[Art Vandelay II]

For any serious photography, I'll just continue to shoot slide film until the digital is available in FF.

Where are these serious photos you speak of? Surely you get digital scans when having them developed. If a K20D is beneath your skill level than I'm expecting some seriously impressive pics. At this point if your photos show anything less than Phil Borges skill levels I'll be disappointed.

[24X36NOW]

Where are these serious photos you speak of? Surely you get digital scans when having them developed. If a K20D is beneath your skill level than I'm expecting some seriously impressive pics. At this point if your photos show anything less than Phil Borges skill levels I'll be disappointed.

Exactly when did I indicate that any particular camera was "beneath my skill level?" Stop putting words in my mouth, OK? FYI I put my film into mailers, and I get back a box of slides. I've got my own slide scanner, and I'll scan them when I get around to it, not that it's any of your concern. As long as my only dSLR choice from Pentax is a cropped format, I'll get more enjoyment out of shooting slides on my LX's. A "crop camera" is beneath what I WANT, my skill levels have nothing to do with it.

[MikePerham]

Exactly when did I indicate that any particular camera was "beneath my skill level?" Stop putting words in my mouth, OK? FYI I put my film into mailers, and I get back a box of slides. I've got my own slide scanner, and I'll scan them when I get around to it, not that it's any of your concern. As long as my only dSLR choice from Pentax is a cropped format, I'll get more enjoyment out of shooting slides on my LX's. A "crop camera" is beneath what I WANT, my skill levels have nothing to do with it.

I did this for quite a while ...never went digital till the K10D. The benefits of shooting digital are manifold ...especially if you are shooting volumes, for instance a wedding or other such event. Scanning a slide was OK for fine art shots ...but laborious and time consuming - and shooting raw allows me to exercise more control in the post processing than I could with scanning a slide.

Also makes archiving and storage a whole lot easier ...I have been using a computer for managing my client data for years ...way better than hard copy files. Now I have the same convenience with my images (I use Lightroom)

Mike.

[Jonson PL]

Directly related, yes but not unsolvable: one need to put a bigger prism AND brighter focussing screen.

Thanks.
Both manual focus film cameras, and auto focus film cameras, had different qualities of Viewfinders.
So hopefully they could improve the VF in APS-C format as well.

Got any good shots in the 14mm FF range? I'd like to see them if so. I like wide angle pics too, I'm always up for looking at some.

I’m a sucker for WA shots as well. But I seldom used wider than 24 mm in the film days.
And thanks for your image resolution comparison, nice to also see a picture

I was just scanning through DPR's preview of the 5D Mark II and I was a bit surprised. The IQ is of course incredible through ISO3200 (it better be for $3000), but if their series of high ISO pics at the end of this gallery is accurate I wouldn't use anything over ISO3200. ISO6400 starts to show horizontal banding and the problem just gets out of control over that.
Canon EOS 5D Mark II Beta Preview Gallery Gallery: Digital Photography Review

For a FF camera, I’ll agree that the Eos 5D Mark II, is disappointing at Iso 6400.

1. What I meant was that a DA lens on a APS camera is just as prone to corner problems as a FF lens on an FF camera. Theres no sweetspot when using a DA lens. The proof is in the pudding; there are both corner issues and fringing issues (at the corners and elswhere for that matter) on several DA lenses.

Several of the DA lenses can also be used on film cameras, so there is a fair margin against corner problems.
The issue is that many lenses from the film days, do not perform equally well on FF digital cameras. And while there is a sweetspot for them on cropped digital SLR, there aren’t for FF DSLR.
A bit of a shame to finally buy FF, and then discover that many of your favourite lenses cannot be used at their widest aperture that you wanted, unless you wanna spent time recovering in PP.

---

Last edited by Jonson PL; 10-10-2008 at 08:59 AM.

[Jonson PL]

So, just get a 5D Mk1 which is damn cheap right now - far below the $1800 threshold you suggested - go figure yourself! And, most importantly, I am sure that the 5D has lower noise than the A900 then, if what you say is true.

Since Pentax don't make and won't make a FF DSLR as it has been told officially (in Photokina), I have successfully made a K5D myself, see the latest photos over my Blog:-

RiceHigh's Pentax Blog: Preview: Cantax K5D Full Frame! ;-)

Well, I think this Cantax is what I need in the meantime, until I might fully migrate to Canon some days later (by re-build my whole lineup again, which requires much time - even my AF Pentax lens series was collected over decades).

RH you bought your Eos 5D long ago, stop lying. Like it is the PhotoKina announcement that made any changes for you.

As you line yourself up like some expert, I would also like to see the extensive portfolio that you must have.


Since you had a link to Ken R. site, likely you know of his seven levels of photographers. And as you call yourself an Measurbator, you should be familiar with his level 1 :
Seven Levels of Photographers © 2005 KenRockwell.com

[Jonson PL]

My point is -- and you are welcome to disagree -- that when comparing a 12 MP FF to a 12 MP APC-C sensor, you are comparing apples to oranges.

You’re not comparing apples to oranges. It is all a matter of finding the right tool for the job. Hiking on a strenuous trip in the mountains, I saw the most beautiful light, when it was clearing through the fog. But we had been walking in the rain for hours, and I didn’t have the energy get a hold of my big film cam, with equally big zoom lens.
With a compact cropped DSLR, and a pancake lens, next time, I might actually get a picture of it.

Why would anyone go FF without increasing the resolution? Just for the sensitivity and DOF? Isn't one typical application of FF / MF landscape photography and very large prints? The latter do not make sense if you do not go beyond APS-C resolution.

Just talk to some of the owners of the current Eos 5D, and the disappointment that MP race has come to FF. Many preferred their bigger pixels, even compared to the 16.7 MP 1Ds Mark II.

With the latest announcements, I've gotten colder towards FF. The whole idea was to get way better high Iso ability, and of cause maybe also DOF potential. The Eos 5D Mark II, and Sony A900, missed the target on this. It is gonna be interesting to see, if the market will slay the A900 on this account, and that it might turn out a failure, commercially.

The D3 and D700 are very interesting prospects. And some day, I could see myself being interested in going for such models.


If they just pack the FF, like the APS-C cam, I don't see the interest. Then I would prefer Medium Format instead.



BTW, what did you mean by : "FF sensor you are faced with potential sensor vignetting in addition to lens vignetting" ?



People should go for what makes them happy. No point in staying with a system that doesn't fulfill your wishes. I understand that many of us older generations might like the old format. So better get it now, before newer generations that want it small, like a phone or Ipod size, make FF die out.
Instead of complaining what you can't get, go for what you can, and then make the most of it.

[Jonson PL]

Actually, there's another; you can use a 1.4X or 1.7X teleconverter to give you the same/similar FOV as an APS-C crop camera, keep your full frame and full megapixel count, AND you still get to enjoy that nice, big viewfinder.

All for minimal additional cost and weight, with comparable image quality (any IQ loss from a quality teleconverter on a FF would be about the same as cropping and required amplification on APS-C).

Using 1.7 or 2x teleconverter, degrades IQ, and can also cause problems with auto focus.

Even Anastigmat wrote in another post, how APS-C had an advantage in the super tele range.
But no rose without thorns, in the ultra-wide angle segment, there are more options for FF cams, and also different speeds to choose from.
Though for 4/3 crop, the 7-14 Zuiko zoom leaves little to be desired. It is stellar.

[Samsungian]

I'm not a fan of 21mp size of 5D MarkII. But when you drill down into the raw specs you see you have three choices: 21mp, 10mp and 6mp. I'm curious how the image quality is at 10mp and 6mp raw settings as I really like my images from 12mp full frame 5D. I wonder if Digic IV will show superiority to 12mp Digic II or just be a tad bit better or a wash or worse? Or maybe 6mp raw setting will compare favorably to old 12mp digic II? I tried to handle a MarkII yesterday assuming the local proshop would have it. Canon is overwhelmed by demand for this $2700 overdue 5D upgrade. Might not be till Thanksgiving before I get to put my cf card in it a my L series glass on it for hands on comparision. If I love it, I won't buy it for a year unless dollar deflation causes the issue price to increase. Canon's pretty good at announcing price increases a couple weeks ahead of time so I'll see. I'd rather wait for 20% off instead of 10% increases.

You’re not comparing apples to oranges. It is all a matter of finding the right tool for the job. Hiking on a strenuous trip in the mountains, I saw the most beautiful light, when it was clearing through the fog. But we had been walking in the rain for hours, and I didn’t have the energy get a hold of my big film cam, with equally big zoom lens.
With a compact cropped DSLR, and a pancake lens, next time, I might actually get a picture of it.



Just talk to some of the owners of the current Eos 5D, and the disappointment that MP race has come to FF. Many preferred their bigger pixels, even compared to the 16.7 MP 1Ds Mark II.

With the latest announcements, I've gotten colder towards FF. The whole idea was to get way better high Iso ability, and of cause maybe also DOF potential. The Eos 5D Mark II, and Sony A900, missed the target on this. It is gonna be interesting to see, if the market will slay the A900 on this account, and that it might turn out a failure, commercially.

The D3 and D700 are very interesting prospects. And some day, I could see myself being interested in going for such models.


If they just pack the FF, like the APS-C cam, I don't see the interest. Then I would prefer Medium Format instead.



BTW, what did you mean by : "FF sensor you are faced with potential sensor vignetting in addition to lens vignetting" ?



People should go for what makes them happy. No point in staying with a system that doesn't fulfill your wishes. I understand that many of us older generations might like the old format. So better get it now, before newer generations that want it small, like a phone or Ipod size, make FF die out.
Instead of complaining what you can't get, go for what you can, and then make the most of it.

[*isteve]

Exactly when did I indicate that any particular camera was "beneath my skill level?" Stop putting words in my mouth, OK? FYI I put my film into mailers, and I get back a box of slides. I've got my own slide scanner, and I'll scan them when I get around to it, not that it's any of your concern. As long as my only dSLR choice from Pentax is a cropped format, I'll get more enjoyment out of shooting slides on my LX's. A "crop camera" is beneath what I WANT, my skill levels have nothing to do with it.

Um, why should any of us care what you want?

[RiceHigh]

Um, why should any of us care what you want?

WHY you bothered (and will bother?) to respond, especially in such an uncivilised way, then? Do you want to stop others to speak here whenever their opinions are not the same as yours?? Do you have such rights after all???

To Mr. 135 FF: As for particular people who challenge others' skill level from time to time, just ignore them all! They will say the same even actually your skill level is far above them, or even you showed them your great works they will have other even worse things to say - they are just finding something to personally attack others who just have a different views from them afterall. It is totally meaningless to "discuss" with such people, believe me.

[vinzer]

WHY you bothered (and will bother?) to respond, especially in such an uncivilised way, then? Do you want to stop others to speak here whenever their opinions are not the same as yours?? Do you have such rights after all???

To Mr. 135 FF: As for particular people who challenge others' skill level from time to time, just ignore them all! They will say the same even actually your skill level is far above them, or even you showed them your great works they will have other even worse things to say - they are just finding something to personally attack others who just have a different views from them afterall. It is totally meaningless to "discuss" with such people, believe me.

Sure, we're just a bunch of meaningless jerks who personally attack people at will. Please move on to more civilized forums.

How *isteve's post could even be considered a personal attack at all amazes me.

[RiceHigh]

Sure, we're just a bunch of meaningless jerks who personally attack people at will. Please move on to more civilized forums.

Don't put words on my mouth. Who said all people here are like that?

How *isteve's post could even be considered a personal attack at all amazes me.

Huh? When some persons are discussing something then a person replied that "why should any of us care what you want?" which essentially mean to ask others to "shut up". Is that already uncivilised enough? What's the point of this reply? Why to be rude? Is it constructive for the thread or destructive (when he started meaningless argument and told others not to write). Afterall Steve has been gone off-topic whilst 24x36Now has always been on, for each post he made.

[vinzer]

Don't put words on my mouth. Who said all people here are like that?

Huh? When some persons are discussing something then a person replied that "why should any of us care what you want?" which essentially mean to ask others to "shut up". Is that already uncivilised enough? What's the point of this reply? Why to be rude? Is it constructive for the thread or destructive (when he started meaningless argument and told others not to write). Afterall Steve has been gone off-topic whilst 24x36Now has always been on, for each post he made.

Dunno, it doesn't sound like a "shut up" to me. It is what it is. A mere question of why someone should care about another's own wants. Perhaps the tone of 24X36's statement of what he wants seemed too forceful? I really don't know.

I do understand other's want for an FF camera, but it's really a moot point to talk about it, as people from both sides have already fleshed out why they want to go this way or that, and with no definitive statements from Hoya (aside from their commitment to the APS-C format), nothing will come about discussing MF, FF, and m4/3 or mAPS-C for now.

What's certain is that there are other choices available for one who wants/needs FF, as you did with the 5D. Others can make the same choice you did, too, which is much better than constantly railing about the lack of a Pentax FF DSLR when it's already clear that they're not leaning that way in the near future. Hoping is fine, admonishing Pentax once for it is also okay, but to forever carp about it gets tiring, wouldn't you agree?

[*isteve]

WHY you bothered (and will bother?) to respond, especially in such an uncivilised way, then? Do you want to stop others to speak here whenever their opinions are not the same as yours?? Do you have such rights after all???

Of course I have the right. Its a perfectly sensible question.

Just because YOU dont like it does not mean I cannot ask it, or indeed that it cannot be asked of me. This is a public forum and unless the moderators disagree I can say what I like.

If someone spends so much time and effort telling the rest of us what they think but "desire" appears to be the only basis for their opinions, then surely I have a right to ask why that opinion should be of any relevance to anyone other than them?

You could in fact substitute "desire" with any other emotion and I would ask the same question. In your case it would be "hate".

[Haakan]

Actually RH's attacks was one of the reasons why I selected Pentax. His blog seems driven by a personal vendetta against Pentax. But despite that and all time he seems to spend on the topic, I found that he had not been able to find a single substantial drawback of Pentax that could be validated anywhere else.

On the contrary I found that most of his findings had the same scientific validity as arguments such as "I have an uncle that smoked since he was 20 years old, and he lived to be 101, so smoking can not be dangerous"

So for me the choice was simple, if RH, being driven by something that to me looked like hatred towards Pentax and spending a lot of time digging up negatives, were not able to find anything signficant negative, then Pentax must be a truly good choice.

So thank you RH for guiding me towards considering Pentax (I bought a K10D).

Haakan