The Full Frame: What will make you buy it?

**filoxophy** · 03-31-2015, 06:35 AM

Public feuds are fun and all, but why don't you two just boriscleto each other and be done with it?

normhead · 03-31-2015, 07:33 AM

trust me, both LFlee and jsherman are now borisclettoed, I just check in every now and then to see what nonsense jay is posting about me. He just can't leave me alone. The guy jumps into threads just to insult me... when he has nothing else to add.

**monochrome** · 03-31-2015, 07:37 AM

Originally posted by filoxophy

Public feuds are fun and all, but why don't you two just boriscleto each other and be done with it?

Originally posted by normhead

truts me, both LFlee and jsherman are now [COLOR="rgb(255, 140, 0)"]borisclettoed[/COLOR], I just check in every now and then to see what nonsense jay is posting about me. He just can't leave me alone. The guy jus into threads just to insult me... when he has nothing else to add.

Ah Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah.

mikeodial · 03-31-2015, 07:39 AM

And back at to the thread ... What will make you buy it?

**monochrome** · 03-31-2015, 08:42 AM

IF I choose to spend the money (i.e. if a K-3 and/or successor aren't good enough)

Best passive / optical viewfinder in the business
Continuation of the Pentax history of wringing just a bit more IQ out of Sony sensors
Continuation of Pentax compact body ethos and general Pentax thoughtful ergonomics
The 'surprise' is something meaningfully useful to me

[EDIT] Thanks Norm (see next post).

And I want my carefully assembled collection of NOS/NIB OEM rectangular Asahi Pentax plastic clip-on K-series hoods to work they way the lens designers intended they should work.

(

)

normhead · 03-31-2015, 09:07 AM

^ that's a good list.... plus, more affordable than other offerings in it's class and I might break down, after I buy the 150-450.

**boriscleto** · 03-31-2015, 09:38 AM

Originally posted by normhead

^ that's a good list.... plus, more affordable than other offerings in it's class and I might break down, after I buy the 150-450.

The 150-450 is attractive if the AF is a fast as rumored. But I still don't see a reason for FF over APS-C.

jsherman999 · 03-31-2015, 07:25 PM

Originally posted by normhead

trust me, both LFlee and jsherman are now borisclettoed, I just check in every now and then to see what nonsense jay is posting about me. He just can't leave me alone. The guy jumps into threads just to insult me... when he has nothing else to add.

I will admit one of the more amusing things this forum brings me is imagining Norm trying, trying, trying to keep himself from clicking on the 'ignored'. And failing. Every single time. Hi Norm! (now, imagine him whistling, looking away, pretending he didn't read this...)

Norm, if you notice, we butt-heads when you wander in to the FF or off-brand forum to throw insults. You can't keep away, but your befuddlement and misinformation does have the positive effect of providing a foil to bounce the truth off of - for the benefit of everyone else, I guess.

.

magkelly · 03-31-2015, 08:48 PM

Somebody hands me a 3K check and tells me that I must spend it on one to accept the check, I might. Otherwise I'm sticking with my K-30's, K-5II and my Oly E-P3's. Okay, I might splurge if I won the lotto or something too, but honestly I don't need one and it's probably going to be too much camera for my budget anyway. I'm glad they are finally making one for people who want them but it's just not a reasonable purchase for me.

**dadipentak** · 04-01-2015, 04:37 AM

I'm really unlikely to go FF but if I do, it'll probably be for the bigger, brighter view-finder. Thing is, I anticipate that'll turn into a "no going back" sort of move so, given the advantages of APS-C (basically size, weight & cost), I'll hold out as long as I can.

**jatrax** · 04-01-2015, 01:22 PM

The shutter sound, that's it. If it has a sexy shutter sound I will buy it immediately. Maybe.

WideOpen · 04-01-2015, 01:34 PM

A big, bright viewfinder, plain and simple. I'm not an engineer, but I don't see why Pentax couldn't utilize a viewfinder with the magnification and coverage of the old MX's: 95/95. It's a pleasure to look through. I find it odd that the FF competitors have magnifications in the 70-80% range. That would be a distinguishing feature.

Kunzite · 04-01-2015, 01:45 PM

Because all their K-mount DSLRs have 100% coverage viewfinders?

We'll get lower magnification (almost certainly), but better coverage.

rawr · 04-02-2015, 01:08 AM

Originally posted by WideOpen

A big, bright viewfinder, plain and simple.

Big they can do pretty easily. Bright not so much.

In most DSLR's, including FF, some light is 'stolen' to feed the AF (via a little semi-transparent segment of the main mirror) plus the metering sensor (via a little feed of light into the metering assembly at the top of the pentaprism), and most DLSR's also have semi-transparent LCD overlays above the focus screen to show stuff like AF points, crop areas, grid lines etc. Manual focus film cameras like the MX didn't have to worry about any of that.

northcoastgreg · 04-03-2015, 08:35 AM

Originally posted by jatrax

What would you like to see that is missing? You have some amazing work, and I thought you would be eager for FF based on your style. Just curious what you feel is needed in the lens department

What I need is a high quality slow aperture standard zoom, something along the lines of an FF version of DA 16-85 and/or the DA 20-40, or perhaps a Pentax version of the Canon FA 24-105 f4. What it looks like is that we'll get a stupendous but heavy and expensive 24-70 f2.8, and a 28-105 f3.5-5 (probably along the lines of the Nikon 24-85 and the Sony 28-70). If I'm going to buy a ~$2,500 camera, I want something better than a mid-range kit lens. Such a lens on FF might give me a bit more resolution to work with, but in terms of perceptual image quality (lens contrast, color rendition, overall rendering), those lenses aren't likely to produce images any better than what I'm getting with my DA 17-70 on APS-C. I want the quality of the FF f2.8 zooms in a smaller package. In short, I want lenses optimized for landscape photography, which means: flare control, lens contrast, edge to edge sharpness. The optimal landscape lens features a slower aperture, because slower aperture lenses require less glass, and that can help with flare control and color transmission (and you don't need f2.8 for landscapes!). If Pentax were to come out with DFA limited zooms using aerobright 2 coatings, my desire for FF Pentax would rise dramatically.

03-31-2015, 07:33 AM	#77
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	trust me, both LFlee and jsherman are now borisclettoed, I just check in every now and then to see what nonsense jay is posting about me. He just can't leave me alone. The guy jumps into threads just to insult me... when he has nothing else to add. Last edited by normhead; 03-31-2015 at 09:08 AM.

03-31-2015, 08:42 AM	#80
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	IF I choose to spend the money (i.e. if a K-3 and/or successor aren't good enough) Best passive / optical viewfinder in the business Continuation of the Pentax history of wringing just a bit more IQ out of Sony sensors Continuation of Pentax compact body ethos and general Pentax thoughtful ergonomics The 'surprise' is something meaningfully useful to me [EDIT] Thanks Norm (see next post). And I want my carefully assembled collection of NOS/NIB OEM rectangular Asahi Pentax plastic clip-on K-series hoods to work they way the lens designers intended they should work. () Last edited by monochrome; 04-01-2015 at 02:41 PM.

03-31-2015, 07:25 PM	#83
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	Hi Norm! ;) Originally posted by normhead trust me, both LFlee and jsherman are now borisclettoed, I just check in every now and then to see what nonsense jay is posting about me. He just can't leave me alone. The guy jumps into threads just to insult me... when he has nothing else to add. I will admit one of the more amusing things this forum brings me is imagining Norm trying, trying, trying to keep himself from clicking on the 'ignored'. And failing. Every single time. Hi Norm! (now, imagine him whistling, looking away, pretending he didn't read this...) Norm, if you notice, we butt-heads when you wander in to the FF or off-brand forum to throw insults. You can't keep away, but your befuddlement and misinformation does have the positive effect of providing a foil to bounce the truth off of - for the benefit of everyone else, I guess. .

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Would you buy a Pentax Full Frame DSLR? extended poll	i83N	Pentax Full Frame	113	04-02-2015 07:12 AM
What will make you buy the K3?	Rupert	Pentax K-3 & K-3 II	106	10-19-2013 01:16 PM
Would you buy a Pentax Full Frame DSLR?	Tesla	Pentax Full Frame	364	07-11-2013 10:01 AM
Pentax full frame fisheye for the 645D...would you buy one?	slackercruster	Pentax Medium Format	7	06-19-2012 07:01 AM
What would you buy? A Full Frame Pentax or an EVIL Pentax?	johnmflores	Pentax DSLR Discussion	104	07-29-2010 07:55 PM

03-31-2015, 06:35 AM	#76
filoxophy Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Albuquerque Posts: 1,132	Public feuds are fun and all, but why don't you two just boriscleto each other and be done with it?

03-31-2015, 07:37 AM	#78
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Originally posted by filoxophy Public feuds are fun and all, but why don't you two just boriscleto each other and be done with it? Originally posted by normhead truts me, both LFlee and jsherman are now [COLOR="rgb(255, 140, 0)"]borisclettoed[/COLOR], I just check in every now and then to see what nonsense jay is posting about me. He just can't leave me alone. The guy jus into threads just to insult me... when he has nothing else to add. Ah Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah.

03-31-2015, 07:39 AM	#79
mikeodial Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2014 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 370 Original Poster	And back at to the thread ... What will make you buy it?

03-31-2015, 09:07 AM	#81
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	^ that's a good list.... plus, more affordable than other offerings in it's class and I might break down, after I buy the 150-450.

03-31-2015, 09:38 AM	#82
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	Originally posted by normhead ^ that's a good list.... plus, more affordable than other offerings in it's class and I might break down, after I buy the 150-450. The 150-450 is attractive if the AF is a fast as rumored. But I still don't see a reason for FF over APS-C.

03-31-2015, 08:48 PM	#84
magkelly Veteran Member Join Date: May 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 5,901	Somebody hands me a 3K check and tells me that I must spend it on one to accept the check, I might. Otherwise I'm sticking with my K-30's, K-5II and my Oly E-P3's. Okay, I might splurge if I won the lotto or something too, but honestly I don't need one and it's probably going to be too much camera for my budget anyway. I'm glad they are finally making one for people who want them but it's just not a reasonable purchase for me.

04-01-2015, 04:37 AM	#85
dadipentak Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Baltimore, Maryland Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,590	I'm really unlikely to go FF but if I do, it'll probably be for the bigger, brighter view-finder. Thing is, I anticipate that'll turn into a "no going back" sort of move so, given the advantages of APS-C (basically size, weight & cost), I'll hold out as long as I can.

04-01-2015, 01:22 PM	#86
jatrax Site Supporter Join Date: May 2010 Location: Washington Cascades Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,991	The shutter sound, that's it. If it has a sexy shutter sound I will buy it immediately. Maybe.

04-01-2015, 01:34 PM	#87
WideOpen Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Ottawa, ON Photos: Gallery Posts: 38	A big, bright viewfinder, plain and simple. I'm not an engineer, but I don't see why Pentax couldn't utilize a viewfinder with the magnification and coverage of the old MX's: 95/95. It's a pleasure to look through. I find it odd that the FF competitors have magnifications in the 70-80% range. That would be a distinguishing feature.

04-01-2015, 01:45 PM	#88
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Because all their K-mount DSLRs have 100% coverage viewfinders? We'll get lower magnification (almost certainly), but better coverage.

04-02-2015, 01:08 AM	#89
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Originally posted by WideOpen A big, bright viewfinder, plain and simple. Big they can do pretty easily. Bright not so much. In most DSLR's, including FF, some light is 'stolen' to feed the AF (via a little semi-transparent segment of the main mirror) plus the metering sensor (via a little feed of light into the metering assembly at the top of the pentaprism), and most DLSR's also have semi-transparent LCD overlays above the focus screen to show stuff like AF points, crop areas, grid lines etc. Manual focus film cameras like the MX didn't have to worry about any of that.

04-03-2015, 08:35 AM	#90
northcoastgreg Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: Northern Michigan Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,173	Originally posted by jatrax What would you like to see that is missing? You have some amazing work, and I thought you would be eager for FF based on your style. Just curious what you feel is needed in the lens department What I need is a high quality slow aperture standard zoom, something along the lines of an FF version of DA 16-85 and/or the DA 20-40, or perhaps a Pentax version of the Canon FA 24-105 f4. What it looks like is that we'll get a stupendous but heavy and expensive 24-70 f2.8, and a 28-105 f3.5-5 (probably along the lines of the Nikon 24-85 and the Sony 28-70). If I'm going to buy a ~$2,500 camera, I want something better than a mid-range kit lens. Such a lens on FF might give me a bit more resolution to work with, but in terms of perceptual image quality (lens contrast, color rendition, overall rendering), those lenses aren't likely to produce images any better than what I'm getting with my DA 17-70 on APS-C. I want the quality of the FF f2.8 zooms in a smaller package. In short, I want lenses optimized for landscape photography, which means: flare control, lens contrast, edge to edge sharpness. The optimal landscape lens features a slower aperture, because slower aperture lenses require less glass, and that can help with flare control and color transmission (and you don't need f2.8 for landscapes!). If Pentax were to come out with DFA limited zooms using aerobright 2 coatings, my desire for FF Pentax would rise dramatically.