The K-3 is a real winner... a K-3-like FF camera should do well even if slightly larger to accommodate the larger sensor. But that puts it head-to-head with popular Nikon & Canon DSLRs.
Seems to me Pentax would want to find a niche with minimal competition, and expand it. As with the 645Z, where the only direct competitor is about twice the price. But given the 645Z option for a sensor larger than APS-C, I wonder if a FF DSLR is in Pentax's future...
I agree.
It already goes head to head in the APS-C realm. Pentax die-hards have been clamoring for a FF model for many, many years and have not abandoned ship yet.
It's a rumor, but one that seems to have more momentum than usual.
uhoh7
Veteran
No one makes a small EVIL FF friendly to film lenses.
Well, unless you count the M9
Gapping hole in the market right now.
Ranchu
Veteran
Some lenses will become more sought after. Some people find those mirrorless cameras somewhat rinky dink, regardless of the sensor.
giellaleafapmu
Well-known
I am sorry, now I am not following: what kind of friendly interface would you expect? Sensors have well-known problems with regard to light striking from odd angles, so certain old design will never really work too well, even if some correction is done to vignetting, like in the GRX M-mount module. Manual focus in a EVIL how can be implemented other than with focus peak, stripes, stuff like this? And the M9 how is it special in any way if compared to other recent M-mount Leicas? Besides, they are not even EVIL cameras. Finally, why not counting Leicas if the purpose is to use Leitz glasses? They have always been very expensive lenses, so even the price should not be a problem: if you had the money to buy a lot of lenses in film era you probably have the money now to buy a digital Leica.
GLF
for all film lenses or just for M lenses?
willie_901
Veteran
An increase in sensor area alone is only half the story. This is also the case when sensor area decreases.
The lens-sensor combination is what matters. There is no inherent advantage/disadvantage to 24 X 36mm, APS-C or m4/3 sensor areas. The advantages and disadvantages come into play when one considers lens selections. (note: larger sensor areas do provide a small but real theoretical advantage independent of lens area)
A Pentax 24 X 36 mm DSLR would have to work well with optics designed for film cameras. Pentax has a large number of lens variants. It's hard to see how all the variants will work well with a 24 X 36 mm sensor.
Since some believe short register bodies are incapable of proper AF, the number of Pentax variants that would perform well with AF would be reduced accordingly. Perhaps Pentax can do what Nikon and Canon have refused to do... sell a DSLR body with excellent MF tools. This would appeal to hobbyists who enjoy experimenting with repurposed lenses. However Pentax would be risking profits from new lens sales.
The SMC Pentax-FA 31mm F1.8 AL Limited and SMC Pentax-FA 35mm F2 AL are a bit slow for APS-C sensors. Their lens surface areas are not quite large enough to cancel the light collecting difference between APS-C and 24 X 36 MM surface areas. This does not mean these aren't excellent lenses. Even the Fujifilm X-Series lenses are barely large enough to minimize the disadvantages of the smaller sensor area. Even then, people whine about lens size (23/1.4, 56/1.2) for some of the Fujinons.
The lens-sensor combination is what matters. There is no inherent advantage/disadvantage to 24 X 36mm, APS-C or m4/3 sensor areas. The advantages and disadvantages come into play when one considers lens selections. (note: larger sensor areas do provide a small but real theoretical advantage independent of lens area)
A Pentax 24 X 36 mm DSLR would have to work well with optics designed for film cameras. Pentax has a large number of lens variants. It's hard to see how all the variants will work well with a 24 X 36 mm sensor.
Since some believe short register bodies are incapable of proper AF, the number of Pentax variants that would perform well with AF would be reduced accordingly. Perhaps Pentax can do what Nikon and Canon have refused to do... sell a DSLR body with excellent MF tools. This would appeal to hobbyists who enjoy experimenting with repurposed lenses. However Pentax would be risking profits from new lens sales.
The SMC Pentax-FA 31mm F1.8 AL Limited and SMC Pentax-FA 35mm F2 AL are a bit slow for APS-C sensors. Their lens surface areas are not quite large enough to cancel the light collecting difference between APS-C and 24 X 36 MM surface areas. This does not mean these aren't excellent lenses. Even the Fujifilm X-Series lenses are barely large enough to minimize the disadvantages of the smaller sensor area. Even then, people whine about lens size (23/1.4, 56/1.2) for some of the Fujinons.
giellaleafapmu
Well-known
I am sure many already know this, but there are actually ways to make modern DSLR much better with respect to MF by changing the screen (actually I find that the web site selling focusing screens with the same name is a good source) and using a magnifying eyepiece such as Nikon DK-17M or Nikon DK-21M (for Nikon, depending on the shape of the eyepiece, Canon, Pentax etc. equivalent to be looked up if interested, but they exist). In an article known blogger Ming Thein claims that the precision possible is not up to his standards for high Mpx cameras but for normal use (not f1.2 lens wide open on a 50 Mpx camera, just a f 2.0 lens on a 24 Mpx sensor) I find them immensely useful.
GLF
Ranchu
Veteran
It'll be nice for people to be able to use their good lenses, anyway.
uhoh7
Veteran
Well the 240 is friendly. With the A7 it depends on the lens, but SLR glass is also effected by the thick sensor cover. Varying degrees per lens and most acute at infinity.
That's why there is a Kolari mod.
Thanks uhoh7.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
I agree, and I'm sorry, but it's so boring.
Sometimes I wonder why are they so afraid to use their own legacy (and in Pentax's case, some *very* popular cameras) as a model for an important release such as this.
Olympus, Fuji, and Nikon have already shown that "going retro" is a good step marketing-wise.
Kate-the-Great
Well-known
A FF sensor should be able to handle SLR lenses just fine though, no? The back focus distance of K-mount lenses can be no less than about 40mm from the image plane (counting the lenses' extension beyond the flange distance) so even ultrawides will have roughly the same placement of the rear nodal point as standard lenses. That should keep the angle that the light rays are hitting the sensor in check and prevent vingetting and color shifts.
Other than stronger CA and the risk of aliasing, my experience has been that older SLR lenses work just as well on FF digital as they did on film.
btgc
Veteran
How about making it like Ricoh Mirai, with 24-200 lens and shutter release on handle?
I bet no one could keep silence seeing this, either way.
I bet no one could keep silence seeing this, either way.
Wow, that thing is crazy...
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
According to http://www.digicamhistory.com/1988.html
"The Ricoh Mirai was a joint project with Olympus; the Olympus Infinity Super Zoom 330 being nearly identical."
Two of my favorite camera companies. They should do more joint projects together.
btgc
Veteran
Sadly, third favorite has fallen out of pack. Yashica I mean.
I agree, but I purchased a K-3 II over the weekend. It was time to try one. I needed something that focused in low-light, that was light, and relatively small....while not being $2000. It's a nice camera even if it isn't my usual type.
Pioneer
Veteran
The latest from Ricoh Pentax is that the full frame is now delayed from this fall to the Spring 2016. Noticed posted here http://www.pentax.com/en/pentaxff/
Hey, at least it's from a reliable source.