[Jardik]

I am a long time Pentax user and I hope so that FF body will come. Why not? Pentax has many great lenses from film era. But waiting is like wait for Godot.

[Ash]

Just be patient. I'll happen. In the meantime, the K-5 is a very good option.

[Anvh]

Why not? Pentax has many great lenses from film era. But waiting is like wait for Godot.

Almost non are in production anymore...
They could inject new life into them since some were quite superb.

[thibs]

Almost non are in production anymore...
They could inject new life into them since some were quite superb.

Some can be reused but they should do it properly:
* keep the blue prints and produce the glass
* modernize the exterior
* either keep the screwdriven AF or, (a lot better) pull a real good AF mechanism à la SigCaNikon

Don't be stupid and change blue prints for those needing an upgrade. The FA50/1.4 needs one.
And make bright, sharp lenses é"&'è(!àç! Pentax

[Chex]

All over now but the wait.. and the FF lens roadmap. It'll be interesting! If it's slick enough I would definitely sell my D800 for it.

[monochrome]

RE: Reusing the old FF lens blueprints, don't forget the coatings have changed since FA's were discontinued - and the EU prohibited the miniscule amount of lead in the glass - which affects the light transmission. Who knows whether the actual glass formulation is still made? Are the blanks available - can they even be ordered?

Can current AF motors turn all that glass as quickly as we seem to demand? Slow AF caused by heavy glass would accrue to the camera - few here would stop to think before slamming the camera the way the K-01 was dismissed before it had a chance to gain a foothold - and now look at the surprised reviews from all these late adopters.

Together, these and other changes might be enough to require new lens designs,

[Kunzite]

Let's not forget about pixel peeping - we will examine the lenses at 200% and look for every imperfection; the old designs were simply not made for this.

[Spare Tire]

Let's not forget about pixel peeping - we will examine the lenses at 200% and look for every imperfection; the old designs were simply not made for this.

Oh please. People pixel peep on film too. They can enlarge it big like a wall if they want. I've done it.

[Kunzite]

But it wasn't a widespread phenomenon like it is today, and IMHO people back then had more realistic expectations. Otherwise, everyone would've used medium format, since the difference is obvious at such sizes.

[24X36NOW]

Let's not forget about pixel peeping - we will examine the lenses at 200% and look for every imperfection; the old designs were simply not made for this.

The "old designs" have been used on dSLRs of a smaller format, which places MORE demand on lens quality than FF, for years now. They hold up quite well, and will hold up even better on a FF dSLR than on an APS-C dSLR.

But it wasn't a widespread phenomenon like it is today, and IMHO people back then had more realistic expectations. Otherwise, everyone would've used medium format, since the difference is obvious at such sizes.

It wasn't as widespread to do the equivalent of "pixel peeping" in film days, but there's nothing wrong with older Pentax lenses, as can be seen by the images taken with APS-C dSLRs - the "lenses won't be good enough" stories are FUD designed to convince you of the supposed "need" for new lenses, but it is for the most part nonsense.

Having said all of that, Pentax didn't have too many high end autofocus lenses, and the ones they did have may not be the best choices; for example, the 28-70 f 2.8 should be updated to a 24-70 f 2.8, and the 80-200 f 2.8 should be updated to a 70-200 f 2.8, since 28/70 really isn't wide enough for the short end of a "standard" or telephoto zoom (respectively) compared with contemporary competing glass, and leaves a gap (though small, still annoying) in the focal length range when using both lenses. It would also be nice if the 250-600 f 5.6 was a 200-600 f 5.6, which would expand the zoom ratio to the ideal maximum of 3:1 and make it "stack" nicely on top of the 70-200.

[Kunzite]

Because you find them acceptable it doesn't means everyone will. You are shooting with them, and then printing probably? I would be happy with some of the old lenses as well. Yet too many people will make buying decisions by judging charts and numbers, and pixel peep studio test samples; I see that all the time.

Canon and Nikon are constantly replacing their lenses with new, improved version. You are saying Pentax should not attempt to keep up...

[Chex]

Because you find them acceptable it doesn't means everyone will. You are shooting with them, and then printing probably? I would be happy with some of the old lenses as well. Yet too many people will make buying decisions by judging charts and numbers, and pixel peep studio test samples; I see that all the time.

Canon and Nikon are constantly replacing their lenses with new, improved version. You are saying Pentax should not attempt to keep up...

Well the MTF charts and other in depth pixel peeping shows differences between lenses at a minute scale, judging if the difference between the $2500 70-200 Nikon VR2 is worth it over the $1500 Tamron 70-200 VC USD is worth that extra $1000... to me.. not a chance! But if I had the budget to easily afford it, then those numbers would be in favor of the Nikon VR2 for it's slightly higher resolution and less vignetting. If the numbers/charts/pixel peeping had no relevance, they would never be posted. I have an older 70-300, but I would love a newer 70-300, as both Tamron's or Nikon's are far sharper than the old mechanical AF, non VR unit I have.

They make new revisions of lenses for a reason.. new glass elements with newer coatings, faster & stronger AF motors, Better image stabilization (a non issue for Pentax because they did it right IMO). If Pentax doesn't update their current line up they are simply shooting themselves in the foot. The newer glass coatings, DC motor, maybe make all the non * series into WR series lenses and really push Pentax's strong weather sealing further to the forefront.

[Chex]

RE: Reusing the old FF lens blueprints, don't forget the coatings have changed since FA's were discontinued - and the EU prohibited the miniscule amount of lead in the glass - which affects the light transmission. Who knows whether the actual glass formulation is still made? Are the blanks available - can they even be ordered?

Can current AF motors turn all that glass as quickly as we seem to demand? Slow AF caused by heavy glass would accrue to the camera - few here would stop to think before slamming the camera the way the K-01 was dismissed before it had a chance to gain a foothold - and now look at the surprised reviews from all these late adopters.

Together, these and other changes might be enough to require new lens designs,

AF motors can turn big elements of glass just fine, even at that, most focus elements are not that large compared to the front element anyways! The of the FA series the 77mm's from element was a decent size, but nothing like an 85mm f1.4's
With the newer glass coatings, I'm sure if they were to remake the FA trio into a DFA trio, the latest coatings would blow away the old glass and coatings.. but I agree, by loosing the bit of lead in the glass, it could change it's rendering characteristics.. which is part of the FA trio's charm.. it just has that special something. I miss my old 43mm Ltd!

[codger]

I have been told by our friends over at Pentaxeros (the Spanish Pentax community) that "it is believed" that a full-frame is on its way, although it's a personal hunch and not at all an official statement, let alone something based on what's currently in the pipeline. It seems that Ricoh isn't opening up to anyone about what they're working on, so I guess time will tell what they come up with.

In the mean time, we will continue to try to push the Pentax Full-Frame idea and if we reach 3000 "Likes" in support of a Pentax Full-frame by CS+ (which is in 3 weeks), an official letter from Pentax Spain will go out to the higher-ups in order to make them aware of this strong backing.

Just a few numbers:
Currently, the (unofficial) Pentax Full-frame page has 2,200+ followers, while...
the PentaxForums page has almost 7,000...
and the official Pentax page has 43,000.

So, combined, out two unofficial pages have almost a quarter of the followers of the official page, which really says something, doesn't it?

Add on top of that this:
PentaxForums.com's global traffic rank is 19,978, while
PentaxImaging.com's global traffic tank is 136,591.

So, if we speak up, we will be heard. Let's make it happen!

Update: the letter to Pentax Japan has been written. Sit tight to hear what they respond with! Keep on supporting the full-frame page, as Pentax executives will soon be visiting it!

What is the lens mount type a full frame Pentax will use? I'll lean toward Zeiss primes until Pentax fills in the gaps.

[Clavius]

What is the lens mount type a full frame Pentax will use? I'll lean toward Zeiss primes until Pentax fills in the gaps.

An M-mount Pentax FF? If that happens, I'll pre-order two at the same time.