Full Frame Pentax!!!!!!!

Hopefully the title grabbed your attention. I read recently that Pentax are looking to bring out a full-frame DSLR this year. Is this still the case? does anyone have any more information regarding this. an update would be nice as the latest news on this dates back to middle 2009.

Where did you read this :

I would have thought that they would be concentrating all their efforts on the 645D.

What is this obsession with full frame :

Edit: Typo corrected.

Here we go again.

Full frame means bigger cameras so everyone looks more professional.

I say ... get a grip. (in more ways than one)

Nah, not again?

link

Regards

I started as soon as I read the title.

No-one outside of Pentax has any info, and no-one inside Pentax is saying anything. So whatever you read was purely speculation.

Personally, I would find FF interesting, except I wouldn't be keen on having to use a 450mm lens instead of a 300mm!

That's right...and I did

FF now with HD Video and Sky+

The quality of existing Pentax DSLRs is so good (I've made many c. A3 prints and a few c. A2 prints with my humble 6mp K100D) I can't understand the obsession some folk have with full-frame. I suppose it's just because it was what we all used to use (sorry you folks who are still using film) and everything relates back to it. That's why I still think of 35mm focal length equivalents.

The main advantage, as I see it, would be the opportunity to use more wide-angle lenses. Mind you, I guess the huge sensor would show up a few deficiencies in my antique manual lens collection! (Best stick to using the middle bit with my small sensor!)

Andrew C.

So by using a Pentax 300mm f/4 lens on a cropped sensor, it's effective magnification is 9 and by seeing more of its image circle as with FF it's magnification reverts to 6? I always thought only the field of view changed?

So it can be said then that we can change the fixed focal length by seeing less or more of the available image circle.

It would be nice to be able to use the 31mm ltd as a 31mm, just a thought.

Regards

Ok, I don't HAVE to use a 450mm lens instead of a 300mm, but there's no advantage to FF if I'm going to crop every shot to APS-C. So therefore I will need longer lenses to take advantage of it for the same telephoto effect.

I presume (but really have no idea) that it all depends on the MP of the sensor involved when looking at effective lens length on a FF camera. If you take something like the D700 that has 12MP and put it against a 12MP 1.5x crop camera then yes the FF would come up short but if you had a 18MP FF then wouldn't they have the same reach?

Or am I way out here?

Not actually, but effectively, yes, but with a loss of image quality when cropping ("seeing less").

Way out i think. The focal length of lenses does not change, only the amount of the image circle that the sensor sees.

For the same pixel pitch a FF frame sensor would have to have a higher pixel count than an APS-C one, simply because there's more of it. Or the pixel count could be the same and the individual pixels could be bigger. This latter scenario is where the lower noise comes in. Bigger pixels produce more current and have less inherent noise and less overspill between pixels.

Focal length does not change. As per this link link
I wonder how many 35mm film users ditched their cameras for APS format?

If larger sensors are not an advantage I would ask why are Pentax launching a medium format digital?

I use digital FF so my 14-24 is just that and not a 21-36 equiv. I don't own the Pentax 31mm but would buy it if Pentax release a FF DSLR.

Regards