[PHOTONY]

I have had a number of bodies over the years and lenses and flash to go with them. the Istdl was where I got my start and the K10 was next...one of my favorites. I then had a K20 and finally the K7. Out of these I wish the K7 features were in the K10 body...To me this would have been a great camera. I never got around to the K5 but do believe it is an amazing camera. I am one of many who waited for the news of a Full Frame camera to compete with the other that are out there. I am a wedding and event photographer in Honolulu and one of only 2 or three who were using Pentax as a profession and I had a great run for over 6 years and as new product came out I picked them up still with the hopes of that ellusive Full Frame body. I probably should have made a switch many years ago before the long commitment and purchases that kept me with Pentax....But I really just love the cameras. I have had a number of issues with a couple of my bodies (K10 and K20) the hotshoe breaking off of the chasis leaving a big hole and in turn having a broken flash to go with it....The most recent problem just occured and I was forced to either get a new body and flash or make the switch now since I did have insurance to cover it. Through out the years I have stood firm in my belief that Pentax holds it own to the industry standards of Nikon and Canon and I still do. I now also freelance for a few of the local publications here in Hawaii and I have access to some long glass when the job requires it and I had to turn away work due to non compatability....So I have made the switch...I forked over about $9000. towards new Full Frame gear and lenses and since I shoot weddings I needed to get 2 bodies and flash and multiple lenses. I would have gladly spent the money on a full frame Pentax and I am sure many others are willing to as well considering all the posts Ive read over the years. I do hope they make one and I am sure I will probably pick one up when they do. I am writing this in the hope that maybe someone at Pentax Ricoh will read this and maybe reconsider their direction regarding a Full Frame body. So bye for now Pentax and hope to see you again soon.

Thanks
Anthony C.

[cmohr]

Yeap, Yet another who is "Forced" by Pentax to jump ship, because they don't want to produce a FF dslr, they are waiting till they can produce a FF that nobody else offers, but when they do, nobody will be letf to buy one. And some people say that nobody would buy a Pentax full frame, yet Pextaxians are always spending 5000-10000 on swapping systems, your story is just like so many others here on the forum, and that is only a small number of people you actually hear about swapping system, we probably only hear about 5% of the actual number of people that switch to the other big brands for exactlythe same reasons..Its such a shame, but, more of an embaressment on the Brand.

I understand your reasons for changing, best of luck with the future.

[Adam]

Glad to hear the Pentaxes have served you well!

If you'd like to continue using our community and post about your new cameras, I recommend you check out Camera-Enthusiast.com, our brand-independent site!

Camera & Photography Forum - Camera-Enthusiast.com

[calsan]

I bet that Pentax will lose more to 4/3 or Fuji X-Pro than they do FF.
I've not seen photos that would convince me to switch to FF - however I have been swayed towards 4/3 by the higher quality, smaller and faster lenses and now the Olympus OM-D hitting the shelves... well!!
The future is smaller, faster and sharper. The entire history of photography has been the move to smaller and smaller systems achieved by higher quality lens making and film technologies (or sensors). IMHO!

[Spock]

The only reason 'Full Frame' still exists in the digital age is because a lot of Canon and Nikon professional photographers have such big investments in pre-digital full frame lenses.

Pentax never really had a great selection of professional film (full frame) autofocus lenses and has pretty much replaced most of them with modern DA lenses - so there is no real need for Pentax to ever produce a 'full frame' camera. The R&D money would be better spent on a larger APS lens line up.

I don't really understand why anyone would need a full frame Pentax SLR today. The only (old) lenses that would perform better on such a camera would be wide angle primes or zooms - and there are new wide angle zooms and prime lenses that fulfil those roles perfectly well.

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

(And as regards to OP's 'goodbye Pentax' post: I can't see how the existance of a full frame would have enabled the OP to stay with Pentax as he suggested, as the Nikon/Canon long glass he now has access to would still have been incompatible).

[Clavius]

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

(And as regards to OP's 'goodbye Pentax' post: I can't see how the existance of a full frame would have enabled the OP to stay with Pentax as he suggested, as the Nikon/Canon long glass he now has access to would still have been incompatible).

I know why Pentax needs a FF: to stop people from leaping to other brands.

Personally, I thought I needed one. People on this forum lap up loads of advantages of FF. But, when someone showed me a few different pictures taken with APSC and the same with FF, I couldn't see any differences at all. Between Medium format and APSC there are very clear and easily noticable differences in IQ, but between FF and APSC? Nope. Imagine spending THAT amount of cash on a camera and a complete new lens lineup, and people can't even really see the difference at first glance. Sorry, that's like selling your new car again, just because there's one out there that has 1 extra horsepower. Of course, the truly really skilled people will notice the difference.

So, I hope that Pentax produces a succesfull FF, just for their sake. But I really don't need one. Heck, if they would release a FF body and a 'K5 Hires', a K5 without a AA filter, I would sooner buy the latter.

[GibbyTheMole]

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

LOL... You and me both. As for me, I'll be hanging onto my "inferior" APS-C DSLRs, thanks... ;-)

[Lowell Goudge]

Given the ever increasing advancements of sensors, and the fact that new full frame bodies only come out every 2-3 years, I really don't get it. Although I am sad to see a member leave because he felt that the cameras were lacking, compared to the competition, for every menber that leaves we get a ton of new ones.

also, considering the improvement in sensors from K10 to K7 to K5, if the K10 and K7 served him well professionally I am not sure that a FF canikon would be any better than the K5 in terms of noise and image.

I can, however see someone jumping specifically to nikon if they are using off camera multi flash setups, because I do believe nikon is far more advanced in that area, buit given the complaints from the OP about breaking the flash off the camera, I would have to question how serious he really is/was, because even as an amature, I have the cable attachment to use the flash on a bracket to get it further off axis

it is also curious that a new member (as a pro shooter) signs on just to announce he is leaving

[eddie1960]

Actually Lowell he's been a member since 2009, he just doesn't post. that doesn't mean he hasn't been lurking

[Lowell Goudge]

Actually Lowell he's been a member since 2009, he just doesn't post. that doesn't mean he hasn't been lurking

missed that little point - oops

[pxpaulx]

Given the ever increasing advancements of sensors, and the fact that new full frame bodies only come out every 2-3 years, I really don't get it. Although I am sad to see a member leave because he felt that the cameras were lacking, compared to the competition, for every menber that leaves we get a ton of new ones.

also, considering the improvement in sensors from K10 to K7 to K5, if the K10 and K7 served him well professionally I am not sure that a FF canikon would be any better than the K5 in terms of noise and image.

I can, however see someone jumping specifically to nikon if they are using off camera multi flash setups, because I do believe nikon is far more advanced in that area, buit given the complaints from the OP about breaking the flash off the camera, I would have to question how serious he really is/was, because even as an amature, I have the cable attachment to use the flash on a bracket to get it further off axis

it is also curious that a new member (as a pro shooter) signs on just to announce he is leaving

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.

[TomB_tx]

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...)

[eddie1960]

I agree Tom, if a K5 (or other apsc) had a FF VF I would have less reason to want FF. the VF is a big part of the experience (and 90+% of my shooting is MF as well)

[Clavius]

Maybe that's the reason why I completely don't understand. I use the VF for composition only. The AF takes care of the rest. I grew tired of my manual glass pretty quickly. I only have few MF glass left. Just the ones that are either unavailable as AF or unaffordable.

[kenyee]

now also freelance for a few of the local publications

The switch makes sense if you're a pro simply for the easy local rentals in any major city...e.g., here in Boston, we have 3 places to rent Canikon stuff from...need a long fast lens for that wedding where the pastor refuses to allow you to use flash while guests can? Rent a long fast tele. Need a backup body for a wedding, rent it. (yes, I know you can mail order rent Pentax gear, but it's not as convenient)...