[Sandy Hancock]

Most of my current primes are FF compatible, and the ones that aren't will have their angle of view covered by other lenses on FF (DA21 = FA31 on FF, DA15 = FA*24 on FF). The flare resistance of the DA limiteds will still keep them in my bag of course.

I will also certainly keep an APS-C body; the smaller body and extra reach will always have a place.

So beyond the price of the body, moving to FF won't cost me anything unless I start replacing older lenses with updated versions. My DA*16-50 is starting to look a little nervous....

[stevebrot]

I will also certainly keep an APS-C body; the smaller body and extra reach will always have a place.

This is a recurring theme and one worth restating. There is nothing intrinsically inferior about APS-C, particularly where reach is a concern.


Steve

[Jamey777]

I should have put a smiley or some other indication of sarcasm.

Ah ok, whew!

My K 24 f/2.8 has such unique colors I can't wait to see it on a full frame in like five years when I can afford one :-)

[pathdoc]

If and when I buy it, I will buy an extra battery and maybe a modern entry level flash if the camera doesn't have one built in. Otherwise I have a 28-50-135 three-prime setup in FA and another in Takumar, a 28-90 FA zoom, an 80-200 M zoom, DFA 100/2.8WR... I'm set for FF glass.

[monochrome]

I have way too much stuff already. I really, really don't need the FF. Buying it would be entirely self-indulgent. All these old lenses I completely don't have the time to use is ridiculous. But this is all I do.

I expect I will wait a year and get the FF and the 24-70 on some kind of Black Friday deal for less than $3000 all-in.

[kooks]

In my case i may buy just a 24-70. MAAAYYYBEEE.. but thats not a lenght that i shoot much.. and for the shoots that I MIGHT do.. the APS-C crop mode could be enough.. besides that.. im setup with a FA 50 f1.4.. Tamron 70-200 f2.8 and my latest lens a Sigma 85mm f1.4..

Im pretty happy with my Tamron 70-200 and my Sigma 85mm .. love that lenses.

[ldj4549]

I make pictures, not cameras. Mine works good (K-5) it's inexpensive to operate. Good business. Thats all i've got.

[RobA_Oz]

With my FA20/2.8, FA*24/2, FA*28-70/2.8, FA31/1.8, FA43/1.9, FA77/1.8, FA*80-200/2.8 and F*300/4.5, along with my A50/1.2, A35-105/3.5, A400/5.6, Nokton 58/1.4, K28/2.8 shift and various other Ms, Ks and M42s, I think I'll be right for a while - I've been collecting for just this event for at least the last ten and the determinists could say for the last forty years.

On the other hand, some reworked Limiteds could cause me to think again...

Damn! I just realised I don't have the Sigma 8-16 covered on 35FF. Hmm. Guess I'll be looking for a 12-24.

[biz-engineer]

The Sigma 12-24, 24-70,

Full frame compliant? How does Sigma 12-24 and 24-70 perform on the edges. When friend having canon more from crop DSLR to FF, they were happy of the general improvement of image quality and also disappointed of the edge sharpness. So I was thinking that perhaps only the most recent FF lens designs were good for the newer high resolution FF sensors.

---------- Post added 26-09-15 at 09:59 ----------

I know, I know...my film lenses are going to suck...

To be honest, I prefer the rendering of photos taken with FA lenses. The only 'old' lens I have is an M50 1.7 from 1975, that I purchased on ebay 4 or 5 years ago for 40 Euros, and I was impressed by the sharpness and the build quality (not even considering the cheap price). My M50 1.7 outresolved my DA lenses, so it made me question the quality of the glass "made for digital".... But what put me off with the M50 1.7 is the amount of flare (depending on light direction) and manual focus only, especially because our digital cameras do no help much for MF (although K-3 now has focus peaking, but the K-5 didn't). So, I did not really consider buying FA lenses, also because I don't really know how to select them. I've seen that we can find cheap FA zooms, and I think some of them can render very beautiful images, from the posted images taken with APSC camera. I'd need a FA lens selection guide.

[mholford]

have to admit... a FF camera would be a luxury for me, and not likely to have for at least a year or two...
but when I start looking at my gear, I guess in one manner or other I have a lot of focal range covered already too....
everything from a 24-40 zoom, a 35-105 zoom, two 70-200 zooms, a 28mm, four fast fifties, 100mm macro, 200mm, 500mm
now the quality of the glass isn't quite up there with my limiteds and DA*'s so I'm unlikely to ditch my aps-c camera any time soon

[6BQ5]

Since we start seeing new DFA lenses I was wondering what would be the minimum FF setup and related budget. I guess a basic setup would cost about $6000 ? How much to money to save ? How do we deal with the APSC to FF upgrade?

I think you've already gotten a feel for what this Pentax community is like. Many of us already have FF capable lenses. All we want is a camera body to mount them on. So, in many cases the cost of moving to FF is nothing more than the body (which may be a lot). Typically, I think amateur/enthusiasts which account for the major of users would need 1 - 5 primes plus 1 or 2 zooms. For primes, consider the FA Limited lenses plus either the 50mm or 100mm macro. There isn't much on the zoom front. The 28-70 f/4 is nice and I like my 28-105 f/3.2 on APS. The primes may already be in our bags. It's the zooms that will be a killer. The used market is an incredible place to find excellent lenses if you know what you're looking for.

After the enthusiasts comes the enthusiasts with special applications. A common one is macro mentioned above. If you need way wicked amounts of telephoto reach then I would recommend against super long focal lengths. Just get a u4/3 body with an adapter if you can handle the manual controls. The smaller sensor will effectively increase the reach of your FF lenses by 2x with excellent results.

Professional photographers who are using a different system like Nikon will have to start over from scratch. They will probably want to stock up on multiple Trinities of zooms and primes. The sky's the limit in that case!

Personally, for me, I have a small collection of Pentax primes and a three FA zooms. I don't know how well these lenses will perform on the FF body but I'll take a patient approach. Let's try them first and see how they fare. Then I will ask myself how much of an IQ jump I get with a different lens and if that jump in IQ is worth the extra $$.

[biz-engineer]

Many of us already have FF capable lenses. All we want is a camera body to mount them on. So, in many cases the cost of moving to FF is nothing more than the body (which may be a lot).

Yeah, some people will be looking for a full frame body to mount on their lenses , while others will be looking for lenses to mount on their full frame body :-)

Personally, for me, I have a small collection of Pentax primes and a three FA zooms. I don't know how well these lenses will perform on the FF body but I'll take a patient approach. Let's try them first and see how they fare. Then I will ask myself how much of an IQ jump I get with a different lens and if that jump in IQ is worth the extra $$.

Do you know how is the coating and flare resistance of FA lenses versus older M lenses ?

[clockworkrat]

Yeah, some people will be looking for a full frame body to mount on their lenses

Pretty much this. I think it'd be fun to see the edges of the image circles on my lenses. Resolution isn't a big deal; even just 16-20 megapickles would make me happy.

[Nick Siebers]

I would think you could make a decent, relatively inexpensive lens kit as follows:
Fa 20-35 $300?
F 35-70 $50
Fa 80-320 $150?
Or Fa j 75-300 $100?

Plus a few primes as you're interested. Fa 35 and 50, maybe macro dfa100. I think that all comes out under $1,500.

Now, would it make sense to buy a FF DSLR to use inexpensive lenses on, or an APS-c body with higher end lenses? That remains to be seen.

[stevebrot]

Do you know how is the coating and flare resistance of FA lenses versus older M lenses ?

They are both good, but the FA are better, at least for the two I own. I still remember the first time I looked at the front element of my FA 35/2. The lack of reflection startled me.


Steve