Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-23-2010, 03:07 PM   #16
Veteran Member
Manel Brand's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Porto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 854
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
It's just not well understood by many.
Well, guess you can count me on those then... Thanks for the info.

11-23-2010, 03:29 PM   #17
Veteran Member
Manel Brand's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Porto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 854
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
FF decreases rather than increases the issue. Because FF tends to have larger pixels.
On a second thought, I realized that you are right. The augmented resolution of the sensor means that more pixels are getting crumpled on the sensor in the same space. Thanks again.

Last edited by Manel Brand; 11-23-2010 at 03:30 PM. Reason: pun
11-23-2010, 06:58 PM   #18
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 8,938
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
FF decreases rather than increases the issue. Because FF tends to have larger pixels.
I agree with the statement but the tendency for "larger pixels" is not the correct reason, is it? In your previous post you just established that.

FF requires less enlargement and hence puts less stress on lens resolution. "Outresolving" lenses isn't a problem, FF or not.
11-24-2010, 05:23 AM   #19
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,862
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
I agree with the statement but the tendency for "larger pixels" is not the correct reason, is it? In your previous post you just established that.
That depends on what Manel Brand meant. I understood he meant that FF with its relatively many pixels would be even more challenging for pixel peeper's critics.

You're right, as far as final output image quality is concerned, FF is even more forgiving. As you say, because it is less demanding in terms of lens resolving power.

11-24-2010, 05:53 AM   #20
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,535
in some ways full frame can be more demanding on other aspects of lens performance, issues such as vignetting, (or fall off for the more technically discerning amongst us). flare and optical aberrations can often be exacerbated by the increased image recording area.
11-24-2010, 08:47 AM   #21
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,862
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
in some ways full frame can be more demanding on other aspects of lens performance, issues such as vignetting, (or fall off for the more technically discerning amongst us). flare and optical aberrations can often be exacerbated by the increased image recording area.
I don't want to go too far into this as it is OT here.

You're right if you're comparing at a given f-stop and focal length. This is why this statement is a common one.

However, if you compare equivalent lenses (the FF lens then has a longer focal length and a higher f-stop; but still the same aperture diameter in mm and about same weight and cost) then these problems are gone.

One very simple thought experiment may help to understand: Look at the ray coming from the corner of an image passing thru the center of the lens, i.e., hitting the sensor at the opposite corner. The angle at which the sensor is hit then is defined by the field of view and independent from sensor size. More complex arguments are required to treat this fully. But FF offers better resolution potential while keeping other problems about constant.

Last edited by falconeye; 11-24-2010 at 09:04 AM.
11-24-2010, 05:05 PM   #22
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 8,938
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
However, if you compare equivalent lenses (the FF lens then has a longer focal length and a higher f-stop; but still the same aperture diameter in mm and about same weight and cost) then these problems are gone.
True and I'm also a supporter of the "equivalent images" / "equivalent lenses" approach. This is why I don't understand that this principle is not applied to APS-C vs FF noise considerations. FF cameras are almost always given a 1+ stop noise advantage (even by DxOMark). If one used equivalent lenses, this advantages goes away. In other words, the K-5 would look even better in the DxOMark ranking.

P.S.: Sorry for continuing an OT discussion. I only did it because I felt that the original question has been answered and that this thread serves no further purpose than tying up discussion ends (which happen to become OT).
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!
camera, dslr, k-5, k-5 ii, k-5 iis, k5, pentax k-5, sensor
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sensor shift during "long" exposures eclipsed450 Pentax DSLR Discussion 11 12-18-2009 12:51 PM
K10D "Sensor moving" possible problem? jaitas Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 6 05-07-2009 02:08 PM
Can some explain "WB when using flash"... dlee Pentax DSLR Discussion 5 03-03-2008 02:58 AM
"Green Clean" Sensor Cleaning System. NLAlston Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 2 05-16-2007 07:35 PM
Please explain the "multiquote" button Jonas B Site Suggestions and Help 4 04-15-2007 07:50 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:52 PM. | See also: NikonForums.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