Full Frame.

Well yes, I can hardly be expected to accept that the quality difference between the two formats is insignificant. I would suggest some caution might be in order though, particularly for those of us with mid range or older glass. I think a FF sensor will be particularly unforgiving of a lot of these lenses, and those that like to shoot full open as well might start to see a tapering off of quality they haven't yet noticed at the edges of the frame :

I feel its a bit like high end hi fi - you need to match the different components carefully to avoid one weak element pulling the lot down.

Well I'm sure they won't mind any extra edge softness upsetting their bokeh

I'm glad that your choice of camera brand is better than your fence choices Smeggy

And that is how I felt when I had a D7000 for 5 disappointing months

Not much bokeh going on at f2.8 on my Samyang 14mm! But plenty of edge of edge sharpness to look forward to on FF (so I'm told!)

I think this makes the point that it is good to consider your shooting styles and requirements along with your current system and potential spending power when dreaming of a FF future. If your style is close up portraits shot wide open at 50mm plus, then there's going be that leeway in edge quality, maybe nothing to worry about. For the landscape / architecture / macro shooters it may be an issue.

I read a detailed comparison recently between the Nikon D800e and the Hasselblad D40 'medium format' machine (40megapixels). In general the Nikon sensor excelled more at high iso's / low light stuff, giving less noise, and conversly the Hasselblad gave better detail, tones and resolution at the lower iso's.

However, the Nikon consistenly was let down by its lenses. Where the Hasselblad glass was rock solid across the frame at all apertures, the Nikon lenses (not cheap ones at all!) fell off in quality at the edges and at wider apertures. In short it seemed only the Hasselblad had the lens range to do justice to the camera sensor.

The question for us , is where do the Pentax lenses place us as we move towards this future?

I thought they were specializing in rugged compacts at the moment

So are my FA primes (28, 35, 50 & DFA100) going to be rubbish on full frame or not then... When used on my MZ-7 they don't appear to have much in the way of 'fall-off' but if a FF sensor is 'unforgiving' is this likely to be the case?

Nobody can tell you how current lenses will behave on an unknown future camera body.

I could speculate that they are unlikely to be rubbish, the existing 645 lenses seem to manage with the 645D. The wide angles were looked at though and specific digital medium format lenses have started to appear.

But there are very likely to be full frame Canon/Nikon users who have tried older Pentax lenses. That would give a pretty good indication.

That's true DrO, although the end result will be the amalgamation of lens and sensor, so the one may not gel with the other.

I see this as a problem with lens testing these days. They have to be tested on something, but the camera used affects the outcome. It's a long way from the days when everything could be tested to a uniform standard using Kodak Technical Pan film.

I certainly don't think older Pentax Primes would be 'rubbish' either, those who have them can look forward to their renewed usefullness with much excited anticipation! I was making the point that we have to take a wider sytem view when thinking of the upgrade, or making purchase decisions now. For example, I chose the Samyang 14mm prime to use now as it is a useful focal length on APS-C, but part of the decision was thinking about its future potential on FF (it produces a FF image circle), and reported edge sharpness was a factor there.

Comparisons to 35mm film may not be that helpful - I mean, we'll be seeing far higher resolutions on FF digital than 35mm film can produce (I believe?), so this is where the 'unforgiveness' could enter. The Nikon lenses that I referred to in the magazine comparison with the Hassleblad system were all pro grade.

According to KenRockwell.com we'll need a 175MP sensor to equal the resolution of film.

Explanation of arriving at the figure here

http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/film-resolution.htm

Yes DSLRs will have 175MP sensors, but not for a few years yet.

But frankly, who cares. Resolution, and indeed edge sharpness for that matter has nothing to do with taking great pics.

If you're that worried about something in the edge of your frame being razor sharp then it must be important enough to recompose so it's in the centre.

I for one don't want to have to deal with file sizes a 175MP FF sensor would produce...

Does give me a bit of hope that my FA's will be of use after all

Indeed.

btw - I end up with images 20000x10000 when I make spherical panos. TIFF file is about 600Mb in size. That's 200MP

It's OK for one offs like that, but imagine doing a whole shoot of them!!

Mind you by the time DSLRs get 175MP or 200MP sensors desktop computers will be able to handle loads of them them easily