Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-02-2012, 07:48 AM   #46
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,933
I'm FF ready, but will certainly miss some very small lenses like the DA15ltd.
Doubt I'll be able to juggle APS-C and FF to give both fair usage.


Having used my M42 lenses (esp. S.Takumars, not even what I consider 'Pentax 1st tier lenses') on a 5D, I don't have any doubts that the good/excellent Pentax lenses (eg. FA*; FA ltd; other well reviewed lenses) will perform perfectly on a Pentax FF.
In fact I think they will make many ppl sit up when used on FF.
Just a matter of Pentax making it happen for its user base.

I'm also convinced that Pentax is the way to go in terms of DSLRs for me (Canon just disagrees with me in every way in terms of usability)

12-02-2012, 09:18 AM   #47
Moderator
Site Supporter
Blue's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Florida Hill Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 17,213
QuoteOriginally posted by pinholecam Quote
I'm FF ready, but will certainly miss some very small lenses like the DA15ltd.
Doubt I'll be able to juggle APS-C and FF to give both fair usage.


Having used my M42 lenses (esp. S.Takumars, not even what I consider 'Pentax 1st tier lenses') on a 5D, I don't have any doubts that the good/excellent Pentax lenses (eg. FA*; FA ltd; other well reviewed lenses) will perform perfectly on a Pentax FF.
In fact I think they will make many ppl sit up when used on FF.
Just a matter of Pentax making it happen for its user base.

I'm also convinced that Pentax is the way to go in terms of DSLRs for me (Canon just disagrees with me in every way in terms of usability)
The FA 20/2.8 isn't a huge lens. Its a myth that Pentax lenses have to be huge to cover full frame. Look at the FA 35/2 and FA 50/1.4 or the F 28/2.8. Non of those are huge lenses. The FA 43 LTD and 77 LTD are relatively compact as well. The F 35-70/3.5-4.5 is incredibly compact.
12-02-2012, 09:22 AM   #48
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Jean Poitiers's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Lost in translation ...
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 16,583
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
The FA 20/2.8 isn't a huge lens. Its a myth that Pentax lenses have to be huge to cover full frame. Look at the FA 35/2 and FA 50/1.4 or the F 28/2.8. Non of those are huge lenses. The FA 43 LTD and 77 LTD are relatively compact as well. The F 35-70/3.5-4.5 is incredibly compact.
Yes, the F 35-70/3.5-4.5 is very compact and mine is on the K-5 a lot ... a very likable zoom. J
12-02-2012, 10:19 AM   #49
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,227
I have a Pentax 35-80 (SMC Pentax FA 1:4-5.6 35-80mm). It's lightweight and quite nice on my K-5. About the same size as a the 18-55. (I don't use it often but there's nothing wrong with it when I do.) It's not an indoor lens but outdoors with good light, what's not to like? Cost me 50 bucks.



Photo albums here.

12-02-2012, 04:36 PM   #50
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,933
QuoteOriginally posted by Blue Quote
The FA 20/2.8 isn't a huge lens. Its a myth that Pentax lenses have to be huge to cover full frame. Look at the FA 35/2 and FA 50/1.4 or the F 28/2.8. Non of those are huge lenses. The FA 43 LTD and 77 LTD are relatively compact as well. The F 35-70/3.5-4.5 is incredibly compact.
Totally agree, which is why I'd rather just wait for a Pentax FF (or even just continue to use a Pentax APS-C).

I'm always a bit irritated by those who make the comment that existing lenses are not FF ready.
Totally untrue as my own use of the Takumars on FF has shown to myself.


I tried the latest and greatest 5DIII with 24-75 at their showroom. What a clunky beast.
Made to impress though with its size and machine gun like loud shutter on multi-frame mode.
I can see why it sells to those who like it this way.
12-02-2012, 05:15 PM   #51
Veteran Member
msatlas's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 309
The only APS-C lens I have is my Tamron 17-50/2.8--everything else is FF compatible.

For FF, I'd really want something that covers 24mm. I'd probably try to track down an AF Sigma 24mm f/2.8 Super Wide II. The Sigma EX 24/1.8 and FA* 24/2 don't really have the sharpness across the frame that I'd want. The Tamron 20-40/2.7-3.5 and Tokina 20-35/3.5-4.5 are decent zoom options but to my knowledge never came in Pentax mount.

I also might be more tempted to get a 77 Limited since I'd much prefer that FL on FF than on APS-C (and yes I know people love the 77 I'm just saying for me it's more appealing on FF).

Depending on the resolution of this hypothetical FF camera and whether or not it includes an APS-C crop mode, I might keep around my K-r if I wanted to use long tele lenses in order to get more reach.
12-03-2012, 09:00 PM   #52
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Edina, MN
Posts: 248
QuoteOriginally posted by SteveTheOldMan Quote
I'd probably stick with APS-C for 2 reasons:
1. Budget (though if I make any new purchases I'll probably make sure they'll work on FF equipment.)
2. I like shooting sports - what I would lose in "reach" would probably kill me!
(And please allow for a dumb question; what the heck is "IQ"?)

IQ = Image Quality
12-03-2012, 09:31 PM   #53
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Taiwan
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,075
Why are there several posts that mention a loss of reach in the FF vs APSC. APSC doesn't reach any further, it is simply a crop and you can do the same on your computer.

12-03-2012, 11:25 PM   #54
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
QuoteOriginally posted by abacus07 Quote
Why are there several posts that mention a loss of reach in the FF vs APSC. APSC doesn't reach any further, it is simply a crop and you can do the same on your computer.
People have missed the fact that FF cameras have proportionately more resolution these days. It used to be that cropping a FF image to APS-C size would give you a lower resolution than an APS-C camera would, but that is no longer the case now, with cameras like D800 offering 36MP to APS-C's 20-24MP. Tough times for APS-C.
12-04-2012, 12:09 AM   #55
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tampere, Finland
Posts: 191
If (when) Pentax FF will come I will most likely wait until price will come down a bit and then buy it. I will definitely buy it but not at the full release price. My primes are already FF compatible. That said, I will not sell K-5 to get it as the zooms I got for it are very good (DA* 16-50 and Sigma 50-150). So my answer is

c) Do both
12-04-2012, 07:39 AM   #56
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,227
QuoteQuote:
People have missed the fact that FF cameras have proportionately more resolution these days. It used to be that cropping a FF image to APS-C size would give you a lower resolution than an APS-C camera would, but that is no longer the case now, with cameras like D800 offering 36MP to APS-C's 20-24MP. Tough times for APS-C.
The guy that missed something is you. There are no FF "cameras" that a has proportionately more resolution... the D800. That's "a camera". The D800 cost 3 times as much as a K-5. That's real bad economics. You can say you are going to buy a D800 and use it in crop mode. That's kind of like buying a half ton truck and using it to go to the grocery store. Why wouldn't you just buy a small car? Not at all tough times for APS-c.
12-04-2012, 08:14 AM   #57
Banned




Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NY/Germany
Posts: 1,183
QuoteOriginally posted by jpyykonen Quote
If (when) Pentax FF will come I will most likely wait until price will come down a bit and then buy it. I will definitely buy it but not at the full release price. My primes are already FF compatible. That said, I will not sell K-5 to get it as the zooms I got for it are very good (DA* 16-50 and Sigma 50-150). So my answer is

c) Do both
You should never, ever definitely buy something not even released yet just because it has the name on it you want. If it's a stinker, then what's the incentive from manufacturers to do better when they know they have people that will buy any junk they make?
12-04-2012, 11:46 AM   #58
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
There are no FF "cameras" that a has proportionately more resolution... the D800. That's "a camera". The D800 cost 3 times as much as a K-5. That's real bad economics.
The D600 has proportionately more resolution than the K-5. So that's 2 cameras now.

Same for the A99. That makes 3 cameras.

There are a few APS-C cameras with 24MP, it's true, but not many (about 5 if I am right) and for those cameras you have the D800 offering proportionally more resolution. In time there will be more FF options based on a 36MP sensor, just as there will be more APS-C models based on a 24MP one.

Economics don't matter here. The point is that an APS-C camera no longer offers an advantage in "reach" over a FF camera. Whether you deem the advantages of FF to be worth the extra price is between you and your wallet.
12-04-2012, 01:26 PM   #59
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,227
WIth a 1.5 crop, a 24 MP camera is the same pixel count as a K-5 per inch so no. (1.5 x 16 is 24.) So still one camera. YOu get the same picture essentially but smaller. But if you expand the K-5 image to the same size (24 MP) as a D600 image they look almost identical. So really no advantage. I've done it a few times with the test pictures from Imaging Resource) so I'm pretty confident that's true. If you want to blow up some images that show a difference I'll look at them, but, I've done my work on this issue to my satisfaction, and while words are nice, really, what my eyes see is worth more than what somebody says.

QuoteQuote:
Economics don't matter here.
SO why aren't we discussing Phase one or 645's or the cameras they use satellites, or the hubble telescope? Because economics do matter.
12-04-2012, 01:50 PM   #60
Banned




Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NY/Germany
Posts: 1,183
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
WIth a 1.5 crop, a 24 MP camera is the same pixel count as a K-5 per inch so no. (1.5 x 16 is 24.) So still one camera. YOu get the same picture essentially but smaller. But if you expand the K-5 image to the same size (24 MP) as a D600 image they look almost identical. So really no advantage. I've done it a few times with the test pictures from Imaging Resource) so I'm pretty confident that's true. If you want to blow up some images that show a difference I'll look at them, but, I've done my work on this issue to my satisfaction, and while words are nice, really, what my eyes see is worth more than what somebody says.



SO why aren't we discussing Phase one or 645's or the cameras they use satellites, or the hubble telescope? Because economics do matter.
I saw that exact post made by Viking79 on DPR.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
aps-c, ff, k-mount, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What would you do if Pentax does not announce a FF for 2013? LeDave Pentax DSLR Discussion 125 08-08-2012 08:38 PM
Would you buy the first FF if it is a K-01 or wait for the FF DSLR? slackercruster Pentax DSLR Discussion 19 07-18-2012 10:09 PM
How does THIS impact your hopes for FF iCrop Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 27 06-05-2012 11:52 AM
Does this indicate a FF problem. Mychael Pentax K-5 9 11-20-2011 11:23 AM
If pentax release a FF, wouldn't they have to release a FF wideangle. pcarfan Photographic Technique 10 12-26-2009 04:45 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:41 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top