[Sandy Hancock]

That DA 10-17 with the hood removed makes a good FF lens though.

I know

[zosxavius]

What happens when the price dips to near K-3 levels? the A7 isn't all that much really and eventually I imagine it will dip further below 2k in the states. I agree that a pentax FF would likely be in the 2000 euro range to keep competitive. I wouldn't be surprised if it was a bit less even. Ricoh is likely going to bet on a healthy attachment rate since only a handful of current DA lenses will cover FF. Crop mode could be great if the pixel density is high enough and it would be like having a ff and k-5 in one camera with even better high iso performance. For me the ability to use k and m42 lenses to their full potential is intriguing. I know that many of them won't equal modern digital lenses in terms of resolution, but given from what I've seen from some classic lenses on the A7 and Canon 5d, I think this could be a whole lot of fun.

As to rangefinder style, not likely really. Pentax will cling to the SLR forever it seems. I would prefer that anyways. It wouldn't be a pentax without a pentaprism really. These new lenses if they are indeed k-mount really say something about what direction they decided to go IMO.

Edit: I think SR is pretty important too FWIW. It is a significant advantage that has given me countless handheld pictures that would have been nearly impossible otherwise. Every K series camera seems to have better SR with each new model. The K-5 IIs I'm using is really amazing to me at times with wide angle lenses. Quite honestly I'm ok with OIS on longer lenses, so I can see room for both approaches. That said the k-5 does pretty well at even 200mm and gives me good results at 1/FL generally. If I can stabilize my position I can easily go much, much lower. That's good enough for me.

[JimmyDranox]

I consider perfectly normal that everybody has a point of view about a K-FF.

But I don't understand the title of this thread. Wouldn't be much better ''Introducing the K-FF, the camera I don't buy'', instead of ''you don't buy''.

[Rondec]

What happens when the price dips to near K-3 levels? the A7 isn't all that much really and eventually I imagine it will dip further below 2k in the states. I agree that a pentax FF would likely be in the 2000 euro range to keep competitive. I wouldn't be surprised if it was a bit less even. Ricoh is likely going to bet on a healthy attachment rate since only a handful of current DA lenses will cover FF. Crop mode could be great if the pixel density is high enough and it would be like having a ff and k-5 in one camera with even better high iso performance. For me the ability to use k and m42 lenses to their full potential is intriguing. I know that many of them won't equal modern digital lenses in terms of resolution, but given from what I've seen from some classic lenses on the A7 and Canon 5d, I think this could be a whole lot of fun.

As to rangefinder style, not likely really. Pentax will cling to the SLR forever it seems. I would prefer that anyways. It wouldn't be a pentax without a pentaprism really. These new lenses if they are indeed k-mount really say something about what direction they decided to go IMO.

Edit: I think SR is pretty important too FWIW. It is a significant advantage that has given me countless handheld pictures that would have been nearly impossible otherwise. Every K series camera seems to have better SR with each new model. The K-5 IIs I'm using is really amazing to me at times with wide angle lenses. Quite honestly I'm ok with OIS on longer lenses, so I can see room for both approaches. That said the k-5 does pretty well at even 200mm and gives me good results at 1/FL generally. If I can stabilize my position I can easily go much, much lower. That's good enough for me.

Whether or not there are cheap full frame options out there, Pentax can and will choose not to compete in those lines. Even though there are full frame options that are cheap and will get cheaper over time, I expect camera companies to hold back features on them in order to protect mid and upper end camera bodies, where most of the revenue will be made.

Cameras like the D810 and D4 will continue to be relatively expensive.

[disco_owner]

That DA 10-17 with the hood removed makes a good FF lens though.

It will vignett pretty severely , I have already tried DA12-24 on A7R and its pretty horrible.

[Clavius]

It will vignett pretty severely , I have already tried DA12-24 on A7R and its pretty horrible.

I don't have the 12-24. But it's a very different lens then the DA 10-17. It does vignette, but not even that bad as I expected. Note that the Tokina version, exactly the same but lacking the hood, is full frame compatible.

[LFLee]

Stardate 04012015, Pentax announce it's first Full Frame DSLR, the K-FF. You shout for joy, spend 79 consecutive hours on photography
forums talking about the event, but in the end, you don't buy. Why?

I was mulling this question today while working in the garden. Admittedly, I'm not clamoring for a FF body. I still own a K10D as my most
current DSLR and will be more than content to upgrade to a K-3 before the year is out. But what if a FF body becomes available before
I get the K-3? Would I buy? There a few key factors.....


1. Price
If I had $10,000 of readily disposable income I'd happily add a 645z to my collection. But I don't and so I don't. But what about the K-FF?
I have little doubt that the K-FF will offer tremendous value for it's price in comparison to virtually any other FF body on the market. But
I also expect Pentax will not release a budget FF body that will compete with it's top end APS-C. Most logical price point is between
the K-3 and 645z and thus the K-FF will likely hit the streets with a MSRP of $2500-$3500. And that is $1500-$2500 more than the
$1000 I'm willing to spend on an upgrade at this time. Price alone will likely stay my hand for the moment.

2. Size
Personally, I think the M-Series represent the ideal sized camera body. Large enough to get a comfortable grip, small enough to carry
anywhere, anytime. My K10D, by comparison, is >BIG<. And it's bigness means that I am less inclined to take the K10D along as a
casual camera. The K10D is largely relegated to the studio and the Q7 and various film bodies see the world. In all likelihood the K-FF
will be at least as big as the K10D, though realistically it will be bigger still. Size alone won't prevent my purchase of the K-FF but
will certainly be a factor. The closer the K-FF gets to D4s dimensions, the less likely I am to buy.

3. Shake Reduction
I've read many of the discussions about SR. I understand the advantages of putting the SR in the lens, particularly for long focal lengths
as well as the possibility that FF SR may not be feasible. I shoot mainly wide to short tele so care less about the drop off in effectiveness
at the long end. And I greatly appreciate the cost and weight savings by not having that feature in every single lens. Whatever the rationale,
no in body SR would be a serious deal buster for me.

4. Video
Lots of noise about video as the present day must have feature for any camera. No video > serious shortcoming > no one going to buy
a camera without it. And it's gotta be 4k whatever, 'cause I wanna know I can shoot a Coca-Cola commercial with my DSLR if asked.
Meh. I've intentionally shot a half dozen videos with my various digital cameras over the past half dozen years. I've probably shot
10 times that many accidentally when the mode dial inadvertently got bumped and subsequently missed my intended still shot. Perhaps
some day I will want to shoot video. But not today. And I really don't want to pay for that feature on my camera. I have no idea what
4k video capability will add to the price of the K-FF, but if it's there I'm going to resent it unless someone can show it's a relatively
costless add-on.

I could add more, but most other features are either relatively insignificant to the decision, (24mp vs 36mp, Ricoh vs Pentax badged, etc),
or likely to be a non-issue to worry about, (the K-FF will be WR, it will be ergonomic and intuitive, etc).

So what about you?

for someone satisfy with using K10D, I doubt you will buy any new camera, FF or not.

PENTAX/Ricoh survival do not depends on user like you, PENTAX FF survival certainly not.

sorry if this come a bit rough, but too many "I don't need FF, why built one" kind of post makes it way more annoying than "I want FF, if not I will leave Pentax" post...

[tvdtvdtvd]

for someone satisfy with using K10D, I doubt you will buy any new camera, FF or not.

PENTAX/Ricoh survival do not depends on user like you, PENTAX FF survival certainly not.

sorry if this come a bit rough, but too many "I don't need FF, why built one" kind of post makes it way more annoying than "I want FF, if not I will leave Pentax" post...

I think you misunderstand my needs and the purpose of my post.

My photography demands have been rather minimal until recently. The K10D has been adequate for it's main purpose, (documenting my
ceramic artwork), but it's limitations have frustrated me for some time, (low light AF and off camera flash support at the top of the list).
I've kept it so long because resolution has not been a problem. I am most definitely not a pixel peeper. Nonetheless, I've been looking
to upgrade for a couple years and have considered the K-7, K-5 and K-3 along the way, again more for the better AF performance than
for higher resolution, (not sure any of those bodes have better flash support ).

As I mentioned elsewhere on the forum, my interest in photography for it's own sake reignited earlier this year. As such, an updated
body is beginning to appeal even more. And there is one clear advantage to FF for me; all my old wides will be wide again. The crop
factor of APS-C is useful at times, but I like to shoot wide and I've missed that on the K10D with all my old glass, (the widest lens I own is
a 24mm, so nothing is really wide on the K10D).

Lastly, I do NOT feel Pentax should NOT build a FF, (they should; I hate double negatives ). Nor do I have any intention to abandon
the brand. I am very much a fan of their approach and so long as they continue to make user cameras, not spec cameras, I'll buy
Pentax.

My post was intended as a reality check. Lots of people are barking, but what if the K-FF is released and it flops because it's too expensive,
too big, doesn't do 4k, too much like canikon, too little like canikon? Certainly that would do none of us any good.

[Rondec]

I think you misunderstand my needs and the purpose of my post.

My photography demands have been rather minimal until recently. The K10D has been adequate for it's main purpose, (documenting my
ceramic artwork), but it's limitations have frustrated me for some time, (low light AF and off camera flash support at the top of the list).
I've kept it so long because resolution has not been a problem. I am most definitely not a pixel peeper. Nonetheless, I've been looking
to upgrade for a couple years and have considered the K-7, K-5 and K-3 along the way, again more for the better AF performance than
for higher resolution, (not sure any of those bodes have better flash support ).

As I mentioned elsewhere on the forum, my interest in photography for it's own sake reignited earlier this year. As such, an updated
body is beginning to appeal even more. And there is one clear advantage to FF for me; all my old wides will be wide again. The crop
factor of APS-C is useful at times, but I like to shoot wide and I've missed that on the K10D with all my old glass, (the widest lens I own is
a 24mm, so nothing is really wide on the K10D).

Lastly, I do NOT feel Pentax should NOT build a FF, (they should; I hate double negatives ). Nor do I have any intention to abandon
the brand. I am very much a fan of their approach and so long as they continue to make user cameras, not spec cameras, I'll buy
Pentax.

My post was intended as a reality check. Lots of people are barking, but what if the K-FF is released and it flops because it's too expensive,
too big, doesn't do 4k, too much like canikon, too little like canikon? Certainly that would do none of us any good.

I just don't think Pentax should build a camera specifically for me or, for you. they need to have as broad a base as possible and not cut out any specific group. Making a digital K1000 might appeal very strongly to 50 people out there, but it would be a mistake to release such a camera on the market, when there are a ton of other, better specified options.

[zosxavius]

It will vignett pretty severely , I have already tried DA12-24 on A7R and its pretty horrible.

Doesn't it work ok from 18-24? I tried it on film but never actually got around to developing those rolls so have no idea. In the viewfinder it looked like it covered ok from 18mm on, but since the viewfinder was only 90%, chances are the corners were pretty dark and rough.

[mecrox]

I just don't think Pentax should build a camera specifically for me or, for you. they need to have as broad a base as possible and not cut out any specific group. Making a digital K1000 might appeal very strongly to 50 people out there, but it would be a mistake to release such a camera on the market, when there are a ton of other, better specified options.

Ah, but we don't buy a camera built for someone else, we buy a camera that is the closest match to a camera built for us. Otherwise, what's the point? That's where staying flexible and not becoming wedded to a brand comes in. If the brand changes markedly, we're not locked to use a camera built for someone else, but not for us.

[Rondec]

Ah, but we don't buy a camera built for someone else, we buy a camera that is the closest match to a camera built for us. Otherwise, what's the point? That's where staying flexible and not becoming wedded to a brand comes in. If the brand changes markedly, we're not locked to use a camera built for someone else, but not for us.

But, lets say you have five needs -- say, ergonomics, a certain frame rate, being able to mount your FA limiteds, weather sealing, and 100 percent pentaprism viewfinder. Pentax offers a camera that checks all five of those boxes, plus about 50 other things that you don't really care about. You will still prefer that camera to a D610 which only checks three of those boxes and offers fewer other features.

[zosxavius]

Whether or not there are cheap full frame options out there, Pentax can and will choose not to compete in those lines. Even though there are full frame options that are cheap and will get cheaper over time, I expect camera companies to hold back features on them in order to protect mid and upper end camera bodies, where most of the revenue will be made.

Cameras like the D810 and D4 will continue to be relatively expensive.

I'm not so sure. The K-3 is about as pro-grade as you can get on aps-c and yet is priced competitively with lesser offerings. Pentax has never been one to really hold back on features. I imagine a FF pentax might carry a slight premium but if you look at what they are doing with regards to pricing they are pushing their prices into Canikon territory while still leaving them slightly cheaper overall. You can get a 6d or D610 for not a whole lot of money really. They would be very smart to create a professional grade DSLR with FF that crushes the lowly canikons and nips at their flagships' heels. They did it on aps-c and they can surely do it with a larger sensor.

[shardulm]

The order I would place:
1. Pentax 24mm-70mm f1.4 Qty:1
2. Pentax 70mm-200mm f1.4 Qty:1
3. Pentax K-FF (WR body that has deadly low light capabilities, and a top of the line image quality) Qty:2

There you go Pentax/Ricoh. You have a buyer already. If you want to use my money I can pay right now and you can fulfill the order when its ready.

[todd]

but lacking the hood

(Sorry for the OT but) how would one go about removing the hood from the DA10-17? A saw?