[Heie]

To me, the perfect crop mode implementation would be as follows. Use a switch on the body somewhere, similar to the AF/MF switch on the K-3 (perhaps above it, where the RAW/FX button is? or add another layer to the locking slider under the mode dial?):



only instead of AF and MF, the options are "FA" and "DA"

-Heie

[filoxophy]

Why not? Information like this has been gathered by several people over several years and published in various places. It is hardly a secret!

Pentax Full Frame tests

Pentax Forums: DA lenses on Full Frame: Test Shots thread

RiceHigh's Pentax Blog: Compatibility of DA Lenses on Full Frame

Karl Knipser - Flickr Set: Many test photos of Pentax lenses on both film and a Canon EOS 5D Mark III

(I expect there are more).

I understand, but it's one thing for there to be internet threads about it, and another thing for a major corporation to release a product.

[Dr_who]

Why not? Information like this has been gathered by several people over several years and published in various places. It is hardly a secret!

Pentax Full Frame tests

Pentax Forums: DA lenses on Full Frame: Test Shots thread

RiceHigh's Pentax Blog: Compatibility of DA Lenses on Full Frame

Karl Knipser - Flickr Set: Many test photos of Pentax lenses on both film and a Canon EOS 5D Mark III

(I expect there are more).

Those tests from what I remember is testing said lens on say a film camera and seeing the results. Ricoh has already said the new FF lenses will have a larger image circle than 35mm film lenses as the FF camera has shake reduction in the body. Not all lenses that look ok on a film camera may have different results on the FF while shake reduction is on.

[Class A]

Actually, I think I summarized the video of that presentation in another thread.

Yes, you did!

Thanks, for mentioning the summary, which prompted me to look for your respective post.
And, many, many thanks for your translations!!!

You not only confirmed the "Foveon-simulator" assumption, but also explained all the laughing that is going on in the interview.
Very informative summary indeed, thanks so much!

I don't think the APS-C crop is anything worth worrying about. Ricoh/Pentax has a good record of respecting their legacy users.

I guess I don't know about Ricoh that much. One cannot extrapolate too much from past Pentax behaviour as Ricoh will imprint their own direction. The reason why I'm mildly concerned is that Ricoh will have to find ways to recover the considerable investment that the development of a whole FF line up represents. Businessmen wouldn't hold it against Ricoh at all, if that implied some unpopular decisions.

It would just a bit too good to be true, if one could disable cropping regardless of the lens mounted. But I'm hopeful that Ricoh will support this, one way or another.

I did mention the idea of different aspect ratios for crop lenses to Kawauchi-san. Someone mentioned it on this forum and I thought it was a great idea, so I made a point of mentioning it.

Excellent!

---

Last edited by Class A; 02-20-2015 at 08:48 PM.

[monochrome]

IMHO the best business decision is the one that builds long-term brand loyalty among the remaining current user base by making it easy for us to justify owning a $2,800 camera. Denying user flexibility is short-sighted.

[zoolander]

I would more so mill around that booth if they had a Teppanyaki chef cooking free food for everyone.

Thats what I mean ! He's cooking food Teppanyaki style, then he puts on another display by chopping a lens in half - food plus entertainment. I probably would be the messiest booth at the convention though !

[RobA_Oz]

So here it goes
• K50 is for bargain hunters and scrooges.
• K-S1 is for kindergarden kids obsessed with lights and novel ideas.
• K-S2 is for those who can't decide between K50 and being a bargain hunter on one side, and still exploring their difficult, perplexing and emerging photographic personna
• K-3 is for die-hard Pentaxians
• FF is for dreamers and those who believers Pentax will strike back the evil imperium of Darth Nikon and Canon the Cloaked Emperor
• 645Z is for those who have repaid their home loans

I generally agree with your characterisations, while retaining the right to buy any of those cameras! You do, you realise, run the risk of being called a snob and Boriscletoed™ by a certain member here, but who needs the approval of humourless, judgmental types, anyway?

Given the pricing suggested for the new lenses, I suggest the mooted 35FF might also fall into the latter category, or perhaps a new category especially for those willing to forego early retirement by more than a few years!

---------- Post added 21st Feb 2015 at 03:20 PM ----------

To me, the perfect crop mode implementation would be as follows. Use a switch on the body somewhere, similar to the AF/MF switch on the K-3 (perhaps above it, where the RAW/FX button is? or add another layer to the locking slider under the mode dial?):

only instead of AF and MF, the options are "FA" and "DA"

-Heie

Following on from the 3-position switch on the K-3, I'd like a mid-position setting that allows lens-specific crop customisation.

Those tests from what I remember is testing said lens on say a film camera and seeing the results. Ricoh has already said the new FF lenses will have a larger image circle than 35mm film lenses as the FF camera has shake reduction in the body. Not all lenses that look ok on a film camera may have different results on the FF while shake reduction is on.

A number of people agonised and argued about this in these pages, and it turns out that there was truth in all sides of the argument, from this latest information. I don't think it will matter all that much. Some film-era lenses will be fine, I'm sure, while others will need cropping or switching SR off. My suggested in-camera customised crop would still allow SR, even with minimal image circles. While that'd be nice, I doubt we'll see it in the first version, if at all.

[JPT]

I guess I don't know about Ricoh that much. One cannot extrapolate too much from past Pentax behaviour as Ricoh will imprint their own direction. The reason why I'm mildly concerned is that Ricoh will have to find ways to recover the considerable investment that the development of a whole FF line up represents. Businessmen wouldn't hold it against Ricoh at all, if that implied some unpopular decisions.

I wouldn't worry about it. Ricoh hasn't previously had a very aggressive stance to forcing people to upgrade and buy more stuff. There are two examples I can think of.

Ricoh has always had a policy of supporting their cameras with function-enhancing firmware. I remember in the presentation at the GRD IV launch event in Japan, they announced the GRD IV and then at the end of the presentation they announced a firmware release for the GRD III that added half of the new features. They said something like "We don't want you to feel like your GRD II is suddenly out of date". Not the behaviour of a ruthless company.

Secondly, the GXR M-mount unit was released even though Ricoh could not capitalise on it with any lens sales. It has the best support of any mirrorless cameras for M-mount lenses because it has micro lenses on the sensor that are optimised for it. It also has some really good manual focusing assist features.

So I don't see any reason to be especially suspicious of Ricoh in this regard. In the case of the FF, they have specifically said that they chose K-mount to keep continuity for their existing users. I don't think they would undermine this by messing up the crop mode.

[Class A]

Denying user flexibility is short-sighted.

Many companies have repeatedly demonstrated that being "short-sighted" is what they are good at.

Not saying Ricoh is one of them, but there is no reason to be overly optimistic just because providing maximum user flexibility would be smart.

So I don't see any reason to be especially suspicious of Ricoh in this regard. In the case of the FF, they have specifically said that they chose K-mount to keep continuity for their existing users. I don't think they would undermine this by messing up the crop mode.

In general, I agree with you.

For the sake of playing the devil's advocate, there are also counter examples:

• Why is there no option to use an SDM/screw-drive AF lens in screw-drive mode only? There has been at least one big petition and Pentax could have saved their face by stating that the software switch is only there to allow such dual-mode lenses to AF, even when a teleconverter doesn't support SDM contacts.
• Why can I not adjust my f-stop on the camera when using a pre-A lens, if only just to record in the EXIF data what aperture I was using? The camera could even be so clever and support A-mode wide-open metering functionality, provided I previously provided information about the lens model (automatically adjusting for the difference in how aperture levers work for A vs pre-A lenses).
• Why were the Auto ISO and HyperProgram bugs of past Pentax DSLRs never fixed? Here we are not even talking about trickling down new functions from new models to old ones, but about not addressing defects in current production runs.

This list could be continued...

I'm overall very happy with Pentax and I do have high hopes that they will make the APS-C cropping optional. It just not a forgone conclusion for me yet.

[Gimbal]

The problem with simple cropping is that it doesn't make best use of the current lens range. And who is to say what is "an APS-C lens"? Obviously it isn't the same as "DA or DA* lens"!

Some lenses need different cropping at different focal lengths. For example, the DA 12-24mm f/4 and the DA 10-17mm Fisheye are both pretty good at FF at the long end, and restricted to APS-C at the short end. I want the cropping to take the currently-used focal lengths of individual lenses into account.

It would however be hard to frame the shot in the viewfinder if the crop ratio changes continuously depending on all of the above. Also who at Pentax decides when the vignetting is bad enough to crop? What if you don't agree? The answer is simple, let the user decide. Either auto crop as indicated by some lines in the viewfinder and frame accordingly, or disable auto crop and the user can crop as he wish in post process. A variable auto crop will never crop where you want.

[Barry Pearson]

Those tests from what I remember is testing said lens on say a film camera and seeing the results. Ricoh has already said the new FF lenses will have a larger image circle than 35mm film lenses as the FF camera has shake reduction in the body. Not all lenses that look ok on a film camera may have different results on the FF while shake reduction is on.

SR doesn't make a lot of demands on the image circle. But anyway some of the lenses appear sharp to the corners of a 35mm film, well beyond the frame of an APS-C sensor.

Those are not just "a little bit better than APS-C, but that will be lost with SR"! They are "image OK right to the corners, and even if cropping were thought desirable, it would only be a bit of cropping, not down to APS-C size". There is discussion about whether the DA& 60-250mm is really an FF lens or not. I call it "nearly FF", because at full aperture there is either softness or mild vignetting in the corners. But it is certainly far more than APS-C!

This discussion shouldn't be about that fact that some lenses really are APS-C with SR only. It should recognise that some lenses are not like that. And that sometimes SR is not on. We shouldn't want Pentax cameras to be dumbed down to the worst case.

[kadajawi]

Pentax does like to dumb down to the worst case, best example is the video SR. Because _some_ users might be able to hear the mechanism move they deactivated a feature that is very useful to others. Just give the option...

So my hopes aren't too high with the FF, choice isn't their strong point.

As for how individual user defined crops would be visible in the viewfinder... use an actual full color LCD screen in the viewfinder. Not sure how much that makes the image darker, but it would at least allow lots of things like overlaying an histogram etc., or even having live view displayed in there as an EVF (if they can somehow fit in backlighting... but that shouldn't be too much of an issue, it just has to, for example, be something that can moved in before the pentaprism).

[IchabodCrane]

Certainly there are a number of sophisticated and even perhaps elegant solutions to address the use the APS-C lenses on the upcoming FF camera. The problem is some start crossing into Rube Goldberg territory. I now think Ricoh will be quite simple in its approach. For example, provide three crop options: none, 1.25x, and 1.5x. If the camera detects an APS-C lens, it will default to 1.5x and it will be up to the user to override that selection if desired. Maybe they'll have a memory function that records how you want to crop each of your lenses?

[Barry Pearson]

Certainly there are a number of sophisticated and even perhaps elegant solutions to address the use the APS-C lenses on the upcoming FF camera. The problem is some start crossing into Rube Goldberg territory. I now think Ricoh will be quite simple in its approach. For example, provide three crop options: none, 1.25x, and 1.5x. If the camera detects an APS-C lens, it will default to 1.5x and it will be up to the user to override that selection if desired. Maybe they'll have a memory function that records how you want to crop each of your lenses?

What does "an APS-C lens" mean? It certainly isn't the same as "DA or DA* lens"!

[normhead]

It would appear from what I've read, that even lenses that would work on a 35mm film camera, will possibly not have big enough image circle for 35mm with Shake Reduction. MY guess is no DA or DA* lens is going to support a Pentax specification FF lens, and that they will still be considered APS-c lens, in that they are not fully 35 mm with SR compatible, although they may be totally compatible with SR turned off.