It's too late now...... were stuck with old movie film sizes, but a FF 35mm lens could have covered a 30.6mm SQUARE sensor. That would have been about 8% bigger in area and highly cropable. The SR mechanism would probably be easier to construct. Mirrors would be bigger in one direction and smaller in the other one.

6x6 used to be the main format for wedding photography and Hasselblads were the main workhorse.... hardly anything else got a look in. A massive market which the camera makers have chosen to overlook.

6x6 was a lot quicker (due to not having to rotate the camera) and 8"x8" prints were cheap and the album was the same size as an 8"x6" album, but the 8"x6" prints looked smaller and unattractive. 10"x8" albums are massive.


--

To me that means you don't need a FF. If your going to crop it
to APS-C..... Just buy a higher spec. APS-C camera

You could do the same with a TV buy a 42" and put a 32" mask
on it

I had to laugh at someone on the US forum. In one single post
he complained about the lack of Pentax FF and about the high
price of the 560mm lens Someone replied saying that
the FF equivalent Nikon 800mm lens would cost $18,000

Don't get me wrong I'd like FF just as I'd like a 560mm but the
cost is purely for pro's and 24x36mm was never a very good
format anyway..... 6x6 or 6x7 was always better. Even 6x9
was always considered a bad aspect ratio.


--

Panasonic own Sanyo but the Chinese made Panasonics aren't
as good as the MIJ ones that you used to be able to buy.

I've still got some Panasonic NiCads from 1992 which still
hold about 1620 mAh (stamped 2000 mAh) I use them in cameras
and flashguns without any problems.

Sanyo Eneloops are about the best today.

--

It's the photographer not the camera

I've seen some good FF stuff on the US Forum, but mostly
using very expensive CZ and Voigtlander glass.

I'm also very impressed with axelluther's shots taken on
APS-C. His latest zoo shots on the PentaxDSLR eu forum
equal anything I've seen from FF plus he would have
needed 1.5x longer lenses on the FF.

Sounds OK

For 3: you will need a small basic K extension ring without
the aperture lever. The T2 mount fits with a small clearance
which can be taken up with the grubscrews as this photo...




I originally did this to use a K lens on a Novoflex
M42 bellows.

--

Buy her a Writing Pad and some Envelopes

--

Ha! Ha! At first you said you didn't like the K-3 and now
after owning a Sony FF...... a K-3 looks desirable

Judging from all the moaning everytime Pentax bring out a new
model.... If they ever bring out FF they will have to provide
counselling as well

--

Non of the Pentax K Tubes have 'A' contacts. I've never found that a problem with the Helicoid because I normally use it on mash-ups where a full sized tube won't work, such as slide copying etc. Sometimes the lens is reversed so the contacts wouldn't work anyway.

Olympus also did one and they sell for a lot more than the Pentax ones.

A K bayonet lens to M42 adapter can be cobbled up from an extension tube and an M42 T2 mount.

--

It's a lot cheaper just tying the camera to the
head of a chicken!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9jhWTrv9rY

--

Shown here.....

http://www.bdimitrov.de/kmp/misc/macro/ext_helicoid.jpg

They usually go for £50 - £100...... Very handy piece of kit.
I bought mine new from Park Cameras in the 80's

--