The rumors of an APS-H sensor for the K30D (1.3x crop factor) had me thinking. Would that explain why Pentax's ultrawide are not as wide as would be expected. If Pentax is planning on an APS-H sensor, it needs to keep its high end lenses to work with that sensor size.

All just thoughts, not even rumors.

I would be happy with an APS-H sensor with a 1.3X crop factor. It may not be full frame, but it's a step up from APS-C. And yeah, that may explain why Pentax's ultra-wides aren't so wide.

Hrm, I don't know. Presumably, that the coverage of recent DA lenses may do might be more of a factor, to my mind, rather than so much focal length.

Has anyone gone through the DA lenses on full frame thread and checked which will work on 1.3x?

I don't come from a film background and that may be one of the reasons I'm sold on Pentax coming out with an APS-H sensor. A Tamron 28-75 on a H sensor is as wide as I need to go.

In theory the DA lenses would work and Pentax wouldn't need to come out with a new line of lenses. Combine that with the lower production cost compared to a FF sensor and Pentax could become very unique both in IQ and cost. They could even reduce the size of the body a little and it would be my dream machine. I'm not going to hold my breath waiting for it but what a great package it would be.

My bet is they could make an APS-H 18MP sensor that at ISO 1600 would be so close to any FF sensor you would have to print larger than 24 X 20 to see any resolution difference at all. Smaller body than the K20D, better resolution, equal noise at high ISO, better wide angle for less money, and less cost than any FF. What's not to like?

The problem with APS-H i that it is neither fish nor fowel.

Its advantages over 35mm are that of cost but its still more expensive than APS-C. But I am not sure the image quality benefits of APS-H over APS-C are enough to mitigate this cost increase.

I've noticed that people who visit forums like this one (i.e. enthusiasts) often highlight wideangle, specifically ultra-wide, as being their preferred focal length range and so 35mm or APS-H seem obviously better for them but I don't think the majority of people who are looking to buy a DSLR are going to be into ultra-wides. For most people I suspect its normal to telephoto which will be their most used focal lengths.

So I am not sure that a 1.3x crop is inherently more attractive tha 1.5x for most people. And this whole crop the photo if you want telephoto is a spurious argument - who wants to have to crop the majority of their photos.

Sorry, the coverage is the issue, but creating an ultrawide with the coverage is tougher. A 12mm is very wide for a 1.5x, but is even wider on 1.3x and extreme on FF.

Looking at Ken Rockwell's chars, the Tokina 12-14 can be used FF down to 17mm

Digital Ultrawide Zoom Comparison Chart

It would be interesting to know the coverage of other SA lenses on FF cameras.

I think that the APS-H creates a nice niche for Pentax. It is better quality than 1.5x, can use the DA lenses (I hope), but would be cheaper than the Canon or Nikon line of FF cameras.

If Pentax bring out a FF camera, I would feel a little screwed - my DA lenses become a dead end. This is one of the problems with Canon/Nikon - if I went with one of those I would feel like I needed to go FF, as their APS cameras seem to be a dead end.

I know what you mean re: Canon and Nikon. Especially with Canon because as I understand it Canon's 35mm digital lenses won't work on one of their APS-C cameras (Although I could be wrong)

I am pretty sure the ones that doesn't work with FF will not work with 1.3X

For example the 16-45mm can be usable from 22mm onward in FF. The DA 15 I hear is a dark circle beyond APS. Maybe the 21mm will work. I am preety sure the 16-50mm and 50-135m won't work. I remember reading a Nikon review of the Tokina version some where.

They should go straight to FF.

I'd be happy with a APS-H camera. Especially if they don't go beyond 16MP.

Doesn't the M8 use an APS-H?

[conspiracy theory hat]

And Ned publicly lauded Leica on his blog. Hmm...

K30d w/APS-H sensor, Pentax also announces an M-K adapter and the K30d essentially becomes the "low end" Leica interchangeable lens camera.

[/conspiracy theory hat]

I hope they don't - going FF will require a whole new range of lenses and could seriously damage the marque. The APS-H is about half way between APS-C and FF; its viability would depend largely on how many of the current APS-C lenses would work with APS-H. If all of the higher end lenses work, then I think it would be a smart move.

Image sensor format - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The other alternative is that they stick with APS-C for the '35mm-style' cameras, and introduce a cost effective medium format digital camera.

Since I am primarily a landscape shooter, I'd love APS-H. In the past, though, a lot of folks here have been resistant to the idea of having to crop to get a 3:2 ratio back.

Also, it has been previously pointed out that the focal lengths of the newer DA lenses are the 1.5 crop equivalents of the more traditional 35mm lengths, e.g. 16-50mm is ~24-75mm, 50-135mm is ~75-200mm, etc. and using a 1.3 crop gives you some odd equivalent lengths. That doesn't bother me at all, but I am sure a few folks will be.

There is a huge thread in xitek.com that documents all the DA lenses used on film cameras. I would link you to it but its in Chinese. Basically DA40 and longer tel lenses work, not the wider DA lenses.

It's not a big deal you just have to use the FF prime lenses such as the 31mm ltd. Or yeah Pentax need to remake the cheap 28mm and 24mm. As for wider zoom, I guess you can make do with the 18-35mm FA-J and what not.

Oh well, here is the link if you just want to see the pictures

Pentax½ºÆ¬»úÉí+DA¾µÍ·¾ãÀÖ²¿ - ÎÞ¼ÉÂÛ̳