[Lowell Goudge]

Yeah, he did sign up in 2009 to announce he was a pro wedding photographer! Saying you're pro makes it so, right? I've been thinking about picking up a used 5d myself and pairing it with a nice wide L lens, but that wouldn't make me want to sell any of my great Pentax lenses - if you've already got multiple bodies, there must be a useful lens attached to each - so why would you consider yourself to be attached to only one system? After the K-5 and current advancements, FF doesn't seem to offer a whole lot more, just a different FOV, slightly thinner DOF and more megapixels. The low light gap is minimal now, and FF bodies are bloated behemoths! They certainly do look pro, though.

If I was earning money, with my pentax system, and I do consider what I have a system, not just a body and a couple of lenses, even if I changed I douobt I would sell everything and give up on pentax. heres why.

When I say system, I really mean it, 3 film bodies (starting with KX and ending with PZ-1) and 4 digital ones (Starting with *istD and ending with K5D)

I can shoot eitherfilm or digital, I have 3 flashes, all of which can operate as slaves, My *istD and PZ1 support TTL flash so I can use every lens in TTL mode, in both formats(digital and film) and each of my bodies especially the digital ones does things a little differently, like TTL flash on the *istD, great ISO 100 shots on the K10D, better high ISO performance on the K7 and K5 etc.....

I have 45 lenses from 8mm through 1000 mm.

I have, over the years, invested a lot, and bought quality when I did. I can use virtually every lens on every body (DAL 18-55 and FAJ 18-35 are the only ones that don't work on my old KX) so what do I really gain by switching and discarding. In fact, if I change, it would probably be to canon, because the shorter regestry distance would let me use all my MF lenses (and they are all obviously full frame). so my change would really be an addition of another body, that's all

[pxpaulx]

Exactly! It is about the lenses - the more you enjoy using, the more likely you'll have multiple bodies - so if I really liked something specific canon offered in a lens, I'd get the body to go with it. I love the Panasonic 20mm lens - tried to replace it with a sigma 30mm in k mount but it just wasn't the same so I've gone back to the 20mm and use it on an e-p1 - probably the only m4/3 lens I'll own (I've tried lots but none are particularly great, maybe the oly 9-18mm just for sheer compact size). I love my Pentax lenses, won't give them up - and the K-5 is such a great body, worth having to pair those great lenses with!

If I was earning money, with my pentax system, and I do consider what I have a system, not just a body and a couple of lenses, even if I changed I douobt I would sell everything and give up on pentax. heres why.

When I say system, I really mean it, 3 film bodies (starting with KX and ending with PZ-1) and 4 digital ones (Starting with *istD and ending with K5D)

I can shoot eitherfilm or digital, I have 3 flashes, all of which can operate as slaves, My *istD and PZ1 support TTL flash so I can use every lens in TTL mode, in both formats(digital and film) and each of my bodies especially the digital ones does things a little differently, like TTL flash on the *istD, great ISO 100 shots on the K10D, better high ISO performance on the K7 and K5 etc.....

I have 45 lenses from 8mm through 1000 mm.

I have, over the years, invested a lot, and bought quality when I did. I can use virtually every lens on every body (DAL 18-55 and FAJ 18-35 are the only ones that don't work on my old KX) so what do I really gain by switching and discarding. In fact, if I change, it would probably be to canon, because the shorter regestry distance would let me use all my MF lenses (and they are all obviously full frame). so my change would really be an addition of another body, that's all

[Lowell Goudge]

Exactly! It is about the lenses - the more you enjoy using, the more likely you'll have multiple bodies - so if I really liked something specific canon offered in a lens, I'd get the body to go with it. I love the Panasonic 20mm lens - tried to replace it with a sigma 30mm in k mount but it just wasn't the same so I've gone back to the 20mm and use it on an e-p1 - probably the only m4/3 lens I'll own (I've tried lots but none are particularly great, maybe the oly 9-18mm just for sheer compact size). I love my Pentax lenses, won't give them up - and the K-5 is such a great body, worth having to pair those great lenses with!

so are you in or out???

it sounds like you generally traded up, from your first post, and had an accident that wrote off most of your kit, so you are jumping ship, you say the K5 is a great body but you never owned it.

Not to sound too inquisitive, but I don't get where you are coming from.

As I pointed out, except for multiple off camera flash where nikon is really king, I don;'t see a lot that cant be achieved with a K5 (or K7, or K10 for that matter) for weddings and events.

Super long glass is available, albiet from sigma, or the used market of F and FA lenses, so with the exception of playing a game with ultra shallow DOF, which you can do by simple careful positioning of your subjects in most cases, what can't you do with pentax and pentax or compatible lenses?

[skism]

Hi, I don't often write in these Forums, but enjoy reading them. But I did want to offer some thoughts. I work for a non-profit involved in global development. I had the good fortunate last year of recruiting 5 professional photographers to go overseas to document our projects. 3 had full-frame cameras, 1 a cropped sensor, and 1 a Leica. When the photos came back, the best were without a doubt the cropped sensor shots. Part of it was technique of course, but this photographer told me that he put his money into lenses (he had 2 really lovely Zeiss lenses). I know we hear that - 'invest in lenses - but I saw the proof. And I gotta say, while I'd love to have a K-5, sometimes I'm really amazed at what my K-x and my old 55 1.8 super takumar can do. Then again, if someone wants to give me that mythical Pentax full-frame, I won't complain.

[PPPPPP42]

Last I checked every Pentax compatible lens ever made (including the FA's) except the recent DA's are full frame (and even a few of the DA's apparently).
If you like modern auto focus lenses a full frame might be considered less valuable to you until they started back into an updated FA line. I highly doubt Pentax has suddenly forgotten how to make these: Pentax FA Prime Lenses - Reviews and Specifications - SLR and Interchangeable Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

If they came out with a Pentax equivalent of the $2500 range Nikon full frame cameras I'd be all over that, I'd love for a fast 50 to be a good all around lens again instead of a rather too narrow lens.

You have to consider what the APSC sensor did to the lens lineup, wide became normal and they have to go into the stupid crazy ultra wide range to get anything super wide now. Its actually MUCH harder to engineer lenses that wide with any kind of fast speed and good image quality, we would probably see cheaper lenses as a whole if they could center the line around the 50mm mark instead of the 30mm mark because they were simply cheaper to build without cutting corners (way too much math for me to fully understand much less explain).

[Lowell Goudge]

Last I checked every Pentax compatible lens ever made (including the FA's) except the recent DA's are full frame (and even a few of the DA's apparently).
If you like modern auto focus lenses a full frame might be considered less valuable to you until they started back into an updated FA line. I highly doubt Pentax has suddenly forgotten how to make these: Pentax FA Prime Lenses - Reviews and Specifications - SLR and Interchangeable Lenses - Pentax Lens Reviews & Lens Database

If they came out with a Pentax equivalent of the $2500 range Nikon full frame cameras I'd be all over that, I'd love for a fast 50 to be a good all around lens again instead of a rather too narrow lens.

You have to consider what the APSC sensor did to the lens lineup, wide became normal and they have to go into the stupid crazy ultra wide range to get anything super wide now. Its actually MUCH harder to engineer lenses that wide with any kind of fast speed and good image quality, we would probably see cheaper lenses as a whole if they could center the line around the 50mm mark instead of the 30mm mark because they were simply cheaper to build without cutting corners (way too much math for me to fully understand much less explain).

I think here you are wrong. Optical element technology and manufacture has in many ways made lens design much easier in the past 20 years. I would love to see some old lenses redesigned to take advantage of new materials, but that is not the point. The is a trade off between cost and format, and part of tat trade off is that it is harder to make lenses that remain well behaved over larger formats, therefore in most but not all cases we are better off with ASP-C

Additionally many of the biases with respect to favorite lenses are based upon people who shot film and therefore have old preferences that they relied on, the issue is rethinking the shooting approach to the tools at hand. Better photographers, who understand what they are doing can easily make the jump, as evidenced by the post by skslm, those who have difficulty are either too stubborn or not. Good as they think.

[richard balonglong]

Perhaps someone can explain why they need a full frame camera because I just don't get it?

A lot of photographers, also professional photographers are really happy using APS-C DSLR, but still there are many who would want a full frame DSLR. Why? It has way bigger view finder, maximizing the DOF and FOV of every lenses, very good performance in low light, etc. I'm a photojournalist working for national newspaper in my country that uses Pentax cameras, and I've produced a lot of great images with my Pentax Film and DSLR cameras (SF-7, K1000, *ist DS, K110D, and K-7). With those APS-C cameras that I have, I am happy with it. But, I'd be more happy if I have a full frame Pentax DSLR and would help me more in my photography needs. Sometimes, when photographing news, I need to crop my images that sometimes I need to crop it 100%, and that I'll lose quality an details. I have a lot of old FF lenses, and I'd be happy to maximize my lenses, and I want to use my 28mm, 50mm, 85mm, 135mm primes still in it's proper field of view not multiplied by 1.5x.
Yes, APS-C sensors nowadays are great, but still a lot of photographers, especially working pros, needed a larger sensor.

[luftfluss]

Sometimes, when photographing news, I need to crop my images that sometimes I need to crop it 100%, and that I'll lose quality an details. I have a lot of old FF lenses, and I'd be happy to maximize my lenses, and I want to use my 28mm, 50mm, 85mm, 135mm primes still in it's proper field of view not multiplied by 1.5x.
Yes, APS-C sensors nowadays are great, but still a lot of photographers, especially working pros, needed a larger sensor.

If you have to crop with APS-C, you'd need to crop even more with FF.

And what happens when the larger FF sensor is surpassed by the smaller APS-C sensor, like we saw when the K-5 & D7000 were released?

[luftfluss]

Here's the OP's web site:

Consillio Photography

[richard balonglong]

If you have to crop with APS-C, you'd need to crop even more with FF.

And what happens when the larger FF sensor is surpassed by the smaller APS-C sensor, like we saw when the K-5 & D7000 were released?

Here, when I'll take a photo with 14mm on an APS-C sensor, then crop it to the max, I'll end up having a low quality image. But if I'll take a photo using a FF, then I will be using a 20mm lens (almost evuivalent to 14mm on cropped sensor), and if I'm goin to crop it fully, at least I won't end up a really low quality image.
And just what I've said earlier, yes, the APS-C sensors nowadays are really good like those of from K-5, D7000, 7D, etc. But still you won't enjoy fully a 35mm format lens. Try to compare the shots using a 50mm or 85mm lenses between a cropped sensor and a full frame sensor, big difference.

[luftfluss]

Here, when I'll take a photo with 14mm on an APS-C sensor, then crop it to the max, I'll end up having a low quality image. But if I'll take a photo using a FF, then I will be using a 20mm lens (almost evuivalent to 14mm on cropped sensor), and if I'm goin to crop it fully, at least I won't end up a really low quality image.
And just what I've said earlier, yes, the APS-C sensors nowadays are really good like those of from K-5, D7000, 7D, etc. But still you won't enjoy fully a 35mm format lens.

So much of the quality of the crop depends on lens, technique, and PP. I have some photos that I can do a 100% crop on and they look very good.

My point is that IQ from FF isn't automatically better than APS-C. A Nikon D700 does not have a better sensor than a Pentax K-5.

Of course I realize that there are inherent advantages to FF - wider FOV, larger VF, narrow DOF come to mind - that simply cannot be easily duplicated by APS-C.

Try to compare the shots using a 50mm or 85mm lenses between a cropped sensor and a full frame sensor, big difference.

This is purely a matter of opinion... some people would find greater use for APS-C "lengthening" those lenses.

[stevebrot]

I have both a K-5 and FF Leica M9. While you can see differences in DOF and other aspects of IQ, I'd agree for most pictures the K-5 compares quite well. However, I end up using the M9 much more, and when I need an SLR I end up using film. With a proper FF Pentax dSLR I would move to it.
Why? The viewfinder. I'm a manual-focus dinosaur, and compared to a 24x36 format, the APS dSLR viewfinders are tunnel vision. For AF they are fine, but still not the joy to use that a film SLR like the MX or KX is. Put an MX viewfinder on the K-5 and I'd use it.
The M9, of course, is a rangefinder camera. Still the best for dim-light and moderate wide angle use. I can focus it much better indoors available light, wide-aperture shooting - which is where K-5 autofocus tends to have problems. And the M9 lenses, of course, are all manual focus, which is where I live. Too bad, because the K-5 high ISO capability is better than the M9. But I get the shots with the M9 and not so much with the K-5. The Leica fast glass makes up a lot for not having high ISO. (After all, I shot available light for 40 years when 400 was very fast film...)

My sentiments echo Tom's, though at a different budget level! (No K-5, no M9...just the K10D and a crowd of vintage film gear of dubious heritage. Oh, and there is a Canon G2 in the closet somewhere wishing it had a larger sensor and better AF.)

I like manual focus and appreciate a good viewfinder. In fact, my style of work pretty much precludes a dependence on AF. I also like the flexibility for landscape work that a larger medium provides. And then there is the matter of DOF.

Sooo...my next camera when the K10D bites the dust? Probably the K-5 or its successor. The small form factor is the deciding point. I will continue to shoot film for the "FF Experience". Unless, of course, Pentax provides a FF.


Steve

[stevebrot]

This is purely a matter of opinion... some people would find greater use for APS-C "lengthening" those lenses.

Yep! That is a recurring argument. The magic formula to convert your moderate-length piece into the monster it was meant to be! As if longer were better

That being said, I do know that it is a happy matter that a decent portrait lens for APS-C is as close as the old K-mount film body in Grandpa's closet. What was previously an expensive and exotic item (fast and good portrait glass) is now cheap and common in the form of the fast 50. Excellent!


Steve

[richard balonglong]

So much of the quality of the crop depends on lens, technique, and PP. I have some photos that I can do a 100% crop on and they look very good.

My point is that IQ from FF isn't automatically better than APS-C. A Nikon D700 does not have a better sensor than a Pentax K-5.

Of course I realize that there are inherent advantages to FF - wider FOV, larger VF, narrow DOF come to mind - that simply cannot be easily duplicated by APS-C.



This is purely a matter of opinion... some people would find greater use for APS-C "lengthening" those lenses.

Yeah, it's purely an opinion. There's nothing wrong on APS-Cs, but for me it's better to have an additional FF setup as well and still using your same set of lenses. I love my K-7 and other APS-C cameras, but having an FF it will give you more extra juice for your needs.
Here's some of my sample having trouble on cropping and ending up on low quality:

I created this image using my K-7 with SMC P M 50mm, ISO 100, 88sec, RAW DNG:

- Then I submit this image to our chief photographer and editor, but they called and told me to crop my image to re-compose, I have a good quality and uncropped image using 135mm lens but it was too dark already:


They like the composition, but still they wanted the other one with ambient light lighting the green surrounding, so the other image ended like this:


I tried all my best to preserve the quality, I've used the Photoshop's Bicubic Sharper, Bicubic Smoother, and used Topaz's DeJPEG, but still not good enough.
So, in the end, the editors and publishers printed my image for front page. Yeah, it's good enough for newspaper prints, but for me, it sucks.
Here's a copy of the final output:



- Pentax K-7, K-5, Nikon D7000, Canon 7D, all of this APS-Cs are all good. But adding a FF camera in your bag will really help you more.
Yes, a lot of photographers are happy with APS-Cs and it's enough for them, but others needed an extra juice.
Canon, Nikon, Sony have really good APS-C cameras, but still they provide FF for their users who needed more than APS-C can provide. That's why a lot of Pentaxians are really hoping to have a FF Pentax, like the OP of this thread but in the end he ended up shifting to another system

[PHOTONY]

Hello,
I have read the posts after my thread and to answer a few of the questions:
I am a lurker, I wont say anything unless I have something to say...And I will continue to follow Pentax because I feel they offer a great product but for now they dont suit my needs anymore.
The point of rentals is very true...In Hawaii there is very poor represtentation of pentax products...Point and shoots at the corner drug store and on occasion at Walmart but no dealers sell any DSLRs.
I have called Pentax and voiced that complaint a number of times. The local service center, although very friendly will not touch any new product and I am forced to send everything to CRIS who has helped me out a number of times and I would highly recommend them. This issue kept my gear out of state for weeks at a time.
The queston of my being Pro due to not having a flash sync cord and bracket I found funny. Other than a single body shooter maybe an event photog or journalist (Although I dont know of any here that use one regularly) I carried Two bodies on my person.
Like I said before, I loved my Pentax gear and will probably go back eventually...I still have my damaged K20 and AF540 that I will probably send out and keep but the rest went real quick and to a couple of guys who would appreciate it as much as I did.
Now heres the part I left out before but since Im getting a little grief anyway I may as well let it out...
Shooting weddings and for a few local publications, it was getting difficult for me to advance regardless of how much they liked my photos when I mentioned the gear I was using. Many wedding magazines print a list of "things to ask your vendors" and in most cases for the photographer it was to ask them of the gear they use. When they would ask I would reply PROUDLY "Pentax" and on numberous occasions I saw the deal slip thru the cracks at that moment when they would reply Pentax? I didnt know they still made cameras....Im not a weekend warrior, This is all I do for a living so every deal lost hits hard. Now for the Journalism side of things, All the Photo Editors and Photo Journalists told me the same thing...If you are going to be in the industry, you need to use what the industry uses.....Do I agree with that...No... but if the people who pay me believe it then I listen to what they have to say.
Lets see how many posts come at me after that...hahaha.

To sum things up, I loved My Pentax gear....The K10 being my favorite to carry due to the shape and weight...Yes I like a hefty camera therfore the FF bodies I carry now fit like a glove. I will probably repair mine and or pick another up at a later date. Do I think they should make a FF...Yes. I think more people with DSLRs will go FF before following the current trend of smaller mirrorless cameras. They are great cameras so dont get me wrong, but I think that current K7/5 owners wouldnt go backwards. They are great for people getting into it or stepping up from P&S.....thats just my opinion.

I would like to thank the Pentax Forums......The person who bought the bulk of my gear is a member and read the post and realized I was in Hawaii too so found my ad on craigslist. So Thanks.
I do find it funny that a few take things so personal......One of the reasons I just read the posts and didnt comment. I tought my parting words may be used to lobby for FF for those who want it......You never know. Wasnt someone petitioning to the Japan big wigs about FF....That was my intention.
I am looking forward to seeing all the colorful responses this is going to bring up...Dont get your panties in too much of a bunch...haha.