[Emacs]

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/non-pentax-cameras-canon-nikon-etc/164147...ically-5n.html

BTW, read what nex-5n owners are saying: nex-5n is better than K-x (and thus K-r for sure). Pentax is losing ground. They won't survive without FF introduction.

[jsherman999]

Aristophanes, I'll just note that the sensor used in the D700 makes most lenses I put on it look better, not worse, than they do on DX sensors.

Same exact finding here.

[Rondec]

I think older wide angle lenses will likely be the weakest on full frame. FA limiteds IMO will be generally fine and who really cares if the corners are a little weak?

I don't know that coatings have changed much if at all since the FA limiteds came out.

[jsherman999]

Ken Rockwell's Photography Updates

.

Quoting Ken "I'll say literally anything for hits" Rockwell now.

Shark Jump moment?.


.

---

Last edited by jsherman999; 11-02-2011 at 11:49 AM.

[Aristophanes]

The reality is lenses performs better on FF.

Of course 35mm lenses are designed for 135 sensors.

I think what Ned was saying is that it's not simply a matter of re-starting film lens assembly lines for FF digital bodies just because 135 is a dimension. Leica is in the midst of re-doing their entire lens line-up because of (admittedly minor, but noticeable) discrepancies. Nikon and Canon have both revamped their line-ups. Pentax will be no different, and that adds substantial cost that must be recouped through sales. For some optics there will need to be a total re-design, and for some it may be minor. Since an FF system will live and die by its top-end zooms, that's where most of the work will be, but altering assembly and manufacturing systems for a lens array will take a lot of time. These are mostly hand-assembled products.

As the price goes up, so do the stakes. The last thing Pentax will want is for a poor review on photozone or elsewhere of lens performance on an FF sensor nixing 5% of sales. And that happens. People who spend $3,000 on a camera body will be very, very fussy about protecting their investment.

Call Ned a shill for Hoya or whatever, what other domestic president of a camera company speaks his mind as a promotion of his brand? We're lucky. Clearly he made an executive decision to clear the air and improve the brand by simply stating basic engineering truths as they've been relayed to him. Since this is what other brands have had to do, so far his comments have played out.

There are 3 sayings about Pentax FF that probably make Pentax marketing cringe:

1) I have no intention of buying new Pentax glass. I prefer my old manual focus lenses on FF.

2) Although I would like FF, it will be too expensive for me.

3) APS-C is good enough IQ for the way I display my images.

Pentax not only has to see hunger for a $3,000 FF body. It has to see hunger for the glass as well or the revenues cannot justify themselves.

[Aristophanes]

Aristophanes has officially jumped the shark.

Making me Fonzie?

Ayyyyyyy........

[Winder]

Resolution is just one of the many variables of a lens. And I consider resolution the least important of them all. It may be important for some, but I care more for an esthetically pleasing image. People should stop with pixel peeping IMHO.

While I wont argue that there are many factors that determine what makes a good lens and some of them are subjective. I would place resolution pretty high on my list. A soft lens is of very little use to me except for special applications. I want the flexibility to compose the shot with the subject off center and not have to worry about softness, distortion, CA, or light fall off. All of these things become more prevalent when you move to a FF sensor. Will it be an issue with all old lenses? No, but it will with the majority. Lenses like the FA* 85mm and the A* 135mm will probably still produce excellent results because those focal lengths are easier to design for. Wide glass which is what a lot of people want FF for will probably have the most trouble.

For people who don't use anything but the center of the frame the old glass will work great. Look at M4/3. That system does really well with legacy glass.

[jsherman999]

Making me Fonzie?

Ayyyyyyy........

I amended that afterwards to ask if the thread had jumped the shark and to not make it seem like a personal attack. No-one wants to be shark-jump-moment Fonzie (except maybe Ken Rockwell.)

[jsherman999]

Of course 35mm lenses are designed for 135 sensors.

...Leica is in the midst of re-doing their entire lens line-up because of (admittedly minor, but noticeable) discrepancies. Nikon and Canon have both revamped their line-ups. .

These companies sell lenses. Of course it's in their interest to try to re-sell the same lenses to the same guys, if possible.

[MrPetkus]

I like Pentax cameras - I bought the K5 within a few weeks of it hitting the shelves - had several earlier models, too. The thought of a FF Pentax is tantalizing; I'm sure I'd want to buy one. But $3k is different from $1.6k.
If I'm going to spend >=$2.5k on a camera body I want it to have fabulous AF and a fast processor. These are 2 areas where Pentax needs improvement. An updated flash system would be nice, too. I'd like to see these domains addressed and Pentax has to if they want to compete against Canikon. They can't just match what's out there now either - Pentax has to match the next generation (D800, 5DKIII).

Other problems:
New lenses. Pentax hasn't released a pro-grade new lens or even a roadmap in years. Losing the crop factor means they'll need new telephoto lenses - 300/4 is the best they currently have. Resurrecting old FA lenses isn't competitive given all the great redesigns from both Canon and Nikon in recent years.

645D is a prestige, niche camera and that's all it'll ever be. Some folks mention the 645D as if it were a viable upgrade from APS-C or a replacement for current FFs. The 645D is a specialized boutique camera designed for landscapes, product shots, and glamour - it's awesome at that. I've been lucky enough to play with one recently while on a trip. It's big, heavy, and really SLOW. It essentially uses the same AF and processor as the K5 except it's dealing with 40MP files. The camera would be totally inadequate for modern journalism, sports -- heck, it would suck even for weddings. Pentax is making some money off the 645D - low volume, high price, and prestige - like a Dodge Viper.

APS-C sensors are much cheaper to make. We don't know exactly what Sony/Samsung has in the pipeline for FF but we do know that all the latest developments have been in APS-C design. The 16MP Sony Exmor sensor was a big upgrade to the market, bringing with it DR almost on par with the current crop of FF sensors. The new 24MP sensor, while noisy on the A77, may prove to be a winner on a traditional mirrored system (i.e., no pellicle). Samsung has the 20.3MP sensor ready to start shipping. There is nothing concrete to discuss regarding forthcoming FF sensors - has manufacturing/design improved enough to make them cost effective enough for a $2k camera?

Big viewfinder. The EVF on the Sony A77 gives a near FF view. I expect EVFs will continue to improve and evolve address most of the shortcomings of the smallish APS-C OVF.

[eddie1960]

the 645D is not expensive in the scheme of things. it's the cheapest (by a substantial margin) of any Medium Format camera, it has the best form function being easily usable hand held, it's the only weather sealed MF......
In reality it was a game changer in the medium format market and though it's sales definitely took something from the 2 big players (phase and hassy) it actually grew the market quite a bit.
Medium format was never a cheap market, but it is not just a prestige niche camera. It is a working tool for a lot of pro's who have the need and can recoup the cost in fees/sales. MF was never intended as a journalistic camera that was the place of 35mm (and now FF and apsc).
The biggest problem with 645d being touted as an upgrade is it's not mount compatible and it's application really has little to do with all the enthusiasts/low level pros. it has a specific use and it fills that area quite well. the only real issue i see is the lack of new lenses on the market for it, but in comparison to leica's s2 system the lenses are arriving with blistering speed (and some of the older designs are available new through japan).

As for EVF while some like it i've not tried one i liked and I pop in and look at new models as they come out on a regular basis. Nothing beats a proper FF large OVF yet and I would bet on that holding true for quite a few years yet (Truly for me nothing beats a big bright RF like the leica M3 had but that is truly a niche market )

[deadwolfbones]

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/non-pentax-cameras-canon-nikon-etc/164147...ically-5n.html

BTW, read what nex-5n owners are saying: nex-5n is better than K-x (and thus K-r for sure). Pentax is losing ground. They won't survive without FF introduction.

This isn't true at all in my experience, btw.

It may be a software problem, however. There's visible NR at base ISO.

[MrPetkus]

I agree but it's still a prestige/niche camera. It's the prestige product in the Pentax catalogue (low volume, high cost) and MF is a very small niche market.
My comments about the 645D are directed toward those who claim that the 645D is a sensible upgrade path for Pentax APS-C owners, which I've seen many times on the forum. For example, If you want FF get the 645 - it's even bigger. The 645D is not a versatile camera like, say, a D3s and it wasn't designed to be.

Sure, a real FF OVF is unrivaled now. But think of the quantum leap in EVF capability in just one generation between the Sony A55 and A77. An OVF is limited by the sensor size but an EVF can potentially offer view from a MF camera and larger on APS-C. It'll be a matter of time when EVFs outstrip OVFs or at least offer such a huge advantage the majority will want one. Not now, but in 2-3-5 years? Maybe.

Medium format was never a cheap market, but it is not just a prestige niche camera. It is a working tool for a lot of pro's who have the need and can recoup the cost in fees/sales. MF was never intended as a journalistic camera that was the place of 35mm (and now FF and apsc).
The biggest problem with 645d being touted as an upgrade is it's not mount compatible and it's application really has little to do with all the enthusiasts/low level pros. it has a specific use and it fills that area quite well. the only real issue i see is the lack of new lenses on the market for it, but in comparison to leica's s2 system the lenses are arriving with blistering speed (and some of the older designs are available new through japan).

[Aristophanes]

These companies sell lenses. Of course it's in their interest to try to re-sell the same lenses to the same guys, if possible.

And Pentax is somehow different?

It's not quite razors and razor blades, but it's pretty similar. You get 4 lenses and the company has you locked into a long-term customer experience. This will be no different with a Pentax FF DSLR.

[Aristophanes]

Big viewfinder. The EVF on the Sony A77 gives a near FF view. I expect EVFs will continue to improve and evolve address most of the shortcomings of the smallish APS-C OVF.

Sony's betting the farm on that concept for the mass market.

I suspect an OVF will be the standby for their FF flagship DSLR, however.

Prism = Prestige from now on. I cannot see a EVF dealing with low-light unless there is an IR overlay someday. But then you lose the 100% DR an OVF gives. An EVF will always have tradeoffs.