On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 5:38 PM, Miserere <miser...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 28 April 2010 15:37, John Sessoms <jsessoms...@nc.rr.com> wrote: >> From: Miserere >>> >>> On 28 April 2010 13:03, Tom C <caka...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> > FF would be nice... :-) >>> >>> Why do you want full-frame, Tom? >> >> Why not? > > Camera size, weight, cost, cost of new hard-drive/SD memory, cost of more > RAM...
None of these are inherent to going full frame. D3/D700/5D files are actually smaller than K-7 files. Current FF cameras are large because they're made by companies which insist on making all of their high-end cameras be large, there's no inherent reason why you couldn't do a FF body in a package marginally larger than a K-7. > > On a more personal note, if I went full-frame, Pentax (or > Sigma/Tamron) would have to release a 40-105mm f/2.8 lens that I could > use as my walk-around zoom, and I'm almost certain none of them would. > > Not that our opinions matter much; Pentax will do whatever they damn > well please. > > > --M. Plenty of 35-105/3.5's around and Tamron SP 28-105/2.8's can be found on the used market. -- M. Adam Maas http://www.mawz.ca Explorations of the City Around Us. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
