[séamuis]

there is plenty of AF Minolta glass.

[Urkeldaedalus]

there is plenty of AF Minolta glass.

I stand corrected

[TourDeForce]

Do those old lenses become that bad and unusable on APS-C? Why aren't they expecting/requesting lenses with similar qualities ar APS-C focal lengths.

I believe something like good 30/1.4 would cost less than a full frame body and it would be a better investment.
Canon EF 24 mm F/1.4 L USM, Canon EF 20 mm F/2.8 USM, Canon EF 35 mm F/1.4 L USM, Sony 35 mm F/1.4 G - They all cost cheaper than 5D I or Sony DSLR A900, body only. Some even several times. And they are designed to cover full frame. Look at the Nikon 35/1.8 .
Don't you think much bigger inconvenience is searching unreliable and overpriced used markets for outdated lenses?

No wonder people does not get what they expect or Pentax doesn't respond to their whining, because they are expecting impossible (exaggerating here ). Why not wish for more reasonable and achievable things?

You're suggesting that Pentax & others simply adopt the current technology and abandon any further development on new technology. They'll surely close their doors if they voluntarily put themselves out to pasture. Remember Beta-Max video tape? Remember digital audio tape? Remember the ever popular VHS video? How 'bout 8-track tape? Airbags are such an added expense, wasn't seat belt technology good enough?

Embracing a current technology while others soldier on to dominate the field is foolish. You're just handing over market share year by year.

New development may be more expensive, but it is required to keep a business like Pentax alive. The K-7 is a great stepping stone & demonstration of what they're capable of offering the photographic community. Pentax has decades of film camera expertise to draw upon. They simply have never been an electronics leader - which is what you must become or acquire to compete in the digital imaging world. The fact that they've finally jumped into the game with the *ist series and have advanced to the K20 and K-7 leads me to believe they're in the game to stay - and I hope they continue their efforts.

[thibs]

I personally would not buy a "5.2fps" camera if I could only get near those speeds shooting something static.

Not any camera manufacturer will give you an FPS spec taking into account FPS.
Following the same rule, you shoudn't have bought any Pentax DSLR at all, ever.

[pingflood]

Not any camera manufacturer will give you an FPS spec taking into account FPS.
Following the same rule, you shoudn't have bought any Pentax DSLR at all, ever.

Regardless of what you're saying, reality is that I get near or at max fps on a 50D when tracking a fast moving target. If that's 6.05 fps or 6.12 fps instead of the stated 6.3 it really doesn't make a difference except on paper.

And I loved my Pentax gear but it fell short on AF performance, so while I did buy one, I no longer own it...

[alexfoto]

It's interesting to me that people are calling the Sony A850 an affordable full frame option.
....

If the start price will be 1500-1600 euro will be cost a lot less then the FF Canon and Nikon that are available for 2000 euro.

Pentax can still get a lot of mileage out of the K-7 by lowering its price over this time, but they should also be planning to release a full frame flagship in the same vein as the K-7 within that time frame, and that means starting to develop the lenses to be available with that camera upon its release.

For the moment Pentax hasn't new lens FF so i think is quite improbable.

The other option would be for Pentax to fully embrace the APS-C sensor like Olympus and Panasonic have with the 4/3 format. In this case, they should release more unique high quality lenses like .... They should also circle the wagons and try to dominate the $1200 and below DSLR camera market -- not necessarily in sales, but in the superiority of their products for the price they offer.

I think the k7d has a good AF but it isn't comparable with the Nikon D300 (the best AF on the aps-c market) unfortunately use a similar AF cost a lot.

But for price/performance if Pentax could develop product with cost even more low and sell the new lens with better price I think could increment his market share.

The recent rise in prices of Pentax lenses, which took place in all the world, I think was a really bad idea, especially in a time of crisis.

Sincerely i can't effort similar expensive so i cover my needs using manual lenses, certainly the absence of AF some times is annoying but sometimes it's necessary some compromise. :ugh:

Given the numerous opinions here i think some of you should see this Kodak interview:
Kodak sensors

It was (as always) only a matter of time before a (any) discussion is thrown into derision.

Radu

The other option would be for Pentax to fully embrace the APS-C sensor like Olympus and Panasonic have with the 4/3 format. In this case, they should release more unique high quality lenses like the DA* 60-250 that don't have a full frame (old film) equivalent.

Why should they drop Full Frame equivalent lenses when they don't need to? There's the possibility that Samsung may make a FF camera and keep the K-mount. Film SLRs are still made by some manufacturers (Voigtlander for example). They would also close the door on themselves making a FF camera if they no longer have traditional focal length lenses.

[ytterbium]

But this would allow for a more coherent system that has been though trough better. No overlapping or similar focal lengths, more quality/price differentiation cheap and average quality "cheaps", more pricey but better "pro's" (Some exclusively digital cheap plasticity -dark zooms, 28/2.8, 55/2..1.8, 135/3.5's; expensive F2..1.4 Limited's).

It was never clear to me what lenses they are actually manufacturing anyway.
Sometimes it feels that they have something like 5 lens production lines which are used in periodic runs to make all their lens selection. If they have such flexible production scheme i believe they have no problem to do a full frame lens run on some line when needed, especially if it has been done already.
Or else they have huge stock, what i doubt because it always gives losses.

Now you've started to convince me that expecting full frame from possible manufacturing point of view isn't so unreasonable. If it only made more sense from Sales POV.

What do you think is more important - having a good (lets say everything else the same as k-7, priced as 5D) full frame, or outstanding APS-C (unique or better features than 40d, d300, unquestionable performance, good price) or something completely else (like better service coverage, more advertisements or real life availability).

No matter what, one of these days, they all will be full frames. So we might as well start buying FA limiteds. I am for one going to buy all three now. When Pentax finally comes out with full frame DSLR a few years from now, FA ltds will cost even more.

[ytterbium]

No matter what, one of these days, they all will be full frames. So we might as well start buying FA limiteds. I am for one going to buy all three now. When Pentax finally comes out with full frame DSLR a few years from now, FA ltds will cost even more.

That actually one thing what i'm afraid of. They've already increased the price several times without any visible upgrades (although i don't see anything to upgrade in something like 31Ltd), and the release of FF may make another lens price jump. Both from increased demand and probably because of new bodies and simple DFA title.
I believe there will never be an affordable FA 50/1.4 equivalent again.

[rparmar]

No matter what, one of these days, they all will be full frames.

Yes, and all the point'n'shoot cameras will be full frame as well.

So we might as well start buying FA limiteds. I am for one going to buy all three now.

Buy them because they are great lenses now. Not for any fanciful hope for the future. Why set yourself up for disappointment?

[Clarkey]

To be quite honest, if Pentax can make a FF-like finder, I don't care much if the format is APS-C: it's actually kind of convenient for a lot of my purposes to have that bit more DOF flexibility in lower light. (APS-C happens to be darn handy for me: I like my FOV a bit tighter than most folks for any given purpose: this means that I can have speed and my favorite FOV in a smaller, lighter, and cheaper-for-quality lens. I'm sure on the other hand that the wider you like things, the more you would want FF. )

I think Pentax may as well wait till after another top-of-the-line APS-C model or so, before going full frame. They may as well get it just right when they enter that niche.

You know, you have a (off the topic, but interesting) point here. Have you looked through an E-3 viewfinder? I'm not saying it is film days, but if they can make the finder that big off 4/3's then they can sure as heck make one for the larger (APS) format.
To me this, the aforementioned manual aperture sensor, and 14-bit (or more!) depth would make a big deal of difference to APS-C usability and results.
Point being, to compete with the larger (FF) format, there are a number of things that still may be done.

[Samsungian]

E-3 are impressive dslrs

I do wander into Olympus 4/3 forums due to some old OM System glass I have from time to time. Theres alot of users enjoying E-3. In some ways it specs better than K-7 except it has no HD video. An HD spec alot of shooters say they don't even want anyhow.

One thing I notice when visiting Olympus forums is theres never Threads like:

Will olympus do under, or get sold off? or Will olympus ever make a full frame OM type system again?

E-3 is $1249 at B&H :


Olympus | E-3 SLR Digital Camera (Camera Body) | 262010 | B&H

[schmik]

Who knows if they will ever make a FF???

Food for thought.
The rumor is that the new canon will be 1.6 crop factor and 18MP.
If that is true then we certainly have not squeezed all we can out of APS-C. Sure, there is a noise consideration but 18MP downsampled to 10MB? Now that won't be real noisey and still have enough room for a crop.

Can you really think like a new DSLR buyer? Can you really forget everthing that you already know?
Do they know what APS.C and FF is? Does 14MP sound like enough?

Are cameras enough like PCs? PCs seem to have reached a point where the Ghz and RAM races have slowed down. A PC is seen as good if it has enough to surf the web and place full screen video. I think that APS.C is enough in cameras. Sure... one day the technology will be there to take shot with a 28mm lense of a human subject 50m away and crop in on their nasal hair but do we need it?

Pics will be printed at A3 or viewed on a 50(ish) inch TV/LCD by 95% of users. Do they need FF?

The DR factor has been mentioned and ignored. I agree that this is the next thing that they should focus on. Did pentax realise theis by including the HDR mode or was it just a gimmick?
More DR, higher FPS, video, bigger finder, better sealing, better price, better internal software...... that's my guess about the future.

mike