[Nicolas06]

Staff note: This post may contain affiliate links, which means Pentax Forums may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. If you would like to support the forum directly, you may also make a donation here.

---

Im thinking more like a high ISO performance, thats really what i ment, for example a D610 can go up to something like 2900 ISO without noticeable noise, but our K3 stays at arond 1200.. wich is not bad at all for an APS-C.. but as i said.. besides this ISO performance APS-C can do some great work... i wish to have int he future some APS-C technology that can push the ISO to something like 2000 without much trouble.. that would be nice specially for night/indoor shooters that need fast lenses

If you take a photos at 2900isos on FF and you are not limited by the lens on either side, the equivalent shoot in deph of field, speed and framing would show 1260 isos on the metering of APSC. So this important only if the APSC lens can't be more wide open or if the optical quality is lesser at this apperture on the APSC than by the equivalent FF lense.

So the high iso adventage of FF is there, that's for sure, but it only kick in on wide appertures. Shoot at f/4 on your FF and the adventage is not that big anymore already has it is fairly possible to get very good f/2.8 shoot on an APSC. The image quality might suffer a bit on zooms or some prime, through. f/5.6 and smaller apperture, there no more high iso adventage for FF on most common focal lenses as it is easy to find an affordable lens that would perform good enough at f/4 and allow to reduce the isos. This is while A7s is a really strange marketing position. It has slightly better high iso but the Sony lens offering in term of appertures make it rougly at a level on any APSC with an f/2.8 zoom and it get kicked by any Nikon/Canon FF with some f/2.8 zoom... Still many think their A7s is the low light kind

The real FF adventage here is with an f/2.8 zoom or shooting prime f/2 or f/1.4... The APSC would manage to handle a transtandard zoom with some success due to sigma 18-35 f/1.8 that is quite affordable and quite a good performancer but that would work only for this focal range (27-52mm FF equivalent). And it is likely than an FF prime shoot at f/2 look better than the equivalent APSC prime shoot at f/4. Lastly, if you use f/1.4 on FF, there no real equivalent on APSC.

---

Last edited by Nicolas06; 11-01-2014 at 01:14 AM.

[LensBeginner]

If you take a photos at 2900isos on FF and you are not limited by the lens on either side, the equivalent shoot in deph of field, speed and framing would show 1260 isos on the metering of APSC. So this important only if the APSC lens can't be more wide open or if the optical quality is lesser at this apperture on the APSC than by the equivalent FF lense.

So the high iso adventage of FF is there, that's for sure, but it only kick in on wide appertures.

*snip*

Last week I went shooting by night, and stayed the virtually whole time at ISO 1600, f/2 in order to get acceptable shutter speeds (even though slower to 1/focal length...).
Photos turned out really good, but I wouldn't have minded to shoot a stop faster, or to stop down to f/2.8...
Besides, that doesn't allow me to shoot with the SMC-M 28 f/3.5 and the DA 40mm f/2.8 XS at night, because even wide open would have been too slow.
That's a real-life situation I can think of... however I really enjoyed the lightness and smallness of the K-01, so I don't think I would bring out a D4-like monster just to go a little faster...

[phoenixvision]

Full frame lenses....not camera....stay calm by my Pentaxian brothers.....My fa 43mm prime is already the best in my collection.....full frame, waiting for the holy grail......

[giu.behringer]

Full frame lenses....not camera....stay calm by my Pentaxian brothers.....My fa 43mm prime is already the best in my collection.....full frame, waiting for the holy grail......

43mm.... I wish I could afford that at this point.

[Nicolas06]

Last week I went shooting by night, and stayed the virtually whole time at ISO 1600, f/2 in order to get acceptable shutter speeds (even though slower to 1/focal length...).
Photos turned out really good, but I wouldn't have minded to shoot a stop faster, or to stop down to f/2.8...
Besides, that doesn't allow me to shoot with the SMC-M 28 f/3.5 and the DA 40mm f/2.8 XS at night, because even wide open would have been too slow.
That's a real-life situation I can think of... however I really enjoyed the lightness and smallness of the K-01, so I don't think I would bring out a D4-like monster just to go a little faster...

Typically if you choosed f/2 but that f/2.8 or f/1.4 was equaly suitable for you the gain of FF would be to shoot with an f/2.8 (equiv f/2) zoom... With on APSC, you'd find you are not limited as prime are concerned.

[simon6z]

Hope to add a fast lens in my cabinet preferably F1.2 but if no choice get the F1.4 also satisfied but not sure which can offer wide open image quality and sharpness

[Nicolas06]

Hope to add a fast lens in my cabinet preferably F1.2 but if no choice get the F1.4 also satisfied but not sure which can offer wide open image quality and sharpness

What use case for it ? My biggest problem with my f/1.4 tries is not really the lens sharpness but more the very thin deph of field that make most of the subject out of focus anyway...

For thoses that might want to play the game... Take a look at theses shoots and try to guess the apperture before checking it in the EXIF part...

---

Last edited by Nicolas06; 12-21-2014 at 03:25 PM.

[Aristophanes]

OK then why this...
Digital SLR Cameras - Nikon D5100, Canon Rebel | Henry's Camera - Henry's best camera store in Canada

Or this...

NEW HD PENTAX DA 560mm F 5.6 ED AW LENS SUPER-TELEPHOTO WEATHER-RESISTANT items in Prodigital2000 store on eBay!

Seem there are lots of KS-1s in Canada... so why is it essentially a Japanese product.

It is not essentially Japanese.

I see the K-S1 as an in-between model until Pentax comes out with a proper video-ready, articulating rear LCD, and built-in wi-fi model friendly with mobile OS's.

It is a stopgap offering.

[BarryE]

Has this difference been mentioned ...?

With pixel count being equal and at base 100 ISP, the FF sensor has bigger photo wells. This allows a greater dynamic range. In landscapes this can be handy.

However I don't want to lug around heavier FF gear so the k-3 wins there, which redresses the balance as the weight difference counts on long days out.

I'd prefer Ricoh to continue to add to, and improve, their lenses options, especially with light weight, quality, weatherproofed gear, which would improve their already clear advantage over their rivals in this area.

There seems to be a desire from many that Ricoh need a FF so the public will buy Pentax as it is professional kit. I'm far from convinced they need this FF option. Market their advantages, improve the lenses, demonstrate that FF actually has a measurable difference infrequently and be different. Pentax market share is limited, but it is strongly supported amongst many of its users- they should capitilize on this and not get into a war with FF, which will be to the detriment of most of us.

[y0chang]

If pentax can release a k-3 sized full frame...that would change the market. A aps-c sized full frame with a full selection of lenses, would give a great alternative to Canikons FF titans. To fit it in a k3 sized body, pentax would have to have no-ibis, and that tradeoff might not be worth it.

[Zygonyx]

Definitely not worth

[RuiC]

If pentax can release a k-3 sized full frame...that would change the market. A aps-c sized full frame with a full selection of lenses, would give a great alternative to Canikons FF titans. To fit it in a k3 sized body, pentax would have to have no-ibis, and that tradeoff might not be worth it.

A K3 sized 35mm body could be made, but I wonder if they would take the reliability issues due to ultra miniaturization that would be required without a bit of fear!

[kooks]

The real FF adventage here is with an f/2.8 zoom or shooting prime f/2 or f/1.4....

Totally correct.. specially for indoor shooters ( like me ) that need wide apertures to use at higher speeds.. Thats the main reason i will like a FF .. Low Light performance.. dont really care about apertures higher than F4 or other "advantages".. that would not make su much of a difference to ME.. but when you are in a nightclub/party and you try to shoot people and everything is dark and moves really fast... a nice wide aperture lens and a sensor that catch that light is magic awsome..

[y0chang]

A K3 sized 35mm body could be made, but I wonder if they would take the reliability issues due to ultra miniaturization that would be required without a bit of fear!

I wonder if the KS-1 was a test for those miniaturization processes. It makes a lot more sense as a test bed, just as a K01 was a test bed for live view contrast focus.

[Nicolas06]

A K3 sized 35mm body could be made, but I wonder if they would take the reliability issues due to ultra miniaturization that would be required without a bit of fear!

There no need for that huge miniaturzation. I guess that a K3 with a bigger bump for the pentaprism could do just fine. The sensor would fit without problem: just look at A7 size. the mirror should not that big of a problem. I mean the mount and it distance to the sensor already ensure most of it would fit anyway on current K3.

---------- Post added 11-02-14 at 01:01 AM ----------

Totally correct.. specially for indoor shooters ( like me ) that need wide apertures to use at higher speeds.. Thats the main reason i will like a FF .. Low Light performance.. dont really care about apertures higher than F4 or other "advantages".. that would not make su much of a difference to ME.. but when you are in a nightclub/party and you try to shoot people and everything is dark and moves really fast... a nice wide aperture lens and a sensor that catch that light is magic awsome..

I would ask you what are your methods... Typically when I shoot in such environement at f/2 of f/1.4 I tend to mostly out of focus shoots and the light is often not that good. I tend to get better results with a flash for light quality (not getting more light) and f/4 for the deph of field (not getting more light again).

Well I manage portraiture without problem with those wide apperture but for the rest that more problematic to me.