[Rush2112]

why worry about FF... I mean it adds bulk and weight I hike and bike alot FF really doesnt make sence for me really. want FF I would get canon nikon or just get the MF pentax camera when it comes up...

Its one thing in your situation, but FF is vital at some point. There is something to be said shooting with FF that can't be quantified with any test result, only real life results. There are advantages on paper too, don't get me wrong....

Just because it is FF doesnt mean it has to be this big heavy clunker of a camera, the D700 and A900 both are really not all that big, I pack one for both hiking and biking and it does add some weight and bulk, but not much over an aps-c camera at all... if I want to go uber light I carry a G10 or GX200.

Not trying to change your point of view, just saying theres something to be said when you actually have a model in your normal lineup to use that is FF, vs. not having one at all.

C

and I wonder which current model this FF is supposed to replace. Hm.... :ugh:

[falconeye]

and I wonder which current model this FF is supposed to replace. Hm.... :ugh:

That's an easy one. The *ist. It is the most recent FF camera from Pentax

Ah, still in denial about k20D replacement, eh?

[mattdm]

I'm being quoted out of context — my post earlier in the thread was that Ned's comments shoot down any idea that a FF camera is in the works.

As for "Its one thing in your situation, but FF is vital at some point. There is something to be said shooting with FF that can't be quantified with any test result, only real life results. There are advantages on paper too, don't get me wrong...." I have to look a little askew. FF isn't some magical formula — it's just a little bit bigger. No way near an order of magnitude bigger. Remember, we're talking about something smaller than medium format. You really need something "full", there's a whole range of large format cameras.

True. Sorry about that.

but there will be a K20d replacement with a larger sensor, but not FF. I guess that only leaves that one particular size ....

[stevebrot]

...I have to look a little askew. FF isn't some magical formula — it's just a little bit bigger. No way near an order of magnitude bigger. Remember, we're talking about something smaller than medium format. You really need something "full", there's a whole range of large format cameras.

Sorry Matt...I have to butt in here. For sure FF is not some kind of magic formula. At least it is not magic unless you just happen to have glass that would work very well with a 24x36mm sensor. As for it being just a little bit bigger? I may have my math wrong, but my understanding is that FF is dimensionally 50% larger than APS-C with more than twice the area.

Now I stand a little over 6 feet tall and I think I am more than a little bigger than a 4-footer. Not quite an order of magnitude difference, but functionally significant for many purposes.

Steve

---

Last edited by stevebrot; 04-28-2009 at 10:31 PM.

[mattdm]

Now I stand a little over 6 feet tall and I think I am more than a little bigger than a 4-footer. Not quite an order of magnitude difference, but functionally significant for many purposes.

Ha. Point taken, although remember that double is just one stop. And you and the four-foot-tall person still use the same chairs, live in the same houses, drive the same cars. (Although the shorter guy may need a little boost.) It's not like you're a whole different sort of creature.

[jeffkrol]

Sorry Matt...I have to butt in here. For sure FF is not some kind of magic formula. At least it is not magic unless you just happen to have glass that would work very well with a 24x36mm sensor. As for it being just a little bit bigger? I may have my math wrong, but my understanding is that FF is dimensionally 50% larger than APS-C with more than twice the area.

Now I stand a little over 6 feet tall and I think I am more than a little bigger than a 4-footer. Not quite an order of magnitude difference, but functionally significant for many purposes.

Steve

23.6x15.7 36x24
370mm squared or 864mm squared.
2.3 times ..........
soon as FF is 32+ MP I'll consider

[Blue]

true. Sorry about that.

But there will be a k20d replacement with a larger sensor, but not ff. I guess that only leaves that one particular size ....

. . . . Aps-h . . . .

[ManuH]

True. Sorry about that.

but there will be a K20d replacement with a larger sensor, but not FF. I guess that only leaves that one particular size ....

That doesn't make sense at all. There is nothing to gain for Pentax with something between APS-C and FF. It will be second to the FF cameras and most APS-C lenses will have problems to take advantage of the bigger sensor. They won't invest on APS-H lenses when anyway the end of the road is still FF. Why? Because the K mount has been designed from the start to be a FF mount. The only reason why the K mount is not FF today is cost. That's the only actual reason.

BTW let's not worry about our APS-C only lenses. These will still work and give good service on a FF sensor in crop mode. APS-C is right now the way to go and I wouldn't buy FF lenses "just in case" because anyway for most of them they won't perform that good on a digital back.

It's funny how this APS-H thing just seems to keep coming back. I was earlier googling for info on APS-H and several results linked back to Pentaxforums, where there had been at the time lots of rumours about K20D having an APS-H sensor. Then the rumoured K-7. Now the theoretical K30D.

[RBellavance]

That doesn't make sense at all. There is nothing to gain for Pentax with something between APS-C and FF. It will be second to the FF cameras and most APS-C lenses will have problems to take advantage of the bigger sensor. They won't invest on APS-H lenses when anyway the end of the road is still FF. Why? Because the K mount has been designed from the start to be a FF mount. The only reason why the K mount is not FF today is cost. That's the only actual reason.

BTW let's not worry about our APS-C only lenses. These will still work and give good service on a FF sensor in crop mode. APS-C is right now the way to go and I wouldn't buy FF lenses "just in case" because anyway for most of them they won't perform that good on a digital back.

+1 on both accounts.

I too believe APS-H (1.3x crop) makes no sense at all.

And if/when Pentax releases a 1.0x crop camera, it will have enough MP to ensure the "crop mode" has a satisfactory resolution (>= 10MP).