[SteveM]

Can someone with more technical knowledge than me explain why these lenses would work on these Canon FF cameras but not on a Pentax version? Assuming, of course, that legacy glass will be accepted on a full frame Pentax camera should it ever materialize.

This camera might not be as kind to lens flaws as an APS-C sensor camera would be (the edge softness of the FA*24 f/2 wide open might be worse on FF for example) but the lenses would still *work* would they not?

I think it'll work fine on FF....perhaps not optimal (presuming they don't release a new mount with FF). Some might argue that the DA70 is better on APS-C than the FA77 or SMCT/K85 and perhaps it is....but I like the look of the pics from the 85 so while it might be "better"...I won't be buying it.

Pentax needs to create a reason to buy new lenses....there are too many good legacy lenses around. They used to sell 110, K or M42, 645 and 67.... Now they basically sell DAs...and a few FAs/DFAs. DFA* or DFA ltd might be a good move...

Re a FF body.....if the 645d is really $4K (I don't know that to be true...just saw someone else list it in a post), that might make it difficult for FF unless FF is around the 2K mark. If the 645 is 4K, I might skip FF, sell some of my 35mm and move to that format....

[Pentaxor]

I think it'll work fine on FF....perhaps not optimal (presuming they don't release a new mount with FF). Some might argue that the DA70 is better on APS-C than the FA77 or SMCT/K85 and perhaps it is....but I like the look of the pics from the 85 so while it might be "better"...I won't be buying it.

Pentax needs to create a reason to buy new lenses....there are too many good legacy lenses around. They used to sell 110, K or M42, 645 and 67.... Now they basically sell DAs...and a few FAs/DFAs. DFA* or DFA ltd might be a good move...

Re a FF body.....if the 645d is really $4K (I don't know that to be true...just saw someone else list it in a post), that might make it difficult for FF unless FF is around the 2K mark. If the 645 is 4K, I might skip FF, sell some of my 35mm and move to that format....

well the DA Ltds perform extremely good on the K-7, better than their FA LTD counterparts. I'm also surprised that some of the FA and non-autofocus Pentax lenses that are deemed to have excellent resolution perform just as good as the DA LTDs. I'm just puzzled as well why the 77 for example doesn't perform at par with the 70. perhaps it's because of the Prime II sensor? whatever problem that Pentax is encountering right now as to their FF experiment, it is related to the sensor. they need something that would negate that effect.

with regards to the 645D, well that's a heavy piece of equipment. I'll just contend myself with 645 lenses (w/ adapter) mounted on an APS-C camera.

[Angevinn]

Re a FF body.....if the 645d is really $4K (I don't know that to be true...just saw someone else list it in a post), that might make it difficult for FF unless FF is around the 2K mark. If the 645 is 4K, I might skip FF, sell some of my 35mm and move to that format....

I used to shoot Medium format, I had a chrome Hasselblad 500CM and a couple lenses. It was a beautiful camera and took stunning photos. Medium format is a much larger format and more cumbersome to handle than 35mm. APS-C and FF DSLR's are way more versatile, have a lot more variety in lenses and features (like faster shutter speeds) than medium format. I can walk around all day with a FF or APS-C camera around my neck and a few lenses. Not so with Medium format. Plus, having a medium format digital camera will make some pretty large files. My K20D makes 16mb RAW files, a medium format file could easily make a 100mb RAW file. Files that large will take a lot of processing power to handle on a computer and take up a lot of space.

Medium format has its place but it's not for everyone. I'm hoping for a FF Pentax DSLR in the future. To me a FF DSLR is the best compromise between sensor size, versatility and overall performance. The FF Pentax DSLR is rumored to be priced at $1500-$1600.00. Check some of Ogl's older posts.

[Ash]

A Pentax FF at $1500 seems a little underestimated given their own flagship APS-C cams were around that price when they were released. But hey, I'd jump in if that were to be the price...

[SteveM]

I used to shoot Medium format, I had a chrome Hasselblad 500CM and a couple lenses. It was a beautiful camera and took stunning photos. Medium format is a much larger format and more cumbersome to handle than 35mm. APS-C and FF DSLR's are way more versatile, have a lot more variety in lenses and features (like faster shutter speeds) than medium format. I can walk around all day with a FF or APS-C camera around my neck and a few lenses. Not so with Medium format. Plus, having a medium format digital camera will make some pretty large files. My K20D makes 16mb RAW files, a medium format file could easily make a 100mb RAW file. Files that large will take a lot of processing power to handle on a computer and take up a lot of space.

Medium format has its place but it's not for everyone. I'm hoping for a FF Pentax DSLR in the future. To me a FF DSLR is the best compromise between sensor size, versatility and overall performance. The FF Pentax DSLR is rumored to be priced at $1500-$1600.00. Check some of Ogl's older posts.

I agree with you that it isn't for everyone and I would probably want to keep one 35mm body. I lug my 67II around and still find it has a 3D quality that I can't seem to get out of digital. (of course I lose that quality as soon as I try to scan it for posting). I just wish I could use my 67 lenses on the 645d.....

I read a book last year (now I can't remember it's name) that sold me on digital MF. The guy uses a Mamiya with a digital back and produces amazing pictures (holds filters on his cameras with duct tape...someone will remember the book I'm sure). Yes..60MP will create huge files....but disk is cheap. We'll have to wait to see how feasible the 645d ends up being.

I still like the idea of FF....hopefully it comes out as rumoured....

[Pentaxor]

a medium format file could easily make a 100mb RAW file. Files that large will take a lot of processing power to handle on a computer and take up a lot of space.

true. that would mean you need to spend on buying a new system which may cost at around 800 - 1700 bucks. the cheapest one would be a Quad Core 2, and the expensive one is an i7 processor.

[ewalk]

I'd be happy with a Pentax FF at or around $2000, just like the A850 from Sony (even with 3FPS...I don't need machine gun speed )

[ryan s]

Can someone with more technical knowledge than me explain why these lenses would work on these Canon FF cameras but not on a Pentax version? Assuming, of course, that legacy glass will be accepted on a full frame Pentax camera should it ever materialize.

This camera might not be as kind to lens flaws as an APS-C sensor camera would be (the edge softness of the FA*24 f/2 wide open might be worse on FF for example) but the lenses would still *work* would they not?

...since people would rather complain about faults than use the lenses.

I mean...look at all the F*, FA*, and FA Ltd lenses people were using in the "film days"...sure, no lens is perfect...but look at all the people using them these days.

Blame the pixel peepers and testers.

So...Just to speculate further. Why not aim to be the best in APS-C?
Let Canon and Nikon have the glory for FF. Isnt FF a rather small part of the total camera market?

If Pentax would aim to be the best in what they already do, wouldnt that be sufficient? That would give us even better lenses and cameras.

I am new to Pentax and was drawn to it because it feels special and different from the rest. You all know what i mean with what makes Pentax special Everything!!!!

Well anyway. If some of you realy want FF from Pentax, then I certainly wont take that from you. As long as Pentax doesnt divert atention from the parts of their industry that needs atention.

...

There are definitely lots of thing that deserve Pentax's attention, like SDM development, P-TTL consistency (according to many), more lenses in the long range and fast APS-C normal prime, and I would put most of these ahead of FF development.

OTOH, it's still feasible to make FF a reasonably high priority given the superior image quality, broader FOV and noise control you can gain from it (caveat: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-dslr-discussion/71896-low-noise-be...uals-zero.html), and that it can be used with old lenses, a legacy that Pentax prides itself with.

Fully agreed.

"Full Frame" and "HD" are the buzzwords these days, like "hybrid" and "green." If you don't have something with those terms, you're not "as good as" those who do.

I am also not that person but this may help. They would work okay, but just as Pentax sells DA for digital and FA for film, they would need to come up with a line designed for FF for those who demand the higher quality of a larger sensor. The biggest reason is DA lenses have more coatings to work with the quirks of a smaller (APS-C) digital sensor. If you stuck an FA or older legacy lens on a digital camera, whether it's APS-C or FF, the idea is you may have more CA and flare, etc. because they weren't designed for digital. These flaws would be even more apparent on a FF camera.

If I forked over the cash for a FF, I'd expect nothing less than perfect quality; and Pentax knows this.

First paragraph...the DA lenses have a digital coating to prevent sensor flare (the old Tamron 90 macro produces this around f/5.6 and smaller when not in the macro focusing area)...doesn't matter the sensor size. The sensor has a shiny piece of glass in front of it...film's emulsion is an almost-matte surface.

Soooooooo that last part...is your current camera perfect? How can you use a camera that's less than perfect??? We've been down this road thousands of times. A trade-off here...a benefit there...

You'll be waiting a long, long time for the perfect camera...

[ogl]

I don't plan to buy Pentax FF camera with CMOS sensor SONY or Samsung and with 20 MP + and higher. Even for $1500.

[fourmiX]

Interesting to see that many people had access to this VIP part. Cute girls, weren't they?

Yes, could be interesting to call Jack Bauer to know how ?

[MikePerham]

Here's one take on that question I found by searching Google: Full frame Vs. APS-C Steff’s Journal of Insanity

Well, the guy is obviously a Canon shooter ...states that the APS-C is a 1.6 crop as if all APS-C cameras were 1.6 crop.

[ryan s]

I don't plan to buy Pentax FF camera with CMOS sensor SONY or Samsung and with 20 MP + and higher. Even for $1500.

That's too bad, you'd be missing out.

Can't say I'm surprised to hear you say that

[ChainbreakR]

That's too bad, you'd be missing out.

Can't say I'm surprised to hear you say that

Video is my make or break. A CCD ff sensor w/ video would change lives!

[lol101]

I agree that people take Ned Bunnell's statements a little bit too far. I think his argument should be more read in the spirit of "Well, we know our lenses -- some old, some new and designed for crop sensor format -- already work well on Camera A, but they might not do so well on more demanding full frame Camera B, and some of them won't work well at all. Therefore, isn't Camera A the smarter choice?"

And until Pentax/Hoya commits to coming out with new FF lenses, it's sort of hard to disagree with him on this point. Although personally I would love it if Pentax bought the Nikon D700 sensor, shoved it in the K-7 body, and let people try all their legacy glass out on it. But that, among many reasons, is why I am not in charge of an international camera company

For discussion purposes, here's an oldy but goodie thread from a German discussion forum where someone converted their FA31 to work on the 5D Mark II:

DigitalFotoNetz.de :: Thema anzeigen - Pentax FA 1,8/31 an Canon 5D II

Looks like pretty decent results for a mount and camera it wasn't designed to work with.

Also, here's the FA31 on a Canon 5d (not as much resolution, i know)

???: ???? Pentax FA 31 LE & Canon EOS 5D

He also converted the FA43:

???: ???? Pentax FA 43/1.9 Limited

And the FA77:

???: ???? Pentax FA 77/1.8 Limited

Can someone with more technical knowledge than me explain why these lenses would work on these Canon FF cameras but not on a Pentax version? Assuming, of course, that legacy glass will be accepted on a full frame Pentax camera should it ever materialize.

This camera might not be as kind to lens flaws as an APS-C sensor camera would be (the edge softness of the FA*24 f/2 wide open might be worse on FF for example) but the lenses would still *work* would they not?

Of course great FF lenses from the film days would work just fine on a Pentax FF!!

I routinely use M42 Taks on a 5D with great results and these are not the best Pentax ever produced.

Of course, some issues would arise like vignetting wide open or some possible CA but nothing dramatic...

The 24f2 was always a fuzzy lens in the corners wide open... digital FF won't change that.

But still, these are lenses of the past, not produced anymore by Pentax so Pentax would still need to launch a new FF lineup, even if some designs are "digital optimized" versions of older ones. The financial effort would remain quite large.


It's all a question of economics. There is no technical real questions about the feasibility of a FF (when I hear that Pentax could be turned off FF because they woudln't be able to make SR works, I just have to ask myself: what's the use of SR if you get ISO 12800 as clean as K-7's ISO 1600?).

[MikePerham]

It's all a question of economics. There is no technical real questions about the feasibility of a FF (when I hear that Pentax could be turned off FF because they woudln't be able to make SR works, I just have to ask myself: what's the use of SR if you get ISO 12800 as clean as K-7's ISO 1600?).

Your right ...it is a question of economics. All the chatter about FF doesn't change the fact that FF is a relatively small segment of the DSLR market and much of that is with PJ and pro photographers with whom Nikon and Canon are well entrenched brand choices and therefor have a natural market for their FF camera models.

The way I read the comments of such folks as Ned Bunnell and other Japanese Pentax executives is that their R&D division has worked with FF but don't expect to see one anytime soon, if at all. FF would have to go mainstream for Pentax to enter the market and have their FF cameras become economically viable. And I don't see that happening, I think APS-C will continue to dominate the marketplace. From what I read on the various forums, Sony's attempt to garner a share of the FF market hasn't met with much success, and Sony have deep pockets.