Yep it is difficult to know what is going on behind closed doors with these companies. They do not have full frame lenses in production. Well , we have the Zeiss lenses now with the K-mount. But Sony hardly have lenses and they will do in the next future. But ofcourse, that is a rel multi-national.
About my aquipment... Yep stuff enough. I might start to sell something of it. Used to be photgrapher. Now I am a DOP and cameraman. (Movies, commercials, etc)

Hope you have nothing to do with Jean Claude Van Damme ?

About the zeiss lenses I am sure that they are neat, but Pentax does not benefit of that. On the other side, to adapt the FA to digital should be easier to do than to start designing lens from scratch but we would have to wait and sit to see what Hoya has in mind. They are struggling now to fill the demand of the DA* lenses so my guess is that they dont have the full frame possibility in mind. Anyway, even if you loose some quality with some of the lens that you have I think that the change to cropped sensor is not that hard once that you adapt.

[vanDam]

Hope you have nothing to do with Jean Claude Van Damme ?

About the zeiss lenses I am sure that they are neat, but Pentax does not benefit of that. On the other side, to adapt the FA to digital should be easier to do than to start designing lens from scratch but we would have to wait and sit to see what Hoya has in mind. They are struggling now to fill the demand of the DA* lenses so my guess is that they dont have the full frame possibility in mind. Anyway, even if you loose some quality with some of the lens that you have I think that the change to cropped sensor is not that hard once that you adapt.

The glass is important. So maybe Pentax might benefit from having these great lenses. I played with them in Rotterdam, when they came out on the Nikon and Fuji bodies. But maybe not to many people want to focus manualy.
I just do want to invest more money in a brand, that will stop being around in a couple of years. I am not a professional anymore. (still photographer) Used to work with Leica and later Contax. Now I stick to film making..
http://www.lightning-ent.com/movie/view/47
Jean Claude is no family. As far as I know.

[and]

If FF is what you want, then I recommend you sell your glass and go for the 5D, its a great camera, the viewfinder is to die for and the quality of the photos, especially portraits, is fantastic imo. I dunno about the ergonomics and controls tho, I havent tried shooting with one, just handled one a bit and checked out the VF.

The focus with canon usm lenses was also veeery smooth and nice. I think its a great package. And if you fork out of the 3 zoom set, 16-35, 24-70 and 70-200 then you are all set from 16mm to 200mm at f2.8! I find that tempting myself.

I want full frame too, and I prefer a pentax one, but its just not gonna happen for at least 1-2 years, at least. and possibly never. I am not getting a 5D setup because I cannot afford it and dont have to have it (ie I cannot justify it), even tho I want it. But I am saying if u want it then go for it, you only have 1 life right, why stick to something if u really want sth else.

My ist D died.. to soon. Repair minimum 500 euro...
No way. I just want a full frame. Can I wait for that or just go to Canon. I prefer not to, because I have some great Pentax glass and film bodies.
Canon and now Nikon and Sony do have full frame.
Will Pentax follow??

[stewart_photo]

I think they made a mistake there. Even Nikon goes full frame now. They really will lose the battle. It is a shame. (snip)

Like another person said, why? Canon has had so-called full-frame image sensors on two or three of it's cameras for some time now. Not only did Pentax not go out of business, but sales overall have increased, independent product reviews have generally been very positive, and the K10D with APS-C image sensor has won awards world-wide.

Canon continues to sell cameras without full-frame image sensors. Nikon also remained in business in spite of not having a full-frame sensor until now. Nikon also continues to sell cameras without full-frame image sensors. By the way, one or two cameras out of several does not mean "Nikon goes full frame now."

Finally, everyone here (including you) bought a Pentax without, instead of a Canon with, a full-frame image sensor. As far as I know, nobody here (pros, amateurs, or rank beginners) went out of the business of taking images because they didn't have a full-frame image sensor.

Given all that, it appears there is a solid market for cameras without so-called full-frame image sensors, with no real evidence that market is going to decline anytime soon.

stewart

[vanDam]

If FF is what you want, then I recommend you sell your glass and go for the 5D, its a great camera, the viewfinder is to die for and the quality of the photos, especially portraits, is fantastic imo. I dunno about the ergonomics and controls tho, I havent tried shooting with one, just handled one a bit and checked out the VF.

The focus with canon usm lenses was also veeery smooth and nice. I think its a great package. And if you fork out of the 3 zoom set, 16-35, 24-70 and 70-200 then you are all set from 16mm to 200mm at f2.8! I find that tempting myself.

I want full frame too, and I prefer a pentax one, but its just not gonna happen for at least 1-2 years, at least. and possibly never. I am not getting a 5D setup because I cannot afford it and dont have to have it (ie I cannot justify it), even tho I want it. But I am saying if u want it then go for it, you only have 1 life right, why stick to something if u really want sth else.

I am thinking about going Canon. They indeed have some nice glass too. Like the 35mm 1.4 L and the 135mm 2.0 L and a lot more. But the 4 Pentax lenses I have are realy so special. Enfin, I will think it over and make a decision soon. But if I change to Canon, I have to start to sell some equipment. It is starting to look like a museum here. Something, I can not afford at the moment.

[raz-0]

I used to be professional. Now I am in filmmaking etc..
I had the ist D long before the 5D and the most important are the lenses. They are great.
And size does matter....

If size matters, how do you think you will get a full frame mirror box inside a teeny camera? Ful frame capable lenses are bigger and heavier too.

I think too many people are running aorund missing the advantages of APS-C. Which kind of sucked for film, but in digital seems to be a very nice sweet spot for quality of output, performance, form factor and cost of gear.

[Lowell Goudge]

Who ever said film was dead?

Just to stir the pot a little here, when I got my first DSLR, I did not get any new lenses except for the kit lens. My DSLR was the *istD, and it came with an 18-35mm full frame lens.

Knowing that my present 24mm was not wide enough, and with the ASP-C sensor made the 18mm behave like a 28mm, I went 3 years shooting a combination of digital and film.

for virtually everything, I shot using the *istD, BUT for ultra wide angle shots, I used the best color negative film I could get, and put the 18-35 on my PZ-1.

This gave me great wide angle shots, using ultra small grain film, and the shots were as good as digital.

If you are that devoted to your 15mm, go ahead and shoot film!

If not, look into some of the new lenses.

[vanDam]

Like another person said, why? Canon has had so-called full-frame image sensors on two or three of it's cameras for some time now. Not only did Pentax not go out of business, but sales overall have increased, independent product reviews have generally been very positive, and the K10D with APS-C image sensor has won awards world-wide.

Canon continues to sell cameras without full-frame image sensors. Nikon also remained in business in spite of not having a full-frame sensor until now. Nikon also continues to sell cameras without full-frame image sensors. By the way, one or two cameras out of several does not mean "Nikon goes full frame now."

Finally, everyone here (including you) bought a Pentax without, instead of a Canon with, a full-frame image sensor. As far as I know, nobody here (pros, amateurs, or rank beginners) went out of the business of taking images because they didn't have a full-frame image sensor.

Given all that, it appears there is a solid market for cameras without so-called full-frame image sensors, with no real evidence that market is going to decline anytime soon.

stewart

Well, I don't know. I think within some years most DSLR's, will be full frame. The prices of the sensors will drop. And evrybody will want to have and make the best quality bodies. With film it was another story. I have a Pentax KM from the 70ties. Just some good glass on it and a good film. You won't see the difference with a modern film body from 6 years ago. With digital, it is a different story. It changes a lot faster. It is the same in digital film making. It drives you nuts, how fast it goes. But even there they go everytime more with the bigger format sensors..... 35mm..

Cheers, Arie.

[vanDam]

Who ever said film was dead?

Just to stir the pot a little here, when I got my first DSLR, I did not get any new lenses except for the kit lens. My DSLR was the *istD, and it came with an 18-35mm full frame lens.

Knowing that my present 24mm was not wide enough, and with the ASP-C sensor made the 18mm behave like a 28mm, I went 3 years shooting a combination of digital and film.

for virtually everything, I shot using the *istD, BUT for ultra wide angle shots, I used the best color negative film I could get, and put the 18-35 on my PZ-1.

This gave me great wide angle shots, using ultra small grain film, and the shots were as good as digital.

If you are that devoted to your 15mm, go ahead and shoot film!

If not, look into some of the new lenses.

I still do shoot film. But workflow is a lot faster with digital and cheaper...
Anyway I still have some other equipment to use film..

Arie

Like another person said, why? Canon has had so-called full-frame image sensors on two or three of it's cameras for some time now. Not only did Pentax not go out of business, but sales overall have increased, independent product reviews have generally been very positive, and the K10D with APS-C image sensor has won awards world-wide.

Canon continues to sell cameras without full-frame image sensors. Nikon also remained in business in spite of not having a full-frame sensor until now. Nikon also continues to sell cameras without full-frame image sensors. By the way, one or two cameras out of several does not mean "Nikon goes full frame now."

Finally, everyone here (including you) bought a Pentax without, instead of a Canon with, a full-frame image sensor. As far as I know, nobody here (pros, amateurs, or rank beginners) went out of the business of taking images because they didn't have a full-frame image sensor.

Given all that, it appears there is a solid market for cameras without so-called full-frame image sensors, with no real evidence that market is going to decline anytime soon.

stewart

I dont think that to dont go full frame will be the end of Pentax as I dont see why people think that the 4:3 format is going to be the end of Olympus. Both afirmations sounds like urban legends to me. What I can understand is that somebody who grown using manual focus and developed all sort of complicity with a full-frame format, as it seems to be the case of VanDam, can find the APS-C system uncomfortable. I think that it is matter of preferences. At any case, once that one get used to the cropped system is not that hard to make pictures (althought I still having some problems for manual focus). Referring to the glass, besides some exceptions at the wide angle, I think it should be as good in one cropped system as it is in a full-frame one.

BTW, even if I am not the most optimistic guy about the Hoya-Pentax merging, I still dont understanding why people is so sure about its dead. I think that they will increase prices (specially at the high-end product level) and they might easily loose some market share but even that way, Pentax still having some margin to be mistaken.

[txbonds]

Canon is definately got a nice combination with a 5d, 35 f1.4 and 135 f2. However, that being said I bought and sold two 5d's and instead ended up with what I felt was the best cost to bang ratio with the K10d. I didn't buy the FA limiteds, but have two of the DA limiteds (70 & 40) and find the size to be the most appealing part of this kit. I'll eventually get the 21 limited also.

I initially sold my canon gear to help fund some other things or I might well still have the 5d, but after owning my K10d setup now for just shy of one year I can tell you that the small, light weight kit with the pancake lenses is just great. The 5d was a wonderful camera, but load it up into a backpack with the 35, a 70-200, a 24-105, and maybe a 135, and it's so much to carry around it's not even funny. It took the enjoyment out of my non camera life.

For me, I find that I can carry my K10d around with the kit lens, and a 70mm ltd, and it doesn't get in the way. I can keep up with family and sight seeing trips, and am not constantly hualing around 40 pounds of camera gear. The built in shake reduction also helps keep my need for tripod/monopod down.


I'm not making the case that the pentax is better than that 5d gear, because it clearly is not as capable, but what I found is that for my style shooting I'm really enjoying the pentax.

[vanDam]

Canon is definately got a nice combination with a 5d, 35 f1.4 and 135 f2. However, that being said I bought and sold two 5d's and instead ended up with what I felt was the best cost to bang ratio with the K10d. I didn't buy the FA limiteds, but have two of the DA limiteds (70 & 40) and find the size to be the most appealing part of this kit. I'll eventually get the 21 limited also.

I initially sold my canon gear to help fund some other things or I might well still have the 5d, but after owning my K10d setup now for just shy of one year I can tell you that the small, light weight kit with the pancake lenses is just great. The 5d was a wonderful camera, but load it up into a backpack with the 35, a 70-200, a 24-105, and maybe a 135, and it's so much to carry around it's not even funny. It took the enjoyment out of my non camera life.

For me, I find that I can carry my K10d around with the kit lens, and a 70mm ltd, and it doesn't get in the way. I can keep up with family and sight seeing trips, and am not constantly hualing around 40 pounds of camera gear. The built in shake reduction also helps keep my need for tripod/monopod down.


I'm not making the case that the pentax is better than that 5d gear, because it clearly is not as capable, but what I found is that for my style shooting I'm really enjoying the pentax.

I will think it over. I like the Pentax glass a lot. Yhanks for yous information.

Arie.

[noblepa]

I don't get the wailing and gnashing of teeth over Pentax' lack of a FF dslr, either.

I just checked B & H. The D3 is $4,999. The 5D is $2,999. The EOS-1DS is $5,999 (bodies only).

Right now, we have some really great, affordable, 10MP APS-C dslrs to choose from. Unless and until someone makes a FF dslr under $1,000, Pentax is safe, IMHO.

I think that what may happen is that APC-C will become the standard for serious amatuers just as 35mm did and FF will replace medium format film cameras as the format of choice for pros.

As for getting used to the "crop factor", I think that is a non-issue. I recently got a K10D, after shooting Pentax film cameras for years. I had no problem at all "getting used" to it. I didn't even notice it. To me, its like the uproar over the conversion to metric measure. Everyone screamed and complained about having to do the math to convert feet to meters, pounds to kilos, gallons to liters. You don't have to do any of that. You just have to learn a few new reference points. The same is true of focal lengths. You just learn that 32mm is the new "normal", 18 the new wide angle and so on.

As some else suggested, FF cameras are going to be larger and heavier, as are the lenses. Most consumers will prefer the smaller, lighter (not to mention less expensive) cameras.

Finally, APS-C sensor development isn't standing still. There are already 12MP sensors. Its only a matter of time before someone develops a 16 or 18MP sensor in the APS-C format. By then, FF sensors will be at 24 or 30MP.

Just my $0.02. YMMV.
Paul Noble

[FotoPete]

Haha I don't hear the Olympus/Pana folks complaining this much about full frame. ;-)

Actually I'm leaning towards an old E-body when I get $$ as a secondary as I find that I'm having trouble getting fast reach. (can't afford 2.8 solutions past 135mm :P)

I failed my Vivitar S1 70-210/3.5 pretty badly at a hockey game. 210mm (~315mm) was a bit too long to keep up on manual focus and too slow at the same time at 3.5. I was constantly blurring my shots.

[carpents]

I don't get the wailing and gnashing of teeth over Pentax' lack of a FF dslr, either.

Well, one of the reasons would be a bigger, clearer viewfinder.

I just checked B & H. The D3 is $4,999. The 5D is $2,999. The EOS-1DS is $5,999 (bodies only).

Right now, we have some really great, affordable, 10MP APS-C dslrs to choose from. Unless and until someone makes a FF dslr under $1,000, Pentax is safe, IMHO.

Agreed that Pentax is not currently in this market.

I think that what may happen is that APC-C will become the standard for serious amatuers just as 35mm did and FF will replace medium format film cameras as the format of choice for pros.

I believe that full-frame will become the standard, and APS-C will be relegated to entry-level only. The reason is because they're using the same 35mm mounts (except Olympus) and there is an understanding that lenses used on these mounts can cover an image circle large enough for 24x36mm. Simple.

As for getting used to the "crop factor", I think that is a non-issue.

For you, that's fine. I never owned a 35mm SLR until after I bought my DSLR so it wasn't an adjustment factor - it was (and is) more about using lenses designed for one purpose in a different way. For example, I'm now shooting 28mm lenses in the same way as 'normal' lenses previously. A 28mm lens isn't designed the same (as far as distortion, CA, bokeh, sharpness, etc.) as a 50mm lens, so this is where many people have problems.

To me, its like the uproar over the conversion to metric measure.

I didn't know they switched to metric in Ohio!

As some else suggested, FF cameras are going to be larger and heavier, as are the lenses. Most consumers will prefer the smaller, lighter (not to mention less expensive) cameras.

I don't really see this, either - the K10 is much bigger than the *ist D. Consumers don't always demand smaller.

This is also where I complain that Pentax is missing the point - if they want to keep on with the small-size sensor, at least bring about some innovative lenses for the format! How cool would an 80-200 f/2 lens be?!? They would sell every single one.
But Pentax is mired in thinking that a 50-135/2.8 somehow replaces an 80-200. This is just not so.

Finally, APS-C sensor development isn't standing still. There are already 12MP sensors. Its only a matter of time before someone develops a 16 or 18MP sensor in the APS-C format. By then, FF sensors will be at 24 or 30MP.

God help us! The 10MP sensors are already too noisy at ISO 400, I can't imagine what an 18MP sensor would be. The few Nikon D300 and Sony A700 samples I've seen employ noise reduction about which I'm still uneasy.

YMMV.