[ManuH]

I'll be very surprised if we will see a Pentax FF camera at less than $3000.....

I'll be very surprised if we see a Pentax FF at all. I just read an article on TOP about the Sony A900 failure. They complain about the lack of FF lenses. Although it certainly cover the basis: 24-70 f/2.8, 70-200mm f/2.8, even a 70-400mm and a few primes. If Sony lacks FF lenses, what to say about Pentax?

And with all the recent improvements on APS-C sensors, FF can wait... maybe indefinitely.

[Emacs]

In what terms? FF has 2.34 times larger area than APS-C. That means FF captures 2.34 times more light. Think about the signal/noise ratio.

Image sensor format - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

In terms of diagonal length

[aurele]

They complain about the lack of FF lenses

i understand. When i see on my shop the "small" place for Pentax lenses, and i see the ver very small place for all Sony lense ... well no more to say.

what to say about Pentax?

Sony got 19 (9 zoom, 10 primes) lenses AFAIK,
Pentax 26 in production (10 zooms, 17 primes)

Canon produce 60 lenses so far (11 APS-C + 49 FF),
Nikon 73 [16 APS-C + 57 FF].

No need to say that if Pentax ever goes to FF, it will probably re-produce some lense he made in the past.

But the main difference is that Pentax has a great knowledge in lense, where sony mostly bought it (Minolta).
Moreover, Pentax main work is optic in general, Sony, it's mostly electronics. With the alpha product, Sony is a newbie (with a lot of money and mean, but a newbie) in photo.

It may not seem a huge difference, but it is.

[TaoMaas]

No need to say that if Pentax ever goes to FF, it will probably re-produce some lense he made in the past.

What makes you think Pentax would go back and re-introduce past lenses? Have they ever done this in the past?

[jsherman999]

.... In FF, Pentax would be a small player against real giants. In crop sensors, they have a chance to be the Giant.

Really?

APS-C DSLR, m4/3 DSLR, and various mirrorless incarnations of those (and smaller) sensors are making that level tier very tough to compete in. I'm not sure how Pentax has a chance to become a 'giant' here just because they offer a few DA Limiteds. Remember, Canon/Nikon could come out with their own versions of DA 'Limiteds' if they felt the whim.

It makes sense to distinguish your line and establish your bead & butter - K-mount - with a FF offering that keeps your brand viable above the aps-c fray, which is being encroached by mirrorless players beyond Canon/Nikon. Oly, Panasonic, Samsung, maybe others are going to be strong players here, not just Canon/Nikon/Sony.

The entirety of K-mount - aps-c DSLR, FF SLR, and maybe even mirrorless K-mount, would be enriched and stabilized by a FF offerring. The R&D is largely applicable to all K-mount - the lenses certainly are.


.

[JeffJS]

Of course, if Pentax released a full frame camera, you could mount your DA lenses on it with some type of software enabled crop. The question is why would you want to do that if you are pretty heavily invested in the DA lenses. The people who really want a full frame camera are those who have old lenses, whether of more recent vintage (FA limiteds) or more ancient. Newer photographers often don't really care and in fact are often quite confused by the whole "crop factor" issue.

First...

I get the point of the question but A: Only Pentax can answer the question and B: your poll is really incomplete. It Should be:

Yes-Don't care about a FF camera
Yes-Do care about a FF camera
No-Don't care about a FF camera
No-Do care about a FF camera

You can put me down for the third option above. I have many FF lenses including the FA Limiteds

Second..

There's probably a niche market for a true 35mm size sensor Pentax. Don't forget that the 645D is Also Cropped. I've seen the idea floated in previous threads that a FF camera could support the DA type lenses with a crop in the software. I have no idea what Ricoh plans on doing but with most new lenses in the dslr market from Pentax being APS-C type lenses, I don't believe Pentax (in its past incarnations) ever had any intention of entering the FF market.

In response to....

Which brings us back to getting the most bang for the buck from Pentax's development resources. I also think that mirrorless APSC is the way to go for Pentax's entry level camera (currently Kx and Kr). It would be incrementally smaller, lighter and potentially cheaper.

Does Pentax have enough engineering to support the misquided Q (currently my opinion), mirrorless APSC (hopefully this sensor), DSLR APSC (the higher end like the K5), full frame (and complete the lens lineup) and 645D? Potentially you could phase you the DSLR APSC and make higher end mirrorless but I don't think that will go well with K5 users with a full set of DA limiteds.

Full frame would be awesome but I'm doubtful that it is in the best interests of Pentax.

[RonHendriks1966]

What makes you think Pentax would go back and re-introduce past lenses? Have they ever done this in the past?

DA*200mm/f2.8 is just a new version of old design.


Well there is a need for some new lenses, but as stated in this poll, we are talking about announcing and presenting at PhotoKina in september 2012 and introducing into market a few months after that event (early 2013) so there is still time to get a few new lenses to support that introduction.

D-FA*85mm/f1.4, D-FA*24-70mm/f2.8, D-FA*80-200mm/f2.8 and D-FA*200mm/f4 Macro and off you go. That and a lensroadmap is all you need.

[Boris]

What makes you think Pentax would go back and re-introduce past lenses? Have they ever done this in the past?

Well, in their right mind they cannot just re-introduce them. They will have to re-evaluate them given the specifics of the sensor/camera that will be available at the time. It would seem conceivable that some of the FA lenses, probably normal/wide/super-wide ones will have to be modified to suit the market demand (for corner sharpness etc).

[TaoMaas]

DA*200mm/f2.8 is just a new version of old design.

But did it completely go out of production and get brought back? Or was it just updated?

D-FA*85mm/f1.4, D-FA*24-70mm/f2.8, D-FA*80-200mm/f2.8 and D-FA*200mm/f4 Macro and off you go.

That would be nice, but I think it's wishful thinking. Pentax didn't make very many of those lenses even when they were new designs.

[Emacs]

That would be nice, but I think it's wishful thinking. Pentax didn't make very many of those lenses even when they were new designs.

Pentax didn't make only 24-70 (it was 28-70 that times).

[Supernaut]

D-FA*85mm/f1.4, D-FA*24-70mm/f2.8, D-FA*80-200mm/f2.8 and D-FA*200mm/f4 Macro and off you go. That and a lensroadmap is all you need.

A very good start. Just add a UVA from start

Maybe Ricoh see a possible market for this. I see the lower end dslr market moving to mirrorless more and more. However, when/if no entry level k-mount body is sold the k-mount will die over time. Maybe moving FF is the best move to buy time for the mount?

[fs999]

I want a small APS-C, not a big FF !

[Asahiflex]

I want a small APS-C, not a big FF !

Interesting, I want a small FF, not a big APS-C!

[TaoMaas]

Interesting, I want a small FF, not a big APS-C!

Yeah...and I want a pony! I think we're both out of luck.

[Emacs]

I want a small APS-C, not a big FF !

Your way is mirroless then, not DSLR