[Parry]

^^ Nice pic.

No need to be driven to extremes, it's only a camera.

From what I've seen full frame (D800e) gives the best of both worlds and once totted up with a few quality lenses (rather than the dozen or so I have now) doesn't come to any more money than I've spent on APS-C over the past few years. But I guess all that just comes with experience (only been doing this a few years).

---

Last edited by Parry; 01-17-2014 at 09:19 AM.

[normhead]

I also think the D800e with 14-24mm F2.8 is a much better combo for landscape work than the 645D 25mm F4 combo that costs much more.

Only people who have D800s but don't have 645Ds say that. No one who owns a 645D and has compared a decent number of images says that. Imagine Resources still has examples on line of detail the 645D resolves that an D800 or A7r, don't. So I guess it comes down to, do you want the better system, or do you want the most economic system. I make the same types of arguments for APS-c and FF and people stomp all over me. Yet FF advocates take a free pass on the 645D. We have FF partisans, magnifying FFs virtues, trying to dismiss the virtues of other systems. There's no other way to look at it.

[ElJamoquio]

if everything I read about sensor size between APS-C and full frame is right, then certainly increasing sensor size again is beneficial.

What you read is correct, and so is your conclusion. You probably also read that generally the larger sensors have longer time on the market and are often a generation behind, which is true for the both 'increases' of sensor size.

Ricoh shouldn't care what Pentaxians want. If they are going to sell a full frame K Mount camera, it has to be to other people than just us. There just aren't enough of us, even if ten or fifteen percent of existing Pentax users buy a full frame camera, to make it worthwhile. There just isn't the margin in these cameras that there used to be.

I kinda agree and kinda disagree. For Pentax to be successful they need to support the K-mount. For FF to be successful it needs to be appealing to both current owners (the bulk of buyers on day 1) and to new customers as well.

We'll see, but Pentax makes some great cameras and they have for years. There's no reason to expect that'll change for the FF.

[Kunzite]

I agree with regard to APS-C line up.

I just think with regard to a full frame project, there needs to be a broader appeal. Focusing on making the camera better compatible with older lenses seems to be a big theme on the forum, but I just don't think something like that would bring in many outside users.

Maybe I'm too optimistic, but I believe many of us are willing to spend on new lenses (even if some might have old lenses or not). I'm talking about such customers, and also about APS-C customers who could be "persuaded" to spend on the larger format.
Such an user base must be maintained and grown.

I'm not convinced that "better compatibility with older lenses" (the improperly called "uncrippled" K-mount) would ensure the project's success. I'd say it would be marginal at best.

[Rondec]

Maybe I'm too optimistic, but I believe many of us are willing to spend on new lenses (even if some might have old lenses or not). I'm talking about such customers, and also about APS-C customers who could be "persuaded" to spend on the larger format.
Such an user base must be maintained and grown.

I'm not convinced that "better compatibility with older lenses" (the improperly called "uncrippled" K-mount) would ensure the project's success. I'd say it would be marginal at best.

A camera designed to sell to the general population interested in full frame, is likely to be adequate for the "needs" of Pentaxians, as well. It is just that such a camera is likely to have better auto focus and features, but maybe not focus so much on backward compatibility. Lenses will likely be pretty pricey as well.

[Parry]

I've concluded it's best just to go with one of the established FF manufacturers if you want FF and be very selective on lenses. Do the research beforehand.

Pentax APS-C has taught me how to use a DSLR and what I like to shoot the most and it's given me a great hobby and good fun. I now know what I want. But blimey this has been an expensive learning curve.

[jsherman999]

... On the other hand, if everything I read about sensor size between APS-C and full frame is right, then certainly increasing sensor size again is beneficial.

As long as the sensors in question are comparible in tech - the CCD in the 645D is getting long in the tooth, so it doesn't quite compare.

Now, a 645D II with the latest/greatest, and better yet a non-cropped Medium Format sensor - that might be tasty, especially if it's priced the same as the original 645D or less, but then again you're taking about a $10,000 body + $4000 lenses to take the space of a $2500 FF body and the same lenses we can shoot on aps-c. It's not the same thing, doesn't sell to the same set of folks.

.

[Parry]

As long as the sensors in question are comparible in tech - the CCD in the 645D is getting long in the tooth, so it doesn't quite compare.

Now, a 645D II with the latest/greatest, and better yet a non-cropped Medium Format sensor - that might be tasty, especially if it's priced the same as the original 645D or less, but then again you're taking about a $10,000 body + $4000 lenses to take the space of a $2500 FF body and the same lenses we can shoot on aps-c. It's not the same thing, doesn't sell to the same set of folks.

.

I agree, MF is a completely different thing altogether in my opinion. It's for studio pro work.

Just priced up a Nikon D800e with Nikon grip and 3x spare Nikon bats, an SB910 flash and the sort of lenses (4No.) I'd actually use and the total has come to a bit less than I've spent on Pentax APS-C cameras and lenses, flash etc.

I'm not running Pentax down here, they're seriously great cameras and lenses, it's more about me having selected the wrong gear through ignorance and buying too many lenses I never use. Same goes for tripods. Tried the mid-range stuff and it wasn't quite up to the job.

As someone coming out of the camera newbie stage I recommend anyone wanting to get into this just buys a fixed lens camera with full manual control that shoots RAW and a good PP package to learn on for two years. Then if you're still into it really research the hell out of the thing and go for the good stuff (but not too many lenses you don't need), because an awful lot of money is wasted on mid-range kit.

[monochrome]

Maybe I'm too optimistic, but I believe many of us are willing to spend on new lenses (even if some might have old lenses or not). I'm talking about such customers, and also about APS-C customers who could be "persuaded" to spend on the larger format.
Such an user base must be maintained and grown.

It feels to me as if Pentax FF proponents on this Forum deep-down think Pentax (Ashai, Pentax, Hoya and Ricoh) has made a terrible mistake all these years not offering a FF camera - and they keep looking for the bogeyman reason that Ricoh can slay.

But what if Pentax been right all along?

Is it at all significant that Canon makes its own sensors, Nikon jointly develops with Sony, and now Sony also makes its own sensors?

[Rondec]

It feels to me as if Pentax FF proponents on this Forum deep-down think Pentax (Ashai, Pentax, Hoya and Ricoh) has made a terrible mistake all these years not offering a FF camera - and they keep looking for the bogeyman reason that Ricoh can slay.

But what if Pentax been right all along?

Is it at all significant that Canon makes its own sensors, Nikon jointly develops with Sony, and now Sony also makes its own sensors?

I think Pentax has been right to this point. The earliest it would have made sense to release a full frame camera would have been about a year and a half ago, but with Pentax/Ricoh merging, that wasn't going to happen.

What disappoints me is not the lack of full frame under Hoya. That would have been a disaster. I am more disappointed with the complete lack of interest and investment by Hoya. There was hardly any new glass. No improvements in auto focus. None of the ground work laid for higher spec cameras (including full frame). The K5 had a beautiful sensor, but certainly the K3 is the first camera that feels "new" since the K10.

[Ash]

I agree, MF is a completely different thing altogether in my opinion. It's for studio pro work.

Except the 645D, which is weather sealed and designed also for the outdoor photographer with looking for an edge on DR and resolution.
Bear in mind that camera technology is quickly dated, and high end cameras take a while to catch up to this for many reasons.

What we think (or what DxO measurebates) that the D800 has over the 645D and the pragmatic advantage of the 645D in its intended setting are two different things. It is not all about DxO scores.

[ElJamoquio]

It feels to me as if Pentax FF proponents on this Forum deep-down think Pentax (Ashai, Pentax, Hoya and Ricoh) has made a terrible mistake all these years not offering a FF camera

'deep down'? No. It's on the surface.
'terrible mistake'? I wouldn't call it 'terrible'.

Bottom line is that Pentax's market share in the digital world was lower than in the film world. That started well before digital but continued or only maintained with digital, despite having the best APS-C cameras and good/best APS-C lenses.

Obviously (to me at least) having great APS-C products is not enough.

[jsherman999]

Obviously (to me at least) having great APS-C products is not enough.

And even if it was 'enough' 2003 through 2010 (and it's hard to make that case airtight when you look at where their market share moved in that time,) one of my main points is always that I fear it won't be enough going forward - not if they want to continue K-mount.

.

[Kunzite]

It feels to me as if Pentax FF proponents on this Forum deep-down think Pentax (Ashai, Pentax, Hoya and Ricoh) has made a terrible mistake all these years not offering a FF camera - and they keep looking for the bogeyman reason that Ricoh can slay.

But what if Pentax been right all along?

Is it at all significant that Canon makes its own sensors, Nikon jointly develops with Sony, and now Sony also makes its own sensors?

I'm sure they were right to cancel the MZ-D, and to not hastily jump with a "full frame" before their APS-C line was ready to support it.
I wonder though if Pentax Corporation, if left alone, would not have had already launched it - I have little doubt they would have been in a much better shape (but still, nowhere near a top player).

P.S. I hope that's English what I'm writing, or at least that it's understandable

[tuco]

Landscape photog... This is the best camera.
Sports photog ... You're nuts. FPS is dismal on that thing.
Street photog ... Both of you are crazy. Big, bulky cameras suck and people freak out over them.
Frugal photog ... You've got to be kidding. This camera has the best bang for your buck. It's the best.
Artistic photog ... None of those inspire me to go out and shoot. This is the best camera.
Gearhead photog ... All those cameras suck. This camera has the highest specs and most features.