[kristoffon]

I am gotta give Pentax another year. If I still do not see the a hope of full frame, I am going to sell everything in pk/pka, very relectuntly.

They'll come up with one. Eventually they'll HAVE to. They still make FA lenses, many DAs are compatible and it would be trivial to re-start production of old FA designs with new finish to plug a gap temporarily. So maybe not next year, I'd place my bet in 2010.

[ogl]

FF is the way to death in crisis time for Pentax.
Sony's photo division is going to go down... Close 5 plants and cut 16 000 jobs in photo and LCD division.

[Matjazz]

They'll come up with one. Eventually they'll HAVE to.

They don't have to come up with FF. Like they said, they're better of improving APS-C.

A company that never had more than 3 dslrs on shelves can't afford FF system because Pentax would ha to:
a) abandon APS-C and convert entire lineup to FF - mind that an entry level camera has to be cheap.
b) create a new lineup of FF cameras in addition to APS-C ones - unless Pentax becomes equal competition to the big boys it can't afford that.
In both scenarios Pentax would have to make new FF lenses and both scenarios are very unlikely to happen in foreseeable future.

[Gooshin]

i'm just thinking outloud,

when the *ist came out, pentax claimed it was the smallest modern era film camera.

the *istD far as i know was simply an immitiation of that

the KXXD bodies, being the largest, will they support a full sized mirror and sensor without a need for a retrofit?

[Erik]

One of the official excuses for Pentax not going full frame (and they aren't, at least not anytime soon) is that their sensor-based shake reduction is physically impossible with the K-mount and a full frame sensor. (It works for Sony because the Minolta mount is different in some way, but I don't remember the exact details)

One of Pentax' main competetive advantages is the sensor SR so it would be suicide at this point to release an FF SLR without it, just like it would be an even more unpleasant form of suicide to release an APS-H one.

Pentax isn't going to go full-frame. Pentax is going to continue releasing APS-C bodies and eventually a 645D, which will completely negate the need for an FF body for any pro photographers wanting to use Pentax equipment. Samsung MAY be going full-frame, and in that case they will be releasing a K-mount SLR without body SR, but with their own set of SR lenses, similar to the way Panasonic and Olympus share mounts but have chosen different solutions for SR.

At least that's what I think!

[stevebrot]

Might as well start selling them lenses now, Pentax ain't going full frame, not with so much glass invested in APS-C

That is an interesting statement that I have seen others make on this forum. It sounds pretty reasonable except that sometimes I wonder just what the level of effort is to retool to a different, but similar product.

Modern manufacturing facilities are amazingly adaptable. I saw a report of TV a few nights ago where an automobile plant manager described changing an entire plant from making small SUVs to sedans in a matter of a week. For sure, they likely had the procedures all laid out in advance, but that is just an example of what can be done to quickly adapt production to market shift.

Unless they were really stupid, Pentax probably still has most of the tooling as well as the design documents for the FA lenses in storage somewhere. They also have manufacturing partners that have current FF products.

Just a thought.

Steve

(Still think that Cosina should jump into the mix with a bare-bones high performance FF K-mount digital body...)

[cpopham]

One of the official excuses for Pentax not going full frame (and they aren't, at least not anytime soon) is that their sensor-based shake reduction is physically impossible with the K-mount and a full frame sensor

Isn't that commonly repeated rumour, rather than quoted by any official sources? Certainly RH seemed fond of repeating it a while ago...

[NorthPentax]

Most of us don't need FF. You just want to feed your equipment ego so you don't feel "small" when your CaNikon friends show up with the latest FF body.

If Hoya(with the brand name Pentax) want's to sell a pro dSLR to their old prosumer and pro photographer customers, they must go for a digital version of 645 or 6X7.

So far in 2008, the marketshare for dSLR's over €1000 is devided like this:

Nikon: 61.33%
Canon: 29.73%
Sony: 7.28%
These numbers comes from Nikon.

Even I thought about switching from Pentax to Nikon D700 when I sold both of my K10D's. I went with K20D and forgot all about FF. The last couple of day's I have only used my Sigma SD-14. This one have a 4,6Mp Foveon sensor, a crop factor of 1,7 and it is a great camera!
The next dSLR body I will buy, most likely the Sigma SD-15(about 1-2 years after they release it and it's alot cheaper).

[Blue]

I thought the current rumor was that the new camera was going to have a 1.3x crop sensor (APS-H)

With the exception of the 645d that's what I thought also.

[Gus]

Pentax isn't going to go full-frame. Pentax is going to continue releasing APS-C bodies and eventually a 645D, which will completely negate the need for an FF body for any pro photographers wanting to use Pentax equipment.

Sure a 645D is interesting for those who have the lenses or don't mind medium format's bulk. Sure Pentax will be able to say "look at me, I can still make high end cameras". Sure it would have bucket-loads of pixels in resolution. But for the rest of us, it's a completely new system, which may or may not be appealing, and will require major re-investment.

For me, my only interest in full frame, besides potential lower noise levels, is the ability to use the FAs below or at 50mm at their original FOVs with a reasonably priced FF body. In reality the appeal of the idea is fading over time and if Pentax manages FF equivalent noise levels on APS-C, things wouldn't be that bad. What do you guys think?

[vanchaz2002]

Well, I believe everyone has the trend moving from smaller format to larger ones. The simple factor in film time is the bigger film can record much more information that make the photo much richer. The same might or might not apply to digital. Anyway, I am done with Media Format and happy staying 135mm.

For people don't have many lenses before DA, FF is just not too attractive. That being said, a lot of good glass before DA is used on cropped sensor that does not get out their full potential, especially in wide angle. The value of lenses under 20mm along in my collection is well above the cost of entry level FF body in either Nxxxx or Cxxxxx. I believe they deserve a body to keep on living in their world, instead of migrating to less valueable normal lenses.

[k100d]

I am gotta give Pentax another year. If I still do not see the a hope of full frame, I am going to sell everything in pk/pka, very relectuntly.

Given what you state as inventory, I hope they never go full frame. Thay way I get a shot at all your lenses

i'm second in line!! honestly, if you ever decide to sell, you should have a Pentax meet just so we can check out your stuff.

have you tried out your lenses on film??

[kristoffon]

almost every DA lens over 50mm is FF-friendly

[RobA_Oz]

One of the official excuses for Pentax not going full frame (and they aren't, at least not anytime soon) is that their sensor-based shake reduction is physically impossible with the K-mount and a full frame sensor.

I wish I understood that better, though I have to say I'm sceptical of it. "Physically impossible" seems to have two possible meanings here: either the sensor can't be moved in the same way or there isn't enough room to sit the actuators in the body.

Neither of those two meanings seem to make sense to me. In the first case, the image excursions aren't likely to be that much bigger for the bigger sensor, and in the second case, the actuators won't be either. If the excursions were to take the sensor outside the lens projection circle, then that might complicate things, and a compromise that reduced the image size from the full resolution of the sensor under those circumstances might be necessary.

None of this makes the system "physically impossible". However, I may be mis-interpreting their meaning, so it would be good to know more.

[nakey]

That is an interesting statement that I have seen others make on this forum. It sounds pretty reasonable except that sometimes I wonder just what the level of effort is to retool to a different, but similar product.

It's not the re-tooling that i see that's the issue. I'm sure they can retool for full frame quite quickly. Remember, the FA35mm F2 and FA50mm F1.4 are still being made in batches.

It's the committment to crop. Why a 17-70 F4? why a 50-135 F2.8? why do we have to go to sigma or Tamron for a 70-200? why a 35mm Macro? Why is pentax one of the few with a factory 180deg diag Fisheye on Crop?

The focal lengths that they're releasing show me that they're not interested in FF. or we'd get DA/D-FA variants of FA lenses

the only company who has an answer for Canon's FF is Nikon. And Vice Versa. Sony's is just there to get that "i want FF" crowd.

It's also just suicide. What pentax needs is market share. less of the Pentaxians shouting that Pentax is a serious contender, and more of everyone else saying that it is. while i was initially disappointed at the lack of FF at Photokina, the fact that the K-m is being advertised on TV, Mainstream TV, by a huge camera shop, on prime time viewing (after a long time without any sort of SLR commercials), is showing me that we need marketshare first. get them in, then get them upgrading.

Finally, i think this need for FF is more about marketing than anything else. who "really" needs FF? not wants, desires, thinks it'll make your pictures better, but actually needs it?

(Still think that Cosina should jump into the mix with a bare-bones high performance FF K-mount digital body...)

Wouldn't be a bad idea though