Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-22-2011, 09:53 PM   #31
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Mexico
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,125
QuoteOriginally posted by Ash Quote
Bear in mind, no crop sensor gives extra reach, it just crops the reach the lens has.
This is not quite right. On APS-C, a lens effectively functions as a longer focal length in terms of the angle of view subtended onto the sensor. You could, if you wanted, just crop a FF image from a shorter lens to give the same angle of view, but then you would be sacrificing resolution. I don't know of many FF users who recommend this as a means of effectively extending the focal length of their lenses, whereas the crop factor of smaller sensors is widely regarded as a true "multiplier," and lenses are used accordingly. When I mount my FA77 on my K-7, I instinctively think of a 116mm focal length in 35mm format, because that is the field of view that will be projected onto the sensor. It works in the opposite direction with medium and large format cameras, of course, i.e. the angle of view is wider for any given focal length.

There is nothing magical about any particular sensor size, as long as the sensor records detail, tone and color accurately, while minimizing artifacts. Bigger sensors have always been better at this, but smaller sensors are improving to the point that the difference between FF and APS-C may no longer be of practical importance to most users.

Rob


Last edited by robgo2; 06-23-2011 at 09:44 AM.
06-23-2011, 03:25 AM   #32
Pentaxian
aurele's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,967
Thanks for the review, it's always good to read such thread

i'd love that Pentax build a FF, but honestly, i don't think it will ever do but if it does, i'd buy it
(and i'm serious)
06-23-2011, 03:31 PM   #33
Pentaxian
Emacs's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Moscow
Posts: 1,221
QuoteOriginally posted by robgo2 Quote
This is not quite right. On APS-C, a lens effectively functions as a longer focal length in terms of the angle of view subtended onto the sensor. You could, if you wanted, just crop a FF image from a shorter lens to give the same angle of view, but then you would be sacrificing resolution. I don't know of many FF users who recommend this as a means of effectively extending the focal length of their lenses, whereas the crop factor of smaller sensors is widely regarded assume a true "multiplier," and lenses are used accordingly. When I mount my FA77 on my K-7, I instinctively think of a 116mm focal length in 35mm format, because that is the field of view that will be projected onto the sensor. It works in the opposite direction with medium and large format cameras, of course, i.e. the angle of view is wider for any given focal length.

There is nothing magical about any particular sensor size, as long as the sensor records detail, tone and color accurately, while minimizing artifacts. Bigger sensors have always been better at this, but smaller sensors are improving to the point that the difference between FF and APS-C may no longer be of practical importance to most users.

Rob
LOL
You think it's for free? We paid for this "extra reach" with: 1.5 times more visible aberrations and diffraction (due to this "zoom") + we usually have 1.5 times less details for the same FOV
06-23-2011, 03:48 PM   #34
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Oklahoma USA
Posts: 1,502
This was an excellent review - thanks for posting.

Paul

06-23-2011, 04:30 PM   #35
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Mexico
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,125
QuoteOriginally posted by Emacs Quote
LOL
You think it's for free? We paid for this "extra reach" with: 1.5 times more visible aberrations and diffraction (due to this "zoom") + we usually have 1.5 times less details for the same FOV
What's the basis for this statement? Please show us an example of 1.5 times less detail from an APS-C sensor.

Detail is largely a function of lens resolution and sensor resolution. If the sensor is good enough, it should be able to resolve up to its limits, regardless of size. Sensor performance is being improved incredibly fast, and it is increasingly difficult to perceive a difference between FF and APS-C. What difference exists is irrelevant to most shooters at this point. This forum has had more than a few posts which attest to that fact from FF users who have switched to or are using the K-5 . The OP of this thread is one such person. On balance, he seems rather pleased with his K-5, even in comparison to his FF cameras. In some areas it lags, but in others it leads.

Rob
06-23-2011, 05:54 PM   #36
Pentaxian
bobmaxja's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Laval, Quebec Canada
Posts: 1,734
I am so fed up to see everytime a fight with FF & APS-C. Again another post hijack by these peoples
06-23-2011, 07:34 PM   #37
Veteran Member
Smeggypants's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,536
QuoteOriginally posted by Emacs Quote
LOL
You think it's for free? We paid for this "extra reach" with: 1.5 times more visible aberrations and diffraction (due to this "zoom") + we usually have 1.5 times less details for the same FOV
You sound like an advertisement selling substanceless beauty products. Beauty product X has 1.5 times more freshness and age defiance than beauty product Y.
06-24-2011, 03:17 AM   #38
Pentaxian
Emacs's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Moscow
Posts: 1,221
QuoteOriginally posted by robgo2 Quote
What's the basis for this statement? Please show us an example of 1.5 times less detail from an APS-C sensor.
It is because of how the optics works: greater magnification, greater details. In real life it is frequently being described as "Full Frame images" which many (and me too) supposed to look better than APS-C. Although selectively blind Pentax fanboys usually see no difference


Last edited by Emacs; 06-24-2011 at 04:39 AM.
06-24-2011, 03:20 AM   #39
Pentaxian
Emacs's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Moscow
Posts: 1,221
QuoteOriginally posted by Smeggypants Quote
You sound like an advertisement selling substanceless beauty products. Beauty product X has 1.5 times more freshness and age defiance than beauty product Y.
When magnified 1.5 times the distance between two aperture spots decreases in 1.5 times, so it's easier for the next glass in the lens to resolve them (and to resolve the spot between them which could be harder without magnification). That's why 645D produces slightly better looking images than FF, FF than APS-C, APS-C than four thirds, etc.
06-24-2011, 03:42 AM   #40
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,904
Just a simple view from a photographer who wonders what all the fuss is about.

To "adjust" to the 24 x 36mm (FF image) in order to get equal dimensions of what you are capturing, APS-C size captured images represent only a blown up "center" of this FF image. The focal length of the lens has not changed, it is still the same. True, but there is a difference. The smaller APS-C sensor has its pixels concentrated into a smaller space.

When you take a 200mm lens stick it on a FF, say 24MP something camera, crop it to APS-C size you get approx. something like a 10MP image whereas the K-5 remains on 16.3MP. So you always stay a little bit ahead in any further enlargements. If you blow up your pics for large format printing this can be a real advantage. Also for wildlife photography.

Conversely of course the APS-C sensor is a disadvantage for wide angel shooters where the full framers have an advantage.

Greetings
06-24-2011, 04:53 AM   #41
Pentaxian
Emacs's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Moscow
Posts: 1,221
QuoteOriginally posted by Schraubstock Quote
Just a simple view from a photographer who wonders what all the fuss is about.

To "adjust" to the 24 x 36mm (FF image) in order to get equal dimensions of what you are capturing, APS-C size captured images represent only a blown up "center" of this FF image. The focal length of the lens has not changed, it is still the same. True, but there is a difference. The smaller APS-C sensor has its pixels concentrated into a smaller space.

When you take a 200mm lens stick it on a FF, say 24MP something camera, crop it to APS-C size you get approx. something like a 10MP image whereas the K-5 remains on 16.3MP. So you always stay a little bit ahead in any further enlargements. If you blow up your pics for large format printing this can be a real advantage. Also for wildlife photography.

Conversely of course the APS-C sensor is a disadvantage for wide angel shooters where the full framers have an advantage.

Greetings
It's a matter of price and size. 900mm FF would produce much better IQ than 600mm + APS-C.
But right, since I tend to shoot at wide end and I find out even 77*1.5 or 85*1.5 being too long, I mostly pay my attention into wide angle (up to about 85mm). And I must say this is day and night difference. The 31Ltd is great, but it's not good enough to compete with any decent 50mm on FF. Even cheap 50 f1.8 on FF looks superior compared to 31 on APS-C in terms of sharpness. But I much prefer Pentax old glass rendition (not DA ones, which are pointless attempt to produce lenses which will look OK even on APS-C, failed in my opinion, I still prefer old glass even on APS-C) , so I will keep 31-43-A50f.2-77-FA*85 at least. I will wait for FF mirrorless in order to utilize them properly without the need to cut them.
06-24-2011, 02:30 PM   #42
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Mexico
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,125
QuoteOriginally posted by Emacs Quote
It is because of how the optics works: greater magnification, greater details. In real life it is frequently being described as "Full Frame images" which many (and me too) supposed to look better than APS-C. Although selectively blind Pentax fanboys usually see no difference
Show us examples, please. Bet you can't, because what you claim is not true. Resolution is resolution, regardless of sensor size. Even though larger pixels are better light collectors, the difference between FF and APS-C is not nearly as great as it once was and is reaching the point of irrelevance for most photographers, including many serious ones. Even some current compact cameras are capable of showing quite amazing detail with their tiny sensors.

Rob
06-24-2011, 02:41 PM   #43
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: New Mexico
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,125
QuoteOriginally posted by bobmaxja Quote
I am so fed up to see everytime a fight with FF & APS-C. Again another post hijack by these peoples
I agree, and I am sorry that I got dragged into it by Emacs. All I did, in response to another post in this thread, was make a factual point about smaller sensors having certain advantages over larger ones, and he took off from there. I did not intend to trigger a FF vs. APS-C flame war, nor do I care what other people use. I use what suits my wants and needs. He can use what suits his.

Rob
06-25-2011, 03:32 PM   #44
Pentaxian
aurele's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,967
QuoteOriginally posted by robgo2 Quote
Show us examples, please. Bet you can't, because what you claim is not true. Resolution is resolution, regardless of sensor size. Even though larger pixels are better light collectors, the difference between FF and APS-C is not nearly as great as it once was and is reaching the point of irrelevance for most photographers, including many serious ones. Even some current compact cameras are capable of showing quite amazing detail with their tiny sensors.

Rob
Ok, let's try

Credits : Asahiflex View Profile: Asahiflex - PentaxForums.com

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/1474568-post49.html

one is from a 5D and the other is from a K5.

See ? no differences

i got you !


My point is that basically, there is no more "great" difference between a 5D and a K5 for exemple. Use the one that suit you best, not the one that seems the best.

And don't forget to take pictures, instead of discussing about wich one is suppose to be the best body !

Cheers !

Last edited by aurele; 06-25-2011 at 03:45 PM.
06-26-2011, 04:13 AM   #45
Pentaxian
Emacs's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Moscow
Posts: 1,221
QuoteOriginally posted by aurele Quote
Ok, let's try

Credits : Asahiflex View Profile: Asahiflex - PentaxForums.com

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/1474568-post49.html

one is from a 5D and the other is from a K5.

See ? no differences

i got you !


My point is that basically, there is no more "great" difference between a 5D and a K5 for exemple. Use the one that suit you best, not the one that seems the best.

And don't forget to take pictures, instead of discussing about wich one is suppose to be the best body !

Cheers !
Some time ago this pictures forced a friend of mine (Pentaxian too) to admit full frame images are sharper. Don't you notice the Takumar image is slightly sharper? If you are looking for the clearer proof, just compare 77Ltd full frame image vs A50 f1.2 both wide open Day and night difference in terms of sharpness
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!
5d, camera, canon, dslr, k-5, k-5 ii, k-5 iis, k5, lenses, noise, pentax, pentax k-5, shadows
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Thoughts on the Canon FS2710 Film Scanner? Abstract Film Processing, Scanning, and Darkroom 3 01-14-2011 06:16 PM
Help for ex-Canon user excanoneer Pentax Film SLR Discussion 8 12-16-2010 11:24 PM
Nikon D700...thoughts from a user. ll_coffee_lP Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 24 10-14-2010 04:00 AM
Canon user has arrived str8talk83 Welcomes and Introductions 7 09-30-2009 06:19 PM
Canon 5D MKII user switches to the K-7 jogiba Pentax DSLR Discussion 22 08-20-2009 05:44 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:57 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