A recent full frame experience

Winder · 03-20-2015, 10:01 PM

Originally posted by yusuf

I sold it very recently as it's too close in focal length with FE55. It's fine otherwise.

OK. I already have the FE55. I guess I will wait for the 90mm macro or the fast tele-prime on the road map. I'm kind of hoping for an 85mm F/2.

**Rondec** · 03-21-2015, 02:58 AM

The thing about full frame is that everyone seems to focus on camera bodies, while my focus would be on glass. This is the problem with Sony. Their bodies are fine, but their glass line up is fairly paltry unless you are going to stick alpha mount lenses on there. This is the reason that Canon and Nikon have done so well over time. There are no gaps in their line up. This is also the reason why Pentax did not go mirrorless. How long would it take Pentax to build up a decent lens line up for a mirrorless full frame mount? I have no idea, but my feeling is that it would take ten years, pretty much dooming the new camera. At least with an SLR, k mount design they have a lot of decent lenses in the line up already and can plug holes a lot faster.

stillshot2 · 03-21-2015, 05:14 AM

Originally posted by Rondec

my focus would be on glass. This is the problem with Sony.

I think Sony's saving grace on the E mount was that it is so adaptable, even to old manual focus lenses from other manufacturers. I realize Sony could make a lot more money if they sold more lenses, but do you think Sony knew their mount distance would be adaptable to fit other glass or was that just a convenient mistake?

**monochrome** · 03-21-2015, 06:29 AM

Originally posted by Rondec

The thing about full frame is that everyone seems to focus on camera bodies, while my focus would be on glass. This is the problem with Sony. Their bodies are fine, but their glass line up is fairly paltry unless you are going to stick alpha mount lenses on there. This is the reason that Canon and Nikon have done so well over time. There are no gaps in their line up. This is also the reason why Pentax did not go mirrorless. How long would it take Pentax to build up a decent lens line up for a mirrorless full frame mount? I have no idea, but my feeling is that it would take ten years, pretty much dooming the new camera. At least with an SLR, k mount design they have a lot of decent lenses in the line up already and can plug holes a lot faster.

FWIW, that's also why there is a 645z. There was already a lens line-up - albeit elderly designs - to sell, with existing lenses already in inventory.

**Rondec** · 03-21-2015, 07:28 AM

Originally posted by stillshot2

I think Sony's saving grace on the E mount was that it is so adaptable, even to old manual focus lenses from other manufacturers. I realize Sony could make a lot more money if they sold more lenses, but do you think Sony knew their mount distance would be adaptable to fit other glass or was that just a convenient mistake?

I'm sure they knew that having a shorter registration distance would have that benefit. It has been there for Olympus and Panasonic for a long time. The problem to me is that the majority of users don't buy cameras hoping to adapt their ancient Leica or FD Mount lenses. They buy a camera hoping to have a lens lineup that you can use with auto focus and auto metering right out of the box -- without an adapter.

emergo · 03-21-2015, 11:44 AM

Originally posted by Rondec

How long would it take Pentax to build up a decent lens line up for a mirrorless full frame mount? I have no idea, but my feeling is that it would take ten years, pretty much dooming the new camera.

Micro Four Thirds debuted in Oct 2008. to date, there have been 40 bodies and about 75 lenses released. it certainly shouldn't take Pentax a decade to create such a system - except that they are slow to change and slow to address market trends and their core users' desires - so maybe you're right.

Kunzite · 03-21-2015, 11:48 AM - **1 Like**

Uhh... their core user's desires are around the K-mount, and Ricoh Imaging is delivering. Just saying.

jeff knight · 03-21-2015, 01:30 PM

Hey stillshot2,
The Pentax FF will not be small. It may be smaller than Canikon, but will probably be heavier. A real brick.

**monochrome** · 03-21-2015, 03:00 PM

Originally posted by jeff knight

. . . smaller than Canikon, but ~~will probably be~~ heavier. A real brick.

You just wrote the typical Review headline.

emergo · 03-21-2015, 03:13 PM

Originally posted by Kunzite

Uhh... their core user's desires are around the K-mount, and Ricoh Imaging is delivering. Just saying.

sorry, what I meant to say there was that the core users have wanted a full frame camera, and that it's taken so very long for Pentax to respond to that. I didn't mean to imply that the users have been asking for mirrorless FF. sorry about the lack of clarity there...

Kunzite · 03-21-2015, 04:12 PM

Oh, my bad.
Though I cannot exactly agree with the idea of "Pentax" failing to respond to our demands in a reasonable timeframe, and use our long wait for a FF to support it. The problem is - between 2000 and 2015, there was no single "Pentax" entity with a single, uniform strategy. We had Pentax Corporation, who tried to be one of the firsts with a FF DSLR; but they had to cancel it. They later entered the DSLR market with the *istD, being complacent in releasing cameras derived from it and, in 2006, they took the world by surprise with the amazing K10D. Just as they did it, Hoya and SPARX orchestrated a hostile takeover, and while they allowed Pentax Imaging Systems to launch the lens line being prepared (and the certain hit 645D), it was all downsizing and cost cutting from there. Last, in 2011 Hoya sold Pentax Imaging Systems to Ricoh.

What would have happened if Hoya failed to take over Pentax Corporation? Who knows, perhaps we'd have our second or third FF DSLR by now (and Mr. Jun Hirakawa would still be with Pentax). What would have happened if Hoya couldn't find a buyer for Pentax Imaging Systems? Would they still have decided to launch the FF?

We know one thing for certain: that Ricoh Imaging is launching the Pentax FF DSLR as fast as reasonably possible (given that it takes about 3 years to develop such a camera). This is more relevant than what Hoya, or even Pentax Corporation did before.

jsherman999 · 03-22-2015, 06:42 AM

Originally posted by stillshot2

I was talking about the Canikon APS-C user that has APS-C kit lenses who decides they wanna go full frame, then tries out a D610/D750 in stores like I did and go, oh crap this is too big and heavy and leans toward a smaller, yet traditional optical viewfinder Pentax FF...

There is a feeling out there that larger = better, up to a point. For some people it just handles better, feels better in the hand, I've heard people say they feel like they're getting 'more for their money'

Those folks will often have a small MILC/aps-c combo as well when they need to go small (or even just a phone), otherwise they enjoy the larger kit and it's ease-of use and performance.

stillshot2 · 03-22-2015, 07:18 AM

Originally posted by jsherman999

I've heard people say they feel like they're getting 'more for their money'

That's funny! I wonder if these people buy the old box shaped monitors for their computers too? On a more serious note, the additional cost and weight full frame will bring really has me thinking of sticking with aps-c, so if many others share this idea I can't imagine that Pentax will cancel a K-3 replacement. I love shooting my K30 with the DA 50mm 1.8 which is on my camera most of the time, but my dream is to get a 77mm f1.8 and mount it on a Pentax FF DSLR which would probably be the "end all" for me. But I wonder if the extra size and weight would cause me to leave the camera home more often?.... Probably not

As for now, I can only just wait and see what the full frame brings.

Winder · 03-22-2015, 01:24 PM

Originally posted by Rondec

The problem to me is that the majority of users don't buy cameras hoping to adapt their ancient Leica or FD Mount lenses.

A person on a budget can pick up a used Sony A7 for less than $1,000 with new A7 bodies going for $1,200. I know 2 people who have picked them up just to use with old Canon FD and Nikon MF glass. There are a lot of people who still own these lenses and have no real digital option for them except mirrorless. The A7 is a very cheap FF option for the millions of FD glass owners.... Actually its their only easy FF option.

---------- Post added 03-22-15 at 03:34 PM ----------

Originally posted by stillshot2

That's funny! I wonder if these people buy the old box shaped monitors for their computers too? On a more serious note, the additional cost and weight full frame will bring really has me thinking of sticking with aps-c, so if many others share this idea I can't imagine that Pentax will cancel a K-3 replacement. I love shooting my K30 with the DA 50mm 1.8 which is on my camera most of the time, but my dream is to get a 77mm f1.8 and mount it on a Pentax FF DSLR which would probably be the "end all" for me. But I wonder if the extra size and weight would cause me to leave the camera home more often?.... Probably not

As for now, I can only just wait and see what the full frame brings.

Its a trade off. I like having buttons I can press to change setting or dials I can turn without having to stop and go into a menu, but these controls take space that you have to give up on a camera like the A7. Sometimes I like the compact A7m2, but for somethings I like the larger K-3 with better controls.

**Rondec** · 03-22-2015, 01:46 PM

Originally posted by Winder

A person on a budget can pick up a used Sony A7 for less than $1,000 with new A7 bodies going for $1,200. I know 2 people who have picked them up just to use with old Canon FD and Nikon MF glass. There are a lot of people who still own these lenses and have no real digital option for them except mirrorless. The A7 is a very cheap FF option for the millions of FD glass owners.... Actually its their only easy FF option.

---------- Post added 03-22-15 at 03:34 PM ----------

Its a trade off. I like having buttons I can press to change setting or dials I can turn without having to stop and go into a menu, but these controls take space that you have to give up on a camera like the A7. Sometimes I like the compact A7m2, but for somethings I like the larger K-3 with better controls.

That's fine, I guess. I just wonder how many of those of FD glass owners also own full frame glass for EOS mount or F mount that could be used with auto focus?

I feel like we get a distorted view of the photography world on the forum here, where everyone is into ancient lenses and figuring out ways to adapt them to current digital cameras. But manual focus, even here isn't the norm. All of the pro photographers I know use auto focus and lean on it pretty heavily, for what it is worth. But that is a pretty small sample size and I wouldn't rely on it to judge what the public really wants.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
why is a full frame Pentax such a holy grail?	adwb	Pentax Full Frame	427	07-24-2015 12:32 PM
A recent bad experience with Precision Camera	hyyz	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	15	02-25-2015 09:45 PM
From Full-Frame Sony... to Pentax... to Full-Frame Canon	Mr_Canuck	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	42	01-21-2014 12:50 AM
Full frame or no full frame....	Deedee	Pentax K-3 & K-3 II	14	10-08-2013 05:39 AM
For Sale - Sold: Full frame $1600 Canon EOS 6D full USA warranty, NIB	pocketrounds	Sold Items	30	06-04-2013 11:43 PM

03-20-2015, 10:01 PM	#16
Winder Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 6,617	Originally posted by yusuf I sold it very recently as it's too close in focal length with FE55. It's fine otherwise. OK. I already have the FE55. I guess I will wait for the 90mm macro or the fast tele-prime on the road map. I'm kind of hoping for an 85mm F/2.

03-21-2015, 02:58 AM	#17
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,651	The thing about full frame is that everyone seems to focus on camera bodies, while my focus would be on glass. This is the problem with Sony. Their bodies are fine, but their glass line up is fairly paltry unless you are going to stick alpha mount lenses on there. This is the reason that Canon and Nikon have done so well over time. There are no gaps in their line up. This is also the reason why Pentax did not go mirrorless. How long would it take Pentax to build up a decent lens line up for a mirrorless full frame mount? I have no idea, but my feeling is that it would take ten years, pretty much dooming the new camera. At least with an SLR, k mount design they have a lot of decent lenses in the line up already and can plug holes a lot faster.

03-21-2015, 05:14 AM	#18
stillshot2 Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Phoenix, AZ Photos: Albums Posts: 1,070 Original Poster	Originally posted by Rondec my focus would be on glass. This is the problem with Sony. I think Sony's saving grace on the E mount was that it is so adaptable, even to old manual focus lenses from other manufacturers. I realize Sony could make a lot more money if they sold more lenses, but do you think Sony knew their mount distance would be adaptable to fit other glass or was that just a convenient mistake?

03-21-2015, 06:29 AM	#19
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Originally posted by Rondec The thing about full frame is that everyone seems to focus on camera bodies, while my focus would be on glass. This is the problem with Sony. Their bodies are fine, but their glass line up is fairly paltry unless you are going to stick alpha mount lenses on there. This is the reason that Canon and Nikon have done so well over time. There are no gaps in their line up. This is also the reason why Pentax did not go mirrorless. How long would it take Pentax to build up a decent lens line up for a mirrorless full frame mount? I have no idea, but my feeling is that it would take ten years, pretty much dooming the new camera. At least with an SLR, k mount design they have a lot of decent lenses in the line up already and can plug holes a lot faster. FWIW, that's also why there is a 645z. There was already a lens line-up - albeit elderly designs - to sell, with existing lenses already in inventory.

03-21-2015, 07:28 AM	#20
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,651	Originally posted by stillshot2 I think Sony's saving grace on the E mount was that it is so adaptable, even to old manual focus lenses from other manufacturers. I realize Sony could make a lot more money if they sold more lenses, but do you think Sony knew their mount distance would be adaptable to fit other glass or was that just a convenient mistake? I'm sure they knew that having a shorter registration distance would have that benefit. It has been there for Olympus and Panasonic for a long time. The problem to me is that the majority of users don't buy cameras hoping to adapt their ancient Leica or FD Mount lenses. They buy a camera hoping to have a lens lineup that you can use with auto focus and auto metering right out of the box -- without an adapter.

03-21-2015, 11:44 AM	#21
emergo Senior Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Coloroado Photos: Gallery Posts: 271	Originally posted by Rondec How long would it take Pentax to build up a decent lens line up for a mirrorless full frame mount? I have no idea, but my feeling is that it would take ten years, pretty much dooming the new camera. Micro Four Thirds debuted in Oct 2008. to date, there have been 40 bodies and about 75 lenses released. it certainly shouldn't take Pentax a decade to create such a system - except that they are slow to change and slow to address market trends and their core users' desires - so maybe you're right.

03-21-2015, 11:48 AM - 1 Like	#22
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Uhh... their core user's desires are around the K-mount, and Ricoh Imaging is delivering. Just saying.

03-21-2015, 01:30 PM	#23
jeff knight Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Pacific Northwest USA Posts: 261	Hey stillshot2, The Pentax FF will not be small. It may be smaller than Canikon, but will probably be heavier. A real brick.

03-21-2015, 03:00 PM	#24
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Originally posted by jeff knight . . . smaller than Canikon, but ~~will probably be~~ heavier. A real brick. You just wrote the typical Review headline.

03-21-2015, 03:13 PM	#25
emergo Senior Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Coloroado Photos: Gallery Posts: 271	Originally posted by Kunzite Uhh... their core user's desires are around the K-mount, and Ricoh Imaging is delivering. Just saying. sorry, what I meant to say there was that the core users have wanted a full frame camera, and that it's taken so very long for Pentax to respond to that. I didn't mean to imply that the users have been asking for mirrorless FF. sorry about the lack of clarity there...

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-21-2015, 04:12 PM	#26
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Oh, my bad. Though I cannot exactly agree with the idea of "Pentax" failing to respond to our demands in a reasonable timeframe, and use our long wait for a FF to support it. The problem is - between 2000 and 2015, there was no single "Pentax" entity with a single, uniform strategy. We had Pentax Corporation, who tried to be one of the firsts with a FF DSLR; but they had to cancel it. They later entered the DSLR market with the istD, being complacent in releasing cameras derived from it and, in 2006, they took the world by surprise with the amazing K10D. Just as they did it, Hoya and SPARX orchestrated a hostile takeover, and while they allowed Pentax Imaging Systems to launch the lens line being prepared (and the certain hit 645D), it was all downsizing and cost cutting from there. Last, in 2011 Hoya sold Pentax Imaging Systems to Ricoh. What would have happened if Hoya failed to take over Pentax Corporation? Who knows, perhaps we'd have our second or third FF DSLR by now (and Mr. Jun Hirakawa would still be with Pentax). What would have happened if Hoya couldn't find a buyer for Pentax Imaging Systems? Would they still have decided to launch the FF? We know one thing for certain: that Ricoh Imaging is launching the Pentax FF DSLR as fast as reasonably possible* (given that it takes about 3 years to develop such a camera). This is more relevant than what Hoya, or even Pentax Corporation did before.

03-22-2015, 06:42 AM	#27
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	Originally posted by stillshot2 I was talking about the Canikon APS-C user that has APS-C kit lenses who decides they wanna go full frame, then tries out a D610/D750 in stores like I did and go, oh crap this is too big and heavy and leans toward a smaller, yet traditional optical viewfinder Pentax FF... There is a feeling out there that larger = better, up to a point. For some people it just handles better, feels better in the hand, I've heard people say they feel like they're getting 'more for their money' Those folks will often have a small MILC/aps-c combo as well when they need to go small (or even just a phone), otherwise they enjoy the larger kit and it's ease-of use and performance.

03-22-2015, 07:18 AM	#28
stillshot2 Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2013 Location: Phoenix, AZ Photos: Albums Posts: 1,070 Original Poster	Originally posted by jsherman999 I've heard people say they feel like they're getting 'more for their money' That's funny! I wonder if these people buy the old box shaped monitors for their computers too? On a more serious note, the additional cost and weight full frame will bring really has me thinking of sticking with aps-c, so if many others share this idea I can't imagine that Pentax will cancel a K-3 replacement. I love shooting my K30 with the DA 50mm 1.8 which is on my camera most of the time, but my dream is to get a 77mm f1.8 and mount it on a Pentax FF DSLR which would probably be the "end all" for me. But I wonder if the extra size and weight would cause me to leave the camera home more often?.... Probably not As for now, I can only just wait and see what the full frame brings.

03-22-2015, 01:24 PM	#29
Winder Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 6,617	Originally posted by Rondec The problem to me is that the majority of users don't buy cameras hoping to adapt their ancient Leica or FD Mount lenses. A person on a budget can pick up a used Sony A7 for less than $1,000 with new A7 bodies going for $1,200. I know 2 people who have picked them up just to use with old Canon FD and Nikon MF glass. There are a lot of people who still own these lenses and have no real digital option for them except mirrorless. The A7 is a very cheap FF option for the millions of FD glass owners.... Actually its their only easy FF option. ---------- Post added 03-22-15 at 03:34 PM ---------- Originally posted by stillshot2 That's funny! I wonder if these people buy the old box shaped monitors for their computers too? On a more serious note, the additional cost and weight full frame will bring really has me thinking of sticking with aps-c, so if many others share this idea I can't imagine that Pentax will cancel a K-3 replacement. I love shooting my K30 with the DA 50mm 1.8 which is on my camera most of the time, but my dream is to get a 77mm f1.8 and mount it on a Pentax FF DSLR which would probably be the "end all" for me. But I wonder if the extra size and weight would cause me to leave the camera home more often?.... Probably not As for now, I can only just wait and see what the full frame brings. Its a trade off. I like having buttons I can press to change setting or dials I can turn without having to stop and go into a menu, but these controls take space that you have to give up on a camera like the A7. Sometimes I like the compact A7m2, but for somethings I like the larger K-3 with better controls.

03-22-2015, 01:46 PM	#30
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,651	Originally posted by Winder A person on a budget can pick up a used Sony A7 for less than $1,000 with new A7 bodies going for $1,200. I know 2 people who have picked them up just to use with old Canon FD and Nikon MF glass. There are a lot of people who still own these lenses and have no real digital option for them except mirrorless. The A7 is a very cheap FF option for the millions of FD glass owners.... Actually its their only easy FF option. ---------- Post added 03-22-15 at 03:34 PM ---------- Its a trade off. I like having buttons I can press to change setting or dials I can turn without having to stop and go into a menu, but these controls take space that you have to give up on a camera like the A7. Sometimes I like the compact A7m2, but for somethings I like the larger K-3 with better controls. That's fine, I guess. I just wonder how many of those of FD glass owners also own full frame glass for EOS mount or F mount that could be used with auto focus? I feel like we get a distorted view of the photography world on the forum here, where everyone is into ancient lenses and figuring out ways to adapt them to current digital cameras. But manual focus, even here isn't the norm. All of the pro photographers I know use auto focus and lean on it pretty heavily, for what it is worth. But that is a pretty small sample size and I wouldn't rely on it to judge what the public really wants.