Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-27-2013, 12:07 PM   #226
Veteran Member
starbase218's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Planet Earth, Sol system, Milky Way galaxy, Universe
Posts: 1,110
QuoteOriginally posted by Wired Quote
F4 is F4

Correct me if I'm wrong but iso 100 1/250" and f4 produces the same exposure on the Q and a D800.
True, but: a given focal length will produce different perspectives on fullframe and APS-C. So you adjust focal length to e.g. 200mm on fullframe and 135mm on APS-C. But now the DOF is shallower on FF. So you stop down to F5.6 on FF while you keep F4 on APS-C. To be able to use the same shutter speed, you increase ISO to 200 on FF while keeping it at 100 for APS-C. The FF sensor is larger anyway, so it can cope better with noise.

However, the difference between F4 and F5.6 is approximately 1.4 (square root of 2). But APS-C sensors are more than 1.4 times smaller than FF sensors. In case of Pentax, it's a 1.5x crop. So F5.6 on FF will still give a slightly shallower DOF than F4 on APS-C, given equivalent focal lengths of 200 and 135mm respectively. And noise performance on the FF sensor at ISO 200 will be slightly better than the APS-C sensor at ISO 100, assuming the sensor technology is comparable.

However, this point is moot, since we were trying to equalize the DOF. So although the FF performance is slightly better, its DOF will still be a little shallower as well.

A few cases where fullframe is better than APS-C:
- The detail level at the same ISO levels
- Ability to create a shallower DOF at wide viewing angles with the same F-number
- Ability to shoot in darker environments by using higher ISO's and the same F-number if you don't mind (or are actually aiming for) the shallower DOF


Last edited by starbase218; 09-27-2013 at 12:16 PM.
09-27-2013, 12:15 PM   #227
Veteran Member
Andi Lo's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,925
QuoteOriginally posted by starbase218 Quote
However, this point is moot, since we were trying to equalize the DOF. So although the FF performance is slightly better, its DOF will still be a little shallower as well.
I dont think it's moot. You've explained it quite well: FF can do basically everything APS-C can, and some more, with little added weight. (and cost if you want SR)

APSC has its good points as well, but claiming that FF has no advantage is absurd.

QuoteOriginally posted by northcoastgreg Quote
Where's the FF f5.6 lens that's lighter, faster, and cheaper than my APS-C f4 stuff (and also has equivalent microcontrast, rendering, and color rendition)?
I assume you mean:
DA 60-250 > Tamron 70-300 VC for a third of the price (slightly worse lens, but not a bad performer, one stop extra DOF at 70mm), or 70-200 /4 VR/IS for the same price (one stop extra DOF and shutter speed)

DA 12-24 > Canon 17-40L (for the same price, one stop extra DOF if you need), Nikon dont have a one under $1100 but tons of third party ones that perform well at f/8. To be fair this is where APS-C might be better value, as most of the FF offerings of equal price need stopping down to achieve results that equal even humble APS-C UWAs like Sigma 10-20; There's the Tokina 16-28 that if you buy used is rather affordable though.

DA 16-45 > Any film age FF standard zoom that has decent reputation (same price)

DA 15 > Nikon 20/2.8 (cheaper), not sure about Canon.

The size of all these FF lenses are slightly bigger but not unweildingly so.

Last edited by Andi Lo; 09-27-2013 at 12:46 PM.
09-27-2013, 12:40 PM   #228
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,994
QuoteOriginally posted by mee Quote
I think, originally, most people were calling the new flagship the 'K-3' because the K-30 was announced back then.. but Ricoh then spent money to align the lower tiers with the top (5xx)
No, it's because the last two flagships have been K-7 and K-5. Natural progression makes the next one K-3. Right or wrong, that was the general assumption.
09-27-2013, 12:49 PM   #229
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2011
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,735
QuoteOriginally posted by Andi Lo Quote
The size of all these FF lenses are slightly bigger but not unweildingly so.
Yet the FA 20 is smaller and lighter than the DA 14.

09-27-2013, 01:03 PM   #230
Veteran Member
Andi Lo's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,925
QuoteOriginally posted by lytrytyr Quote
Yet the FA 20 is smaller and lighter than the DA 14.
I think DA 14 even though it's a decent performer is too much of a rush job and shouldn't represent the best that APSC can offer (DA lims are). There are actually old 14mm/2.8 FF lens designs that are the same size as DA 14 (granted they're not amazing performers). Perhaps all pentax did is cut out the uneeded image circle area? I really doubt that it's as simple as that, but I wonder.

FWIW the MF Samyang 14mm is a great lens save the moustache distortion for a very good price in FF world
09-27-2013, 01:10 PM   #231
Veteran Member
starbase218's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Planet Earth, Sol system, Milky Way galaxy, Universe
Posts: 1,110
QuoteOriginally posted by Andi Lo Quote
I dont think it's moot. You've explained it quite well: FF can do basically everything APS-C can, and some more, with little added weight. (and cost if you want SR)
The point that was moot is that a FF camera has slightly better noise performance. Because, while that is true in my example, the DOF is not entirely the same anyway (using F5.6 on FF and F4 on APS-C). It is like using a slightly faster lens: you can slightly lower the ISO and achieven slightly better image quality.

Fullframe does give you some extra possibilities when compared to APS-C: you can create shallower DOF and resolution at the same ISO will be better. But if you want to shoot the same photos you have been shooting with APS-C (including the same DOF), don't expect an upgrade. The IQ will most likely be similar.
09-27-2013, 01:16 PM   #232
Pentaxian
Wired's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Edmonton, AB
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,525
QuoteOriginally posted by starbase218 Quote
True, but: a given focal length will produce different perspectives on fullframe and APS-C. So you adjust focal length to e.g. 200mm on fullframe and 135mm on APS-C. But now the DOF is shallower on FF. So you stop down to F5.6 on FF while you keep F4 on APS-C. To be able to use the same shutter speed, you increase ISO to 200 on FF while keeping it at 100 for APS-C. The FF sensor is larger anyway, so it can cope better with noise.

However, the difference between F4 and F5.6 is approximately 1.4 (square root of 2). But APS-C sensors are more than 1.4 times smaller than FF sensors. In case of Pentax, it's a 1.5x crop. So F5.6 on FF will still give a slightly shallower DOF than F4 on APS-C, given equivalent focal lengths of 200 and 135mm respectively. And noise performance on the FF sensor at ISO 200 will be slightly better than the APS-C sensor at ISO 100, assuming the sensor technology is comparable.

However, this point is moot, since we were trying to equalize the DOF. So although the FF performance is slightly better, its DOF will still be a little shallower as well.

A few cases where fullframe is better than APS-C:
- The detail level at the same ISO levels
- Ability to create a shallower DOF at wide viewing angles with the same F-number
- Ability to shoot in darker environments by using higher ISO's and the same F-number if you don't mind (or are actually aiming for) the shallower DOF
I'm well aware of the differences in FOV and DOF, but the argument was made for "Faster" which typically means light. Hence why F4 is F4
09-27-2013, 01:19 PM   #233
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
QuoteOriginally posted by northcoastgreg Quote
Where's the FF f5.6 lens that's lighter, faster, and cheaper than my APS-C f4 stuff (and also has equivalent microcontrast, rendering, and color rendition)?
Amazon.com: Sigma 300-800mm f/5.6 EX DG HSM APO IF Ultra Telephoto Zoom Lens for Canon SLR Cameras: Camera & Photo

09-27-2013, 01:32 PM   #234
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Victoria, BC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 310
Interesting to see the FF debate. Part of me wants FF, and if Pentax can fit a FF sensor in the K-3 body we're seeing with the same spec, 24Mpix etc., it would indeed be extremely tempting, almost hard to resist. Wonder if Pentax made the K-3 FF ready ? i.e. the only difference would be the sensor (and possibly power mgmt), which would mean that the K-03 already has a larger prism, viewfinder etc.
09-27-2013, 01:47 PM - 1 Like   #235
Pentaxian
johnmflores's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Somerville, NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,185
This thread went 8 pages before devolving into a FF debate. Must be some kind of record.
09-27-2013, 01:48 PM - 3 Likes   #236
Pentaxian
konraDarnok's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2007
Photos: Albums
Posts: 962
QuoteOriginally posted by regor Quote
Interesting to see the FF debate.
Is it really?

"FF's advantage is shallower DOF at a given aperture."

"That's true, but APS-C's advantage is a greater DOF at a given aperture."



Worst part is it's all reactionary. If tomorrow Pentax brought out a 1500$ 645D that could achieve DOF equivalences at narrower apertures than FF, people would just bitch about the loss of absolute light gathering ability. These people want Pentax to be Nikon or Canon; I can't figure out why they just don't switch systems. Frankly wears me out.
09-27-2013, 01:48 PM   #237
Veteran Member
starbase218's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Planet Earth, Sol system, Milky Way galaxy, Universe
Posts: 1,110
QuoteOriginally posted by Wired Quote
I'm well aware of the differences in FOV and DOF, but the argument was made for "Faster" which typically means light. Hence why F4 is F4
F4 is F4, but that doesn't say much. Faster is a difference in time. If you don't mind (or even like) the shallower DOF, you can generally get away with setting the ISO twice as high on a fullframe camera, so you will need only half the shutter speed.

So, IMHO, the "speed" of a lens depends on more than the maximum aperture of that lens.
09-27-2013, 02:11 PM   #238
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,762
Oh boy,

I just went a way from this thead for a moment. It was fun before it. New camera is coming! Possibly best AF so far, can it be...
Now for last 2 pages, you guys make me scratch head a bit...what are you talking about.

As Was said, F4 is still F4. Someone else said, faster means less time...really! If you don't like too little Dof you can stop down a little and make it up with ISO..... Slower lenses are lighter, that is true!

Can't see speculation of K-3 anymore...thanks guys, you kind a spoiled it up for me. There is actually place for FF threads, you did know that... (unsuscribes from thread 3,2,1..)
09-27-2013, 02:19 PM   #239
Veteran Member
skankin_giant's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Deepest Darkest Cornwall
Posts: 497
QuoteOriginally posted by konraDarnok Quote
These people want Pentax to be Nikon or Canon; I can't figure out why they just don't switch systems. Frankly wears me out.
Very well put! enjoy Pentax for what it is, not what you want it to be!

Cheers, Steve
09-27-2013, 02:31 PM   #240
Pentaxian
Wired's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Edmonton, AB
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,525
QuoteOriginally posted by starbase218 Quote
F4 is F4, but that doesn't say much. Faster is a difference in time. If you don't mind (or even like) the shallower DOF, you can generally get away with setting the ISO twice as high on a fullframe camera, so you will need only half the shutter speed.

So, IMHO, the "speed" of a lens depends on more than the maximum aperture of that lens.
Yes I agree. I'm just trying to figure out why all things being equal in exposure settings people say A lens is faster on FF

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!
pentax news, pentax rumors
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Sale of image, requires "20x30 image size digital image" ? NeverSatisfied Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 25 03-29-2013 05:38 AM
What is the Shutter Count of the first image of a brand new K5? TropicalMonkey Pentax K-5 16 01-31-2013 01:45 AM
Latest FF K-3 leaked Image? Clinton General Talk 16 09-14-2012 06:00 AM
"Chassuer d'Image" - K-01 review = 3/5 Jean Poitiers Pentax K-01 12 05-19-2012 10:26 PM
Which one out of the 3 image? (BW scanned) SuperAkuma Post Your Photos! 12 03-05-2009 08:28 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:18 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