FF Pentax anyone?

Just saw this...

link

So who needs FF?

IF, it happens, shall we expect more FF glass and yet more expense?

I would be interested if the high ISO is acceptable.

Regards

Very encouraging! Thanks for posting it.

Best regards - Pete.

I still love the idea of a square format using the current size.
That way all our current DA lenses will still work, we will get FF in one direction and won't need to rotate the camera for portrait.

Further thoughts on this possible FF.

To use George's term "those ending with ON" (manufacturers), have both formats in their arsenal. They refer to FF as Pro cameras and cropped as begginer to semi-pro. A marketing strategy I am sure.

Why would Pentax NOT apply the same. They were very late in introducing a DSLR (istD)and may also be the last to introduce FF. I find it hard to believe that Pentax would let the big three continue to dominate the DSLR FF market as ultimately FF will be the norm. The cropped sensor product range effectively re-invented the market. With positive results I might add, as thousands of people are now using DSLR's.

Looking at Nikon, Canon and Sony, all three are registering patents for lenses, the majority are FF. Sigma etc will be happy to deal with either format, indeed its good business. So why would Pentax stay with cropped? They would sell FF, in good numbers as there is a lot of 35mm glass out there that people would use regardless of wether or not it was sharp at the edges.

Top photographers, proffessionals and the like are not the people who generate good profit for camera manufacturers, the man in the street, Joe public, the consumer does that. Yes he is influenced by the hype etc just as the world used VHS and not Betamax even though Betamax was better.

As far as Pentax are concerned, if they are not on the circuit, thay can’t compete.

Now I need a tea break,

Regards

I have always thought it would happen and have been steadily collecting a fine range of A series primes, for when the great day arrives.

When I first joined this forum, one of my first posts was on the desire for a FF Pentax. I was surprised at the number of responses rubbishing the idea and saying it was not widely wanted and would not happen.

I look forward to saying, Nah-na na na nah!..Told ya so!

You won't say "Nah-na na na nah", as you will be too busy capturing/processing more detail........

Regards

I wonder if there's a bit of a misunderstanding here. Unlike film, where bigger format=more detail, this isn't true of digital unless the pixel pitch remains the same and the bigger format has, therefore, more pixels.

A 14MP APS-C sensor will resolve the same as a 14MP FF sensor, providing the lens can also resolve an appropriate amount of detail. In this case we would however get an improvement in noise and possible less abberation due to the pixels being too close together or too small.

If the pixel pitch was kept the same however, then the FF frame sensor would have more pixels, just as you get more film grains from a larger format, and that's a different issue. Noise might be the same, but resolution would then increase.

Well put John, so is it true to say that regardless of image sensor size, lower pixel density means less noise?

Regards

If there are larger, more widely spaced pixels there will be less light spillage from one to the other, less electronic "crosstalk" and less noise as they will each produce a larger signal. The signal-to-noise ratio will improve.

If you recall, when the 10MP Pentax K10D was introduced Pentax themselves recommended the 6MP DSLRs if low noise was your priority.

I admit I don't know much about the tech stuff, thus I never heard about pixel pitch before. But with my limited understanding it seems obvious that there is so much more room for improvements in FF while there are signs that APS-C is already getting close to peak performance. So what system performs better today is not really all important to me.

Think 5 years from know, at that time I think FF will be vastly superior. Pentax on the other hand would be struggling to keep people interested in APS-C by introducing features you either love or hate. We can lament this fact but market logic dictates that every manufacturer put a new top model to market at least every 2 years or so.

Thanks for that John. I didn't know about the recommendation. That explains why I like my istD images more than the K10D..

Regards

Oh! One can never be too busy to gloat.

Think my reasoning was incorrect by the way.

Regards

I met up with an old friend yesterday who I hadn't seen in a few years. He has left the Pentax fold because of (a) the lack of full frame and (b) the lack of long fast lenses. As to (a) the arguments will run on no doubt, but for (b) it is certainly true. The 600mm image stablised monster he whipped out of the boot of his car (from a very neat purpose built bag) was quite some beastie. Personally, I have no use for a 600mm lens but the 18mm tilt/shift lens he had was very very nice. If I could afford the lens I'd be tempted to get a body to go with it!

K.

Not really though, new types of sensors are being tested so who knows. Also with technology we see everything getting smaller, digital cameras wouldn't be an exception I think.

Why would someone want a APS-C?
Well because the camera is smaller and cheaper, that's more then enough reason for some.
I'm one of them and if I want more quality the 645D would be interesting, if the price is right.