How to push the Pentax Full-Frame Idea and get that FF out faster...

**Pepe Guitarra** · 09-19-2012, 01:25 PM

You've got a point there. In fact, after I purchased my Canon FF, I found out that I still need my crop factor of 1.5 for birding and macros, I miss them. So, the grass may not be as green as it seems in the neighbors.

Originally posted by Anvh

but who of those have a 645 camera

If FF is needed for professional image, wouldn't 645 be even better?

ElJamoquio · 09-19-2012, 06:27 PM

With the NIkon you can crop without loss compared to a k-5. Heck, the Canon would be a 11 MP APS-C... which is fine by me, too.

**PPPPPP42** · 09-19-2012, 08:16 PM

Originally posted by Anvh

If FF is needed for professional image, wouldn't 645 be even better?

The FF will cost somewhere in the neighborhood of twice what the apsc camera will cost, if the 645DII will cost twice what the FF will cost then that statement would be true, if it still costs 10k then its a big joke, literally. Plus very few people have a pile of good 645 lenses lying around they are just waiting to use.

If it weren't for the stuff I already have all of which is FF and compatible with all my film stuff, I would have bought a D600, at that price its even tempting to sell everything and start over with just its kit lens considering this latest 12 month promised delay on the Pentax FF. Kinda funny but the only reason I haven't is that I inherited my Super Program and A501.4 so I can't sell them and if I am going to have them I want all the rest of the stuff to use with them.

I need the FF so that I can take wide pictures with full magnification, if I go to APSC I have to drop focal length to get the same FOV so I lose magnification and you have to make the picture bigger to see which makes it look worse or not fit on a computer. I love high detail huge FOV pictures, especially in cities or forests where the buildings and trees are huge and all around you.

And if I need an APSC crop, I will crop, it baffles me why people say a forced crop is useful, perhaps someone will explain. Especially with birding, better to have a big frame to capture and then selectively get the best crop, especially if the blasted thing is moving.

I've actually gone almost 100% film now since my refurbished Super Program came back and it just truly fits me better than a crop format (especially the huge bright viewfinder)

Anvh · 09-20-2012, 10:07 AM

Originally posted by PPPPPP42

I need the FF so that I can take wide pictures with full magnification, if I go to APSC I have to drop focal length to get the same FOV so I lose magnification and you have to make the picture bigger to see which makes it look worse or not fit on a computer. I love high detail huge FOV pictures, especially in cities or forests where the buildings and trees are huge and all around you.

Sorry but i can not follow you there.
Since when does focal length equal magnification?

As for your Pentax lenses and FF DSLR, just get a Canon and use an adapter.

Anvh · 09-20-2012, 10:13 AM

Originally posted by Pepe Guitarra

You've got a point there. In fact, after I purchased my Canon FF, I found out that I still need my crop factor of 1.5 for birding and macros, I miss them. So, the grass may not be as green as it seems in the neighbors.

They are just different formats with different specialties in a way.

Pentax FF might be nice but the cost of setting up such a line now will be high and the competition is very fierce in such a small market.
I don't believe Pentax can make FF series work if the only ones buying them are the ones owning older Pentax glass they want to use, the amount of those people who have those lenses and are willing to pay for such FF is low and since they already own lenses Pentax won't sell many new ones. So will a FF be cost effective?

If Pentax want to have FF they either need to create a nice market or steal away some souls form Nikon or Canon, well good luck with that i say....

Maybe Pentax, will make a larger GXR so that it can fit a 645 sensor and also smaller FF ones.

Blue · 09-20-2012, 10:21 AM

Originally posted by Anvh

Sorry but i can not follow you there.
Since when does focal length equal magnification?

As for your Pentax lenses and FF DSLR, just get a Canon and use an adapter.

The downside is that with the FA 77 for example, autofocus would be lost. With the A 50/1.2 for example, it would possibly require butchering the lever. Of course with an M 50/1.4 and lenses that are abundant and economical, that would be a very good option. As far as 645D goes, there are probably more ff Pentax lenses in production than for 645.

ElJamoquio · 09-20-2012, 10:51 AM

Originally posted by Blue

As far as 645D goes, there are probably more ff Pentax lenses in production than for 645.

There's about 40 or so k-mount FF lenses in production.

I only know of the latest 3 Pentax 645 lenses that are still in production, but of course some of the older ones might be as well, I just don't know it.

gazonk · 09-20-2012, 11:02 AM

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

There's about 40 or so k-mount FF lenses in production.

I only know of the latest 3 Pentax 645 lenses that are still in production, but of course some of the older ones might be as well, I just don't know it.

There are 17: http://www.pentax.jp/english/products/lens/645_Mount_Lens.pdf

Anvh · 09-20-2012, 11:13 AM

Originally posted by jarski

perhaps they should just watch and see these two catching all the fish. least they didnt fail while trying..

Canon and Nikon have their pro-bodies, which Pentax does not even compete with. but cheaper models are getting larger sensor currently, effectively eating Pentax market if they only remain making small sensor dSLR's.

Sony brought out a FF several years ago to compete with Nikon and Canon and what happend with that?

For you second part, this statement isn't true just check the other comments.
Besides Pentax has 645D which can compete with hassleblad, Phaseone and the like, Nikon and Canon are not competing against those... so really who cares what the rest is doing and who is competing with who?

Anvh · 09-20-2012, 11:17 AM

Originally posted by gazonk

There are 17: http://www.pentax.jp/english/products/lens/645_Mount_Lens.pdf

And those are all Pentax lenses so compare that to Pentax FF lenses in production.
FA31, FA43, FA77, DFA50 and DFA100 so that are 5 lenses...

ElJamoquio · 09-20-2012, 12:16 PM

Originally posted by Anvh

And those are all Pentax lenses so compare that to Pentax FF lenses in production.
FA31, FA43, FA77, DFA50 and DFA100 so that are 5 lenses...

Keep counting, there are 10 total lenses that have been described by Pentax as FF. There are others that are not described as full frame, too, but not 17.

And of course there are 17 sigma FF lenses for K-mount.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/183420-current...me-lenses.html

Anvh · 09-20-2012, 12:34 PM

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

Keep counting, there are 10 total lenses that have been described by Pentax as FF. There are others that are not described as full frame, too, but not 17.

And of course there are 17 sigma FF lenses for K-mount.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/183420-current...me-lenses.html

Wrote some correction there

Anvh · 09-20-2012, 12:47 PM

Originally posted by jarski

I meant my comments in context of SLR's only, naturally there are larger formats but those markets have different logic, and wont head on compete with SLR pro-models. just IMHO ofcourse.

my guess little improved K5 this Photokina is indication something bigger is coming, just wasn't ready yet.

Since when isn't the 645 a SLR?

Anvh · 09-20-2012, 02:04 PM

Not the way you're saying things.

You're talking about SLR pro-models, in what way isn't the 645D a pro slr camera? and what makes a camera "pro" to begin with?
Do you best to define these categories.

Sure a FF camera is different then 645 if you meant that but so is an APS-C so what is the point you're trying to make?
Besides high end ASP-C often have better features, hardware and specs compared to budget FF cameras so two different markets all together.

**PPPPPP42** · 09-20-2012, 08:41 PM

My terminology was wrong I am sure, I meant to say that for example with my Super Program my A501.4 will have a 40 degree horizontal field of view and the image will appear a certain size, If I put that same lens on my K20D the horizontal field of view drops to 27 degrees. If I want my 40 degree field of view back I have to drop down to the 35mm F2 (approximately) which shrinks the image to fit the same crop on the smaller sensor and thus detail is lost, plus it is much harder to focus the wider angle lenses.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
The full frame Pentax that never was	dj_saunter	Pentax DSLR Discussion	23	05-06-2011 04:06 AM
Pentax and Full Frame	oppositz	Pentax DSLR Discussion	58	03-18-2011 09:39 AM
Full frame pentax	cem.kumuk	Pentax DSLR Discussion	11	11-12-2010 03:13 PM
Pentax and Full Frame...	Shutter-bug	Photographic Technique	60	11-03-2010 10:03 AM
Pentax A 50/1.2 on Full Frame	aegisphan	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	23	10-28-2010 04:16 PM

09-19-2012, 01:25 PM	#856
Pepe Guitarra Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,223	You've got a point there. In fact, after I purchased my Canon FF, I found out that I still need my crop factor of 1.5 for birding and macros, I miss them. So, the grass may not be as green as it seems in the neighbors. Originally posted by Anvh but who of those have a 645 camera If FF is needed for professional image, wouldn't 645 be even better?

09-19-2012, 06:27 PM	#857
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	With the NIkon you can crop without loss compared to a k-5. Heck, the Canon would be a 11 MP APS-C... which is fine by me, too.

09-19-2012, 08:16 PM	#858
PPPPPP42 Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Wisconsin Photos: Albums Posts: 947	Originally posted by Anvh If FF is needed for professional image, wouldn't 645 be even better? The FF will cost somewhere in the neighborhood of twice what the apsc camera will cost, if the 645DII will cost twice what the FF will cost then that statement would be true, if it still costs 10k then its a big joke, literally. Plus very few people have a pile of good 645 lenses lying around they are just waiting to use. If it weren't for the stuff I already have all of which is FF and compatible with all my film stuff, I would have bought a D600, at that price its even tempting to sell everything and start over with just its kit lens considering this latest 12 month promised delay on the Pentax FF. Kinda funny but the only reason I haven't is that I inherited my Super Program and A501.4 so I can't sell them and if I am going to have them I want all the rest of the stuff to use with them. I need the FF so that I can take wide pictures with full magnification, if I go to APSC I have to drop focal length to get the same FOV so I lose magnification and you have to make the picture bigger to see which makes it look worse or not fit on a computer. I love high detail huge FOV pictures, especially in cities or forests where the buildings and trees are huge and all around you. And if I need an APSC crop, I will crop, it baffles me why people say a forced crop is useful, perhaps someone will explain. Especially with birding, better to have a big frame to capture and then selectively get the best crop, especially if the blasted thing is moving. I've actually gone almost 100% film now since my refurbished Super Program came back and it just truly fits me better than a crop format (especially the huge bright viewfinder)

09-20-2012, 10:07 AM	#859
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Originally posted by PPPPPP42 I need the FF so that I can take wide pictures with full magnification, if I go to APSC I have to drop focal length to get the same FOV so I lose magnification and you have to make the picture bigger to see which makes it look worse or not fit on a computer. I love high detail huge FOV pictures, especially in cities or forests where the buildings and trees are huge and all around you. Sorry but i can not follow you there. Since when does focal length equal magnification? As for your Pentax lenses and FF DSLR, just get a Canon and use an adapter.

09-20-2012, 10:13 AM	#860
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Originally posted by Pepe Guitarra You've got a point there. In fact, after I purchased my Canon FF, I found out that I still need my crop factor of 1.5 for birding and macros, I miss them. So, the grass may not be as green as it seems in the neighbors. They are just different formats with different specialties in a way. Pentax FF might be nice but the cost of setting up such a line now will be high and the competition is very fierce in such a small market. I don't believe Pentax can make FF series work if the only ones buying them are the ones owning older Pentax glass they want to use, the amount of those people who have those lenses and are willing to pay for such FF is low and since they already own lenses Pentax won't sell many new ones. So will a FF be cost effective? If Pentax want to have FF they either need to create a nice market or steal away some souls form Nikon or Canon, well good luck with that i say.... Maybe Pentax, will make a larger GXR so that it can fit a 645 sensor and also smaller FF ones.

09-20-2012, 10:21 AM	#861
Blue Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Florida Hill Country Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,377	Originally posted by Anvh Sorry but i can not follow you there. Since when does focal length equal magnification? As for your Pentax lenses and FF DSLR, just get a Canon and use an adapter. The downside is that with the FA 77 for example, autofocus would be lost. With the A 50/1.2 for example, it would possibly require butchering the lever. Of course with an M 50/1.4 and lenses that are abundant and economical, that would be a very good option. As far as 645D goes, there are probably more ff Pentax lenses in production than for 645.

09-20-2012, 10:51 AM	#862
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Originally posted by Blue As far as 645D goes, there are probably more ff Pentax lenses in production than for 645. There's about 40 or so k-mount FF lenses in production. I only know of the latest 3 Pentax 645 lenses that are still in production, but of course some of the older ones might be as well, I just don't know it.

09-20-2012, 11:02 AM	#863
gazonk Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Oslo area, Norway Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,746	Originally posted by ElJamoquio There's about 40 or so k-mount FF lenses in production. I only know of the latest 3 Pentax 645 lenses that are still in production, but of course some of the older ones might be as well, I just don't know it. There are 17: http://www.pentax.jp/english/products/lens/645_Mount_Lens.pdf

09-20-2012, 11:13 AM	#864
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Originally posted by jarski perhaps they should just watch and see these two catching all the fish. least they didnt fail while trying.. Canon and Nikon have their pro-bodies, which Pentax does not even compete with. but cheaper models are getting larger sensor currently, effectively eating Pentax market if they only remain making small sensor dSLR's. Sony brought out a FF several years ago to compete with Nikon and Canon and what happend with that? For you second part, this statement isn't true just check the other comments. Besides Pentax has 645D which can compete with hassleblad, Phaseone and the like, Nikon and Canon are not competing against those... so really who cares what the rest is doing and who is competing with who?

09-20-2012, 11:17 AM	#865
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Originally posted by gazonk There are 17: http://www.pentax.jp/english/products/lens/645_Mount_Lens.pdf And those are all Pentax lenses so compare that to Pentax FF lenses in production. FA31, FA43, FA77, DFA50 and DFA100 so that are 5 lenses...

09-20-2012, 12:16 PM	#866
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Originally posted by Anvh And those are all Pentax lenses so compare that to Pentax FF lenses in production. FA31, FA43, FA77, DFA50 and DFA100 so that are 5 lenses... Keep counting, there are 10 total lenses that have been described by Pentax as FF. There are others that are not described as full frame, too, but not 17. And of course there are 17 sigma FF lenses for K-mount. https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/183420-current...me-lenses.html

09-20-2012, 12:34 PM	#867
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Originally posted by ElJamoquio Keep counting, there are 10 total lenses that have been described by Pentax as FF. There are others that are not described as full frame, too, but not 17. And of course there are 17 sigma FF lenses for K-mount. https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-slr-lens-discussion/183420-current...me-lenses.html Wrote some correction there

09-20-2012, 12:47 PM	#868
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Originally posted by jarski I meant my comments in context of SLR's only, naturally there are larger formats but those markets have different logic, and wont head on compete with SLR pro-models. just IMHO ofcourse. my guess little improved K5 this Photokina is indication something bigger is coming, just wasn't ready yet. Since when isn't the 645 a SLR?

09-20-2012, 02:04 PM	#869
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Not the way you're saying things. You're talking about SLR pro-models, in what way isn't the 645D a pro slr camera? and what makes a camera "pro" to begin with? Do you best to define these categories. Sure a FF camera is different then 645 if you meant that but so is an APS-C so what is the point you're trying to make? Besides high end ASP-C often have better features, hardware and specs compared to budget FF cameras so two different markets all together.

09-20-2012, 08:41 PM	#870
PPPPPP42 Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: Wisconsin Photos: Albums Posts: 947	My terminology was wrong I am sure, I meant to say that for example with my Super Program my A501.4 will have a 40 degree horizontal field of view and the image will appear a certain size, If I put that same lens on my K20D the horizontal field of view drops to 27 degrees. If I want my 40 degree field of view back I have to drop down to the 35mm F2 (approximately) which shrinks the image to fit the same crop on the smaller sensor and thus detail is lost, plus it is much harder to focus the wider angle lenses.