[wll]

A FF that you could switch to APS-C if you choose.

As an example, if your using an 100mm FF lens and switch to APS-C it becomes a 150mm. Of course it would have less megapixels and all the characteristics of a regular APS-C camera.

No other manufacturer has this I think, and it would be great for all us APS-C users.


wll

[jsherman999]

A FF that you could switch to APS-C if you choose.

As an example, if your using an 100mm FF lens and switch to APS-C it becomes a 150mm. Of course it would have less megapixels and all the characteristics of a regular APS-C camera.

No other manufacturer has this I think, and it would be great for all us APS-C users.


wll

Nikon has it, see earlier in the thread. Of course any modern FF camera will have it - and it is useful.

.

[rvannatta]

Maybe someone can help me with my confusion about the appeal of full frame. My assumption is that the future of digital photograph is to smaller sensors that can do everything today's full frame sensors can do, with corresponding reductions in the size and weight of good glass. As it is now I come back from birding with sore shoulders as a result of carrying my K5 and DA*300. Shouldn't I expect that in the next few years I'll be able to purchase a prosumer package from Pentax or someone that is smaller, lighter, and as good or better than what I'm using now? If the answer is yes, doesn't that mean that the appeal of full frame should be short-lived?

I tend to agree with you. Throughout the history of photography, the negatives
of the film based stuff got smaller with every generation. They started out making contact prints with the negative as large as the print and went smaller and smaller from there.

I wouldn't be surprised if the biggest selling camera isn't or soon will be an "iPhone". Why carry 10 lbs of extra equipment that won't fit in your pocket when you have an IPhone camera in your pocket?

I've read more than one place a prediction that that the Canikon folks were
going to be left at the alter soon because someone disruptive technolgy
in the form of a Mirrorless high quality camera would catch in the wind
and sail over the top of the mirror based SLR that we know andlove.

Whether it will actually happern or not, who knows.

the high end model is never the biggest seller, but there needs to be a high end model for the gee whiz buyers who others follow. I've thought that
Pentax needs about 3 models in the market, with the top end defined by
a camera that will adjust to what ever foot print the lens has, FF, APS-H, APS-C
etc., a middle market model--- similar to the K-5 Aps C only, and a mirrorless low end model which worked with the K mount lenses, but got the price down
by leaving out the mirror assembly.

If they 'get it right' the mirrorless model will be cheap and a big seller, and the upscale models will draw customers in and appeal to the upscale snobs and those a bit more serious about their picture taking.

The challenge that all camera makers have is to avoid being turned into an Iphone 'app'.

[ironlionzion]

Good point asahiflex. Another point people fail to realize is that in most companies, the high end models only serve as a tool to attract customers to their lower end models. This is true of almost any brand, and especially prominent in car companies. Car companies make losses developing their high end, low volume cars, but in doing so, attract buyers to their cheaper models. I'm sure pentax is making a lot more money off their point and shoots and K-r's than their 645D. I wouldn't be surprised if they haven't turned a profit on the 645D yet. As for people's strong opinions for what's "right" for Pentax, no one can know for sure. The people actually inside the company would have the best idea whether or not a full frame is right, and even then, every business move is a partial gamble. But personally, I'd buy a full frame the moment it came out!

[gtl]

Nikon has it, see earlier in the thread. Of course any modern FF camera will have it - and it is useful.

.

If I am not wrong, you can't mount APS-C canon glass on their FF cameras

[Karl Stevens]

Except for the DFA macros and the FA Limiteds, they haven't sold officially FF-capable glass for many, many years.

This is not true, unless you're claiming that the FA 50/1.4 is a macro or limited lens. (Or the FA-J 18-35 4.0-5.6.) I bought one of the last FA-J 75-300 4.5-5.8 new last summer, and while it's no longer available, 15 months is less than "many, many years".

Even if you claim was true, they'd still have the designs - is the manufacture of FF lenses really so much different than that of a DA-lens, or even the Q lenses?

[ironlionzion]

I tend to agree with you. Throughout the history of photography, the negatives of the film based stuff got smaller with every generation. They started out making contact prints with the negative as large as the print and went smaller and smaller from there. I wouldn't be surprised if the biggest selling camera isn't or soon will be an "iPhone". Why carry 10 lbs of extra equipment that won't fit in your pocket when you have an IPhone camera in your pocket?

Somewhat true. With smaller negatives and sensors there is usually a compromise in resolution. I have no doubt that the most popular camera isn't an SLR. But that doesn't mean that there will be no market for SLR's in the future! There will always be people who need/want the highest resolution possible. There are plenty of medium and full format photographers today still shooting for magazines. There are even people who shoot daguerreotypes that were invented in 1830! (which had excellent resolution, predated the contact negatives, and were smaller in size)

[gazonk]

This is not true, unless you're claiming that the FA 50/1.4 is a macro or limited lens. (Or the FA-J 18-35 4.0-5.6.) I bought one of the last FA-J 75-300 4.5-5.8 new last summer, and while it's no longer available, 15 months is less than "many, many years".

Even if you claim was true, they'd still have the designs - is the manufacture of FF lenses really so much different than that of a DA-lens, or even the Q lenses?

Right, forgot about the FA35 and FA50. And even the A50/1.2 - in Japan. I think they still sell one of the better zooms in Japan - but FA-J zooms? Do you really think they're relevant for digital FF?

But as you said, it may be possible to reuse a lot of older designs.

But still the fact remains that the loyal Pentax customers of recent years have a lot of crop-only glass...

[maxfield_photo]

Pentax needs about 3 models in the market, with the top end defined by a camera that will adjust to what ever foot print the lens has, FF, APS-H, APS-C

I'd like to see the option to choose the crop size that you want.

Sure, an auto select option should be the default, but maybe the old lens I have throws an acceptable FF circle, but I prefer the sharper corners and smaller file size of APS-H; boom, I can just dial it in. Maybe I'm using a DA lens, but want a different aspect ratio that I can select in post; boom, just set the sensor to full frame. Maybe I'm birding and I have a FA* 300mm f/2.8 *drool*, but that eagle is way off in the distance, and I don't need the whole frame, but a couple of extra FPS in burst mode would be nice to capture the moment he grabs that fish; boom, just set it to APS-C.

[adamfogerty]

[cynical mode]
It's interesting that this is the cause Adam decided to take up on behalf of his members.

As some of the replies have shown there are users here who aren't interested in FF.

Personally I'd have seen more value in a letter requesting a firmware update to the K-5 to add manual video controls and tethering.
[/cynical mode]

Still, kudos to Adam for building dialogue with Pentax and to them for responding.

(the other) Adam

[les3547]

Heck, I'd bet Voigtländer would resuscitate the SL II KA line.

Wishful thinking of course, but I'm with you . . . while we're at it, let's imagine Voigtländer would add 24mm and 300mm lenses to the line up.

[eddie1960]

Wrong on every account.
- We (I?) understand very well.
- There are only few lenses available - several more will have to be developed. e-bay is irrelevant, by the way.
- SR must be adapted for the larger sensor.
- A new body will have to be made (optionally weather sealed).
- Most likely a new (faster) image engine will be needed.
- R&D for things that doesn't exist can't be "done and paid for"

There may not be many currently marketed FF lenses but there is a large number of existing designs that would take little to bring to market


Really the things that are needed for a FF pro camera are also things needed in the enthusiast line of apsC as well
Faster better AF with more AF points
Faster image processing (prime 3 is probably already in development in any case)
Better Flash Control (and higher sync speed) along with flashes to support it
Better Video control with frame rate and resolution options equal to a 5dmkII or the pending Nikon

In reality all these features are needed in the apsc line as well, and aside from video the next gen 645D will need them as well. So whether FF is on the board or not they are likely already in development, FF adds another model to spread the R&D cost over

Really developing a FF is not a big stretch in time for Photokina in September. Personally i believe the upcoming Photokina will be the biggest launch year for Pentax in a long time as Ricoh seems to want to take the business to the next level and has the cash to do so, and the Bi Annual event is the big Photo Imaging event if you want to make a splash and disrupt Canikon and the rest this would be the time to do it, the intervening 11 months are for getting all your guns lined up and production ramped up

[jogiba]

Did anyone see this message?
It was posted in the ricoh website....

Some folks worry about missing K5 in the picture - afraid that Ricoh will discontinue the K-mount but keep 645D mount and Q-mount...
Can Ricoh assure K-mount will be continue? FF will be great but I am grateful enough if APS-C line with K-mount will continue to come. =)




The link to this pic is here: PENTAX RICOH IMAGING COMPANY, LTD. / What makes a great photograph? | RICOH

Out of the 25 million Pentax 645D, K and Q mount lenses out there 99.999999% are K mount so you have to be brain dead to think Ricoh will discontinue the K-mount after paying millions to get it.

[Chex]

Having a K-5, I definitely am looking for an upgrade path down the road, and as much as a K-3 would be nice, I would much prefer a FF option without having to go Canikon..
As for lenses, all if their designs are there, they would simply need to have different glass coatings for digital.. isn't that what DFA lenses are? Pentax can easily revamp their old lineup of FF lenses.

[NaClH2O]

Perhaps you feel the Q was money better spent?

People don't seem to understand, there is very little to "develop" in creating a FF body. The lenses already exist, the mount already exists, the technologies like SR and weather sealing already exist, the image engine already exists. The R&D is done and paid for. Now look at the Q, it basically had to be built from scratch from the ground up with the exception of the software, lenses and all.

But I agree, better AF and better flash options are sorely needed (I don't know about, nor do I care about video, but I'll take your word for it) What better place to debut these new innovations than a new professional model? Those features could also trickle down into the K-5's successor.

Also full frame glass means better pictures for every K mount camera, regardless of sensor size. A wider image circle means sharper corners, less CA, less vignetting, and faster AF acquisition for APS-C users. Pentax should have never gotten away from the 35mm image circle.

No I think the Q was a waste of resources for the exact same reasons.
And as others have said there will need to be considerable R&D work for a FF camera. First of all an SR that works on ASP-C sensor will be woefully inadequate for the bigger sensor. Then you will need to redesign chasis and body. And what about lenses? I'm sorry but the three FA ltd's, the DFA Macros and the FA 50 won't quite cut it. People who spend upwards of $2500 (or more probably) will want some professional grade zooms, or are you expecting them to settle for the FA-J 75-300?!!!

NaCl(I don't consider new SR, new chasis, new body and new lenses to be negligable R&D)H2O