Pentax 1.3 Sensor...

I'd have thought that if Pentax imagined that they might be producing a 1.3 or a 1.1 sized sensor, then their new DA* lenses would be built with some lee-way, and they aren't! It looks like Pentax have nailed their colours to the APS-C mast quite firmly.

I agree with the idea that if you want a bigger sensor get the 645.
If you really need a big sensor for "pro" stuff (whatever the word "pro" means...) a 645 is a logical camera.

Medium format has been hit very hard by DSLRs, full frame or APS-C, and I'm not convinced that other manufacturers are selling enough digital versions to make it worthwhile for Pentax. It ultimately depends on price as well as performance, but if the price ends up at Hasselblad levels, how many will buy?

:

I'll have to take your word for this, though it amazes me. Is it not possible that sales have been hit because pros realise the shift to digital has begun and there is no point in making a big investment in rollfilm cameras?

I should have thought the only advantages a minature format DSLR has over medium format film is immediacy and economy - not necessarily the principal factors for choosing medium format in the first place. The quality difference between minature and medium format has always been striking, at least for big enlargements. It is hard to imagine that anyone with a requirement for superior quality would ditch it in favour of economy and convenience in the long term - the clients won't stand for it. I suspect that once medium format cameras are available at something other than Hassselblad's fetishistic prices, the line will become more profitable. Hasselblad are charging an astronomical price because they have always been able to do so for a hand-built product they take a year to construct. Many studio based photographers chose cameras like the old Mamiya C330 (or dare I say it, the old Pentax 67) at a fraction of the price of a Hasselblad and produced stunning results in spite of it.

Pentax has had a sigificant presence in medium format market for something like 37 years. I would be staggered if they abandoned that position to chase minature format success alone.

I hear what you say, and you make a good argument.

It depends on what you need. I am amazed at the quality possible when shooting Macro on digital. It's far better than anything I ever did on medium format. Unfortunately I bought a Pentax 645n when really what I wanted was a 67 II.

So it also IMHO depends on what you define as medium format. 645 just was not a big enough quality jump from 35mm. 6x7cm is. 5" x 4" is even better, but the expense puts it right out of the question for me.

But at the end of the day it's the subject matter that's most important. I seem to make better images on DSLRs than i ever did. Partly maybe because of Photoshop, but maybe I've improved as well, helped by the ability to take so many more shots at no cost whatsoever.

A lot of good points have been made, I'm not going to bother adding my 2 cents since between George, Matt and Ben everything I would say has been said.

The only thing I will say is this

It turns out I really like Pentax gear. I love the combination of optical performance, size and price from the lenses. I love the colours, tones and shaddow detail my DL2 and K10D provide (yes, even the DL2, she's no match for the K10 but she's still a lady). I've had Canon AND Nikon people go gooey over the colour reproduction my DL2 + kit lens produces, and I'm pretty sure thats nothing to do with me.

What I'm trying to say is this: I don't actually care if Pentax go full frame or not. The only thing I want them to do is to continue to produce high quality, relatively small cameras and lenses at prices I can afford. I'll leave the decision as to how best to do that up to them.

I'd be happy to retire my RB67 if Pentax came out with a medium format digital that could equal the quality of 6x7.

Given the quality of the 10 megapixel sensor, the 31 megapixel sensor might even let me retire the 4x5!

I've been especially impressed with the performance the K10D's sensor produces when set to low contrast. Gradation and subtlety of colour reminds me of the low contrast films I used to use. This has probably been helped by the 22 bit processing. Even when it is averaged down to 12 bit (or even 8 bit for jpeg) it does prove the point that a bigger sample will give a more accurate average.

I wouldn't retire the 5x4 just yet. Even if the 645's sensor turns in large format performance it still won't give any of those very useful camera movements.

I have been enormously impressed by the subtlety and gradation performance of the K10D's sensor - especially when it is set to low contrast. If a sensor of that quality with the 22 bit processing is scaled up to 645 I don't think Pentax will have any problems selling them to anyone earning a living from it. No more polaroids and, as you so rightly say, ability to take many more shots at no cost. I'm up for it.

There are various gadgets that allow you to create a "view camera" effect with a lens and a medium format (or even small-format) back. They basically take the digital back, put it on one end of a belows, and have a holder for the lens in front.

Of course, if I was using a 645 back I'd probably need the image circle of my 6x7 lenses. But I have the Mamaiya lenses to start with, and who knows what the industry will come up with in the next few years?