[Miserere]

Miserere,

Weren't you the one that wrote that excellent article about FF vs APS-C? I remember reading it some time ago, but I don't have it linked. It should be a "sticky"

I have written many excellent articles, PP; you'll have to be more specific than that

If it was me, then you're talking about this post, which points to this article:

PENTAX DSLRs: Do You Really Need a Full-Frame Camera? Article by: Miserere

There's a small error in that article: Shooting times are the same for both formats; FF sensors don't shoot at twice the speed. I need to get Yvon to change that.

.

[Blue]

I think following Photokina, there will be speculation that Pentax will release a ff body in 2011. If Pentax release a ff, I think that's when it will occur. That's unless they do something radical.

[jogiba]

The market for a FF Pentax DSLR is at least 10x larger than the 645D because of a much lower price and K mount that works with 24 million FF K mount lenses.

[24X36NOW]

Falconeye, how on earth can you take the sensor size and extrapolate to the full volume of a camera? It's not like a camera (all it's components) would scale perfectly with the size of the sensor!
Besides, it's not like an APS-C DSLR will have the same size as a FF one, if both uses the same mount. Components like the prism will be smaller, but also the mirror chamber which now has to accommodate a smaller sensor/mirror/shutter.

The thickness of the skulls of the "APS-C is the greatest thing since sliced bread" crowd is sometimes astounding, eh Falconeye?!

Maybe if we approach it on simpler terms...APS-C dSLRs were designed to be backwards compatible with lenses designed for 24X36 format. Therefore, the lens mount and register distance, and the mirror box, are already large enough for 24X36 format because they have to be. The only thing that actually "needs" to be bigger is the prism, the benefits of which are obvious.

[24X36NOW]

For those who will "believe they can make a smaller FF dSLR when they see it":

Pentax MZ-S with grip:

PENTAX MZ-S with Battery Grip BG-10 + smc PENTAX-FA ZOOM 20-35mm/F4

vs.

Pentax FF dSLR with built in grip:

ASAHI OPTICAL HISTORICAL CLUB - Photo.net Pentax Forum

The cameras are already big enough for 24X36 format sensors. They needn't grow to 1DSIII or D3X proportions.

[Blue]

For those who will "believe they can make a smaller FF dSLR when they see it":

Pentax MZ-S with grip:

PENTAX MZ-S with Battery Grip BG-10 + smc PENTAX-FA ZOOM 20-35mm/F4

vs.

Pentax FF dSLR with built in grip:

ASAHI OPTICAL HISTORICAL CLUB - Photo.net Pentax Forum

The cameras are already big enough for 24X36 format sensors. They needn't grow to 1DSIII or D3X proportions.

Most of us are aware of the MS-D prototype. However, it needs to actually go into production. The proto-type was unveiled 10 years ago.

MZ-D

[jogiba]

A Pentax FF EVIL using the new Epson Ultra-Compact, High-Resolution HTPS TFT Color Liquid Crystal Panel for Electronic Viewfinders could be the same size as the K-7 IMHO.
Epson starts mass production of high-end EVF panels: Digital Photography Review

[24X36NOW]

This may sound like a broken record, but where would the Pentax FF lenses come from? They no longer make any zoom lenses that will work on FF. They would have to rely entirely on third party zoom lenses that are made for other mounts and hope they are converted to k eventually. Ned himself talked about the challenges with adding a FF lens to the lineup, and seemed to indicate it was not going to happen any time soon.

They need not "hope" for "conversion." There are already plenty of third party FF lenses in PK mount, like the following collection of Sigma zooms:

12-24 f4.5-5.6 EX DG
24-70 f2.8 EX DG/24-70mm F2.8 IF EX DG HSM
70-200mm F2.8 II EX DG
100-300mm F4 EX DG

The market for a FF Pentax DSLR is at least 10x larger than the 645D because of a much lower price and K mount that works with 24 million FF K mount lenses.

Agreed!

A Pentax FF EVIL using the new Epson Ultra-Compact, High-Resolution HTPS TFT Color Liquid Crystal Panel for Electronic Viewfinders could be the same size as the K-7 IMHO.
Epson starts mass production of high-end EVF panels: Digital Photography Review

I'll go one further and say they can make a FF dSLR that has no material difference in size from the K7, except for the bigger better prism which provides the bigger better viewfinder. NOT that I'd mind if it were a bit bigger anyway.

[Blue]

The FF lens issue is simple. They have some in production and could easily make some runs of recently discontinued ones if necessary. I will say Hoya's Pentax has been leak proof over the past year or so. They may be working on something besides the bodies. The bodies are made in the Philippines and the lenses are assembled in Vietnam so it is possible that they would work on both a body and lenses. They may even do something radical and release an APS-H just to implode some peoples brains.

[rawr]

My 2 kopecks...

While a Pentax FF would be nice, as would be a 645D, IMHO the limited resources of a small company like Pentax should be focussed on shoring up it's [diminishing] presence in the mainstream consumer SLR marketplace, rather than chasing the FF and pro market. In particular they need to keep the momentum going after the positive critical and sales success of the K-x.

And the immediate questions should be: what come after the K-200D? What is coming after the K-7? What comes after the K-x? An expensive FF model isn't likely to be the best answer to any of those questions.

[lithos]

The FF lens issue is simple. They have some in production and could easily make some runs of recently discontinued ones if necessary. I will say Hoya's Pentax has been leak proof over the past year or so. They may be working on something besides the bodies. The bodies are made in the Philippines and the lenses are assembled in Vietnam so it is possible that they would work on both a body and lenses. They may even do something radical and release an APS-H just to implode some peoples brains.

Fully agree with you there, Blue.

There's nothing wrong with the old lens formulas. Maybe an external appearance/construction update - frankly, some of those FAs look a bit naff - but that's pretty much all that needs to be done. I think any of the resulting CA that may be there (from working with a 3D "sensor" like film) to being used on a 2D digital sensor could be corrected with the existing aberration control in current DSLR firmware.

Save 'em a bunch in R&D - hell, it's like free R&D!

But Pentax'll have to keep it on the lowdown to prevent whinging from the tech/photonerd sites - "This lens isn't actually Digitally Designed™! It's not new, so it must be crap!"

[lol101]

This may sound like a broken record, but where would the Pentax FF lenses come from? They no longer make any zoom lenses that will work on FF. They would have to rely entirely on third party zoom lenses that are made for other mounts and hope they are converted to k eventually. Ned himself talked about the challenges with adding a FF lens to the lineup, and seemed to indicate it was not going to happen any time soon.

Where did Pentax APS-C lenses came from? Where were they when they released the *istD?

They built their lineup pieces by pieces and they have more FA and D-FA in their present lineup than they had DAs when they went digital.

Is it possible that Pentax has the resources to:

a) Continue the DA and DA* lines (and hopefully significantly improve the DA*'s)
b) create a new line of lenses for the 645 that is rumored to be released
c) Create another new line of zoom lenses that will work for FF?

Why not? If they have the resources to create a new line of 645D lenses and invest in the production hardware for such a limited market, why can't they invest at least to the same amount on a much bigger market?

On a side note, every FF lens that would be released would also be 100% compatible with their APS-C cameras so everyone would benefit from them, not only the one buying the FF camera: that's an even bigger market.

After all, why did they re-release a D-FA 100mm macro WR (which is a FF lens) instead of making it a 70mm macro WR dedicated to APS-C? It didn't appear to have shocked anyone and people are buying them to fit their APS-C cameras aren't they?

The only place Pentax is covered FF is the old FA primes and Limiteds.

Not such a bad place to start IMHO.

I still think FF is wishful thinking. Pentax seems to be spread thin enough as it is. It would be nice to see them focus on making the best APS-C cameras and lenses available.

Spread thin with only two current models...? I hope not!

[juu]

They built their lineup pieces by pieces and they have more FA and D-FA in their present lineup than they had DAs when they went digital.

That seems an unfair comparison as the FF lenses worked on the APSC bodies while most of the DA lenses vignet.

[lol101]

That seems an unfair comparison as the FF lenses worked on the APSC bodies while most of the DA lenses vignet.

True... FF lenses worked on APS-C.

... and they still do!

Getting a "new" line of FF lens is a big investment, granted, but since these lenses could be used equally well on APS-C and FF, the user base is already there and there is no need to sell a huge number of FF cameras.

Hoya's politics has been to sell relatively low priced bodies (relatively to their qualities and features) and get their money back on lenses.

I can totally see this business plan working for FF.

[nosnoop]

Why not? If they have the resources to create a new line of 645D lenses and invest in the production hardware for such a limited market, why can't they invest at least to the same amount on a much bigger market?

That's because they can charge a premium for 645D camera and lenses with a much larger profit margin. They cannot afford to do the same for FF cameras.

Even though it is a "much bigger market" than medium format, FF market is still minuscule. If the Pentax FF sells as "well" as the Sony A900, they would be in big big trouble.

And if the plan is to aim for a bigger market segment with a new lens line-up, wouldn't a hybrid/EVIL camera makes much much more sense?

Spread thin with only two current models...? I hope not!

It's 3 models at this point. With its current R&D budget and down sized staff, I won't be surprised. Just see how long it has taken them to try to get the 645D out the door.