michael_kuhne

<p>In regard to having the most flexible uses, I cannot see why one would have to switch to APS-C format with a lens made for APS if that is not desired. Then the photo would simply have edge issues to be addressed in post process. Unless the camera will automatically switch itself!</p>

<p>I assume the switch will be to exact APS-C format. There should be no change in picture frame shape. If the FF format is say 36 MP, the APS-c format would be say 20MP, which of course would be spread over a smaller area so resolution would be similar to that of 36MP over the FF larger area. You would not use all of the 36MP crammed into the APS-C area. That would not be a good idea even if possible because such cramming of so many MPs would cause more noise.</p> <p>You would use all 36MP for full frame when that is appropriate for good design and performance with FF lenses, and less MP as required for APS-C use for good performance there. The issue is to accommodate both lens types with excellent performance in either case, all in one camera body.</p> <p>Up to now I have stuck with and prefer the APS-C format for DSLR use because I get very fine performance with smaller lighter lenses especially for normal-to-telephoto focal length. But the advantage is reversed for wide angle, and for achieving tighter depth of field. I use 35mm film when I want "full frame", but the new camera may present a desirable alternative.</p>

<p>Well, let's say we have the same pixels in APS-C mode from the new camera that we have from the K-3 or K-5, which have given excellent IQ. To have enough pixels in the FF mode to equal that resolution will require more MPs when spread over that greater area. If one ONLY has DA APS-C lenses and will not be getting FF lenses, there would be no point in acquiring this new camera. </p> <p>But many of us have a mixture of FF and APS-C lenses. One such I have as an example is the Sigma EX DG 24-60mm f/2.8 which I have found to be a very fine performer. It is full-frame and can be used on both my Pentax DSLR bodies and on my 35mm film bodies. On the DSLRs the crop factor comes out to about 35-90mm f/2.8 equivalent. Great for extending use in the tele range, not so great if my interest happens to be more in the wide angle. With the new FF camera I could switch back and forth as my need indicates. I often carry this lens in conjunction with my DA* 50-135mm f/2.8 as a kit. By using the Sigma in FF mode I would extend the range of my kit to a true 24-60mm with a switchable overlap to the DA* lens's 75-205mm equivelent. That beats other brands' FF models having to tote a much heavier 70-200mm f/2.8 to match up with the Sigma 24-60mm. </p> <p>Also, the new Pentax (or other brand) 70-200mm f/2.8 on the new camera would be useable either way according to one's needs. Better DOF control as FF, then in APS-c mode as a 100-300mm f/2.8 equivalent for extended tele use.<br> <br> </p>

<p>I just read the interview on dpreview. I have known since the appearance of the Pentax D-FA* 7o-200mm f/2.8 lens that Pentax will finally produce a Full-Frame DSLR soon. How wise of them to make it compatible with their DA lenses. I wonder what the MP rating will be. I'm thinking 30- 36 MP to be in line with the resolution of the K-3.</p>

<p>As you no doubt realize, John, the K20D's meter consistently underexposes by 1/2 stop or so. Using Imaging Resource's comparometer, you can include older models by clicking on "all cameras" at the top of the column. </p>

<p>The great prices now available for the K-5IIs are because of being an outgoing model. Possibly no longer in production. Which makes it a great time to pick one up. I'm sure as time passes, the KS2 will come down, though its price bundled with the neat little kit zoom lens is pretty good. When I go bike riding it would fit into my belt pouch even better than the K-r. It is a bit heavier, but even with its superior glass pentaprism VF it is actually not as high and about the same width.<br> POP PHOTO uses a DOX (?) machine for noise and some other factors, as does Photozone for lenses, which is good information to a point, but I always like to compare test images. To me that is what reveals reality best. Dpreview is especially slow when it comes to Pentax. Who knows when we might get a KS2 report. </p>

<p>BTW I agree about the new articulating LCD on the KS2, great for getting down low for closeup work, if you do that a lot, and other special features too. And it has the 2-wheel system for the full Pentax Hyper system and smoother operation. If you shoot mainly jpegs, the built-in camera noise reduction appears to do a fine job. It would make a good small sidekick for your K20D. But for me I'd rather have the more pro build quality of the K-5II(s) and top LCD panel if I had to pick between them. </p>

<p>I too have a K20D, a fine camera, and K-5, IIs. The K20D has its own virtues, such as superior exposure metering consistency, exceptional color accuracy, excellent flash metering, superior handling with larger lenses, on-body controls for bracketing and SR, but higher ISO low noise is not one of them.</p> <p>My K-5 and IIs are great for that and overall superb IQ. I am merely looking to replace my old K200D as being my lightest weather sealed body. I sometimes want to travel as light and small as I can, still having aDSLR. The K-5II might be even a tad better for low noise. Reason being that the extra tad of fine detail from the IIs not having the AA filter might show up noise grains a little more- maybe. But either model would blow the K20D out of the water for low noise. The K-3 does a fine job of noise reduction, but its noise program has to be much more aggressive to compensate for the noise from its big 23mp sensor, so it loses detail resolution below that of the K-5 above ISO 800 or so. Check out dpreview reviews carefully. The K-5II or K-5IIs are hard to beat overall.</p> <p>The latest issue of Pop Photo has a review of the KS2. Fine for shooting jpegs but noise may be more of an issue for RAW processing. Check out the compare images on imaging resource which are jpegs. Both K-5IIs and KS2 look great at ISO 1600.</p>

<p>Seems like a neat little camera. I've seen complaints about its weight, which is around that of the K200D, but more than the KSI or K-r. It is easy to understand the extra 3 oz or so. The weather sealing plus the added frame for the articulating LCD, and the two dial control wheels design. But it is compact for all that it offers. The new super compact kit lens WR is neat too.</p>

<p>I think this camera is designed for static setup photography in mind, such as landscape, etc. using this new technology. The lack of a built-in flash lends to that concept also. Ironic that Pentax, who introduced the built-in flash for SLR design back in the mid 1980's now abandons it, but for this intended specialty it makes sense. The top Canon and Nikon models also are without, even without this new advancement, with the idea that photographers using such models will be doing so under professionally setup circumstances.</p> <p> Although I have several Pentax and a Metz flash units, I do often make use of the built-in flash on the spur of the moment. Many good shots would not have been done without it. The K-3II is not for me.</p>

<p>As others have said- depends on your needs. I have the regular Pentax 540 not the II. I also have that Metz model you are considering. I like the Pentax 540 display and controls a little better, and my observation has been the Pentax flash in P-TTL mode is a little more conservative in its output, a little less exposure, a less "flashy" look if used as ordinary straight-on. The Metz seems to emit more power under the same conditions. Perhaps a difference in communication with the camera's metering. Of course, that can be quickly adjusted for the degree of exposure characteristics you prefer by using the flash exposure comp. </p> <p>I bought the Metz because that model offers dual flash outputs, one smaller straight-on plus the tilt and swivel head. When set up to work that way, both can be fired together, so you can get a bounce-and-fill effect without having to go to using a bracket mount or other more awkward setup to access the built in flash for simultaneous use. I used that feature often with my old Pentax PZ-1p body, which has dual flash capability built in, using its built in flash together with a flash in the hotshoe, which can be done because the camera's flash is offset to the side instead of directly beneath the hotshoe. The results can be really excellent under common conditions to effectively control shadows, with very little fuss.<br> </p>

<p>Is your Pentax K 50mm f/1.4 the "M" version or an "A" version having the "A" setting on the aperture ring? That makes a huge difference, since with a manual focus "A" lens you don't have to go to any menu to set the camera for aperture ring use. You just select A on the aperture ring, focus manually and shoot. </p> <p>I have the *ist also, but never used it with my manual lenses. In fact I hardly wound up using it at all, even though it is an exceptionally nice little camera. I was still shooting a lot of film and subsequently bought a K100D Super, which can take the SDM lenses. I should sell both, since I used the K100 only for less than a year before buying a K200D. So they just sit. I have not checked Pentax Forum to try to find out what they'd sell for. </p>

<p>I have both the 5 and IIs. Yes the AF is a bit better, enough to notice, and resolution as well. The 5IIs is shown to be better than K3 at higher ISO over 800, while the K3 is best at lower ISO. The K3 suppresses noise more aggressively to get a similar noise result, but the extra aggressive need against noise as the ISO setting goes up creates a decrease in image detail. At around ISO 800 it starts to fall below the K-5 or IIs.</p> <p>Great posting, Harry- your observations are right on. I wonder if you are onto the Pentax "Hyper" system yet? Very unique and very much raved about when dpreview first found it in their report of the K10D. It is not just a common temporary program shift. It is an instantaneous mode change on the fly. It's not employed when shooting with the green button setting on your mode dial, which is best when having a novice shoot with your camera so they don't inadvertently change something they shouldn't. </p> <p>"Hyper Program" is automatically available when in "P" mode. If the camera is setting a shutter speed or aperture not to your liking, you can simply change it by using the thumb or finger dial to intercede and instantly set the value you wish. The camera will instantly convert to shutter or aperture priority operation without your having to go to the mode dial. First click freezes the current camera setting, second click onward you change to the number you prefer. It will stay as you put it unless lighting changes beyond metering capability, or you turn off the camera. To immediately restore full Program operation, just hit the green button. Extremely fast and efficient. You can also easily change the "P" program to be biased for speed: higher shutter speeds, depth of field: smaller apertures, or for the sharpest aperture range for the particular Pentax lens on your camera. So you have 3 "P" program lines plus normal "P" at your pleasure.</p> <p>You come across as very experienced and likely to often shoot in manual mode. With the Pentax "Hyper Manual" system, you can instantly set a "correct" exposure by using the green button, which will respond metering with the program line as set above. This gives you a base exposure to work from, as you can of course change aperture or shutter speed from there. If you wish a different aperture, for instance, hit the AE-L button first and the shutter speed will automatically follow suit to preserve the exposure value without your having to twirl the shutter dial as well! Same with a shutter speed preference and the aperture will follow suit. This system is very fast. It is also exceptionally useful when doing spot-meter readings in Manual mode. Spot metering around a scene- just hit the green button as you go in order to very quickly get your readings, and then go from there!</p> <p> </p>

<p>I ave never owned the K10D, but passed it up and later went for a great deal on the K20D. From test reviews of the K10D by dpreview and others, the sharpness of jpeg shots was rated rather below its potential, and I do shoot jpegs most of the time. Its control for setting sharpness apparently had a design flaw. The K20D delivers excellent jpegs. You can, however, compensate for that by simply adding some sharpening using Photoshop Elements unsharp mask or other editing programs. The K10D is a very well-made camera that is capable of delivering fine results, if employing the appropriate processing.</p> <p>I vote for the DA 16-45mm f/4. A bit largish, but not excessively so, and delivers exceptional image quality. A very versatile range from very wide angle to short telephoto.</p> <p> </p>

<p>All excellent choices. Since you have that fine zoom, the 35mm macro, and a very good 50mm, I highly recommend saving for the FA 77mm Limited. We who own one are crazy about it. Great bokeh and great in every way. The less fast but even smaller 70mm actually tests in at 65mm, so the 77mm is a more meaningful jump from your 50mm.</p>

<p>I've had the DA 21mm for several years and love it. Although I have long had the FA 43mm f/1.9 which is a fav, even moreso on a film body, I went for a DA 40mm (non-HD) just a couple of months ago as it was offered at a great closout price by B&H. I am very impressed with it. Excellent image quality across the frame, even wide open, and soo small!. That little 3mm difference from the FA 43mm Limited I find to be meaningful in this focal length range.</p> <p>Enjoy, Duane, I know you will treasure these little babies!</p>

<p>The DA* 50-135mm is not especially noteworthy as a portrait lens. In fact, some testers have said it's not all that good at closer focus distance. Even the traditional full-frame 70-200mm f/2.8 it replaces is not the type often used for portraits or other closer focus work. I have this very fine Pentax lens and have never experienced the exposure issues you mention. You might consider the Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 for your needs. I've read some very positive comments about it from those who own it. A lot less money too. </p>