Reading mode: Light Dark

The new Full Frame: What would make you buy it?

Go to last post
Zvonimir Tosic said:
Alex Sarbu said:
What a load of dots? :D

Obviously, the same AF system with the same lens will get you the same performance - as it doesn't read this forum to know about sensors receiving double the light; except that using an APS-C AF on a FF camera will get you very poor coverage.
Click to expand...
It will be different. Even with Nikon D800 and D7100, having the same 51point focusing system, D800 will lock on target with greater precision. D800 is snappier, despite D7100 using the same AF module.
Click to expand...
They're not using the same AF module; the coverage alone should tell you that. The D7100 has a Multi-CAM 3500DX, and the D800, a Multi-CAM 3500FX AF system; however even that is only a generic 'family name', with no guarantee that e.g. processing power is the same. Pentax had how many generations of SAFOX VIII?

(the rest of your post skipped, as based on a false assumption).

Alex
 
Alex Sarbu said:
Donald B said:
Zvonimir Tosic said:
mikeodial said:
So I am a pretty happy K3 user, but am excited about the potential of getting even more from my lenses with the upcoming Full Frame. For me to pull the trigger straight away, on release of the camera, these are the key issues:
  1. ...
Click to expand...
Pentax FF camera, using same AF system as it s crop peer, is bound to have faster AF performance because by default is catches twice as much light, and it has 50% larger DoF using same focal length.

FF wins, hands down, especially for amateur users who generally can't use DSLRs. For most DSLR users, FF is the way to go, because their focusing techniques are poor and they need plenty of head-start advantage to feel happy.

Most of DPR members qualify, together with mirrorless folks who cannot imagine anything without heavy processing of the obvious, and be spoon fed with instant results all the time.

That is issue that Pentax has never addressed in the past, as it never made an FF camera to finally silence endless complaints about the "poor performance" of its DSLR system.

That is the most significant benefit. So, with an FF, EVERYONE will benefit.

It will be easier-to-use than K-3, and easier-to-get-desired-results camera.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Better Autofocus

Articulated screen

Weight not much more than K3

Some affordable lenses around 500g in weight

Greater resolution

Facility to choose between cropped and FF modes rather than camera reading DA lens data and setting accordingly
 
DAVID MANZE said:
Alex Sarbu said:
Donald B said:
Zvonimir Tosic said:
mikeodial said:
So I am a pretty happy K3 user, but am excited about the potential of getting even more from my lenses with the upcoming Full Frame. For me to pull the trigger straight away, on release of the camera, these are the key issues:
  1. ...
Click to expand...
Pentax FF camera, using same AF system as it s crop peer, is bound to have faster AF performance because by default is catches twice as much light, and it has 50% larger DoF using same focal length.

FF wins, hands down, especially for amateur users who generally can't use DSLRs. For most DSLR users, FF is the way to go, because their focusing techniques are poor and they need plenty of head-start advantage to feel happy.

Most of DPR members qualify, together with mirrorless folks who cannot imagine anything without heavy processing of the obvious, and be spoon fed with instant results all the time.

That is issue that Pentax has never addressed in the past, as it never made an FF camera to finally silence endless complaints about the "poor performance" of its DSLR system.

That is the most significant benefit. So, with an FF, EVERYONE will benefit.

It will be easier-to-use than K-3, and easier-to-get-desired-results camera.

--
Madamina, il catalogo è questo; Delle belle che amò il padron mio; un catalogo egli è che ho fatt'io; Osservate, leggete con me.
Click to expand...
what a load of ...................

cheers don
Click to expand...
What a load of dots? :D

Obviously, the same AF system with the same lens will get you the same performance - as it doesn't read this forum to know about sensors receiving double the light; except that using an APS-C AF on a FF camera will get you very poor coverage.

I don't believe Pentax would not only use an APS-C AF on their K-mount FF flagship, but also cripple its precision (attempting to hide it within DoF).

Alex
Click to expand...
We will have to wait and see what AF system is in the FF, however Pentax saw fit to use it in the 645Z, but it's shown itself to be accurate enough for the medium format where the depth of field is even smaller than FF!
Click to expand...
I hope they will have a FF-dedicated AF system (even as a SAFOX XI with FF coverage); otherwise the camera will be seen as worse than the D610.

With the 645z, even the APS-C AF was more advanced than anything else from the competition - this obviously won't be the case with the 35mm camera.
DAVID MANZE said:
--
Dave's clichés
Click to expand...
Alex
 
Last edited:
AW construction.

36MP or more sensor with SR - CIPA 4-stops. (IBIS isn't yet being done on larger than 24MP FF, but watch out for A7rII)

EFCS (Also not yet being done at 36MP, Sony has it in the A7II but 24MP)

14+ stops of DR

Self calibrating PDAF/CDAF menu option.

14-bit lossless PEF at 7 fps, 11 fps in 16-bit crop mode. (This is a lot for 36MP at full bit depth)

16-bit uncompressed tiff option.

Centre cluster of AF cross points sensitive to -3,5 Ev and AF for f/8 max aperture lenses.

Physical SR active during video as is AF & exposure controls.

4K 60p 10-bit video can use h.265 compression (this will take a monster cpu but Samsung can do it)

Buffer holds 40 full sized raw.

200K mtbf motorized shutter.

TaV mode, wi-fi, GPS, touch-screen video controls & camera, (focus-pull)

-

Lens:

Looks like they'll have the 70-200 f/2.8 I'd also want an HD D FA* 15/16 - 30/35 f/2.8 with a rear filter holder if it requires that, the standard HD D FA* 24-70 f/2.8 & upgrade some of the FA primes with internal (quiet) AF motors.
 
Last edited:
4K at 60fps seems like too much to ask. 30fps would be acceptable.

I would appreciate HEVC, too.
 
If I wanted a FF system, I probably would have already bought into a Nikon system, either D810 or D750, which already has a lens lineup that Ricoh can only hope to someday aspire to have. The Sony A7 looks interesting too, using an adapter with older MF lenses. I'm just not sure what Pentax is bringing to the table here that I can't get elsewhere. And no, I don't own any FA Limiteds.
 
all the FF should do is to beat the K3. The K3 has done the rest with others. :D
--
Regards,
Soheil
------------------------------
It's the singer not the song.
 
Last edited:
mikeodial said:
So I am a pretty happy K3 user, but am excited about the potential of getting even more from my lenses with the upcoming Full Frame. For me to pull the trigger straight away, on release of the camera, these are the key issues:
  1. Increased DR
  2. Higher resolution (or at least the same at 24MP)
  3. Improved low light performance over the K3. (Which is already pretty good)
  4. WR (must have, don't want a plastic camera I can't take out in the field)
  5. Not huge profile. (A little larger than the K3, but as small as is practical)
  6. Price in the $1.5-2.5K range (USD)
  7. Excellent dust control
Nice to have but not essential:
  • Better integration with wi-fi and remote control
  • ASPC compatibility for my DA lenses (Crop mode)
  • More programmability for bracketing and long shots
Click to expand...
Well if I had the cash on hand, maybe I'll get one but most likely won't since my K5II is still plenty for what I do (all of my lenses BTW are FF ready) and I don't have the spare $$$

But the thing I really want the most is the FF's larger OVF (but my itch for it was solved by the Pentax 1.2x magnifier, the OVF now is as huge as the 6D)
 
mikeodial said:
So I am a pretty happy K3 user, but am excited about the potential of getting even more from my lenses with the upcoming Full Frame. For me to pull the trigger straight away, on release of the camera, these are the key issues:
  1. Increased DR
  2. Higher resolution (or at least the same at 24MP)
  3. Improved low light performance over the K3. (Which is already pretty good)
  4. WR (must have, don't want a plastic camera I can't take out in the field)
  5. Not huge profile. (A little larger than the K3, but as small as is practical)
  6. Price in the $1.5-2.5K range (USD)
  7. Excellent dust control
Nice to have but not essential:
  • Better integration with wi-fi and remote control
  • ASPC compatibility for my DA lenses (Crop mode)
  • More programmability for bracketing and long shots
Click to expand...
Having it available would be enough for me.
 
soheil said:
all the FF should do is to beat the K3. The K3 has done the rest with others. :D
Click to expand...
Do you think a FF K-3 would be better than a Nikon D750 or D810? Please explain how it would be, especially in regards to AF.
 
Everything!
 
iMage qualiTy and box siZe.



If I needed a machine gun I would buy a Canon............
 
You all live in FF Fairyland. and when you get FF, it will be

Its to small,

AF could have been better,

no touch screen,

viewfinder to small,

no 4k,

no this,

no that,

theirs nothing special about FF, you won't take any better photos, than you would with aps-c

oh you will get a few more pixels,

but will you be a better photographer,------ NO

Tom G
 
Since the OP asked what would make me buy it, I won't dwell in what Ricoh should do to increase their market share, or spend time on a guessing game about what they actually will do.

These are my decisive points:

Affordable (not as in cheap, but as in "I have enough money set aside")

High DR, high iso capacity

As small as they can possibly make it

Leaves nothing to desire when used with my old film era lenses, A, F and FA

Good viewfinder, with exchangeable focus screen. Some focusing screens to exchange!

Customizable wheels and buttons

Effective SR, I'm getting old and shaky :-)

If these requirements are met, I look forwards to using my WA lenses to their full capacity. For the long end, my K5 is still better than the man who use it.

Of no importance to me:

Video

High pixel count (don't need it, slows down processing) but it won't stop me from buying it anyway

Innumerable in camera processing possibilities, prefer to do that in the computer afterwords
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Keyboard shortcuts

f
Forum
m
My threads
Mobile site
About
Editorial content
Cameras & Lenses
Community
All content, design, and layout are Copyright © 1998–2025 Digital Photography Review All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or part in any form or medium without specific written permission is prohibited.
When you use DPReview links to buy products, the site may earn a commission.
©GPS Media - Guides, Products, Services.
Back
Top