

Pentax are promoting DA lenses because they are selling APS C cameras only. The only FF compatible lenses are the DA300 and DA200. They do not need to make them DFA lenses as DFA signifies an aperture ring which FF cameras do not really require.

You can still get the FA lenses listed above and I am sure Pentac will re-release them in bigger quantities if FF ever eventuates. They will more than likely re-introduse them for digital ready purposes.

The same has happened to Canon and Nikon users. Those that invested in APS C lenses would have to dump them *if* they decide to go to FF. Do not forget that FF is more for advanced amateurs, semi-pros and pros or amateurs with big wads of cash and you can also sell off your DA lenses and purchase FF lenses.

I would more than likely go to a FF camera simply because I like the larger VF and that I can use my FA* lenses as they were intended. At the moment, the K20D's resolution is more than enough, but that big bright VF is a major draw card.

That is just not true. Never did Canon or Nikon promote a 100% APS-C lens lineup. People who bought APS-C lenses had the choice of buying them or sticking to FF compatible lenses.

I know that for a fact because I have bought a Canon APS-C DSLR but nothing but FF compatible lenses to go with it. And it was not special order, I just went into a shop and bought them.

You're seing no problem because you have a large FA array but I don't and many people who recently bought into Pentax don't either.

All I am saying is this: if Pentax plans to release a FF in the next three years, please, release FF compatible lenses NOW. These can be used on APS-C with no problems (as you know) so I don't see who wouldn't benefit from it.

If Pentax is currently planning a FF camera but is sticking to sell APS-C only lenses until the camera is ready, I would find it borderline dishonest and Pentax would have no credibility as a FF system.

Plus, releasing FF lenses (and clearly stating it, unlike the release of the DA* 200 and 300 where they stated explicitely that they were APS-C only lenses) would send a message to people considering buying the now affordable (and still better IQ-wise than any APS-C camera, including K20) 5D or the coming Sony that they can be confident that they can buy a lens compatible with everything the future might bring (pretty much like in the film days).

Right now, they are sending the opposite message quite clearly and that is bad communication if this is not their intention.

Last edited by lol101; 05-03-2008 at 03:50 AM.

thePiRaTE!! · 05-03-2008, 06:33 AM

Maybe Pentax will tell us when they have an actual non-APS-C product announced, until then... confusing the masses too early would be counter-productive on a couple levels from a business stand-point and I don't think you can fault them until they have something to sell us in FF before putting the scare on their current flagship line-up.

You may have your wish re: glass though. Many of us are waiting to discover the edge performance data of the newer primes (which cover the FF) - maybe once a few of these are proven to be FF compatible, a clearer picture will begin to emerge.

I think if it turns out that the 60-250 supports FF (and Pentax haven't announced a FF venture by then) that will be your signal to start selling previous DA zooms if you are considering a body upgrade to FF. The fact that it was held back after the first two APS-C DA*s (16-50 + 50-135) were released (last lenses that came out as Hoya began its takeover) followed by its physical redesign, makes me wonder if Hoya has seen the writing on the wall for a while, setting the table for a likely transition into FF in future.

But even saying all that, I'm sure APS-C will survive for a long time afterwards as they rake in premium dollars on a FF offering.

falconeye · 05-03-2008, 06:36 AM

Originally posted by lol101

Never did Canon or Nikon promote a 100% APS-C lens lineup. [...] release FF compatible lenses NOW. [...] they are sending the opposite message

I totally agree. I thought it, you said it. Thank You.

To add to it:

-> @Ned Burnell, are you reading this?

Pentax management in Japan made a mistake by bedding onto APS-C sensors with 35mm mechanics. (Maybe not as bad as the mistake by the 4/3rds people, though

Now, mistakes can happen. This is fine. Pentax management may only start to realize this now, but anyway.

Can you then please rectify the mistake and start to communicate a clear, predictable FF roadmap, starting with your lenses. Please?

*isteve · 05-03-2008, 08:22 AM

Originally posted by falconeye

I totally agree. I thought it, you said it. Thank You.

To add to it:

-> @Ned Burnell, are you reading this?

Pentax management in Japan made a mistake by bedding onto APS-C sensors with 35mm mechanics. (Maybe not as bad as the mistake by the 4/3rds people, though

Now, mistakes can happen. This is fine. Pentax management may only start to realize this now, but anyway.

Can you then please rectify the mistake and start to communicate a clear, predictable FF roadmap, starting with your lenses. Please?

As long as they continue to make BOTH APS and FF lenses. It matters little above 100mm but for wider focal lengths there are some significant advantages to designing lenses specifically for the intended format.

If Pentax make FF lenses and abandon APSC lenses then 99% of their users will be short changed for the sake of 1%.

RBellavance · 05-03-2008, 10:31 AM

Originally posted by philmorley

big viewfinder. 28mm lens has less distortion /ca/pf etc than 18mm x 1.5

Do you have numbers to back this up ?

I'm not saying it isn't true. I'm just curious.

MJB DIGITAL · 05-03-2008, 11:06 AM

....make a round sensor instead

Originally posted by alohadave

Because of how chips are fabricated, you will never see a round sensor. Part of the reason that APS-C is so popular with manufacturers is that they can make more chips per wafer than if the chips was FF sized.

It's also the reason why MF digital backs are $30K. So many fewer chips can be produced, so it automatically limits the supply.

The same thing applies to P&S chips, smaller chips mean more working units per wafer, which lowers costs.

dave is right. there wont be a round sensor.
however, the square is THE rectilinear shape that provides the MOST sensor coverage inside of the image circle. IMO it would be the optimal shape!
almost anything we want to print needs to be cropped to size anyway, so why not. besides, then we wont need to rotate the camera, as there will be no vertical shooting anyway right?
and while we're at it, can we have a CMYK sensor also? 8)

but yeah, the square is the way to go IMO

NickC · 05-03-2008, 03:53 PM

Originally posted by MJB DIGITAL

.
however, the square is THE rectilinear shape that provides the MOST sensor coverage inside of the image circle. IMO it would be the optimal shape!
almost anything we want to print needs to be cropped to size anyway, so why not. besides, then we wont need to rotate the camera, as there will be no vertical shooting anyway right?

but yeah, the square is the way to go IMO

I disagree. Very few pictures are printed or displayed square, so you'd always be cropping or throwing pixels away. the side of a square sensor will be smaller than the longest side of a rectangular sensor for the same image circle (30mm vs 36mm for FF), so you'd end up overall with less quality.

Nick

*isteve · 05-03-2008, 03:56 PM

Originally posted by RBellavance

Do you have numbers to back this up ?

I'm not saying it isn't true. I'm just curious.

There is no reason why it should be true.

Snapshot12 · 05-03-2008, 05:36 PM

It all depends on if samsung is commited to developing a FF sensor,when Pentax was sold to hoya,i think there must ve been a disscussion or some kind of agreement between the 3 companies regarding the future of K mount....

Then i could be wrong, Hoya could always buy a sony FF sensor for Pentax if it proves successful... there is also a lot Hoya can do for Sony in different areas...

philmorley · 05-04-2008, 02:00 AM

Originally posted by RBellavance

Do you have numbers to back this up ?

I'm not saying it isn't true. I'm just curious.

just looking at various photozone reviews, seems to be across all manufacturers that as the less gets wider the distortion / ca and pf increases. of course there are exceptions but in general terms thats the way it seems

*isteve · 05-04-2008, 02:07 AM

Originally posted by philmorley

just looking at various photozone reviews, seems to be across all manufacturers that as the less gets wider the distortion / ca and pf increases. of course there are exceptions but in general terms thats the way it seems

Then I think you should try looking at the distortion CA and PF of 28mm primes on FF cameras.

mermozjg · 05-04-2008, 03:37 AM

Originally posted by lol101

That is just not true. Never did Canon or Nikon promote a 100% APS-C lens lineup. People who bought APS-C lenses had the choice of buying them or sticking to FF compatible lenses.

Nikon has claimed over years they will not build a FF DSLR and that the future of Nikon was APS-C ONLY.

05-03-2008, 11:06 AM	#69
MJB DIGITAL Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: st. louis Posts: 1,170	sensor shape ....make a round sensor instead Originally posted by alohadave Because of how chips are fabricated, you will never see a round sensor. Part of the reason that APS-C is so popular with manufacturers is that they can make more chips per wafer than if the chips was FF sized. It's also the reason why MF digital backs are $30K. So many fewer chips can be produced, so it automatically limits the supply. The same thing applies to P&S chips, smaller chips mean more working units per wafer, which lowers costs. dave is right. there wont be a round sensor. however, the square is THE rectilinear shape that provides the MOST sensor coverage inside of the image circle. IMO it would be the optimal shape! almost anything we want to print needs to be cropped to size anyway, so why not. besides, then we wont need to rotate the camera, as there will be no vertical shooting anyway right? and while we're at it, can we have a CMYK sensor also? 8) but yeah, the square is the way to go IMO

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Very positive K-x review again	gazonk	Pentax News and Rumors	9	03-29-2010 05:10 PM
be positive	axl	Monthly Photo Contests	0	06-09-2009 03:46 PM
be positive...	axl	Post Your Photos!	8	05-07-2009 09:39 AM
Converting a Negative to a Positive	Iowa Tom	Digital Processing, Software, and Printing	10	02-23-2009 03:27 AM
Positive news about Pentax AF over Canon....	offertonhatter	Pentax DSLR Discussion	31	10-08-2008 07:49 AM

05-02-2008, 03:36 PM	#61
CreV New Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: sweden Posts: 23	Pentax has to aquire Tamron 70-200 design and make it a DFA* lens. Then 17-70 and 70-200 may be a killer setup for FF. If 17-70 is a FFlens. I hope pentax 645 will have K-mount so you can use all your lenses for all systems.

05-02-2008, 06:00 PM	#62
Lance B Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Sydney, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 593	Originally posted by lol101 The only problem being that Pentax is now promoting nothing but DA lenses, most of which don't cover FF. In other terms, if you want recent glass for your new Pentax gear, you HAVE to buy DA and, according to the roadmap, it will remain so for at least a year. If these are FF compatible, why not make them D-FAs? My guess is that Pentax didn't plan to have a FF camera for too long and that they developped an array of DA lenses thinking they would only have APS-C cameras to fit. If they are now thinking to develop a FF cam, they must also be planning to release their new DFAs ... we'll see in the next month/years if something like D-FA* 24-70f2.8, D-FA* 70-200f2.8 comes around but that would mean dumping the nice DA* for the people wanting to go FF: quite an investment! Pentax are promoting DA lenses because they are selling APS C cameras only. The only FF compatible lenses are the DA300 and DA200. They do not need to make them DFA lenses as DFA signifies an aperture ring which FF cameras do not really require. You can still get the FA lenses listed above and I am sure Pentac will re-release them in bigger quantities if FF ever eventuates. They will more than likely re-introduse them for digital ready purposes. The same has happened to Canon and Nikon users. Those that invested in APS C lenses would have to dump them if they decide to go to FF. Do not forget that FF is more for advanced amateurs, semi-pros and pros or amateurs with big wads of cash and you can also sell off your DA lenses and purchase FF lenses. I would more than likely go to a FF camera simply because I like the larger VF and that I can use my FA* lenses as they were intended. At the moment, the K20D's resolution is more than enough, but that big bright VF is a major draw card.

05-03-2008, 02:10 AM	#63
philmorley Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: in a house in Armidale, Australia Posts: 472	big viewfinder. 28mm lens has less distortion /ca/pf etc than 18mm x 1.5

05-03-2008, 03:44 AM	#64
lol101 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Garennes sur Eure France Photos: Gallery Posts: 899	Originally posted by Lance B Pentax are promoting DA lenses because they are selling APS C cameras only. The only FF compatible lenses are the DA300 and DA200. They do not need to make them DFA lenses as DFA signifies an aperture ring which FF cameras do not really require. You can still get the FA lenses listed above and I am sure Pentac will re-release them in bigger quantities if FF ever eventuates. They will more than likely re-introduse them for digital ready purposes. The same has happened to Canon and Nikon users. Those that invested in APS C lenses would have to dump them if they decide to go to FF. Do not forget that FF is more for advanced amateurs, semi-pros and pros or amateurs with big wads of cash and you can also sell off your DA lenses and purchase FF lenses. I would more than likely go to a FF camera simply because I like the larger VF and that I can use my FA* lenses as they were intended. At the moment, the K20D's resolution is more than enough, but that big bright VF is a major draw card. That is just not true. Never did Canon or Nikon promote a 100% APS-C lens lineup. People who bought APS-C lenses had the choice of buying them or sticking to FF compatible lenses. I know that for a fact because I have bought a Canon APS-C DSLR but nothing but FF compatible lenses to go with it. And it was not special order, I just went into a shop and bought them. You're seing no problem because you have a large FA array but I don't and many people who recently bought into Pentax don't either. All I am saying is this: if Pentax plans to release a FF in the next three years, please, release FF compatible lenses NOW. These can be used on APS-C with no problems (as you know) so I don't see who wouldn't benefit from it. If Pentax is currently planning a FF camera but is sticking to sell APS-C only lenses until the camera is ready, I would find it borderline dishonest and Pentax would have no credibility as a FF system. Plus, releasing FF lenses (and clearly stating it, unlike the release of the DA* 200 and 300 where they stated explicitely that they were APS-C only lenses) would send a message to people considering buying the now affordable (and still better IQ-wise than any APS-C camera, including K20) 5D or the coming Sony that they can be confident that they can buy a lens compatible with everything the future might bring (pretty much like in the film days). Right now, they are sending the opposite message quite clearly and that is bad communication if this is not their intention. Last edited by lol101; 05-03-2008 at 03:50 AM.

05-03-2008, 06:33 AM	#65
thePiRaTE!! Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Calgary, AB Photos: Gallery Posts: 942	Maybe Pentax will tell us when they have an actual non-APS-C product announced, until then... confusing the masses too early would be counter-productive on a couple levels from a business stand-point and I don't think you can fault them until they have something to sell us in FF before putting the scare on their current flagship line-up. You may have your wish re: glass though. Many of us are waiting to discover the edge performance data of the newer primes (which cover the FF) - maybe once a few of these are proven to be FF compatible, a clearer picture will begin to emerge. I think if it turns out that the 60-250 supports FF (and Pentax haven't announced a FF venture by then) that will be your signal to start selling previous DA zooms if you are considering a body upgrade to FF. The fact that it was held back after the first two APS-C DA*s (16-50 + 50-135) were released (last lenses that came out as Hoya began its takeover) followed by its physical redesign, makes me wonder if Hoya has seen the writing on the wall for a while, setting the table for a likely transition into FF in future. But even saying all that, I'm sure APS-C will survive for a long time afterwards as they rake in premium dollars on a FF offering.

05-03-2008, 06:36 AM	#66
falconeye Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Munich, Alps, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,871	Originally posted by lol101 Never did Canon or Nikon promote a 100% APS-C lens lineup. [...] release FF compatible lenses NOW. [...] they are sending the opposite message I totally agree. I thought it, you said it. Thank You. To add to it: -> @Ned Burnell, are you reading this? Pentax management in Japan made a mistake by bedding onto APS-C sensors with 35mm mechanics. (Maybe not as bad as the mistake by the 4/3rds people, though Now, mistakes can happen. This is fine. Pentax management may only start to realize this now, but anyway. Can you then please rectify the mistake and start to communicate a clear, predictable FF roadmap, starting with your lenses. Please?

05-03-2008, 08:22 AM	#67
*isteve Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: London, England Posts: 1,187	Originally posted by falconeye I totally agree. I thought it, you said it. Thank You. To add to it: -> @Ned Burnell, are you reading this? Pentax management in Japan made a mistake by bedding onto APS-C sensors with 35mm mechanics. (Maybe not as bad as the mistake by the 4/3rds people, though Now, mistakes can happen. This is fine. Pentax management may only start to realize this now, but anyway. Can you then please rectify the mistake and start to communicate a clear, predictable FF roadmap, starting with your lenses. Please? As long as they continue to make BOTH APS and FF lenses. It matters little above 100mm but for wider focal lengths there are some significant advantages to designing lenses specifically for the intended format. If Pentax make FF lenses and abandon APSC lenses then 99% of their users will be short changed for the sake of 1%.

05-03-2008, 10:31 AM	#68
RBellavance Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Near Montréal, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,716	Originally posted by philmorley big viewfinder. 28mm lens has less distortion /ca/pf etc than 18mm x 1.5 Do you have numbers to back this up ? I'm not saying it isn't true. I'm just curious.

05-03-2008, 03:53 PM	#70
NickC Forum Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 53	Originally posted by MJB DIGITAL . however, the square is THE rectilinear shape that provides the MOST sensor coverage inside of the image circle. IMO it would be the optimal shape! almost anything we want to print needs to be cropped to size anyway, so why not. besides, then we wont need to rotate the camera, as there will be no vertical shooting anyway right? but yeah, the square is the way to go IMO I disagree. Very few pictures are printed or displayed square, so you'd always be cropping or throwing pixels away. the side of a square sensor will be smaller than the longest side of a rectangular sensor for the same image circle (30mm vs 36mm for FF), so you'd end up overall with less quality. Nick

05-03-2008, 03:56 PM	#71
*isteve Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: London, England Posts: 1,187	Originally posted by RBellavance Do you have numbers to back this up ? I'm not saying it isn't true. I'm just curious. There is no reason why it should be true.

05-03-2008, 05:36 PM	#72
Snapshot12 Inactive Account Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: UK Posts: 36	It all depends on if samsung is commited to developing a FF sensor,when Pentax was sold to hoya,i think there must ve been a disscussion or some kind of agreement between the 3 companies regarding the future of K mount.... Then i could be wrong, Hoya could always buy a sony FF sensor for Pentax if it proves successful... there is also a lot Hoya can do for Sony in different areas...

05-04-2008, 02:00 AM	#73
philmorley Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: in a house in Armidale, Australia Posts: 472	Originally posted by RBellavance Do you have numbers to back this up ? I'm not saying it isn't true. I'm just curious. just looking at various photozone reviews, seems to be across all manufacturers that as the less gets wider the distortion / ca and pf increases. of course there are exceptions but in general terms thats the way it seems

05-04-2008, 02:07 AM	#74
*isteve Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: London, England Posts: 1,187	Originally posted by philmorley just looking at various photozone reviews, seems to be across all manufacturers that as the less gets wider the distortion / ca and pf increases. of course there are exceptions but in general terms thats the way it seems Then I think you should try looking at the distortion CA and PF of 28mm primes on FF cameras.

05-04-2008, 03:37 AM	#75
mermozjg Inactive Account Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: France Posts: 8	Originally posted by lol101 That is just not true. Never did Canon or Nikon promote a 100% APS-C lens lineup. People who bought APS-C lenses had the choice of buying them or sticking to FF compatible lenses. Nikon has claimed over years they will not build a FF DSLR and that the future of Nikon was APS-C ONLY.