FF Systems can achieve higher image quality despite using inferior "average" lenses. Lens cost can be less with FF systems because the lens doesn't have to be as good with a FF system as it does for a APS-C system for same or even better system image quality. Similar to the reason even a mediorce lens on the 8x10 format destroyed the very best lenses on the 35mm format. The larger the format, the lenses become less critical, not more critical to overall system performance.
I don't know why some are confused about FF cameras, its all about image quality. The higher the better. This is why when 35mm cameras dominated there were MF, 4x5, 8x10 and even larger cameras in use. Image quality matters. APS digital is not the ultimage with anything better being overkill. Just from a cropping flexibility standpoint, higher image quality is better -- J.C. O'Connell (mailto:[email protected]) Home Page - www.jchriso.com Join the Audio CD PLAYER DISCUSSION list - http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cdplayers/ -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Graydon Sent: Friday, August 28, 2009 8:13 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: OT: Sony Releases A850 FF Camera for $2,000 On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 07:55:00PM -0400, John Francis scripsit: > On Fri, Aug 28, 2009 at 07:03:48PM -0400, Miserere wrote: > > 2009/8/28 Mark Roberts <[email protected]>: > > > In June at GFM I said I expected full-frame to hit the $2000 price > > > point in 2010. Seems I was off the mark a bit. This means we might > > > see full-frame at actual street prices around $1500 by next > > > summer. > > > > Exactly, which makes me wonder if Pentax can justify asking $1,300 > > for their next flagship APS-C camera. You notice Olympus quaking in their boots asking people to buy 4/3rds kit? > What next flagship? I don't expect anything better than the K-7 to > show up for at least the next 3 to 5 years. Beyond that is too far > away to be making any kind of predictions. 3 to 5 years of no upgrades just due to better sensors and faster image engine chips becoming available, if nothing else? This doesn't seem highly plausible, somehow. > The next Pentax bodies will be sold on (low) price, not on features. They're busy staking out "small", "tough", and "good value" as their chunk of the feature space. That's not consistent with a plan to compete on price, which would be crazy anyway. (You never compete on price as the little guy; you can compete on value, or features, but price is too dependent on volume.) Full frame isn't inherently an advantage. Up at the full frame end of things, lens costs dominate the opportunity cost of switching systems. Sony is trying hard to subsidize the body costs long enough to get people switched in system terms. I'm not expecting this to work quite how they plan. Switching systems only works if people are willing to give up their favourite existing lenses, or the body has some feature that they absolutely must have to do their job or make them happy. Those are both fairly rare conditions. The last thing standing I can think of is in-body anti-shake. Pentax is betting quite a bit on the unwillingness of people who've tried them to give up the DA Ltds., and to a lesser extent the DA* lenses. So far, though, combining that with good value in the bodies doesn't seem to be a bad bet. -- Graydon -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
