[orangezorki]

If I think objectively, Pentax are skating on thin ice if they release a FF body. I may have not spent much on their system, but it's more than any other system by a large amount - K10, Kx, Kit lenses, Samsung 50-200, Sigma 105mm Macro, 31mm Limited, plus old MF lenses. They already have the APS cameras and the 645D, and while there is an order of magnitude difference in their prices, with the Q - how many systems can one relatively small manufacturer support? Also, look at how many of their lenses support FF - not a lot, and mainly pricey (but good value) primes. That does not a system make.

Their real mistake, IMO, is the Q. Don't get me wrong, it is a lovely item, but the small sensor is physically incapable of delivering the quality that the brand should offer for the price. I feel that in time it will be proved to be a failure, albeit a glorious one in the same vein of the auto 110.

I might be proved wrong, but even if Ricoh can muster the huge funds required for a FF camera and the required assault of FF zooms at launch, they will still piss off most of the APS-C owners. The only thing that would remedy this is if we discover that their most recent releases for APS actually cover the FF sensor.

Of course, the market as a whole does not always think objectively, so we may be here in a years time celebrating the success of the K FF Digital and Q!

David

[eddie1960]

Why if they continue to support APSC with new models and high quality ones like the K5 would having a FF option Piss off apsc owners? Particularly if they implement a masking system like Nikon that lets you make the transition if you want.
I would understand anger if they scrapped APSC K mount and launch a FF line and left you high and dry but thata isn't likely.

Reality is there are a number4 of people clamoring for FF. the other 3 DSLR makers all offer both to their customers and Ricoh wants to compete and grow the line. FF is a given eventually. APSC disappearing from the DSLR line may also happen 10 years fromnow where it will be relegated to MILC (where once again they will likely find a way of supporting K lenses)
Any other path is commercial suicide

The Q was a specialty Item that while marketed worldwide was really designed with the Asian market in mind (and it did well there and has sold elsewhere) The 645 exists as a flagship and supports the existing pro market from film days at a price in line with medium format market. the FF is the missing Gap.

[orangezorki]

I completely see what you mean, but I'm just saying that offering compacts, Q, APS, FF and 645 just seems like a great deal for a relatively small company to do. The Q is too new to scrap, and the 645 is likely too profitable even at low volumes, as well as being a flagship. If someone at PRIC decides that three lines is the most they can handle, when a FF comes out, the APS is in the firing line. With so many APS lenses out there, having to upgrade most lenses as well as the body will lead to a great deal of switchers, or skint Pentaxians.

David

[mattdm]

Why if they continue to support APSC with new models and high quality ones like the K5 would having a FF option Piss off apsc owners?

Because it's unlikely they would. And they'd be more tempted to artificially withhold software features from the mid-range models to encourage more spending on the higher ones — something Canon and Nikon users are familiar with.

[jsherman999]

Because it's unlikely they would. And they'd be more tempted to artificially withhold software features from the mid-range models to encourage more spending on the higher ones — something Canon and Nikon users are familiar with.

I doubt the K5-level aps-c DSLR would lose any features, though, in that scenario. The 7D and D300s are incredible, feature-rich top-end aps-c DSLRs.

Since Pentax probably wouldn't have an FF offering at the 1DS / D4 level (a $5000 - $8000 body,) it could unload all the 'very top' features, AF, etc at the K1 (5DII/D700) level, something that might give it a slight advantage over CaNikon there.

As far as the lenses go, it's hard to imagine that many aps-c shooters wouldn't welcome a new, 3-lens-per-year lens roadmap, with exciting new K-mount lenses that work perfectly well on their aps-c bodies...

[Quicksand]

As far as the lenses go, it's hard to imagine that many aps-c shooters wouldn't welcome a new, 3-lens-per-year lens roadmap, with exciting new K-mount lenses that work perfectly well on their aps-c bodies...

Sure, why not three more lenses per year that I can't afford!

Let's start with DFA Limited WR, like the 100 macro.

[Class A]

that's not how it works a TC won't give a bigger image circle than the original lens has.

That's exactly how a TC works. It enlarges the image circle and the magnification is a byproduct (or vice versa).

Auto-crop and TC effectively achieve the same APS-C to FF conversion.

[builttospill]

I completely see what you mean, but I'm just saying that offering compacts, Q, APS, FF and 645 just seems like a great deal for a relatively small company to do.

I don't think it would be a problem at all, especially since Pentax used to offer more sizes in the past. Granted they aren't as big as they used to be, but even not that long ago they had the Auto 110 (and the entire 110 system), p&s cameras, 35mm cameras (plus the entire LX system for years), the 645 and the 67.

Why couldn't they add a FF system? They have most the developments completed already (MZ-D, K-1), they'd just need to update a few things and they've got the K2-D or the LX-D.

[drougge]

That's exactly how a TC works. It enlarges the image circle and the magnification is a byproduct (or vice versa).

Auto-crop and TC effectively achieve the same APS-C to FF conversion.

The good thing about a TC is you get to use the whole viewfinder, and they don't have to make the sensor extra high resolution just to please the people who want lots of pixels with APS-C lenses.

But of course they have to offer the cropping option too, at least unless they want to include the TC with the camera.

[DaveBlack]

It would be nice to have a FF Pentax in the line-up along with a series of DFA* lenses to go with it. It will give me something to dream about buying in the future. I can not even dream about buying the 645D. My only concern is Pentax leaving the APS-C market. The K-5 class of camera has a few advantages over the FF camera. These advantages are the size, weight and cost of both the camera and the lenses.

If Pentax did come out with a FF camera I will most likely buy the new DFA* lenses that will be released with the camera. I would really enjoy using DFA*12-24, DFA*24-70, DFA*70-200 and DFA*200-400 lenses with my K-5 camera along with the FA Limited lenses I already own. Re-releasing all the FA* lenses with modern coatings and ring-motors would be really great. After getting all those wonderful FF lenses I might consider buying a FF camera.

Dave

[ElJamoquio]

You must understand, image quality isn't the main concern of the professional photographer, it is the ONLY concern.

Taken to that extreme, though, all landscape photographers would shoot 645D... or would ditch digital and go 8x10 large format.

[Clavius]

As far as the lenses go, it's hard to imagine that many aps-c shooters wouldn't welcome a new, 3-lens-per-year lens roadmap, with exciting new K-mount lenses that work perfectly well on their aps-c bodies...

Whoa! That would be awesome. Like limited's with WR and DC motors... Or long tele's... and... and...

[Sinister]

Whoa! That would be awesome. Like limited's with WR and DC motors... Or long tele's... and... and...

DC and WR for every lense *wahoooo*

[TZH]

I hope to get a F 1.7 AF TC more reasonable price , so I can play my manual focus lens with "AF" , wahoooo

[eddie1960]

I hope to get a F 1.7 AF TC more reasonable price , so I can play my manual focus lens with "AF" , wahoooo

I'll add the missing smiley for you