My response is interspersed below. Thu Feb 7 06:28:17 EST 2013 Steve Cottrell wrote:
> I mean, aside from the obvious reasons like, bigger sensor, better > image > quality, better use with lenses designed to work with a 36X24mm frame, > better lighting, better heating, better sewer systems, the roads (yes > we > can't forget the roads).... > A considerable portion of my photography in the past 5-7 years had to do with the situations of low light (often combined with the fast motion): dance photography [and most recently, - photography of a small child]. For that reason, one of the technical parameters that I've been interested in has been the high-ISO performance. About 3 years ago, I somewhat seriously entertained an option of buying Nikon D700. It was a very reasonable tool for the "job". (Especially, compared to the K-7 that I was using at that time.) However, a considerable portion of the photographs that I take are done while I am traveling. Since 1998 and until recently, I've been fitting all my shooting travel kit (except for the Gary Fong lightsphere) in a LowePro Nova 3 bag (two of them over this time span). http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/279078-REG/Lowepro_2037320_Nova_3_AW_Shoulder.html (Unfortunately, this bag is no longer available.) Typically, this kit included a Pentax camera body the largest compact flash (Pentax AF 500 ftz, and then Metz 58 AF) and 3-4 lenses, depending on the trip. Most recently, those have been: FA 50/1.4, DA* 50-135/2.8, and then either Pentax 18-250 (if the travel doesn't involve dance photography) or Pentax 17-70 with either FA 77/1.8 or Sigma 28/1.8. You'd be surprised, I can fit all that in this relatively small bag. (When I travel by car I can take a large Tamrac System 12 which makes it more convenient to work as well as fitting more lenses) D700 is so much larger than K-7 that I decided that it wouldn't be convenient to take it with me on the trips (I wouldn't fit my camera and the minimum set that I need in that same bag, ...). And that even in case I would be willing to spend that much. So, in the past year or so, I've been waiting for the new Pentax camera to come out, and I was not sure if I wanted it to be an APS or a FF. On one hand, a FF would potentially provide a higher quality high-ISO capability. On another hand, even if I expect (almost subconsciously) Pentax to have a smaller FF body (compared to Nikon or Canon), it would still likely to be larger than K-5*. If a FF came out instead of K5-II*, it would've been sort of a "need". But if FF comes out on the market soon, in order for me to consider it, it would have to offer a vast improvement over the K5-IIs. > I still have my A*85/1.4 and I long for the time I can mount it to a > proper 36X24 Pentax body - simple as that. I'd be more than happy with > just that lens attached the whole time - and just for portraits. Daft > innit! > > But there you go - that's the way it is. So much for the photographic > tools theory. I keep a lens that waits for the right body to come > along. > Who'da thought it. I know the right body for that lens! ;-) Will you write my name next to that lens in your will? ;-) Igor -- 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.
