[monochrome]

I have the lenses I have to use with the cameras I have. Some of those are film cameras, some are APS dSLR's. Should the lenses I have suddenly rise in market price so be it, but I'm not amassing a mountain of lenses to resell in the fall.

I will note the secondary market certain FA telephoto lenses completely cleared last summer as if certain buyers knew something was coming from which those lenses would benefit. A certain eBay seller who has consistently had a list of 8 lenses For Sale, usually K-mount K series or M series, hasn't had more than one or two for weeks and frequently has none. In the early 2000's that seller consistently had M42 lenses - they dried up right before the istD was released. K-mount lenses disappeared just before the K10D came. I won't say there is a correlation - just an observation.

That seller has been a PDML member as long as I can recall and is a member here as well.

[ScooterMaxi Jim]

so will my DA Limited lenses work with a full frame camera?
How about the DA 12-24?...that's one of my favorite lenses but then again I really like all my lenses...

I have this bridge in Brooklyn for sale. Any takers?

For years people have been saying they tried their DA lenses on film cameras and the image sort of covered the full 24x36 (although you rarely saw anyone actually post a FF scan). Now we have had a fine Sony FF micro camera with PK adapter available for quite some time and suddenly a deafening silence from the DA crowd. Even FA lenses are sometimes marginal on FF (see explanation above). For the record, I tried the 12-24 on FF Canon (Tokina lens - optical design and element sizing is identical to the Pentax version; only coatings differ - and as expected hard vignetting was apparent even at 17mm on down) - so NO, as in NOT REMOTELY CLOSE, just forget about it.

DA is designated for crop sensor - and will work just fine up to 16x22.5mm; just crop to that size and it will work just as it does on the current cameras. Hey, then, it works!

If the Pentax engineers had designed it to work with a FF sensor, then the lens would have been designated FA - a much different standard. Why would they design a lens to cover MORE THAN TWICE THE AREA than its designation?

[PPPPPP42]

I don't normally add to FF threads out side of the FF quarantine forum (despite being pro FF) but I can't help but add my 2 cents.

Yeah I would give up on trying to use DA with a FF body that has SR, it rather defeats the purpose of going to FF if you crop it back to APSC. You will notice I don't own any DA lenses as I was planning ahead from the beginning (and also shoot film with them) and an FA will always be a DA if you want it to be.

Meanwhile on the topic of FF lenses having bad edges or not being good enough for a modern sensor, in short what was good, is still good, actually more so than even I was hoping for. I would direct your attention here for a small sample of proof. He has links to the full resolution uncropped images:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/169-pentax-full-frame/246917-does-my-m42-...ploration.html

I only wish I could afford more FA lenses, but its no big deal, the good ones will likely be produced again with updates. Most of the FA* stuff is more expensive used than most of the new Pentax lenses.

[crewl1]

when Pentax comes out with a FF camera.

HAHAHA, and monkeys fly out of my bum.

(Every time I say Pentax won't do something they prove me wrong, so I am just here to help .)

[Kerrowdown]

HAHAHA, and monkeys fly out of my bum.

Now there's a new photographic term I'm not familiar with, I best go and Google it.