Pentax Full Frame, Will it ever happen.

Why should that be rubbish. On the contrary. My example was to show, that to get the same resolution as the current Pentax APS-C A 37mP are required.

Regards, Horst

[quote:3496ace15f="Horst]Why should that be rubbish. On the contrary. My example was to show, that to get the same resolution as the current Pentax APS-C A 37mP are required.

Regards, Horst[/quote]The pixel density is much lower than that of the 36.3 MP Nikon D800 as the 645D sensor is 44 x 33mm as opposed to 35.9 x 24mm

John

Hi Horst, I was saying the 645D is not 'rubbish' because it's sensor is a mere 40 megapixels. It is certainly vastly superior to my K5. As long as a replacement sensor for the K5 is low noise I welcome the extra pixels (for cropping) I just don't think you need 37 mp to achieve an improvement. The limits on the glass are a point well made though.

I don't understand this. Are you talking about if you crop your FF sensor to APSC size, and hope to maintain the same resolution as the K5? Otherwise maintaining the pixel density but enlarging the sensor seems like a big resolution 'win' to me.

To avoid implict assumptions in the poll could you change the option from "Will not upgrade" to simply "Do not want?". For me at least, in these days of improving sensors, an unnecessary change going to the increased bulk of 35mm sensor bodies would be a downgrade rather than an upgrade.

Four or five years ago with the state of the sensor art as it was then I might have considered sacrificing portability for that extra sensor area but not now. And with every year that goes by my desire for a 35mm sensor reduces, even if one was cheaper than APSC I wouldn't want it today let alone tomorrow.

You also have to scale up the sensor movement shake reduction mechanism. This may or may not scale up easily - the 645D does not have it.

You could save quite a bit of space inside the camera by not having the inbuilt flash - the flash capacitor takes up a fair bit of room - but I suspect that the marketing people would be in uproar if the designers suggested that.

The inbuilt flash is often pretty useless; its light often suffers with a shadow caused by the lens! Given the high ISO's obtainable now just how often is a flash a necessity, and with the reduced noise from a sensible FF sensor (probably not 37mp) no doubt even less.

John K

Funnily enough I found myself using the inbuilt flash recently (on my K10D) - I was photographing from beneath some metal steps onto a sunlit garden, and wanted some detail in the underside of the steps to come through.

In general though, I agree the inbuilt flash is expendable. If I want flash, generally I want it off camera. My solution would be an inbuilt radio controller and some matching off camera flashes with built in receivers.

I'm not sure how vitally important SR is for a FF camera either, to be honest... a lot of third party lenses have inbuilt OS anyway these days, but the higher ISO offsets the need for SR anyway.

I gave the weight / dimensions earlier in the thread, of the K5II and D600 (FF) - they are, for all intensive purposes the same.

Not having a pop-up flash on a DSLR is traditionally one indicator that the body is a 'pro' model. But the makers did not think that the high iso performance would render flash unnessary, they figured that the pro user base would have their own flash guns, which are clearly much more versatile. But for these people, and still in many situations for all types of users, flash is a great 'get out of jail' card. Even our humble pop up can be very effective.

What is interesting in other brands is to see cameras with FF / 35mm sized sensors and other pro specs continue to be made with pop up flashes. Our own K7 / K5 ranges have many 'pro-spec' features, in particular the range of on body levers and switches to directly control many essential camera functions that other brands place onto electronic menus. Yet they still have a pop-up flash.

It seems the traditional distinctions between consumer / enthusiast cameras and the pro models is becoming less and less distinct. It will be a very important judgment for Pentax in deciding if they could dispense with the pop up in a new FF / 35mm body.

And don't forget that under maybe 50mm IS/SR/OS/VR is of very limited use anyway. I don't remember a single shot taken with my 21mm or 35mm that has been spoilt by motion blur (mine)

However the higher ISO capability is just another aid to the SR and of course now doubles your chances of a blur/noise free image ! At least I hope Pentax continue to offer SR in camera - think of all those stabilised old lenses for starters !

The humble pop-up can indeed be very effective. I have one on the D800 and use it now and again as fill - it is very effective (even when birding if I don't have the BEtter Beamer to hand, it is surprisingly powerful). It is a good thing that Pentax keep it on all their cameras and long may it continue.

I would suggest the inclusion or not on a new FF / 35mm sensor body may be an indicator as to the market positioning as seen by Pentax, and potential user base. As the lines between 'Pro' and 'Prosumer' models becomes more blurred this remains a clear distinction on other brands.

On Pentax our top of line models already have many 'Pro-Spec' features (the levers and switches I mentioned earlier) where other brands cameras of similar pricing would use electronic menus. With the additional space inside required for the bigger sensor, could it not be attractive to Pentax to remove the built-in flash in the interests of compactness? Only, I would say, if they believed the potential user base will be the type of photographer who would either have already, or be happy to invest in a flashgun / off camera setup, or who might have studio equipment.

Or could be they be expecting that it will be the same group of serious enthusiasts / semi pros / the odd pro etc who will be tempted?

Crikey all of a sudden everyone's stripping down the alleged Pentax FF of all features

Ahhh it's FF we don't need on-board flash
Ahhh it's FF we don't need SR
Ahhh it's FF we don't AF
Ahhh it's FF we don't need a shutter button!
Ahhh it's FF let's dispense with lenses. Oh and the read LCD and while we're at it we could save awful lot of space by not having a battery!!

Like Horst rightly says, 35mm film SLRs were very compact. I'm currently hold a Pentax Super A body next to my K-5. Same dimensions but the K-5 is slightly deeper to accommodate the electronics and LCD.

There's no reason why a FF Pentax should be anything more than marginally bigger

Any space saving from removing items such as built-in flash (or shutter button :wink would have little appeal to me - I rather like a larger camera, in fact I use my K7 permanently with the BG4 grip for this reason. This grip can almost act as a tripod replacement at times (along with the SR).

No, I don't think its about removing items - from what I've read I believe FF shooting to be more unforgiving and challenging, so us mere 'enthusiasts' may need all the help we can get. I bought into Pentax exactly because it offers many more 'Pro' level features at a reasonable price.

I am just highlighting a relationship between features on offer and the targeted users - I am saying that on other brands the lack of built-in flash signifies the top line pro models. The question is would Pentax follow this distinction as well and target the pro base who would normaly use flashguns and wireless / studio setups, as a market positioning statement.