Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-15-2011, 03:25 PM   #511
Pentaxian
bossa's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 4,538
It seems obvious to me that Ricoh have an chance with the GRX to develop a professional modular camera system - APS-C or FF sensor module with a K-Mount seems likely considering they own Pentax now. But I can see a system with a series of mounts available (eventually) that can use other makers lenses which would be a plus. When you think about it, the sensor is really 'only' the film and as such should not really be a fixed entity on a camera even though in the past cameras have tended to be a one format system. Interchangeable sensor modules and mounts would be pretty nice along with a modular viewfinder system and a non-mechanical shutter. It can only be a winner if it works and accesses every other makers lenses. You have nothing to fear here if your lenses are up to scratch but your business model would have to be profitable based on the camera alone.

10-15-2011, 03:57 PM   #512
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,556
QuoteOriginally posted by stanleyk Quote
The Canon 5DMkII is a great camera. I've used a friend's twice with that giant 70-200 zoom. It's like walking around with a cinder block. Somehow my quest for shallow depth of field isn't as exciting when I have to do a full cardio workout plus weight lifting just to get it. Maybe if I was getting paid it to do it would make sense. I would be far more likely to spend my money on Leica if I wanted a Full Frame camera but I just can't justify that expense. An M9 is not going to make me a better photographer.
Well even with K-5 and 200mm at f2.8 you can isolate a subject quit good. That would be even better with a 300mm at f2.8.

But a FF could offer better low noise pictures at say iso 5000 or so. Wich would be of my interest.
10-15-2011, 11:00 PM   #513
Veteran Member
Eruditass's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,206
Some people, myself included, like shallow depth of field without the perspective compression.

Ryan Brenizer

Sean Molin

Granted, these are bokeh panoramas, but you can approach that effect much more readily with a full frame without stitching.
10-15-2011, 11:24 PM   #514
Veteran Member
eurostar's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Albareto, Italy
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 813
QuoteOriginally posted by Eruditass Quote
Some people, myself included, like shallow depth of field without the perspective compression.

Granted, these are bokeh panoramas, but you can approach that effect much more readily with a full frame without stitching.
You can get that effect even more readily using a tilt lens.

10-15-2011, 11:46 PM   #515
Pentaxian
Emacs's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Moscow
Posts: 1,221
I can't understand what people are arguing here: larger sensor is larger sensor and usually provides much better IQ for the same FOV. And the same lenses used on APS-C and FF usually looks sharper on the latter due to lesser magnification factor.
10-16-2011, 06:18 AM   #516
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 318
QuoteOriginally posted by Emacs Quote
And the same lenses used on APS-C and FF usually looks sharper on the latter due to lesser magnification factor.
Err, really? I'm not so sure about this. Can you explain how the magnification factor impacts sharpness?
10-16-2011, 06:27 AM   #517
Pentaxian
gazonk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oslo area, Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,509
QuoteOriginally posted by ewalk Quote
Err, really? I'm not so sure about this. Can you explain how the magnification factor impacts sharpness?
I think he meant that If a lens is just barely sharp enough for sharpness at 100% crop level on a 24mp FF sensor, it will not be able to resolve enough for sharpness at 100% crop level on a 24mp APS-C sensor.

But the problem is more often the opposite: Although a lens is made to cover FF, it may be too weak in the corners (in terms of both sharpness, vignetting and distortion), so it will actually look better on APS-C, which only covers its "sweet spot" (and in the sweet spot, the lens may resolve more than enough for a 24mp APS-C sensor anyway).
10-16-2011, 06:40 AM   #518
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,790
QuoteOriginally posted by gazonk Quote
I think he meant that If a lens is just barely sharp enough for sharpness at 100% crop level on a 24mp FF sensor, it will not be able to resolve enough for sharpness at 100% crop level on a 24mp APS-C sensor.

But the problem is more often the opposite: Although a lens is made to cover FF, it may be too weak in the corners (in terms of both sharpness, vignetting and distortion), so it will actually look better on APS-C, which only covers its "sweet spot" (and in the sweet spot, the lens may resolve more than enough for a 24mp APS-C sensor anyway).
It's well known that larger lenses have less absolute sharpness. So MF lenses are less sharp than 135 lenses. A great many FF lenses from film days were designed to have falloff in the corners as that was a desired aesthetic. Absolute sharpness across the frame was deemed too informative because post-production editing (the airbrush, dodge burn, etc.) were far too time consuming.

I have generally found it a truism that FF lenses are better on APS-C than on 135 film because of the sweet spot effect. That said, film is more forgiving than digital.

10-16-2011, 07:00 AM   #519
Pentaxian
Emacs's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Moscow
Posts: 1,221
QuoteOriginally posted by gazonk Quote
I think he meant that If a lens is just barely sharp enough for sharpness at 100% crop level on a 24mp FF sensor, it will not be able to resolve enough for sharpness at 100% crop level on a 24mp APS-C sensor.
Wrong
I meant:
1) Smaller pictures looks sharper than largers
2) When printed at the same format common part of the image taken with FF is lesser than on taken with APS-C. Thus it looks sharper. Edges problem is not particularly significant: it's avoided with composition and, on the other hand, the edges on FF most probably aren't worse than on APS-C, but the central part is much better with FF, so the edges are noticeable due to the difference. The excellent example of this is 31Ltd: it's not good enough wide open on APS-C. But I taken many film shots with it at @f1.8, and the results were more than satisfactory.
10-16-2011, 08:07 AM   #520
ogl
Banned




Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,114
QuoteOriginally posted by Emacs Quote
Wrong
I meant:
1) Smaller pictures looks sharper than largers
2) When printed at the same format common part of the image taken with FF is lesser than on taken with APS-C. Thus it looks sharper. Edges problem is not particularly significant: it's avoided with composition and, on the other hand, the edges on FF most probably aren't worse than on APS-C, but the central part is much better with FF, so the edges are noticeable due to the difference. The excellent example of this is 31Ltd: it's not good enough wide open on APS-C. But I taken many film shots with it at @f1.8, and the results were more than satisfactory.
1. 40 MP 645D's or 37.5 MP Leica S2's pictures look sharper than APS-C pictures...
2. By the way - You use really WRONG English words and WRONG grammar for your explanation sometimes ...Not the problem, but it grates on the ears of English-speaking men... IMO. Really hard to understand what you mean.


You are myth-maker...Show us, please, the comparision of the same picture which made from colour film and by K10D, for example.

FA31 is GOOD at APS-C.



As for 135 film - it's rather hard to compare 135 film shots with shots from DSLR...It seems to me - good colour film + good development + good scanner + good soft are just the level of 6 MP APS-C in terms of sharpness...Not above. B&W film is better.


Edges problem, chromatic aberrations, vignetting and distortion are significant -
just for review - please, compare

Sigma AF 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 HSM DG II - APS-C Format Review / Lab Test Report
Sigma AF 12-24mm f/4.5-5.6 HSM DG II - Review / Test Report


Last edited by ogl; 10-16-2011 at 08:19 AM.
10-16-2011, 09:04 AM   #521
Pentaxian
Emacs's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Moscow
Posts: 1,221
QuoteOriginally posted by ogl Quote
You are myth-maker
I have only negatives, and I wouldn't do any comparison for sure, I know better ways how to spend time. But your example just proves you have no idea what are you talking about. These tests are designed to compare lenses of the certain focal length on the certain sensor size and nothing more. It can't prove anything.
And don't even dare to prove with examples (sigma 12-24), it's not funny: learn some logic
10-16-2011, 10:55 AM   #522
Pentaxian
johnmflores's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Somerville, NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,007
Question, can you folks look at a photo and tell whether it was taken with a FF camera vs APS-C camera?
10-16-2011, 11:26 AM   #523
Pentaxian
Emacs's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Moscow
Posts: 1,221
QuoteOriginally posted by johnmflores Quote
Question, can you folks look at a photo and tell whether it was taken with a FF camera vs APS-C camera?
Wide angle usually.
10-16-2011, 11:32 AM - 1 Like   #524
Pentaxian
TaoMaas's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Oklahoma City
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,146
QuoteOriginally posted by johnmflores Quote
Question, can you folks look at a photo and tell whether it was taken with a FF camera vs APS-C camera?
If shown the same pic taken by a FF and an APS-C camera side-by-side....maybe. But when I see a great pic, the very last thing on my mind is the format used. Who cares?
10-16-2011, 11:40 AM   #525
Pentaxian
Emacs's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Moscow
Posts: 1,221
QuoteOriginally posted by TaoMaas Quote
If shown the same pic taken by a FF and an APS-C camera side-by-side....maybe. But when I see a great pic, the very last thing on my mind is the format used. Who cares?
true )
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, body, camera, format, frame, k-5, lenses, limiteds, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, primes
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Some Full-frame shots & thoughts jsherman999 Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 5473 03-04-2017 10:02 AM
Pentax and Full Frame oppositz Pentax DSLR Discussion 58 03-18-2011 09:39 AM
Full frame pentax cem.kumuk Pentax DSLR Discussion 11 11-12-2010 03:13 PM
Pentax and Full Frame... Shutter-bug Photographic Technique 60 11-03-2010 10:03 AM
Pentax A 50/1.2 on Full Frame aegisphan Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 23 10-28-2010 04:16 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:00 AM. | 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