Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-12-2009, 11:43 PM   #1
Inactive Account




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Lincoln, Nebraska, USA
Posts: 65
Pentax should build faster glass

Reading all the rants from all the people yelling about full-frame as a way to to get better photographs (because of the shallower DOF) encouraged me to start this thread.

What if Pentax came out with new, ultra-fast DA* lenses? Would you stop complaining, then?


What about a conversion from full-frame to APS-C like this:

85mm f/1.4 --> 55mm f/1.2
300mm f/2.8 --> 200mm f/2.0
80-200 f/2.8 --> 50-135mm f/2.0


You'd get your shallow DOF, but you'd also get an extra stop, for available light.

Or, if you honestly think that a full-frame camera looks noticably better than an APS-C all the time, then think of that extra stop as a means to turn down your ISO (to regain image quality).

And if you're like me, and want your pictures to actually be sharp and have a discernible subject (I know, I'm so old-fashioned), then you could simply stop your lens down a stop. You'd have the same available light as a full-frame camera, but you'd have a sharper photo.

Thoughts?

05-13-2009, 12:13 AM   #2
Veteran Member
lol101's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Garennes sur Eure France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 900
QuoteQuote:
Reading all the rants from all the people yelling about full-frame as a way to to get better photographs (because of the shallower DOF) encouraged me to start this thread.
(Grabs pop-corn... and then puts it down: too early for pop-corn...)

QuoteQuote:
What if Pentax came out with new, ultra-fast DA* lenses? Would you stop complaining, then?
Of course not... what would Internet fora be for?


QuoteQuote:
What about a conversion from full-frame to APS-C like this:

85mm f/1.4 --> 55mm f/1.2
300mm f/2.8 --> 200mm f/2.0
80-200 f/2.8 --> 50-135mm f/2.0


You'd get your shallow DOF, but you'd also get an extra stop, for available light.
Or, if you honestly think that a full-frame camera looks noticably better than an APS-C all the time, then think of that extra stop as a means to turn down your ISO (to regain image quality).

And if you're like me, and want your pictures to actually be sharp and have a discernible subject (I know, I'm so old-fashioned), then you could simply stop your lens down a stop. You'd have the same available light as a full-frame camera, but you'd have a sharper photo.
As you rightfully pointed out, a larger aperture isn't really a replacement for clean high ISO. DoF is DoF and the question is: can I get the DoF I want (shallow or not)? If I have to open the lens up to regain IQ and avoid high ISO, then I'll loose my chosen DoF and that's a trade off I prefer not having to make.

Plus if Pentax made those large aperture zooms, they would be very expensive, they would be bulky and then you'd end up with the same price/size than FF but still would be missing the most important benefits (IMO of course) of FF which are increased DR and lower noise.

When you take pictures with FF or APS-C you always have to choose some compromise but they are somewhat different.

Using APS-C, my compromises were that I tried to favor low ISO and thus often used the lens wide open and "risky" shutter speeds, after 1 year of using FF, I have now taken the habit of letting the ISO run more or less freely and get higher shutter speeds and smaller f-stops: that's a compromise (I take the risk of more noise but find it OK up to 3200) but in the end, the pictures I am getting are more in line with what I wanted, thus my desire (but not great hopes) for a FF from Pentax.

QuoteQuote:
Thoughts?
Yeah!... time for a cofee...
05-13-2009, 12:13 AM   #3
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 184
WHO'S YELLING??? HUH??? HUH???



There are some tough lenses to get APS-C equivalents on. Assuming the 1-stop difference you're advocating:

85mm f/1.2 --> 55mm f/0.9 (is that right? What's 1 stop bigger than f/1.2? I don't usually have to calculate that in my head )

35mm f/1.4 --> 23mm f/1.0

Those are 2 lenses I use often on FF. I don't see us getting APS-C equivalents of them anytime soon.

But yeah, if you could get those lenses and an APS-C camera that comes within 1 stop noise performance of the best FF cameras then your solution would definitely be workable. Just a theoretical exercise at this point though, since those lenses I listed would be very difficult to design, and in reality don't exist anyway.
05-13-2009, 12:41 AM   #4
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Cape Town, South Africa
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 107
QuoteOriginally posted by jay Quote
You'd have the same available light as a full-frame camera, but you'd have a sharper photo.

Thoughts?

Sorry jay - are you saying that currently APS-C cameras produce sharper photos than current FF cameras?

or are you saying that if APS-C cameras had faster glass, then APS-C cameras would produce sharper photos than what they are currently producing?

05-13-2009, 12:57 AM   #5
F16
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: U.S.
Posts: 106
By far, the biggest argument against FF cameras is that they're still quite expensive. So to combat this by creating super fast lenses in the APS-C format isn't that great of an alternative, as such lenses would be very expensive and you're sort of back to square one in terms of high costs.

For me personally, I still haven't seen a really strong argument against FF cameras other than their price. Obviously that's a big issue, but I do hope that sensor prices continue to drop to the point where a FF camera can be bought at a reasonable price eventually.
05-13-2009, 01:56 AM   #6
Pentaxian
gazonk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oslo area, Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,510
QuoteOriginally posted by Yohan Pamudji Quote
35mm f/1.4 --> 23mm f/1.0
How often do you really use f/1.4 for DOF effects on the 35mm?

The equivalent of 35mm/2.0 would be great, though - 23mm/1.4?
05-13-2009, 02:25 AM   #7
Veteran Member
creampuff's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Singapore
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,955
Most people opt for Pentax because it is relatively speaking more affordable compared to similar offerings from Canon and Nikon. Faster lenses are nice to have but don't come cheap and the reality is most Pentax users are Pentax users because they either have a collection of legacy lenses, or they can't afford or are unwilling to spend the kind of money that a Canon or Nikon system will cost. Pentax already have the fast FA 31mm and FA 77mm but how many actually own one or both?
05-13-2009, 03:10 AM   #8
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: WV
Posts: 1,492
QuoteOriginally posted by jay Quote
What if Pentax came out with new, ultra-fast DA* lenses? Would you stop complaining, then?
If you think you can get a complainer to stop complaining by giving him/her what he/she wants, then I'm afraid you have seriously misjudged human nature.

Complainers complain. That's what they do, and you can't take that away from them.

05-13-2009, 03:36 AM   #9
Veteran Member
celetron's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Greece
Photos: Albums
Posts: 302
QuoteOriginally posted by creampuff Quote
Most people opt for Pentax because it is relatively speaking more affordable compared to similar offerings from Canon and Nikon. Faster lenses are nice to have but don't come cheap and the reality is most Pentax users are Pentax users because they either have a collection of legacy lenses, or they can't afford or are unwilling to spend the kind of money that a Canon or Nikon system will cost. Pentax already have the fast FA 31mm and FA 77mm but how many actually own one or both?

Hmmm, I used to own both but gave them away... I really miss the 31 but not for aps-c format... I always used it on a film body. If pentax decide to release a 23/1.8 or 23/1.4 I would be more than happy... I really don't get it what's all that fuzz with the FF... I shoot with FF and APS-C and honestly I cannot find any major advantages of FF over APS... (the bigger/brighter VF is an exception). Truly, I haven't seen any improvement at the final result with FF... Now if you were talking about MF I could mention a few cons that make THE difference... But I suppose these differences would exist even between ff and mf...
05-13-2009, 06:57 AM   #10
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Boston, PRofMA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,053
QuoteOriginally posted by jay Quote
300mm f/2.8 --> 200mm f/2.0
In the Canikon world, the 200/2 is a droolworthy portrait lens (Canon actually has a 1.8 version of it). It's also $3-4K!

Pentaxians are too cheap to buy enough 300/2.8 and 600/4 lenses for anyone to keep them in stock...what makes you think this would be a good seller?
05-13-2009, 07:21 AM   #11
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,056
QuoteOriginally posted by jay Quote
Reading all the rants from all the people yelling about full-frame as a way to to get better photographs (because of the shallower DOF) encouraged me to start this thread.

What if Pentax came out with new, ultra-fast DA* lenses? Would you stop complaining, then?


What about a conversion from full-frame to APS-C like this:

85mm f/1.4 --> 55mm f/1.2
300mm f/2.8 --> 200mm f/2.0
80-200 f/2.8 --> 50-135mm f/2.0


You'd get your shallow DOF, but you'd also get an extra stop, for available light.

Or, if you honestly think that a full-frame camera looks noticably better than an APS-C all the time, then think of that extra stop as a means to turn down your ISO (to regain image quality).

And if you're like me, and want your pictures to actually be sharp and have a discernible subject (I know, I'm so old-fashioned), then you could simply stop your lens down a stop. You'd have the same available light as a full-frame camera, but you'd have a sharper photo.

Thoughts?
Here we go with another one trick pony apologist thread......
Why don't you go take some pictures, or something.

Last edited by Wheatfield; 05-13-2009 at 08:59 AM.
05-13-2009, 08:45 AM   #12
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,767
QuoteOriginally posted by creampuff Quote
Most people opt for Pentax because it is relatively speaking more affordable compared to similar offerings from Canon and Nikon. Faster lenses are nice to have but don't come cheap and the reality is most Pentax users are Pentax users because they either have a collection of legacy lenses, or they can't afford or are unwilling to spend the kind of money that a Canon or Nikon system will cost. Pentax already have the fast FA 31mm and FA 77mm but how many actually own one or both?
The FA 77 is a work of art that I wouldn't be without. I haven't seen the need for the 31 yet, given the 28/2 I already had.
05-13-2009, 09:00 AM   #13
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,056
QuoteOriginally posted by creampuff Quote
Pentax already have the fast FA 31mm and FA 77mm but how many actually own one or both?
Me.
Me me me
Me me me me me me me.
05-13-2009, 09:15 AM   #14
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 489
Or do as I've been saying, and expand the FA limited range.

And I think they should bring back some of the older lenses, like the 135mm f/1.8... etc.

I agree, they should make some nice fast primes. Sigma make a lot of good, fast (<f/2) primes.

It's just that Pentax aren't as popular as other makes, therefore can't develop as many lenses, plus I heard that a load of the lens designers/manufactures for Pentax moved over to work for Nikon a few years back.
05-13-2009, 09:28 AM   #15
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by jay Quote
Reading all the rants from all the people yelling about full-frame as a way to to get better photographs (because of the shallower DOF) encouraged me to start this thread.

What if Pentax came out with new, ultra-fast DA* lenses? Would you stop complaining, then?


What about a conversion from full-frame to APS-C like this:

85mm f/1.4 --> 55mm f/1.2
300mm f/2.8 --> 200mm f/2.0
80-200 f/2.8 --> 50-135mm f/2.0


You'd get your shallow DOF, but you'd also get an extra stop, for available light.

Or, if you honestly think that a full-frame camera looks noticably better than an APS-C all the time, then think of that extra stop as a means to turn down your ISO (to regain image quality).

And if you're like me, and want your pictures to actually be sharp and have a discernible subject (I know, I'm so old-fashioned), then you could simply stop your lens down a stop. You'd have the same available light as a full-frame camera, but you'd have a sharper photo.

Thoughts?


Sure, more glass is always better, although a 200mm f/2 for example would probably be huge and cost $1500+, thus negating the (potential) 'cheaper, smaller' glass advantage of APS-C.

I'm one of those folks who doesn't personally feel a need for FF, and thinks that the writing is on the wall for APS-C continued progress resulting in smaller IQ+advantage gap between FF and APS-C, thus negating the need for FF even more.... (I think we're on the same boat there, welcome to the side.)

What I'm wondering is why do you take this battle up so vigorously, Jay? FF advocates have a right to have their wishes heard in online forums where vendor reps may be present.

Keep in mind that 'complainers' exist in both camps.



.
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, camera, dof, f/2.0, f/2.8, full-frame, k-mount, light, pentax, pentax lens, slr lens
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Who build Pentax Optio? arm_jstp Pentax Compact Cameras 3 10-10-2010 05:05 AM
Pentax Should Build an EVIL Camera Biro Pentax News and Rumors 308 02-08-2010 01:10 AM
faster glass? Gooshin Pentax Medium Format 21 08-21-2009 01:57 AM
looking for some longer/somewhat faster glass khardur Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 9 04-26-2008 05:37 PM
Pentax glass versus 3rd Party Glass??? rdrum76 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 1 11-04-2007 04:02 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:58 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