[jsherman999]

As amazing as a 50-135 f/2 would be, looking at the size and cost of the Oylmpus 14-35 f/2, there would be almost no benefit in developing these lenses except for people laden with money or pros, who will most likely just buy a FF system and get cheaper lenses that do the same thing. You could buy a D700 for the cost of that lens. Let's not even think about the cost of a 50-135 f/2

We can dream though...

+1

Being able to use less-expensive lenses at expensive-feeling FOV/DOF combos (in terms of what we could shoot in aps-c) is one of the draws of FF.

My Tamron 28-75 f/2.8 on the D700 is equivalent to a 18-50 f/1.8 on aps-c. It cost $300, and as we know, is extremely sharp. My $110 50 1.8 is a 35 f/1.2 (try to price one of those,), my 20mm f/2.8D is a 13mm f/1.8, 24mm f/2.8 Sigma SW II ($77, ebay) is a 16mm f/1.8, etc.

Aps-c catches up at around 200mm and surpasses the cost/benefit of FF for longer FLs in good light, though.


.

---

Last edited by jsherman999; 12-06-2011 at 07:49 AM.

[oppositz]

For a long time I obsessed over Full Frame. However, do I really need it? I carry my aging K10D everywhere with me. Hiking in the mountains, in my airplane and, rarely do I get into my car without it.
A while back on a hike in the High Peaks of New York I slipped and fell. Yes I managed to keep my camera from hitting the ground, at the expense of my elbows (which are still sore). It made me realize that it is only a matter of time before something disastrous occurs. Do I really want to be carrying $5,000 worth of camera and lens around?

I do want the lower noise and greater depth of field. It would be wonderful to go back to the days where I could walk around with my 50/1.4 and not have the field of view so narrow.

After all this time I guess my big complaint is not knowing what Rocoh/Pentax is planning for the future. I'm not talking the secret specs of future camera, only the general plan for camera formats. It seems all other manufacturers have made this clear. If I knew FF was in the future for Pentax I could plan accordingly.

Friends have D700 and 5DmkII and they are great cameras. But I like everything about my Pentax. It is so well designed and thought out.
At this point my plans are to wait and see what is next. If it is an APS-C well then that is what my next camera will be.

I just want to keep photography fun and do the best I can.

[Aristophanes]

The 1Ds line has always been a more expensive than the 1D line even though the 1D line had better AF and faster frame rate. The 1DX has other advancements, but not $3,000 worth.

You can buy the wafers from Sony or any manufacture. Nikon was rumored to be doing this for the D3 and D700. Nikon was leasing space at the Sony fab plant (why?). They were taking the Sony wafers and making the 12MP FF sensors. Nikon can claim that it is a Nikon sensor but they are making them from Sony wafers. The 25MP in the D3x is also a Sony wafer, but Nikon does their own micro-lenses and finishes them out. How much is done by Nikon? I don't know. Canon's new 1DX is the first Full-Frame with gap-less micro-lenses which I am told is an expensive process. The Nikon D90 used the same 12MP sensor as several other cameras, but to my knowledge it was the only one with gap-less micro-lenses which is why it performed so much better than all the other 12MP sensors cut from the same wafers.

How much fab capability does Pentax have? I don't know. I know that in order for Ricoh to compete at the level they have stated they want to compete at they will have to develop a certain level of fab capability. I think Nikon is working towards making their own high end sensors in house so they don't have to depend on a competitor for sensors. Aptina is making some Nikon sensor and there are rumors that Nikon owns a big piece of Aptina. Image Sensors - MT9H004 (Preliminary) - Aptina Imaging Aptina also has a 16MP APS-C sensor for sale.

Sony and Nikon have an engineering, design, and fabrication agreement. Sony supplies the industrial capacity, Nikon the specs and some components. This has been known for half a decade. It's not all about the wafer and die.

Pentax has no fab capacity, but gets some with Ricoh. However, these fabs can cost between $250 million ($US) to $1 billion to set up. Sony can average out its investments through diverse markets where it is an entrenched brand, like cellphones and P&S. That's why Nikon teams with Sony.

If Ricoh is looking to do that with Pentax, this is an effort requiring many years of assembly, especially in human resources. What we do know is Nikon/Sony have a huge lead in NR for relative sensor sizes. instead of reducing prices to leverage market share, canon is keeping up by increasing FF, virtually replacing APS-H, and attacking their market structure through high-margin sell-through.

How long the Sony/Nikon joint effort will last is anyone's guess. Thom Hogan has taken his estimates, but right now it is unlikely that FF from this partnership is available on the open market without distribution and licensing restrictions by one party or the other. To control costs manufacturers often need to control supply and calibrate margins. This is not unusual in many industries. Rumour had it that Leica wanted the Sony FF CMOS sensor but was rebuffed. Pentax could try a new sensor on spec design from Samsung or even Panasonic, but I wager the start-up costs would be extreme with a price higher than a D700 and SNR much worse making for an noncompetitive product.

FF for Pentax will require price drops by economy-of-scale competition between diverse suppliers. That's not happening. What is happening is *higher* FF prices as Canon and Nikon and Sony make up for APS-C commoditization by driving margins and market separation for the FX format higher. APS-H would make nary a difference in that equation because I doubt there is a wafer readily available, and if it was, Pentax volume would be so low that prices would approach D700, wherein Pentax is immediately uncompetitive (even against a used D700 market of considerable size).

APS-H does not solve Pentax's problems.

[Jodokast96]

Will it work with DA16-45? DA12-24? DA21 Ltd? DA15 Ltd? DA35 Macro Ltd?

And those are only a few of the lenses they offer. And don't forget third party offerings.

[montman]

For a long time I obsessed over Full Frame. However, do I really need it? I carry my aging K10D everywhere with me. Hiking in the mountains, in my airplane and, rarely do I get into my car without it.
A while back on a hike in the High Peaks of New York I slipped and fell. Yes I managed to keep my camera from hitting the ground, at the expense of my elbows (which are still sore). It made me realize that it is only a matter of time before something disastrous occurs. Do I really want to be carrying $5,000 worth of camera and lens around?

I do want the lower noise and greater depth of field. It would be wonderful to go back to the days where I could walk around with my 50/1.4 and not have the field of view so narrow.

After all this time I guess my big complaint is not knowing what Rocoh/Pentax is planning for the future. I'm not talking the secret specs of future camera, only the general plan for camera formats. It seems all other manufacturers have made this clear. If I knew FF was in the future for Pentax I could plan accordingly.

Friends have D700 and 5DmkII and they are great cameras. But I like everything about my Pentax. It is so well designed and thought out.
At this point my plans are to wait and see what is next. If it is an APS-C well then that is what my next camera will be.

I just want to keep photography fun and do the best I can.

I agree! I have a Canon 5D Mark II but sits on my shelf most the time. I do use it for all my paid work but I carry my K-5 and M glass with me everywhere. I just like the ergonomics and Pentax glass. Plus if I drop it I am only out $1100 instead of $3700. Actually the Pentax would probably take the fall quite well, The Canon I think would shatter… Don’t get me wrong, I love FF it has it’s benefits.

[Jodokast96]

I forgot to say that APS is a film size...
So APS-H was not invented to be an useful size to make digital sensors out of a wafer, it just happened to be like that, nothing more.

Don't confuse him with facts.

[Macario]

For a long time I obsessed over Full Frame. However, do I really need it? I carry my aging K10D everywhere with me. Hiking in the mountains, in my airplane and, rarely do I get into my car without it.
A while back on a hike in the High Peaks of New York I slipped and fell. Yes I managed to keep my camera from hitting the ground, at the expense of my elbows (which are still sore). It made me realize that it is only a matter of time before something disastrous occurs. Do I really want to be carrying $5,000 worth of camera and lens around?

I do want the lower noise and greater depth of field. It would be wonderful to go back to the days where I could walk around with my 50/1.4 and not have the field of view so narrow.

After all this time I guess my big complaint is not knowing what Rocoh/Pentax is planning for the future. I'm not talking the secret specs of future camera, only the general plan for camera formats. It seems all other manufacturers have made this clear. If I knew FF was in the future for Pentax I could plan accordingly.

Friends have D700 and 5DmkII and they are great cameras. But I like everything about my Pentax. It is so well designed and thought out.
At this point my plans are to wait and see what is next. If it is an APS-C well then that is what my next camera will be.

I just want to keep photography fun and do the best I can.

I do agree with you, I waited for long for a FF Pentax, so I just shot film. But a year ago, I did finaly buy the K-7. And I haven't regret it at all. It takes very good pics, even in high ISO. Do I miss anything from the film era cameras? Yes the big viewfinder I do miss, but I did buy the pentax magnifier, so the problem isn't that big.
I was very used to the lenses I had (and still have). But I am already very used to the ones I use now, with their FOV. And no, they do not have the same DOF, but then again, I do not miss it tghat much. And yes, I do have a 1.4 50MM, so I do know how the DOF with it is on a FF camera. But then again, Most of the shots were around f5.6 anyway. 1.4 I rarely used, just at night time concerts etc. And do I mis that now? No I don't, I can use a longer lens at aroudn f5.6 thanx to the SR.
I still use the film cameras if I go out on a photo trip. And I find it very easy to switch between the K-7 and any of the film cameras I would be taking.
WOuld I buy a FF Pentax if it came out? Yes I would, but only when the K-7 does not work anymore. It works fine, extremely fine, and there just is no reason to go already and get a new one. It just is not worth the money. I'd rather spend it on some new lenses.
My ooint is , just use the gear you have now. It is APS-C, live with it, learn to shoot with it. Instead of just complaining why there isn't a Pentax FF. If you can't take good photo's with any the DSLR's Pentax has now, you won't be able with a FF either. And no, having a shallower DOF will not help either.

[Pentaxor]

this is what I don't understand with some people that say APS-C is more than enough for them. I mean, we see Pentax already competing in a very crowded APS-C market which includes entry level, and midlevel cameras. so why should Pentax nor Pentax worry about Pentax competing in the FF market which isn't really that as crowded? is the market for Pentax really that small that they consider selling APS-C bodies which are fighting tooth and nails with other brands? how many Pentax users were able to afford or bought a D700 or 5D 2 or A900 because Pentax doesn't offer one? we could see that there is a market even for cheapskate Pentax users are willing to pay above $2,000 just to get a FF. so how can Pentax attract other customers to join in if there isn't an option that could be an alternative to other brands?

[Chex]

If you can't take good photo's with any the DSLR's Pentax has now, you won't be able with a FF either. And no, having a shallower DOF will not help either.

So if you feel you DO take good pictures, the same would apply.. and a FF could simply help enhance your images. It's not like Nikon saying your only as good as your equipment.. but the difference between FF and APS-C is fairly substantial.

[Macario]

I think the FF market is as crowded as the APS-C market is. Not in absolute numbers, but statisticly when looking at the number of people owning and willing to own a FF camera at a higher price. It will be about as crowded.

[Anvh]

Leica has said that the next generation of S2 WILL BE CMOS. Pretty sure that means CMOS will be MF.

Have you ever used a Maymia 7II? Before you start talking about lens size take a look at MF range finders and lenses. Have you taken a look at the new 45mm Olympus for m4/3 compared to the 50mm f/2 for standard 4/3. Same sensor size, but bid difference in lens size.

I am not taking about changing the "whole photography brand" for Pentax. The EVIL 645D would be a specialty camera like the Fuji's and Maymia's that have been around since the 60's. Nothing that I have said indicated that the K-5 line will not go on just as it always has.

APS stood for Advanced Photo System. APS-C was a crop of the full APS format. APS-C is a relic of the film era. The Canon APS-C is a good bit smaller than the film version.

APS-H :The APS-H size was selected since it is the largest that can be imaged with a single mask to help control production costs and manage yields. Image sensor format - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia The APS-H film format happens to be a 16:9 format and is not the same dimensions as the APS-H used in digital cameras which a 3:2. The name might have been kept, but the dimensions were adjusted for format and production yields.

Leica is in a league on their own or are you saying that their camera's look like a 645 (d)slr?

Never used Maymia 7II, should i?
I've therefore no idea how they handle.
How many have they sold?
Alpa are making very small 4x5 cameras but they still aren't trully made to be handheld.

About the lenses, the DA40 is also very small but those aren't your average lenses. The size is determainted by the sensor size and not by the register distance.
Look at how small the lenses are for the Pentax Q thanks to the small sensor.

Specialty camera can be good but they aren't your average product sadly, i doubt much money can be made from that.

Thanks for explain APS-H for me.

[Anvh]

As amazing as a 50-135 f/2 would be, looking at the size and cost of the Oylmpus 14-35 f/2, there would be almost no benefit in developing these lenses except for people laden with money or pros, who will most likely just buy a FF system and get cheaper lenses that do the same thing. You could buy a D700 for the cost of that lens. Let's not even think about the cost of a 50-135 f/2

We can dream though...

Don't know if you've seen the prices of the Canon/Nikon 70-200 f/2.8 for example...
FF can be a good system for someone but if you need to be mobile APS-C has some advantages and since it's highly unlikly pentax will make an APS-H or FF camera they might do something else.

[Anvh]

I think the FF market is as crowded as the APS-C market is. Not in absolute numbers, but statisticly when looking at the number of people owning and willing to own a FF camera at a higher price. It will be about as crowded.

Sadly the recession still isn't over...
And Sony failed in FF market, many photographers that need FF have already invested either in Nikon or Canon, there is no way you can get them over easily.
So all you've are the people that "want" FF but how many of those will actually buy one and want to start investing in new glass?

[stanleyk]

I think you are probably correct. I've been a loyal Pentax user for a long time. However I recently aquired a Nikon. I've invested in Nikon lenses now and I wouldn't buy a Pentax Full Frame. They don't really have the lenses I want for this format. I will still use the K5 a few Pentax lenses though.

[Kryscendo]

I'd be most interested in a full frame camera for the low light capability. Not so much more megapixels. Not even so much that I can crop my photos or that the angle of view is more normal. No, I'd rather use one for the amazing performance. Seeing where Pentax stacks up on DXO as it is, I'd say unless they somehow drop the ball in an epic way, we should all be very excited for that aspect of full frame photography.