Full Frame Rumors, Part 6, the Continuing Saga

<p>Hi All.<br>

<br /> The rumor mill is all a-buzz about several new Pentax cameras, including a "$2,000" camera. The Pentax reps seem to likewise be talking about a full-frame body and it has even been suggested that Tokina is working on lenses as well. We'll see.</p>

<p>whay could make it go BIG TIIME is how well the film lenses will work with it.<br>

Canon chaged and likely for good reasons<br>

but now Canon ef ( both film and digital)<br>

make it a rich man's game<br>

Nikon's "well it fits but..." </p>

<p>Bah... I don't need full frame, I want the K-5IIs. (And the next gen after this would be even better if it had the sensor type that the Fuji X-Pro1 uses. If I were starting from scratch again, the Fuji would be a real contender for my money.) APS-C is all I need for filling a sheet of 17x25 inch paper. $2000 is a no-go for me no matter how stellar it would be. (Pretty easy to end up having a $4000-5000 investment once you toss in a kit of new full frame lenses to go with the full frame body. My assumption is digital oriented FF lenses would generally out perform film-era lenses. And there isn't a limitless supply of the highly regarded [vs. low-end] film-era lenses out there, especially ones that are not only available, bur free of damage, mold, internal lens group de-lamination, etc.) Others will happily put down their money for it, especially brand loyalists making a living at this, but not me.</p>

<p>I'd order one at B&H or Amazon the first day I could. Got FA lenses from 20mm to 135mm, I'm ready. Also have lots of wonderful MF lenses (mixture of K, M, and A).</p>

<p>I'm of three minds about Pentax's future moves. <br /><br />A. I'm more convinced that FF will happen merely because the component costs have come down to the point where the next top of the line Pentax APS-C will be competing almost directly with a new entry FF. The value equation starts getting fuzzy there. <br /><br />One issue will be availability of higher quality lenses for a FF camera. I believe that the older FA 31, 43, and 77mm lenses are in the process of being discontinued. There is a rebate on them still in Canada, and they are not called out in a brand new Pentax lens sales brochure.<br /><br />My guess is that Tokina is manufacturing a basic set of zooms or primes or both that would accompany any new FF. Pentax gotta have something to put on a new FF body. The FA lenses, though of amazing optical quality, just aren't of a contemporary design that would compete for mindshare with the other three competitors.<br /><br />Tokina is being used because Pentax simply doesn't have manufacturing capacity at this point. Though Ricoh is a large well capitalized concern, a lens marketing business model in 2013 may just be about outsourcing manufacturing while nourishing your core design assets. <br /><br />I would not be surprised if the FF camera has a totally different mount--it may even have a Leica M mount or even a Nikon one. That's one clean way of solving the problem of a lack of ready-to-go lenses while leveraging the brand name. Though many of us grandpa Pentax users would be PO'd, I think we are outnumbered by new customers who would seriously consider a Nikon mount FF--especially if the FF is of the mirrorless kind.<br /><br />Ricoh's breadth is also reason to for me to believe FF will happen.<br /><br />B. They will not pursue FF at all, but issue another top-notch APS-C DSLR like they have been doing in the past, and spend their new development energy on nich-ey stuff like expanding the Q lineup. Product platform exists and it's cheaper to build little stuff that they hope will sell well. Though I enjoy my Q, it's really competing with iPhones and high-end Androids. Good luck on that.<br /><br />C. They could do both of these. Or none.</p>

<p>ME</p>

<p>I'll just wait and see. I can't say what I'd do since this is theoretical at this point. I have a few lenses that would work with FF and if the body had the features to make it seem worth it and I could come up with the cash I'd do it! How's that for a non-committal answer? :)</p>

<p>I'm totally with Matt's non-committal stance--more or less ;~)</p>

<p>Hey, you're either with me or you're with the terrorists!</p>

<p>Knowing Pentax, here is what will happen- The FA 31mm, 43mm, 77mm, and 50mm lenses will be discontinued. Then 6 months later a FF body will be announced, but no FF lenses available except for the D-FA 100mm macro, the DA* 200mm f/2.8 and DA* 300mm f/4 and maybe the DA*55mm. Loss of those FA lenses would also create a deficit of fast primes in the entire lineup.</p>

<p>What Pentax SHOULD do is NOT discontinue those faster FA lenses, but any new body should have AA filters of a type that does not screw up the edge performance of the 43mm. I now use that lens mainly on my K200D or occasionally on the K20D, where it seems fine, but not on my K-5. I have not tried it with the K-r. The FA 77mm seems to be ok on the K-5. I am seriously thinking of getting a DA 40mm for the K-5.</p>

<p>What was hilarious is it was supposed to be announced on March 27th....instead, what we got was more K-30 COLORS! And it turned out one of the "reasons" it was going to be announced was some random guy was posting in his Google+ stream that he was testing it just to keep his friend from switching off Pentax. It was truly another great April Fool's like last year's "April 1st FF" announcement :-)<br>

I'd agree w/ most of Elenko's comment..at some point, they will have to just because of the D600 and 6D. Canikon are clearly positioning FF for the prosumer. Next year's bodies from them should be really good instead of the castrated versions this year (D600 has a crappy AF sensor...6D does as well). Rumor has it that Pentax will release theirs then and the main problem I see is they'll be going up against V2 of Canikon's attempts.<br>

As for this year, it'll probably be the D7100's 24MP sensor...when the K-5 was announced, there were rumors of 16MP FF which turned out to be the K-5's "16MP FF-like high-ISO performance" ;-)<br>

I'll believe Pentax FF when I see it...and the 43Ltd/77Ltd which I have supposedly have sucky edge performance on FF so I can't see them or me keeping them for FF :-(</p>

<p>I have the D7100, I hope Pentax goes with a more modest MP count. Not to exceed<br>

20mp. The D7100 has less dynamic range that its predecessor the D7000 and <br>

high iso is I think the same or worse.</p>

<p>Also, most people love the D7100 except its FPS is slower than the D300 and its buffer<br>

will only allow like 6 raw exposures before its full. This is due to buffer size constraints<br>

and the 24mp by 14 bit of data per shot.</p>

<p>Pentax, you don't need 24 mp, like Steve said you can make big prints with todays <br>

APS-c with no problem, we want better IQ and faster frame rate, and larger<br>

sensor pixel locations is the answer in a FF sensor. </p>