Bojidar wrote: > First of all, releasing lenses with smaller coverage circles seems to > indicate that the APS-sized digitals are here to stay. Like Alin, I too > had hoped that they are only for-the-time-being solutions.
It might be that this move is just a way to get proper wide angles for the APS size sensors DSLR. It's the only reasonable way to do it. On the other hand, if these cameras and lenses takes off saleswise, theres a real "danger" that the manufacturers will expand the new lens lines. > If Pentax decides to build such smaller-coverage lenses, even if they > are K-mount, this will mean the end of the "unrivaled K-mount > compatibility". And let's face it, this is the only real advantage of > Pentax's SLRs. Yes, they build small and "cute" cameras, but that's > just a plus and not a real argument. But this could be said about all DSLR cameras; Nikon, Canon etc. The main problem with DSLR's so far is price. Smaller sensors equal lower prices. Lower prices are needed in order to achieve volume and profitability. As long as not full frame DSLR exist, making lenses designated for them surely makes more sense than not making such lenses (in practical terms leaves you without the option of a wide wide-angle) > If I cannot use my A20/2,8 as a 20-mm lens on a future digital camera, > then I have no reason to stick to Pentax and their slowness in extending > their SLR technology. So you only want a full frame DSLR? Fair enough but such cameras are still too expensive to give much commercial sense. P�l
