[cali92rs]

I mean they say that by design they are not going that route of fast glass anyway.

I really think people project what they want and not what is likely to occurs. it is not like pentax did not say they want to focus on small and light lenses instead of fast lenses.

The only modern lens Pentax has with f/1.4 is the 55mm f/1.4, all FA are already older and all the DA ltd line is f/2.4 or slower. And ultimately it is easier to make small lenses for APSC image circle than FF.

Quite honestly of course im projecting what I want. It would be my money, A Lot of money...im not going to spend that amount of money on something I wouldn't be completely satisfied with.

We can debate whether or not it is the correct way for pentax to go, it may or may not be. But what is not debatable is that I will be the one cutting the check and if they dont release something I want, I won't buy it.

[mecrox]

Is that so?

Where is you proof that they are using Pentax IP illegally?

Are you sure they are not paying license fees or have some agreement?

If there is illegal action, where is Pentax's lawsuit?

As an expert witness, I have testified many times that the Chairman of Sigma is known to keep a parrot in his office and likes to hold a cutlass between his teeth while counting out the company's pieces of eight.

Show us the licences, mi hearty. If Sigma pirate one they pirate them all. The most recent spat was a multi-million dollar payment to Nikon for infringeing their VR system.

[ak_kiwi]

As a Pentax shooter all I can say to the above is thank goodness for Pirates!

[RonHendriks1966]

In support of Ron's numbers, Well here's where we are in FF capable current technology Pentax lenses.... No long teles of wide apertures.... Forget the Birders, Wildlifers, Sports Pros, surveillance types, Photojournalists. No 12-14 FA F2.8... Forget the landscapers, realtors, admen, scenery designers, and architects (Canon has their glass in shifts). So you end up with wedding shooters and portrait folks? 55mm F1.4 is ok for APSc, need 85mm F1.4 for FF.... OK forget them. So there goes the major market for a Pentax FF in Pros. I would hedge Ron's number and take it to 2-3% MAX. Add in the affluent enthusiast that has been squirreling FA*s, subtract those that don't do landscapes or too many wides and are happy with 12-24 F4 or the primes...

Any firm that puts R&D in that for a Now launch when Canon's line is not profitable, Nikon is BLEEDING, Sony is back-filling A7s and Alphas with cash they don't have, 4/3 is in decline...... ought to go broke from violating basic rules of business ... a Business Darwin Award Winner...

If Pentax marketers were dolt's, I could see it in 14/15. I suspect it will be longer. FF at less than 50MP is a loser optically (simple math). An addition of HQ long teles, telezooms, a longer macro, and a DA* zoom to 10 at F2.8 would cement Pentax as the leader in APSC. Kill the MF market with new 400/600/800mm... FF is backward, too heavy, too expensive, a resolution loser, etc. IMHO

Well some of those issues can be repaired. But they need to be adressed soon, and at bets with the start of the FF.

[JimmyDranox]

As a Pentax shooter all I can say to the above is thank goodness for Pirates!

Sorry Pentax, but I have to say the same.

[RockvilleBob]

Sorry Pentax, but I have to say the same.

I concur wholeheartedly
Ricoh/Pentax should do all possible to get more Sigma lenses with K mounts and get them announced faster

[VladimirYo]

I think Ricoh needs to introduce new Theta after watching this:

Vimeo

[RonHendriks1966]

I think Ricoh needs to introduce new Theta after watching this:

wow yes theta misses video.

[todd]

I think Ricoh needs to introduce new Theta after watching this:

that camera would be good fun but (for me) not enough fun for $609... Theta is too much dough as well.

[goubejp]

If you limit the full frame to 16 Mpix, you can't offer a crop mode to use with APS-C lenses with decent resolution.
You need 16 Mpix in APS-C, implying more or less 32 to 36 Mpix in full frame

[RonHendriks1966]

If you limit the full frame to 16 Mpix, you can't offer a crop mode to use with APS-C lenses with decent resolution.
You need 16 Mpix in APS-C, implying more or less 32 to 36 Mpix in full frame

Maybe you just should use a Full Frame lens on it and stop cropping...........

[thibs]

Unlike other manufacturers's mounts, the K mount (and m42 before them) have always been "open" designs, free for anyone to use (although I'm not entirely sure this is true about the modern AF design).

It is more complicated:
K-mount has always been free indeed.
KA was closed though but patents expired, which explains why Samyang can produce KA compatible glass but could not do the same for electrical F mount, they later redid early Nikon F mount lenses to AE F mount. It also explains why Canon versions still miss any electrical linking.
BTW, Ricoh and Chinon to cite those two both did their own variations of the 'electrical' K mount back in the time.
KAF is not free yet
KAF2 is not free yet and
KAF3 is not free yet either obviously.

[Poit]

Ron....I'm glad someone said it!

[thibs]

Maybe you just should use a Full Frame lens on it and stop cropping...........

But maybe that's exactly what would limit the interest of all those with APS glass.
Things are always more coplicated than we think they are.

[JimmyDranox]

But maybe that's exactly what would limit the interest of all those with APS glass.
Things are always more coplicated than we think they are.

Maybe things are complicated. Or maybe there are very simple. So simple as: there is no perfect solution. Try to find it and you'll fail. There are only ways. Some better for some, other better for others. If we keep looking for perfect solution, anybody will never do anything.