Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-13-2012, 12:54 AM   #1
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Chandler, AZ
Posts: 142
Why Do You Want FF?

I posted this on the Pentax Facebook, but thought it might make an interesting discussion point here -- and help me to understand the rage?

So, I want to know. Why do you want a FF camera? I know APS-X gives better DOF advantages for Macro and in many cases is easier to shoot with (assuming same lens) as you can be further from your target (macro or otherwise). For telephoto, APS-X is great for filling the visible frame with the subject with less DOF than you might have with FF since you have a larger area at the egde of the lens reach.

Regarding lens reach, the APS-X multipler would give you a huge advantage in cost savings since a 1.6 multipler on a 100mm lens would give you an effective reach of 160mm at a cost savings. This can be HUGE for even larger telephoto lenses. Then again, this can be BAD for wide angle shooting but is great for everyday and telephoto shooting.

So I guess it breaks down like this:

APS-X Camera:
Pros: Cost, Greater Telephto, Macro, & Wildlife Shooting.
Cons: Wide-Angle Loss, Less DOF - Bad for Bacgrounds When Focus Is Not Desired.

FF Camera:
Pros: Better Wide-Angle, Less DOF on Macro (Could Be Pro/Con), Great For Landscape/Architcture Shots - Noise Redution
Cons: Price, Less Frame Fill For Telephoto

So, FF for closeup/wide and APS-X for everything else? Then again, if you are getting the FF for the pros related to image size/focus would you not want to have the Medim Format anyway since it would be even better?

09-13-2012, 12:59 AM   #2
Pentaxian
aurele's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,207
The viewfinder is really huge compared to APS-C, and it's easier to build a lens line up when you have only FF SLR and DSLR
09-13-2012, 01:10 AM   #3
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Chandler, AZ
Posts: 142
Original Poster
Interesting, I would not really consider the OVF worth the cost investment. Granted, Pentax could simply start now in developing only FF compatable lenses -- which would be great. I would even be interested to see Pentax put out some of their awesome glass with Canikon mounts to steal some of the revenue from Canikon and use it to enhance their development, instore presence, and customer base.
09-13-2012, 01:14 AM - 1 Like   #4
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Sanski Most
Posts: 147
To have one to dream about.
To buy lenses that never will be mounted on that FF.
To be treated like full right member of pro photo community when show up with K-5.
To make hell good shots in studio and in landscape.
To shot weddings without nervous stomach.
To make great shallow dof portraits of family and kids.
To shoot concerts and sport events.
To have true The Camera, Pentax FF ultimate photographic tool.

09-13-2012, 01:15 AM   #5
Pentaxian
aurele's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,207
QuoteOriginally posted by tkj365 Quote
Interesting, I would not really consider the OVF worth the cost investment.
You didn't get me : i'd love a FF for all the things already said, plus the VF and the easy lens lineup :-)
09-13-2012, 01:23 AM   #6
Pentaxian
calsan's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Perth, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,463
FF Camera:
Pros: Better Wide-Angle ...if you're prepared to stop down to f/16.

To Full-Frame or Not To Full Frame?
09-13-2012, 02:24 AM   #7
Veteran Member
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
Better IQ at all ISO's, more detail, potential for thinner DOF, sharper pics, bigger brighter VF, in fact it's better than APS-C in every way except price and size of body.
09-13-2012, 02:54 AM   #8
gtl
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 349
QuoteOriginally posted by twitch Quote
Better IQ at all ISO's, more detail, potential for thinner DOF, sharper pics, bigger brighter VF, in fact it's better than APS-C in every way except price and size of body.
And size of lenses... But yea I am all for a FF Pentax. The D600 seems pretty close to the K5 in terms of weight.

09-13-2012, 02:55 AM   #9
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
newmikey's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,907
Prize, size and weight of both body and lenses considered, together with the shallow DOF leading to unwanted OOF subject matter (unless diffraction-creating small apertures are used) and the use of the qualitatively weaker extreme edges of the lens leave me solidly and with both feet in the APS-C field.

Law of physics: the weight of an object increases by the third power of its dimensions.
Law of physics: the larger the lens, the more critical and difficult/costly its manufacturing will be
Law of physics: when the size of the shutter curtain increases, the whole mechanism that moves and controls it becomes more sensitive
Law of Economics: dollar for dollar, I can buy more IQ with an APS-C than with FF
09-13-2012, 03:09 AM   #10
Veteran Member
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
Equiv lenses are usually smaller on FF body, not bigger.
09-13-2012, 03:28 AM - 1 Like   #11
Forum Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 91
I have the only reason why I would buy FF camera: FA31mm mounted on FF body will become true wide-angle lens. Everything else (stunning high ISO noise, dynamic range, raw headroom, resolution) is more than enough for me on K-5.
09-13-2012, 03:41 AM   #12
Veteran Member
FruitLooPs's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: New Zealand
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 440
I prefer telephoto, and lighter weight body - My K-30 provides enough resolution for me at the moment and thin enough DOF when I want it.

I'm happy to stay where I am, especially after seeing my workmates D700 with a pretty expensive nikkor 70-200mm F2.8 lens vignette quite visibly. I have a fairly budget priced zoom that is way short of the 70-200mm in resolution, but definitely doesn't vignette on aps.c because it's a FF lens, the extra reach is a boon too. I think for sure you get a lot more credit amongst professional circles for having a FF but for my hobby use at least it's overkill, redundant and potentially even counterproductive.

FF certainly has its benefits for some situations though. Just a matter of right tool for the job.

With the D600 I think a good deal more folk are going to look at FF DSLR's like crop sensor DSLR's were looked at a few years ago as the next must have.

I would not be oppose to Pentax going down the FF route though, whatever it takes to stay competitive is just fine with me.
09-13-2012, 03:44 AM   #13
Pentaxian
calsan's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Perth, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,463
QuoteOriginally posted by twitch Quote
Equiv lenses are usually smaller on FF body, not bigger.
Eh? Normally I agree with you, Twitch - but apart from designed for film FF lenses at around the 40-50mm range, I can't think of where that's the case. When those same focal lengths are are issued as designed for digital FF lenses, they're usually 77mm filter lenses weighing 1/2 a kilo. And the FF kit lenses were / will be atrocious. Anyone want to have a 35-80 f/4-5.6?
09-13-2012, 04:06 AM   #14
gtl
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 349
I think twitch meant equivalent lenses for DOF? Well, can't ask for the world I guess. For exposures only, look at the Nikon 24-70mm and the Pentax 16-50mm. And the 70-200mm vs Pentax 50-135mm.
09-13-2012, 04:13 AM   #15
Senior Member
victordeamorin's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Lyon area
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 205
QuoteOriginally posted by calsan Quote
designed for film FF lenses at around the 40-50mm range
and also the wide-angle (actually UWA): picture the difference between a FA 20-35mm and a DA 12-24 (both f/4 and both highly rated).
EDIT: oops I forgot to answer the OP question -- for all the cited reasons above but I have to admit, not all of this is rational...
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, cons, cost, dof, ff, lens, macro, photo industry, photography, pros, telephoto
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:31 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