Previously written; I was just wondering if anyone else agrees with me that the new DA lenses seem like a bit of a backward move. Shouldn't they be working toward incorporating full frame CCDs and reducing the cost of that technology first? Doesn't this new DA lens reduce the optical sweet spot (and isn't that bad?)? I always thought size alteration was more of a final phase of product evolution- like when they run out of things to do, they'll go "I wonder if it'll fit into a matchbox" or "let's make this the biggest flat screen ever!" (thus this seems a bit like jumping the gun). I wonder how much resources this direction takes away from moving towards full frame (maybe Pentax isn't even considering it!). Whole thing kinda reminds me of APS.. Could it be this is another Pentax nail in the pro coffin?
I think what it signifies is that the *ist-D is not the last APS sized DSLR Pentax plans to make. As has been debated in this group before, there are a number of advantages to the sensor size. The advantage to making a lens with an image circle APS versus 35MM size is that it is easier to design and build and potentially could be smaller then the same lens for 35mm. I don't think this will have anything to do with a full 35mm size Pentax DSLR, should Pentax decide to make one. Given the lack of interest by 3rd party manufacturers to develop software in support of the *ist-D, I wonder if they know something we don't? I went to the Capture 1 folks and the Adobe booth at the Photo Plus show in NYC. Capture one doubted the *ist-d would get enough market share for them to develop for it. The RAW converter in the new Photoshop CS doesn't list the *ist-D and nobody has gotten back to me to let me know if they plan to support it. Butch Each man had only one genuine vocation - to find the way to himself. Hermann Hesse (Demian)
