[tlwyse]

Under $2K FF.....better do it soon before the economy gets better and I can afford the Sony a850! Seriously, I'm officially on hold for buying any more lenses until I decide whether to make the jump to FF. If I buy any lenses for the K20, they will be FF lenses...just in case. Good, sharp focus and those damn SDM lenses has been the Achille's Heel of my K20.

Terry

[johnmflores]

With the launch of the Olympus E-PL1, the price of an EVIL with kit lens just dropped into entry-level dSLR territory, $599

Olympus PEN E-PL1 Thankfully Includes Built-In Flash and $200 Cheaper Price Point - Olympus pen e-pl1 - Gizmodo

It will be interesting to see how it does in the ultra-competitive market segment. I'm sure Pentax and others manufacturers not yet on the EVIL bandwagon will be watching closely...

[mattdm]

I voted neither, but I could actually be talked into either one if the conditions were right.

For full-frame, it'd have priced around the current K-7 price point, with discounts on an updated DFA Limited series. (Particularly if the new lenses would be weather-sealed.) And it couldn't be much bigger or heavier.

For EVIL, the viewfinder would have to be a step above the current best. I'm certain that one day electronic viewfinders will outpace optics, but even the top isn't there yet. And I'm not particularly interested in using legacy glass on such a camera — I'd be most comfortable if Pentax joined micro 4/3rds for this segment.

[matoqui]

Both, because I want an EVIL-FF camera for about $1200 and full of features.

[Urmas R.]

Neither probably. FF is too heavy for longer hiking and I much prefer the excellent clarity of an optical VF to an electronic one in an EVIL camera.

My secret dream would be a Pentax with a new type of aps-c sensor, which would be capable of resolving fine detail better. Something like an upgraded Foveon. As I'm mostly into landscape and macro, then resolution at low ISO is my priority. Combine this with a compact weather sealed body and I'm as happy as I can be.

[rfortson]

Between those two choices, I'd vote for an EVIL assuming it's smaller, like the Olympus E-P1 and it used the DA Limited lenses.

[Noisychip]

That's difficult to decide. I voted FF, but I think it would depend on prices. Neither would I buy a FF for 2,000 $/€, nor a EVIL camera for 1,000.

[interested_observer]

A full frame camera is going to be too large - the current ones on the market are larger than I want. The APS-C is just fine for my needs and skills. So I voted evil. I have an LX3 and its sensor is a bit too small and their is too much noise even at the lower ISO levels of 800, with essentially 400 being the top end of being useful. So for all essential purposes - an APC-C is about as small as I want to go (maybe 4:3 - but I really do not want to buy new glass).

[Photomy]

Both, because I want an EVIL-FF camera for about $1200 and full of features.

sounds good to me. Also, I want 3 smallish in-lens-shutter primes. One made for portrait use.

[johnmflores]

We have a lot of new forum members since the contest and a lot of recent discussion about the impending new models. Let's float this survey back to the surface and get more voices!

[mattb123]

K-x with:

- magnesium-alloy weather-sealed body
- focus dots
- 1080p 24fps with manual exposure
- stereo mic jack with manual gain control

The 7D's got these but it's HUGE for an APS-C camera imho

I would not be disappointed by something like this. In fact, if I had the money I'd buy one for sure. I'm holding out to see what comes around before I invest in a second body. If what comes out doesn't suit me then that second body will likely be a K-7; hopefully at a deeply discounted price!

But if they did an EVIL instead, one that could use my existing K mount lenses (especially DA Limited primes), and about the size of the EP-1 then I'd be pretty tempted. I take my K-x all kinds of places under my own power so a smaller/lighter package capable of similar results would be good for me. I could live with a EVF in exchange for the small size and full features too.

[Douglas_of_Sweden]

Both, because I want an EVIL-FF camera for about $1200 and full of features.

I'll take one too.

[eldee]

I voted for FF. I think we have enough "little" cameras. I'd like Pentax to come back to the forfront with what they know best...exceptional equipment for stunning photos.
The 645D is a start but I still don't understand the smaller sensor. I have lots of FF glass and prefer it over the smaller format. Besides, I want to take advantage of those real pixels not the pimped ones. Just my 2 cents.

Both, because I want an EVIL-FF camera for about $1200 and full of features.

It seems so counterintuitive that Pentax will do FF with EVIL before DSLR format; but as a speculation, it is not a bad thought, in my opinion. It is just as counterintuitive to think that Pentax of all company would move away from Penta prism. But again, knowing their history full of innovation and quirkiness, it just may not be a bad idea.

FF DSLR market is still unpredictable in its early stages, or so it seems with Sony attempting to right the ship with their line up somehow. Pentax engineers have been quoted as saying that there aren't really any EVIL products out there that they themselves "liked."


As EVIL sales grows, it just may work to sneak into this EVIL market theng from the side door.

For me, the only way I would buy FF is that if it is in EVIL format in pursuit of smallness. Even then it is a hard sell. I just want to save enough to buy 645D.

[KxBlaze]

I am very surprised with the results so far. I thought EVIL was the new FF, but it seems that FF is still the king of camera features.