"If Pentax does the same thing, what is the harm? Seems to make lots of sense. Don't abandon the mount, just make a few specific lenses to cover the wide side. If and when full frame is a economically viable option, then build and sell it."
Exactly. Pentax wants to make a viable APS sensor camera, so it builds some "APS sensor only" wide angles for it that are reasonably priced. No need to make teles if the older lenses can be used. If they are building a camera they want to be a commercial success, the new lenses make sense. These new lenses can be viewed as special purpose lenses. If everyone goes to a bigger sensor, then stop making these new lenses. We see the MF vs. 35 debate on this list sometimes. MF has many advantages over 35 mm, but the cameras are bigger and more expensive. If the APS sensor produces pics that are good enough for many folks, then it will survive even if a bigger sensor comes out. The problem with film APS is that their just wasn't a good enough reason to make the switch. If digital APS can gain a foothold, many with stick with it and not switch to the bigger (and better) sensor. One interesting counter argument, however. Even though most folks do not make enlargements bigger than 8x10 using film, this is not true with digital. It's EASY to crop out the middle of a pic and blow it up on the computer. Oddly, the very nature of digital technology makes a higher resolution sensor more desirable and easier to take advantage of. And given the same basic technology, the larger sensor will have higher resolution. Steven Desjardins Department of Chemistry Washington and Lee University Lexington, VA 24450 (540) 458-8873 FAX: (540) 458-8878 [EMAIL PROTECTED]
