Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-28-2008, 07:07 AM   #46
Pentaxian
reeftool's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,109
QuoteOriginally posted by Entropy Quote

Same will likely go for camera sensors. Yes, usually technology progression leads to things becoming smaller, EXCEPT where large size is desirable, such as in TVs and high-quality camera sensors. Yes, APS-C noise performance will consistently improve (at least for a while), but most of those improvements can also be applied to FF sensors, along with improved manufacturing techniques that make the sensors cheaper.
Comparing the size of a tv screen isn't quite the same thing as a camera sensor. A 20 in. screen viewed across a room will always be 20 inches. Image quality from sensors is constantly improving and it won't be long before little point and shoot sized cameras will have IQ that rivals our current DSLR's. Full frame sensors remind me of pickup trucks. Contractors and farmers need the large full sized trucks to do their work. 90% of the people who drive them don't and they are finding that out the hard way these days every time they get gas. There will always be a full frame camera for the pro's and studio's just like the big view cameras never disappeared for film but I don't think any of us has to worry about our DA lenses becoming obsolete in the near future.

05-28-2008, 07:19 AM   #47
New Member
chadvw's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Grand Rapids
Posts: 21
QuoteOriginally posted by Zewrak Quote
Well, then you really don't need a fullformat either . I can't see a downside to why not have for example 14mpixel when the technology is there, as long as it doesnt come at the expense of something else, noise for example.

The more data you have the better imho.
full frame and megapixel size aren't the same. 10mp on an aps sensor or 10mp on a full frame sensor....

but I'm not going to make this into a MP debate, already turned the original topic around enough.
05-28-2008, 07:05 PM   #48
Veteran Member
ManuH's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Montreal
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,209
It’s funny to see all these FF debates and how some people try to see through a Crystal Ball.

I think there will be more FF cameras in the future, even from Pentax.

First fact: all mounts are still the same as they were during the 35mm era. They can all (except for Olympus which is already FF by definition) accept a FF sensor without any change of the mount. Therefore it’s an obvious evolution and an easy answer for the camera maker to the ever growing megapixel race.

Second, don’t worry about buying DA or FA lenses. Your old FA lenses worked on APS-C and your new DA lenses will also work on a FF body, you will just have to crop the image just like the way Nikon is doing it automatically on the D3. You can use a FF camera as an APS-C camera. So if you prefer APS-C just push the APS-C button and voilà. And a 15MP crop from a 30MP FF will still be of very high quality unless you want to print very big.

Third, let’s not try to foresee too much the future, buy what you need *now*, not what you *may* need later. I’ve got burned too many times not following this simple advice in other technologic sectors. You can never predict what new technology can change everything.

In conclusion don’t worry too much about FF, when it will come, it will not make all your lenses obsoletes. I’ll buy one if the price is right, if not, I’ll stick with an APS-C which already have much more image quality than most of us really need.

My 2 cents
01-28-2011, 11:43 AM   #49
Site Supporter
valarie's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: New York/ DC Area
Posts: 84
QuoteOriginally posted by Gooshin Quote
what is FULL FRAME??!!?!!?

you guys are mind boggling

everyone is hell bent on adhering to an arbitrary standard set decades ago

for what?

what?

a few inches of added depth of field on your ancient 50 f1.2 and the overpriced 85 f1.4???

seriously people!
Nothing arbitrary about the 35mm standard. The standard (horizontally), was chosen by filmmakers who wanted a format that as closely as possible mimicked the way we see. Technical issues forced the T.V. to be almost square. With those limitations gone, they could have kept our T.V's 4/3, but who has a square T.V. in the digital age? Even when films are no longer shot on film, the digital motion pictue cameras will continue to mimic the size of a 35mm frame (they already do!!). Coincidence? Why try and reinvent the wheel?


Last edited by valarie; 01-28-2011 at 11:59 AM.
01-28-2011, 03:46 PM   #50
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
QuoteOriginally posted by valarie Quote
Nothing arbitrary about the 35mm standard. The standard (horizontally), was chosen by filmmakers who wanted a format that as closely as possible mimicked the way we see. Technical issues forced the T.V. to be almost square. With those limitations gone, they could have kept our T.V's 4/3, but who has a square T.V. in the digital age? Even when films are no longer shot on film, the digital motion pictue cameras will continue to mimic the size of a 35mm frame (they already do!!). Coincidence? Why try and reinvent the wheel?
Well, part of it is arbitrary. IIRC Thomas Edison (whose shop built cine cameras) wanted a wide film stock and had George Eastman (whose shop made film etc) produce film 70mm wide. Turned out that 70mm was better for still cameras (and survives on 120/220/620 reels) and splitting it in half down to 35mm was better for cine. IIRC the first 35mm still cameras were built as test-beds to evaluate cine film stocks and lenses.

I don't recall the details of how the 3:2 aspect ratio was developed, as opposed to the 5:4 and 7:5 formats used by view-cameras, but in cine that was nibbled-away down towards 4:3 by adding optical soundtracks to the film. And there are multitudes of cine formats, an interesting history to follow.

I would like to see (but probably never will) an interchangeable-lens digital camera with a big square sensor, with the option of changing aspect ratios without twisting the cam body around. A big round sensor would be almost as good. I know, I rob a few mini-marts and buy that new 80mb sensor back. That will give a lot of real estate for cropping, eh?
01-28-2011, 04:52 PM   #51
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by valarie Quote
Nothing arbitrary about the 35mm standard. The standard (horizontally), was chosen by filmmakers who wanted a format that as closely as possible mimicked the way we see. Technical issues forced the T.V. to be almost square. With those limitations gone, they could have kept our T.V's 4/3, but who has a square T.V. in the digital age? Even when films are no longer shot on film, the digital motion pictue cameras will continue to mimic the size of a 35mm frame (they already do!!). Coincidence? Why try and reinvent the wheel?
Any reason why a 2.5 yr old thread was brought back from the grave?

.
01-29-2011, 06:38 AM   #52
Senior Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 240
valarie, you're talking about aspect ratio, not sensor size, if I'm not mistaken.

It seems to me that Pentax FF is deader than ever. With an incredibly high-quality APS-C sensor and a suite of good lenses made for it, there's no longer much point. The 645D is what Pentax did instead.

I suspect there will be fewer and fewer people each year who care about full frame, and they'll buy Nikons or Canons.
01-29-2011, 05:20 PM   #53
Site Supporter
valarie's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: New York/ DC Area
Posts: 84
QuoteOriginally posted by mabelsound Quote
valarie, you're talking about aspect ratio, not sensor size, if I'm not mistaken.

It seems to me that Pentax FF is deader than ever. With an incredibly high-quality APS-C sensor and a suite of good lenses made for it, there's no longer much point. The 645D is what Pentax did instead.

I suspect there will be fewer and fewer people each year who care about full frame, and they'll buy Nikons or Canons.
mabelsound, true, aspect ratio is the most important thing. But sensor size does influence DOF. I have always used small sensors on T.V. cameras, I am not a ff die hard. I think that the smaller sensors are great. They allow you to get the best out of our legacy lenses by not utilizing the nasty edges. I just want fully manual control. I also think Hollywood will always demand a motion picture camera with the same target area as 35mm/film. If not for the legacy lenses, than the legacy knowledge. For stills, we can adapt. For motion pictures, The DP's get paid to much to unlearn a lifetime of information. Working in television, with the technology always changing, we are the ones forced to adapt, and I have no problem working with a variety of sensor sizes.


Last edited by valarie; 01-29-2011 at 07:06 PM.
01-30-2011, 03:45 AM   #54
Senior Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Upstate NY
Posts: 240
Movies shoot at half frame, though, 24x18mm.
01-30-2011, 03:54 AM   #55
Moderator PEG Judges
Kerrowdown's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Highlands of Scotland.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 32,165
Alas just a rumour I fear.
01-30-2011, 06:31 AM   #56
Veteran Member
RioRico's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Limbo, California
Posts: 11,264
QuoteOriginally posted by mabelsound Quote
Movies shoot at half frame, though, 24x18mm.
Or in cine speak, movies shot at full-frame, and stills cams shot in double-frame.

QuoteOriginally posted by kerrowdown Quote
Alas just a rumour I fear.
Not rumour, just variable reality.
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!
frame, 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
LX + Scan=Full Frame Digital ziggy7 Pentax Film SLR Discussion 45 01-09-2011 01:59 AM
Is full frame the medium format of the digital era ? ghelary Photographic Technique 2 05-28-2009 08:50 AM
Digital Only or Full Frame lenses JamieP Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 15 05-10-2009 08:48 PM
DA vs FA Limited and the question of full frame digital 8540tomg Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 27 11-29-2008 10:07 AM
Full Frame Digital with DA lenses konraDarnok Pentax News and Rumors 27 08-20-2008 11:07 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:02 PM. | 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