[ogl]

I know FF should be expensive. BUT! why would anyone (non pentax) consider using pentax body and glass when C and N already have a pretty long history and many generations of digital full frame dslr? (Especially used top glass fir those two are plenty as well). If they are priced like CaNikon, honestly, and Pentaxian who is thinking of moving into Full frame now realize they don't need to wait for Pentax. Since the entry price will be the roughly the same no matter what brand you choose (and likely cheaper if you choose CaNikon, as used bodies are plentiful). Since I will be spending the same amount of money, I rather buy dslr that is in their 2nd or 3rd generations than a new comer and first one from Pentax.

If the pricing is high like this, they might just push Pentaxian who are waiting for full frame finally realized they don't have to stick with Pentax, after all these years. ..

We have a lot of old Pentax FF lenses.

[lytrytyr]

Specs from the usual source.

As of specs of the next "HD PENTAX-D FA ★ 70-200mm F2.8ED DC AW"

- Dust and water structure. Sealing 13 places
- Image circle covers the 35mm format
- Nanotechnology coating of newly developed "Aero Bright coating II"
- HD coating
- Two super ED lens, two ED lens, four abnormal low dispersion lens
- Switch with quick shift focus system selector switch to "QFS / A", "QFS / M", "MF"
- "QFS / A" autofocus priority. "QFS / M" manual focus priority
- Lens within the motor (DC motor)
- Circular aperture
- 3-stage focus limiter
- Lens front to the SP coating
- New development of removable tripod mount (Captive)
- Over-the-counter expected price is 260,000 yen (including tax)

If this is all for real, the most interesting thing for me
is the absence of "SR" like you see in the D FA 645 90mm F2.8 ED AW SR Macro.

Does it mean they will put IBIS in an FF body?

[Kunzite]

Why not? They did that with APS-C...

[repaap]

There is no point of building a professional system, with good quality and sell it too cheap. Just to possibly gain new customers. And most of the ones who has wanted FF pentax for meny years has gone to canikon/sony. And are still going. But some new ones might get interested because of great line up and possibilities of Pentax system. Q, aps-c, FF, MF...you name it we have it and in high quality. AND once you get used to system, it will be easy to use MF, or aps-c because of easy and similar layout. Who cares if old 'loyal' ones who jumps ships anyway, goes away. New pros are on their way, and will know pentax/ricoh. It is good for everyone willing to shoot with pentax. So brign it on and make it high quality.

[RGlasel]

why would anyone (non pentax) consider using pentax body and glass

New customers for ILC's don't start with FF DSLRs. Well, a few of the "have more money than sense" crowd might, but they won't spend thousands of dollars on a brand they never heard of before, so Pentax has no chance with those customers, anyway. Anyone who would seriously considering buying a FF Pentax already has K-mount lenses or has used Pentax products in the past or is unhappy with Canon and/or Nikon FF for whatever reason, and is looking for another quality brand in the same price range.

It appears that the Pentax FF is targeted at more expensive than average FF cameras instead of less expensive than average, which makes sense if you only have one FF camera to offer. Lenses can be priced at Canon and Nikon levels, because Canon, Nikon and Pentax don't manufacture lenses for their competitors' mounts, and once the customer decides on which camera body to buy, the decision of which lenses to buy has also been made.

Edit: I see repaap posted much the same a minute before me.

[lytrytyr]

Why not? They did that with APS-C...

There were some concerns about the image circle of the lenses,
and the heavier weight of an FF sensor.

[Mistral75]

There were some concerns about the image circle of the lenses,
and the heavier weight of an FF sensor.

ja ja ja...

and some answers (including from yours truly) pointing at the Sony Alpha 900, 850 and 99 and their impeccable behaviour with the Minolta AF lenses from the '80s.

[asahi man]

Don't worry, the D FA* 70-200mm f/2.8 will also be double the price of the DA* 60-250mm f/4.

ja ja ja...

and some answers (including from yours truly) pointing at the Sony Alpha 900, 850 and 99 and their impeccable behaviour with the Minolta AF lenses from the '80s.

Boom !
That's the point,for the hundreds of time :-)
And I prefer the body system,maximal optical quality and durability is only with a fix and stabil lens group.

[Rondec]

I know FF should be expensive. BUT! why would anyone (non pentax) consider using pentax body and glass when C and N already have a pretty long history and many generations of digital full frame dslr? (Especially used top glass fir those two are plenty as well). If they are priced like CaNikon, honestly, and Pentaxian who is thinking of moving into Full frame now realize they don't need to wait for Pentax. Since the entry price will be the roughly the same no matter what brand you choose (and likely cheaper if you choose CaNikon, as used bodies are plentiful). Since I will be spending the same amount of money, I rather buy dslr that is in their 2nd or 3rd generations than a new comer and first one from Pentax.

If the pricing is high like this, they might just push Pentaxian who are waiting for full frame finally realized they don't have to stick with Pentax, after all these years. ..

My feeling is that there will be some features in the full frame Pentax body that will we different from Canon/Nikon full frame (best guess would be IBIS), better ergonomics, maybe better buffer, and flip out screen. As long as these things are priced comparably, I don't think folks will jump ship, in particular, not if they already own a couple of the FA limiteds, or other full frame primes in a k mount.

All this is speculation though. We don't know anything more than the specs on these two lenses, but it does seem pretty clear that Pentax released them as "full frame compatible" for a reason. If they weren't planning such a launch down the road, I think they would have called them DA lenses, same as lenses like the DA *200 and DA *55 are.

[goubejp]

Canon 70-200/2,8 - 2200 USD
Nikon 70-200/2,8 - 2400 USD

Yes but these lenses incorporate in lens image stabilisation. This has an extra cost

[asahi man]

Don't worry, the D FA* 70-200mm f/2.8 will also be double the price of the DA* 60-250mm f/4.

Yes but these lenses incorporate in lens image stabilisation. This has an extra cost

That's theoretically,how much exactly is the extra cost?

[Mistral75]

Yes but these lenses incorporate in lens image stabilisation. This has an extra cost

The Sony 70-200mm f/2.8 G SSM II is even more expensive...

Don't forget that the R&D costs per unit are much higher for Pentax and Sony which sell far less copies of such a lens.

[monochrome]

I know FF should be expensive. BUT! why would anyone (non pentax) consider using pentax body and glass when C and N already have a pretty long history and many generations of digital full frame dslr? (Especially used top glass fir those two are plenty as well). If they are priced like CaNikon, honestly, and Pentaxian who is thinking of moving into Full frame now realize they don't need to wait for Pentax. Since the entry price will be the roughly the same no matter what brand you choose (and likely cheaper if you choose CaNikon, as used bodies are plentiful). Since I will be spending the same amount of money, I rather buy dslr that is in their 2nd or 3rd generations than a new comer and first one from Pentax.

If the pricing is high like this, they might just push Pentaxian who are waiting for full frame finally realized they don't have to stick with Pentax, after all these years. ..

In some way the Pentax offering will be different enough - it will be an alternative to C & N & S (dSLR). It has always seemed to me that 'Pentax by Ricoh' has offered a value based on feature level at a price, not just price, but the price was a bit lower.

If they price at the same street level as the competitors but maintain the features / price relationship, wouldn't that imply their lenses are BETTER than the same-priced competitor offerings?

[jatrax]

I know FF should be expensive. BUT! why would anyone (non pentax) consider using pentax body and glass when C and N already have a pretty long history and many generations of digital full frame dslr? (Especially used top glass fir those two are plenty as well). If they are priced like CaNikon, honestly, and Pentaxian who is thinking of moving into Full frame now realize they don't need to wait for Pentax. Since the entry price will be the roughly the same no matter what brand you choose (and likely cheaper if you choose CaNikon, as used bodies are plentiful). Since I will be spending the same amount of money, I rather buy dslr that is in their 2nd or 3rd generations than a new comer and first one from Pentax. If the pricing is high like this, they might just push Pentaxian who are waiting for full frame finally realized they don't have to stick with Pentax, after all these years. ..

So you want Canon / Nikon quality at half price? Not going to happen. This is a pro level lens for a pro level camera, if you want cheap stay with APS-C. I am delighted at the price. If it had come out at $1,000 everyone would say it was just a consumer lens, because it would be. Canon and Nikon equivalents are the same price, why on earth would Pentax be cheaper? If you want third party cheap gear then buy Sigma or Tamron. If you want OEM FF gear this is the cost of admission.

Ricoh says they want to be a player, you don't do that with cheap junk, you do it by setting the bar high.

[D1N0]

Sigma and Tamron will probably bring out some more K-mount lenses once the FF body is on the shelves. So if it is too expensive, just get one of those.