[bymy141]

There has been a lot of discussion on Pentax getting a Full Frame sensor DSLR.
The real question for Pentax (I guess) is; is there a market for such a camera?

Remember, there are a number of technical obstacles for Pentax the take:
- Getting a FF sensor at a reasonable price: from Sony or the (rumour based) future Samsung.
- Getting enough FF glass on the market. Most developments in the today's lens roadmap are digital lenses.
Also longer glass is needed due to the 1x crop factor. Or they need to develop second sources.
- Getting SR to work, otherwise lens based SR needs to brought to market.
Due to the increased size of the sensor, sensor based SR needs to be revised, if possible at all with the Pentax technology.
- Getting new / improved autofocus and memory bandwidth designs; trying to compete in the FF market with the current technology seems pointless.
- Getting Pro type accessories developed; GPS, WiFi, converters, grips, etc.

So there is huge cost involved here, at a considerable risk.
Also it would take a considerable amount of skilled resources, resources that can also be assigned to work on new K?0D and K?00D series, getting these cameras out faster.

Pentax / Hoya would need to be able to sell enough FF bodies and FF lenses to make this scenario work for them.

The big question therefore is: is there a market for a Pentax FF camera?

Remember: the D3 costs cosiderable higher than the D300. (€ 4200 vs €1480! here in NL).
We are likely the see the same price differences between Pentax FF and APS-C cameras.
I, for me, will stay with APS-C. Like to weight/size and prices advantages too much to change.

- Bert

---

Last edited by bymy141; 04-12-2008 at 06:46 AM. Reason: Getting the cost element in the poll

[JJJPhoto]

To be perfectly honest, I don't care one way or the other. I really, REALLY like my DA lenses (particularly the DA Limited primes and the new DA* 200) but I also have several full-frame lenses and I'll live if Pentax decides to go the FF route.

However, there are plenty of other things that I think Pentax needs before worrying about a FF body.

1. We need a "one piece" P-TTL External flash cord
2. We need a good DA Limited prime in the 100mm-135mm range
3. We need better continuous/burst shooting performance (3fps is junk ... give me 8fps and unlimited JPEGs at full res or 8fps and at least 10 RAW)
4. We need better standard flash sync for daylight fill (1/180th isn't good enough for most daylight fill needs and HSS mode only works with the higher end Pentax flash units)
5. We need a camera body that puts BOTH batteries into the battery grip when a battery grip is used.
6. We need High ISO performance that rivals the new Nikon D3.

Of course, those are just my opinions ... but I'd rather have all of these issues resolved BEFORE Pentax worries about a FF sensor.

[roentarre]

i would love a full frame camera to try out all my Fa limited

[philmorley]

here we go again

over 50% have said yes so far (but only 9 votes) but the issue is cost. How many would actually hand over the cash? many people want it but not so many are willing to pay the extra it will cost.

edit: it would depend on specs. I dont really care sensor size whether ff, 1.5x or 1.1234. so I wouldn't care for 14mp FF (when the aps-c is out) but a 24+mp (or 38 that takes 645 & k mount lenses? that would be of interest (I like BIG prints

---

Last edited by philmorley; 04-12-2008 at 06:32 AM.

[Buddha Jones]

I just evened it up, I don't care for FF, I don't care if my 16mm is actually a 24mm, but I do care that my 300mm is actually a 450mm. That is just my preferance though.

[pixelpruner]

wide is my thing so when i can afford to go FF i will. also 300mm isn't really 450mm, 300mm is a crop of 300mm. if the same quality sensor was made FF you would have the same resolution for the centre that you refer to as 450mm, but a lot more pixels round the edge as well which is want i want. now, please.

[bymy141]

here we go again

over 50% have said yes so far (but only 9 votes) but the issue is cost. How many would actually hand over the cash? many people want it but not so many are willing to pay the extra it will cost.

I doubt if the poll until now is representative for the entire market.
It seems that MANY people can afford to spend yet another $5000 or €4000 on their hobby!

I don't believe this. We would many more people buying expensive lenses, K20D upgrades and question what cheap flash to buy if the prices differ no $50....

I'll edit the poll's questions to make people more alert to the cost issue.

- Bert

Edit:
Ah, you cannot edit the poll question after initial posting.....
Enhancement request?

[RiceHigh]

The Canon 5D is selling for less than $2000 now for the body, just somehow a little bit dearer than the D300, I think it is just a no-brainer for anyone who wishes to go full frame, or simply want to have the best image quality.

Full frame is totally viable for Pentax as Samsung can now produce their own imager. As least they could make a "cheap" FF sensor like that one used in the 5D and then to be the first DSLR maker to make an "entry level" FF DSLR to compete with Canon. I am sure that if there will be such a model very soon, Pentax can even beat Nikon and Sony as their FF DSLRs are just the flagship models which are just too heavy and too expensive for most of the average advanced amateur users.

Regarding the FF lens issue, Pentax has already had the design of every lens in their film SLR lineup. It will not be too difficult for them to re-issue those FF lens models or to just make minor modifications to the existing lens designs, e.g., to add in SDM or Quick Shift Focusing, etc.

[NaClH2O]

Even tho most of my lenses are either K, A, or FA, I still would probably stay with the APS-C. I've several lenses (notably the 12-24) that will not work very well on an FF camera, add to that the extra cost of an FF and I'd rather put my money into lenses. I pased up on the K20D for more lenses too. I'll probably get the K30D (or what ever it's name will be) but I'm much more interested in lenses than I am a new body. Besides I'd prefer that Pentax put more R&D into faster frame rate and better predictive AF.

NaCl(the only "new body" I'm interested in right now is one that comes with new knees)H2O

[thePiRaTE!!]

I just evened it up, I don't care for FF, I don't care if my 16mm is actually a 24mm, but I do care that my 300mm is actually a 450mm. That is just my preferance though.

300 on APS-C still magnifies like a 300 on anything else, its just cropped to the FoV of a 450. If you want the actual magnification of a 450, you still need a 1.5x TC. There is no advantage at either end of the focal range for APS-C, its all cropped the same.

[NaClH2O]

*snip*

Regarding the FF lens issue, Pentax has already had the design of every lens in their film SLR lineup. It will not be too difficult for them to re-issue those FF lens models or to just make minor modifications to the lens design, e.g., to add in SDM etc.

I don't think it would be as easy as you think. AFAIK many of the FA designs use lead or arsenic in the glass blanks used for the lens components. Much of that glass is now banned in the EU, and hopefully soon here in the US also. Other glass (or plastic) optical compounds have significantly different optical qualities. The entire lens would have to be redesigned. It's not just a matter of putting in a different chip, and SDM motor and modifying the mount. The electronics are easy the optics aren't.

NaCl(if it were as easy as that it would have been done already)H2O

[and]

it makes sense that you cannot edit a poll once people have voted, the answers of the people who had voted could be different if the question was changed so that invalidated the existing votes. btw 5000 I dont think that is a realistic price, it would have to cost less, unless it was every bit as good as the nikon d3, including 9fps.

A FF Pentax would be more in the Canon 5D class meaning a price around 2000-2200. That should sell quite well indeed.

[NaClH2O]

300 on APS-C still magnifies like a 300 on anything else, its just cropped to the FoV of a 450. If you want the actual magnification of a 450, you still need a 1.5x TC. There is no advantage at either end of the focal range for APS-C, its all cropped the same.

This is true but while (generally speaking of course) the most important part of a telephoto shot is the crop, the opposite is true of a wide angle shot. I use a wide angle lens to get the whole canyon, I use a telephoto lens to bring that distant mountain peak closer. I don't want a crop on my wide angles. All that said I'm still not terribly interested in a FF camera unless it's significantly cheaper than they are now. Besides the price tag being a lot bigger, the camera is too. One of the best features of my DS IMHO is it's small size. I wouldn't want anything much bigger than my K10D.

NaCl(bigger isn't necessarily better)H2O

[Peter Zack]

here we go again

over 50% have said yes so far (but only 9 votes) but the issue is cost. How many would actually hand over the cash? many people want it but not so many are willing to pay the extra it will cost.

edit: it would depend on specs. I dont really care sensor size whether ff, 1.5x or 1.1234. so I wouldn't care for 14mp FF (when the aps-c is out) but a 24+mp (or 38 that takes 645 & k mount lenses? that would be of interest (I like BIG prints

Exactly. If there was a 645D then I'm in. I'm perfectly happy with APS-C and since I have a mix of FA and DA lenses, FF isn't of much interest. A 645 would be great and I miss my old 6x7 which produced landscape shots that couldn't be matched with a smaller negative or sensor.

[Kguru]

-Deleted-
Sorry double posted. The 1st click hung, tried again, ended up with two.