[totsmuyco]

24-36 mpx is so 2014! In 2015 you need at least 50.6 Mpx

You're right! A retro style 50.6 mpx, with the size of the actual ME and a battery grip for it to look mean. One unit for FF lovers and one for us APS-C users. I like to dream big dreams.

[Zygonyx]

I agree but resolutions arent what it should be about. Larger and smaller sensor sizes each have different characteristics. DOF and low light ability (for a given resolution) change for example.

Pentax needs to push the strengths of each, as presently FF is considered the top/holy grail to canikon customers.

Anything zoomage is going to be expensive on FF and MF, whereas anything wide or narrow DOF/fast is expensive on apps-c.

Resolutions are all very similar now between the sizes. Nokia did a 40mp phone camera didn't they? It's not about the MP race.

It shoudln't be about, but it is for two reasons :
* main argument from Canikon fanboys and marketing dept
* strong argument just because Pentax hasn't - yet - taken the gist of it's 645 sensor issuing really fast lenses able to compete with f/1.2 35mm primes DOF

[philbaum]

I agree but resolutions arent what it should be about. Larger and smaller sensor sizes each have different characteristics. DOF and low light ability (for a given resolution) change for example.

Pentax needs to push the strengths of each, as presently FF is considered the top/holy grail to canikon customers.

Anything zoomage is going to be expensive on FF and MF, whereas anything wide or narrow DOF/fast is expensive on apps-c.

Resolutions are all very similar now between the sizes. Nokia did a 40mp phone camera didn't they? It's not about the MP race.

Good points all. I've given up on the idea of one camera will do everything. My K3 does excellent in normal light (and even focuses well in dim light). The Sony A7S is the most innovative camera of 2014 and it has my attention for a speciality low light camera. I aim to rent it first, however.

The other feature that i like about the A7s is the option of a no-noise shutter - i don't see that on any other aps or FF camera. For special events like the theater dress rehearsals i shoot, that no-noise shutter is invaluable.

Reviews of the A7S invariably have positive comments about the rendering as in "looks like medium format output, very attractive" , or some such comments. Compared to the A7S, most other large cameras look like iterative copycats.

So for me, i'd like to see manufacturers worry less about resolution - boring - and do larger pixels and electonric shutters. Thats what always attracted to me was the quiet shutters in K7 thru K3 - not as silent as A7S, but pretty quiet.

[Alizarine]

"Reviews of the A7S invariably have positive comments about the rendering as in "looks like medium format output, very attractive" , or some such comments. Compared to the A7S, most other large cameras look like iterative copycats."

I wonder how those reviewers did that comparison... Or how it reminded them of MF. While I am no expert myself it is pretty hard to tell many MF shots vs APS-C on platforms like Facebook and many other sites. How do good low-light shots automatically resemble MF output?

[Kunzite]

"Reviews of the A7S invariably have positive comments about the rendering as in "looks like medium format output, very attractive" , or some such comments. Compared to the A7S, most other large cameras look like iterative copycats."

Interesting. Detail is apparently unimportant; high ISO OTOH - an area medium format only recently started to be competitive (well, more than competitive - the best actually ) at - matters a lot.
Who said that? Who made those reviews?

[Zygonyx]

"Reviews of the A7S invariably have positive comments about the rendering as in "looks like medium format output, very attractive" , or some such comments. Compared to the A7S, most other large cameras look like iterative copycats."

I wonder how those reviewers did that comparison... Or how it reminded them of MF. While I am no expert myself it is pretty hard to tell many MF shots vs APS-C on platforms like Facebook and many other sites. How do good low-light shots automatically resemble MF output?

+1000
This sounds like total marketing lie... moreover with a 12 Mpix sensor !!!
After Fujimania APS-C versus FF ; Sonymania FF versus MF ?

[philbaum]

I'm the one that repeated the comment "looks like medium format", remembering a few of the reviews i have read. In tracing down where i saw it, Luminous Landscape and an article by Michael Reichmann

With the Sony A7s we see that Megapixel count isn't the be-all and end-all either. There is something to the look of A7s files that reminds me of medium format, and the only thing that I can think of that could be at work here are the large individual sensels. I can't say why, but like the US Supreme Court judge, when asked for his definition of pornography replied – "I can't say, but I know it when I see it".

Sony A7s First Impressions

That comment was picked up by a coupla other websites/blogs.

Reichmann is certainly no industry shill and has a policy of not accepting equipment from manufacturers. In the above article he also said:

But, as I noted earlier in this report, individual images from the A7s have what I can only call the medium format look, which might be a curious thing to say given that the sensor is only 12 Megapixels, but nevertheless is what I see. Large pixels are simply different in the "look" that they create.

He's not the only reviewer that i've read that had positive comments about the rendering of the A7s but i don't want to spend much more time on this. however, if you read more about the development of the A7S, you'll find that the downside of the large sensels is that when there's adequate light, the large sensors overload with photons too quickly. Sony licensed some new technology from another company to deal with the overload situation. So is it the larger sensels that produce this pleasant rendering, or is it this new technology that Sony licensed that produces the pleasant look? I don't know.

[richandfleur]

Yeah, get used to needing ND filters if you have that machine for video work.


Personally I'd be all over it if I had the cash. There has been very little progression in the last 3 - 5 years in terms of low light ability in APS-C. Each new product seems to pack a higher resolution onto the sensor, negating any potential low light/high ISO abilities. Heck I'd even love a 12MP APS-C pentax if it had better low light ability and associated APS-C Pentax price tag.


Let the other companies deck it out with Mega Pixels. The Nokia Lumia 1020 phone seems very MF ish to me with it's 41 Mega Pixel camera...

[philbaum]

Yeah, get used to needing ND filters if you have that machine for video work.


Personally I'd be all over it if I had the cash. There has been very little progression in the last 3 - 5 years in terms of low light ability in APS-C. Each new product seems to pack a higher resolution onto the sensor, negating any potential low light/high ISO abilities. Heck I'd even love a 12MP APS-C pentax if it had better low light ability and associated APS-C Pentax price tag.


Let the other companies deck it out with Mega Pixels. The Nokia Lumia 1020 phone seems very MF ish to me with it's 41 Mega Pixel camera...

I don't know about needing filters, they'd done some special stuff in designing it so that it doesn't get overexposed - at least none of the reviewers have mentioned that so far.

I'm hoping it hasn't been too popular so that the price drops. It was ironic how the A7II came along, and suddenly the bzzz about the A7s died out.

[rrstuff]

Good points all. I've given up on the idea of one camera will do everything. My K3 does excellent in normal light (and even focuses well in dim light). The Sony A7S is the most innovative camera of 2014 and it has my attention for a speciality low light camera. I aim to rent it first, however.

The other feature that i like about the A7s is the option of a no-noise shutter - i don't see that on any other aps or FF camera. For special events like the theater dress rehearsals i shoot, that no-noise shutter is invaluable.

Reviews of the A7S invariably have positive comments about the rendering as in "looks like medium format output, very attractive" , or some such comments. Compared to the A7S, most other large cameras look like iterative copycats.

So for me, i'd like to see manufacturers worry less about resolution - boring - and do larger pixels and electonric shutters. Thats what always attracted to me was the quiet shutters in K7 thru K3 - not as silent as A7S, but pretty quiet.

have you seen an old Olympus e-1? Not a low light camera, but it had the softest shutter of all. You can get one with a good wr lens for $120 on eBay.

[richandfleur]

I don't know about needing filters

I believe the minimum ISO in the S-Log profile is 3200, which is going to be an issue in daylight, especially if you are after a narrow depth of field via a low Aperture.


Quick google for a reference for you: https://www.facebook.com/philipbloomfilms/posts/10152096954740426

[aoeu]

50.6 mpx

The only exact perfect size. Does anyone make a sensor that exact perfect size?

Why is that exact size so perfect, anyway?

[reh321]

24-36 mpx is so 2014! In 2015 you need at least 50.6 Mpx

I'm not sure that is true. According to my calculations, once you get above 36, a FF sensor is potentially (depending on the sort of engineering which I'm not an expert in) as crowded as the K-50's sensor is, so FF may start losing its light-gathering advantage. (that is why cameras like the 645 family exist)

[richandfleur]

(that is why cameras like the 645 family exist)

The problem there will no doubt be a desire to combat the little FF sensor starting to annoy below by upping the resolution on the MF to compensate/maintain the difference.


Agreed though that I'd happily sacrifice some resolution to get better low light abilities.

[Alizarine]

Reichmann is certainly no industry shill and has a policy of not accepting equipment from manufacturers. In the above article he also said:

He's not the only reviewer that i've read that had positive comments about the rendering of the A7s but i don't want to spend much more time on this. however, if you read more about the development of the A7S, you'll find that the downside of the large sensels is that when there's adequate light, the large sensors overload with photons too quickly. Sony licensed some new technology from another company to deal with the overload situation. So is it the larger sensels that produce this pleasant rendering, or is it this new technology that Sony licensed that produces the pleasant look? I don't know.

It's no biggie for me but just curious where he got that "reminds him of medium format look" about the A7s' rendering. There are simply too many factors to consider the final look of an image to just base it on just sensor size, or resolution, or sensel technology, because to create any image, it's a combination of sensor, sensor tech, optics, coatings, and lots of complicated mathematics to get where it's going.

Personally I think the pleasant look could be agreed upon by many, but to state that it would remind one of medium format is too speculative, or hard to base upon. I don't have any experience shooting MF, so maybe that's why. I am not so sure for MF Pentaxians if they could say the same, if they were handed an A7s for their work.