[Rondec]

False.

Any image an APS-C camera can make, a FF camera can replicate perfectly with the same pixel density and technology generation. You know how? By cropping.

Take a D800, stick any lens on it, FF or APS-C, crop the image and it will be indistinguishable from a shot taken with the D7000 with the same lens and same settings. Nikon even makes it easy by providing automatic crop modes and saving you post-processing time.

As Norm says, as long as APS-C has higher pixel density, there will be a difference in photos you can take. I do think there is more cropability from the same focal length with the K3 than certainly, say, with a 5D MK III, D600, or a D4. The only camera that can currently come close is the D800 and that is "crippled" with a slowish frame rate.

[ElJamoquio]

As Norm says, as long as APS-C has higher pixel density, there will be a difference in photos you can take.

Sure... but Norm's pic is ~1MB.

The cases where APS-C pixel density beats full-frame or cropped full frame are approximately 0.07%.

[normhead]

Sure... but Norm's pic is ~1MB.

The cases where APS-C pixel density beats full-frame or cropped full frame are approximately 0.07%.

How did you arrive at that, you just made it up didn't you? Every K-3 or D7100 beats every full frame at both magnification in the crop area and resolution in the crop area, and most FFs up to the the 24 MP D6100 and D800, beats them in over all resolution as well, even with the FF using it's full sensor area.. Currently if you wish to beat a K-3 in resolution you need a 36 MP FF camera, no other FFs need apply. And really, FF or APS-c has not much to do with it. More MPs means more resolution, and higher iQ.

[monochrome]

How did you arrive at that, you just made it up didn't you?

He's pulling your chain. It should be 0.7%, not 0.07%





Ducking now

[normhead]

He's pulling your chain. It should be 0.7%, not 0.07%
Ducking now

I hate it when he does that.

[normhead]

That's very true, until Sony's next rumored 54 Mpix FF sensor comes out in Nikon D900 / Sony A7n, by one or two years...

I'm defintiely concerned about the pixel size and resulting noise etc that's becoming apparent with really small pixel sizes. I'm hoping Pentax can come out with a 30 MP FF, not that I have a clue where they'd get it from. If Nikon comes out with a 54, it will be in a Pentax a year later, that seems to be the trend. At this point I'm more once red with minimizing file size than increased resolution at the expense of colour reproduction and noise. The K-3 24 MP APS-c has convinced me I don't want a 54 MP FF.

[Clavius]

If Nikon comes out with a 54, it will be in a Pentax a year later, that seems to be the trend.

I must have missed something here.

[xe dap]

?????????? Google
Pay attention!
1. FF will be next year. Not later than Photokina 2014. Maybe, on spring or summer, 2014.
2. New DFA lenses will be offered. New 2.8 zooms will be made.
3. New Limited Zoom will be real.
4. New WR lenses will be launched.
5. K-01 is failed because of design. Mirrorless cameras - Ricoh will offer something new.
6. New 645D will be later. It will be different from 645D. It was plans to launch 645DII this year, but the situation is changed.
7. SMC DA LIMITED are discontinued.

I will buy a FF of pentax-ricoh, sure.
body: 2000$, 01 len: 1000$, temporary like this

[kenyee]

Honestly, do you guys think Pentax has a choice on whether to release FF or not in a few years?
The Canon 6D FF is down to $1400: http:///permadeal/108622/buydig---canon-6d-20.2mp-full-frame-dslr-camera-pix...ards?#comments
at Buydig if the link doesn't work...and it includes a printer and memory card and photo paper. That's ridiculously cheap.
And that's probably also why the K-3 price is dropping so quickly...APS-C DSLRs seem to be dropping faster now...the D7100 was lightning deal'd by Amazon on BF for $700. Smartphones killed off the lower end...mirrorless is killing off the lower end DSLRs.

[mecrox]

Honestly, do you guys think Pentax has a choice on whether to release FF or not in a few years?
The Canon 6D FF is down to $1400: http:///permadeal/108622/buydig---canon-6d-20.2mp-full-frame-dslr-camera-pix...ards?#comments
at Buydig if the link doesn't work...and it includes a printer and memory card and photo paper. That's ridiculously cheap.
And that's probably also why the K-3 price is dropping so quickly...APS-C DSLRs seem to be dropping faster now...the D7100 was lightning deal'd by Amazon on BF for $700. Smartphones killed off the lower end...mirrorless is killing off the lower end DSLRs.

In a few years?? The way the market is going where I live, I'd say more likely in a few months.

[NicholasJong]

False.

Any image an APS-C camera can make, a FF camera can replicate perfectly with the same pixel density and technology generation. You know how? By cropping.

Take a D800, stick any lens on it, FF or APS-C, crop the image and it will be indistinguishable from a shot taken with the D7000 with the same lens and same settings. Nikon even makes it easy by providing automatic crop modes and saving you post-processing time.

No, this is not true. Because APSC cameras have a larger focus points coverage.

D7100 and D800 use basically the same 51 points focus system. The focus points are mostly in the center in the D800, but they spread out in a D7100, since the points are there, and the CMOS in a D7100 is smaller

And this can be very useful when you have a high demand on focusing

[Cannikin]

No, this is not true. Because APSC cameras have a larger focus points coverage.

D7100 and D800 use basically the same 51 points focus system. The focus points are mostly in the center in the D800, but they spread out in a D7100, since the points are there, and the CMOS in a D7100 is smaller

And this can be very useful when you have a high demand on focusing

I fail to see how this is at all relevant to my point that a cropped FF image will appear identical to an APS-C image of the same pixel density.

Also, your premise is flawed. If they have the same focusing system, and you crop the FF to APS-C, the focusing point coverage of the final frame will be the same.

[mecrox]

I fail to see how this is at all relevant to my point that a cropped FF image will appear identical to an APS-C image of the same pixel density.

Also, your premise is flawed. If they have the same focusing system, and you crop the FF to APS-C, the focusing point coverage of the final frame will be the same.

Except they won't be, unless it is the same image using the same lens on the same camera with the same settings? Otherwise, if different cameras are involved, all the other usual factors will kick in - lens, sensor, settings, imaging software et al. Perhaps this is why, to my eyes anyway, FF images nearly always look superior to APS-C ones. The FF images I see online frequently look almost effortless whereas a lot of APS-C ones look a little brittle - too much sharpening, clarity and de-noising in order to try to get to where FF is already. Perhaps APS-C camera-owners typically use less capable lenses? Who knows. All subjective, of course, but I suspect many people know this even if they'd like the data measurement crowd to convince them otherwise. One can reject FF on grounds of size, weight and cost but not image quality, I'd guess.

[Cannikin]

Except they won't be, unless it is the same image using the same lens on the same camera with the same settings?

Yes, that's kind of the whole point of this line of discussion. I'll save you the trouble of going back and reading my original post by quoting the relevant portion:

Take a D800, stick any lens on it, FF or APS-C, crop the image and it will be indistinguishable from a shot taken with the D7000 with the same lens and same settings.

[mecrox]

I'll save you the trouble of going back and reading my original post by quoting the relevant portion:

Lol, thanks. But I'm not convinced of the quality side (not the size/scale side). The sensors are not the same even if the pixel coverage is the same after a crop. Can you point me to some comparative pics somewhere online?