Originally posted by Watson So why did I buy this Nikon? I bought this because I wanted Full Frame (whether or not I need FF is beside the point).
Seems like a lot to give up. But I hope it works for you, I know it had some issues early on but after working through that it seems a good camera. Shame you will have to invest in all new glass, but at least with the way Pentax prices have gone up you should be able to move your old kit without too much pain.
Originally posted by Watson In fact, I finally had to admit that I don't believe Pentax will be in the FF game anytime soon.
Probably true. Even the most optimistic of realists are expecting some time in 2014. And who is to say it will be a dslr like is expected? Might be something completely different.
Originally posted by Watson as Pentax is no doubt fully aware that a certain segment of their customers really want FF, that they just don't care if they lose this segment of their customer base.
Also, probably true. The whole Pentax ecosystem (in recent times, leaving aside the glorious memories of another era) is built around APS-C. Moving to a large sensor format is risky, requires R&D and really only caters to a very small portion of their customer base. That portion of their customer base represented here on this forum is very atypical in having a higher percentage of FF advocates but even here it is miniscule.
Originally posted by Watson All they had to do was unequivocally announce that they were working on it and commit to some reasonable time-table.
Well, they have announced (several times) that they are working on it. But announcing a time-table would just be foolish. Set aside that doing so advertises their intentions to the competition (as they may not really care) but what happens if they don't make the deadline? More bad publicity. Under-promise and Over-achieve is the way to win friends and customers.
And just to throw fuel on the fire: why do you want a FF anyway? I am really curious as I have struggled with this myself, going back and forth. I think the goal should be best IQ, dynamic range and low noise performance. If that can be done in a smaller format why is there a need to carry a bigger, heavier camera? Is the D600 that much better than the k-5 in those areas? Keeping in mind that the k-5 is using a sensor that is 3 or even 4 years old at this point. Not trying to start an argument, just genuinely curious about the parameters that forced this decision.