Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-01-2008, 10:07 PM   #31
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philippines
Posts: 1,399
QuoteOriginally posted by tux08902 Quote
What is the obsession with FF? I don't understand it. I realize that lenses have gotten narrower in their FOV, but that only means that we need lenses with smaller focal lengths to offset that. Really, that's all it is. In addition, FF technically means larger lenses, which I'm not in favor of. Yes, I like a big camera, but I don't like lenses that look like airplane jets and feel like them too! I think the 645 D option seems like a nice option for people looking for something like FF.
With technology and physics as it is today, FF addresses some very specific needs of some photographers, mainly, better high ISO performance, dynamic range, greater control over DOF (for those who favor really shallow DOFs), and the possibility for greater resolution.

I'm a mere hobbyist, so those items don't apply to me (perfectly happy with APS-C), but I would understand other hobbyists and working pros who would want those.

High ISO for concert shooters and sports/action photographers. Manufacturers can continue to eke out better performance in APS-C sensors by minimizing circuitry in the sensor itself (like what Olympus and Pentax/Samsung did), but that same workaround can also be applied to FF sensors and even gain better high ISO performance.

As for DOF, a 1.2 aperture lens mounted on FF can deliver shallow DOF that cannot be matched by APS-C. That may make for some more creative shots.

With regards to resolution, I'm perfectly happy with 10 MP, really, but there are those who need to print bigger (ad photographers), or would want to show more detail (fashion and landscape photographers). As well, having bigger MP counts can allow for greater cropping (something I don't do, but would benefit others).

As for the weight and size penalty, it's an acceptable drawback for those who have need of FF cameras. It's certainly not for all, though, so I think APS-C will still be there co-existing with FF.

I won't need it, but I certainly won't complain also if Pentax chooses to develop a camera system with a FF or 645 sensor. Just because I have no need for it doesn't mean camera manufacturers have to stop making those bigger-format DSLRs altogether. Different strokes for different folks.

02-02-2008, 02:53 AM   #32
Veteran Member
benjikan's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,309
QuoteOriginally posted by Confused Quote
Hi Ben

Re your sentiments:



Blimey, I hope you haven't just inadvertently broken your existing NDA agreement.......ooops !
You DO realise that the choice of punishments is endless.......would you perhaps prefer ritual disembowelment or maybe being fired from a C****n ! Goodness, perish the thought, I mean possibly a N***n at a pinch, but a C****n, absolutely no way,
Hosť......gawd 'elp us all......

Best regards
Richard
Hi Richard;

As I said "personal feeling that..."

Benji
02-02-2008, 07:13 AM   #33
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Netherlands
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 908
QuoteOriginally posted by RMabo Quote
K1D? Quite possibly yes!
I don't think so, I have seen teh graph the good sir mentins and the steeper arrow comses straight from the K20D and is indeed steeper than from K10D to K20D so I expect it to be the K30D, with significant improvements over the K20D. Well significant in the eyes of Pentax. Maybe it is minor tweaks to those who will be happy with the K20D AF and fps...
02-02-2008, 09:13 AM   #34
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Berlin, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 151
QuoteOriginally posted by Anastigmat Quote
NASA put in an order for a bunch of D2X cameras. They probably would have waited and bought D3 cameras had it been announced sooner.
I doubt that. Space technology is never the newest, edge of the knife technique but well established and tested ten times to any imaginable limit. Because you simply cannot afford that something breaks.

Am I permitted to speak frankly:
This whole FF discussion is brought up by people who don't know anything about physics, nor engineering, nor economics of industrial sensor and camera production - MF, FF, or APS-C.
They probably own some pretty neat film glas which they want to use again with the FOV of older days (and some pretty neat and stunning vignetting on nowadays sensors). They love and need something big when they look down their bodies (well, that's okay, it's not them, just this nasty testosteron that shaped their brain).
It's a pity: big cams&lenses are gone, big cars will be drowned by the waters of the melting arctic, big muscles are symbols of nothing but doping, y-chromosomes are shrinking from generation to generation, we all will be women in 30,000 years ...
Lads, the times they are a changing.

02-02-2008, 09:59 AM   #35
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philippines
Posts: 1,399
QuoteOriginally posted by JanG Quote
Am I permitted to speak frankly:
This whole FF discussion is brought up by people who don't know anything about physics, nor engineering, nor economics of industrial sensor and camera production - MF, FF, or APS-C.
They probably own some pretty neat film glas which they want to use again with the FOV of older days (and some pretty neat and stunning vignetting on nowadays sensors). They love and need something big when they look down their bodies (well, that's okay, it's not them, just this nasty testosteron that shaped their brain).
It's a pity: big cams&lenses are gone, big cars will be drowned by the waters of the melting arctic, big muscles are symbols of nothing but doping, y-chromosomes are shrinking from generation to generation, we all will be women in 30,000 years ...
Lads, the times they are a changing.
As much as I respect your own thoughts on the subject, boxing people who want FF into negative stereotypes isn't at all helping with the discussion. Not all Pentax-FF-wishers are what you think they are. Don't castigate them for wanting something *you* don't want. Like they always say, different strokes for different folks.
02-02-2008, 11:21 AM   #36
Senior Member




Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Berlin, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 151
QuoteOriginally posted by vinzer Quote
As much as I respect your own thoughts on the subject, boxing people who want FF into negative stereotypes isn't at all helping with the discussion. Not all Pentax-FF-wishers are what you think they are. Don't castigate them for wanting something *you* don't want. Like they always say, different strokes for different folks.
You are right, I apologize to those who simply "want" something big - that's absoolutely okay for me. Unfortunately, hardly anybody pro FF is putting it in such simple words. Actually that's what I wanted to point out.
There is *very* little substance in this discussion but many unproven claims are poured out over several threads in this and the other forum, many of them under rather strange assumptions.

So I suggest: If somebody wants something big, post it like that. Fine. Or give us substantial reasons for why Pentax should go FF.
Lust for size is okay, but leave away those rationalizations (Rationalization (psychology) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

Jan
02-02-2008, 02:05 PM   #37
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: London
Posts: 1,067
Hi Ben

Re your comment:

QuoteQuote:
As I said "personal feeling that..."
Just 'reading between the lines' as usual. By the way, I'm sure I noticed a crack opening-up in your plasterwork, last time I looked. You really need to get that fixed in the near future ! Always remember, 'walls have ears', as someone in industrial espionage once told me........lol !

Best regards
Richard

Last edited by Confused; 02-02-2008 at 02:11 PM.
02-02-2008, 02:25 PM   #38
Senior Member
proudtoshootpentax's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Idaho Falls
Posts: 112
Just my humble opinion

One of the advantages of what is called 'Full Frame' is that of optics quality. There is only a certain amount of information a lens can resolve. This is one reason why a larger format is always better. APS-C sized sensors will never have the potential for resolution that a 'FF' camera is capable of, because at a certain point, your pixels are just splitting up the same information from the lens.
In my opinion, Pentax has two options for the future, and only time will tell which would be best. They can either go 'FF' (which is to me a complete misnomer... what does full really mean? what about a digital large format camera? would you call that a XXXFF?) and compete against the C/N crowd. As has been said here the advantages are more image resolution, wider pictures with less distortion, and lower noise (although I think that the K20D has shown this to be less of an issue than has been thought before... and future advances could help this even more!). The disadvantages would be a whole new line of lenses (both for Pentax to develop, and for us to buy), larger bodies, and more cost (that will come down in the future, but I think it's going to take some time).
The other course they could take (and apparently were on the very verge of taking) is what could be called the Fuller Format. Launch a digital medium format. The advantages of DMF are an even higher potential for image resolution, even less lens distortion, and even higher potential for low noise and increased dynamic range. The disadvantages again would be a new line of lenses, larger bodies, and more cost. Personally, if I have to have a whole new line of lenses just to gain minimal image quality gains, I'd rather spend the dough on a system that will make C/N shooters hand their heads and cry in shame. APS-C can currently duplicate most of the advantages that 35mm had over 120 film. For anything we would have used small format for in the old days, APS-C can match it in almost all practical ways. If you're going to spend a bunch of money for better quality images, they blow it on something that will really shine, like a DMF. We could call the format XFF, so all the measurebaters would have an acronym to do their thing with. The K20D is proof that APS-C can really compete in high quality, low noise images. If you're going to break the bank to move up a notch... why not make it count? My hope is that DMF will come back someday. Then we'll once again show why Pentax is an innovator, not just a follower.

02-02-2008, 02:34 PM   #39
Senior Member
proudtoshootpentax's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Idaho Falls
Posts: 112
BTW

By the way, I don't want anyone to think I'm against a K1D. Bring it on! I just hope and think it will be compatible with lenses that I already have. To think that Pentax users would be happy to spend some odd grand on a new 200mm f2.8, only to turn around next fall and find out their new pro body won't support it seems silly to me. Pentax knows they have a different target audience than the other guys. Pentax users don't spend the same kind of money as C/N guys do (not most of them anyways... that's a big chunk of the Pentax appeal). There will probably come a day when Pentax goes 'FF.' But I'm not expecting it anytime in the near future, and I'm frankly not at all troubled by that. If you want to go FF, and spend a couple grand more on lenses, there are a few options currently available.
02-02-2008, 03:43 PM   #40
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Brazil
Posts: 377
QuoteOriginally posted by vinzer Quote
As for DOF, a 1.2 aperture lens mounted on FF can deliver shallow DOF that cannot be matched by APS-C. That may make for some more creative shots.
Honestly, there is very little you can do with that f1.2 DOF, unless you're shooting paper. It is so shallow it is useless for most picture taking - I don't shoot many flat stuff at a straight angle. And it is still like that on APS-C.

Last edited by ricardobeat; 02-02-2008 at 03:49 PM.
02-02-2008, 06:17 PM   #41
Busiko
Guest




QuoteOriginally posted by ricardobeat Quote
Honestly, there is very little you can do with that f1.2 DOF, unless you're shooting paper. It is so shallow it is useless for most picture taking - I don't shoot many flat stuff at a straight angle. And it is still like that on APS-C.


Ricardo, a 50mm F1.2 lens when focused to 10m distance will have a DOF from 8.75 to 11.67
Do you call this thin paper? I wonder the size of your pocket agenda

fyi - Depth of Field Calculator - Mark Roberts Photography
02-02-2008, 07:19 PM   #42
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Philippines
Posts: 1,399
QuoteOriginally posted by JanG Quote
So I suggest: If somebody wants something big, post it like that. Fine. Or give us substantial reasons for why Pentax should go FF.
Lust for size is okay, but leave away those rationalizations (Rationalization (psychology) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

Jan
I'd rather Pentax go 645, actually, if only to one-up full frame. I think that a pro APS-C K1D (action shooters' camera) running alongside with a 645D (for ultimate IQ) would make serious waves in the pro market and show Pentax's ability to better cater to different shooting needs.
02-02-2008, 08:13 PM   #43
Senior Member
proudtoshootpentax's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Idaho Falls
Posts: 112
exactly!!

QuoteOriginally posted by vinzer Quote
I'd rather Pentax go 645, actually, if only to one-up full frame. I think that a pro APS-C K1D (action shooters' camera) running alongside with a 645D (for ultimate IQ) would make serious waves in the pro market and show Pentax's ability to better cater to different shooting needs.
Yes! Exactly! Who else on the market would have both a small format and medium format system with compatible flashes, accessories, and even lenses?? Better still if they could figure out an adapter or something to give auto aperture to 645 lenses to k mount bodies!

Speaking of which, while we're discussing dream features of a pro body Pentax DSLR, how about loosing the crippled k mount?
02-02-2008, 10:05 PM   #44
Site Supporter
rvannatta's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Apiary, Oregon
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,171
QuoteOriginally posted by proudtoshootpentax Quote
Yes! Exactly! Who else on the market would have both a small format and medium format system with compatible flashes, accessories, and even lenses?? Better still if they could figure out an adapter or something to give auto aperture to 645 lenses to k mount bodies!

Speaking of which, while we're discussing dream features of a pro body Pentax DSLR, how about loosing the crippled k mount?
Given the pentax historic success with the 645 format, and the fact that much R & D has already been done, it makes more sense to produce a 645 model for the pro market
than an FF. It is also consistent wwith the press release that started this thread---radically better, but not FF. If they can bring a 645D on the market at a price near the
FF of C----n, etc. , the C folks will have a heck of a time claiming that their FF is better.
02-02-2008, 10:47 PM   #45
Veteran Member
*isteve's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,187
QuoteOriginally posted by proudtoshootpentax Quote
One of the advantages of what is called 'Full Frame' is that of optics quality. There is only a certain amount of information a lens can resolve. This is one reason why a larger format is always better. APS-C sized sensors will never have the potential for resolution that a 'FF' camera is capable of, because at a certain point, your pixels are just splitting up the same information from the lens.
Hmm, is that so? Then perhaps you could explain why MF lenses have lower resolution than 35mm ones? Or why tiny little digicam sensors like the G9 can get pretty close in resolution terms to a 5D with a prime lens even though they have a little dinky wobbly 4X zoom lens?

FF sensors place far more demands on lenses because if you are projecting onto a flat plane, the wider the plane relative to the lens the harder it gets! If sensors were spherical perhaps....
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!
carlson, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K1D MJB DIGITAL Pentax DSLR Discussion 28 03-04-2008 01:58 AM
Pentax K20D, K5D, or K1D (or both a K5D and a K1D)? stewart_photo Pentax News and Rumors 42 01-04-2008 02:45 AM
so its actually the k1d CarlCanary Pentax News and Rumors 29 01-03-2008 01:53 PM
K1D/K10Ds? wmmk Pentax DSLR Discussion 7 04-11-2007 08:34 PM
K1D rumours? Harald Pentax DSLR Discussion 3 02-02-2007 03:03 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:42 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