Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-28-2008, 04:51 PM   #16
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: CT, USA
Posts: 499
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
It can't be the sensor size.
It's not (see comment above). Since a "like kind and quality" comparison yields little increase in size or weight, we can conclude it is entirely possible to make reasonably sized FF cameras. APS-C dSLRs are based on cameras with FF lens mounts, and are thus a compromise that makes them larger than necessary. It was more important for camera makers to keep their lens mounts compatible with past products (or risk losing their existing customer bases) and to keep the upgrade path to FF once the sensor prices got more reasonable than it was to miniaturize the cameras a little bit more (Olympus decided for the do-over, and you can decide for yourself whether that is a smashing success; their sensor is even smaller, yet the difference in camera sizes isn't that significant to me when the Olympus Four Thirds bodies are placed next to the dSLRs of other camera makers).

09-28-2008, 04:55 PM   #17
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,064
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
Except that FF cameras are monsters. Even the D700 is a very large camera by any measure. This is very restrictive to amateur sales. Physics and design limitations can only shrink the form factor marginally. .

No. FF cameras are big because all of them are currently high-end bodies. All APS bodies are indeed FF cameras with cropped sensors only. The only size advantage with APS is that you can use shorter focal lenght for the same angle of views...but then you can crop an FF image.....

Last edited by Pål Jensen; 09-28-2008 at 05:05 PM.
09-28-2008, 05:05 PM   #18
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,064
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
Now, I can take a loupe and scan that print and see extreme detail in the wooden door and rusted hardware of the subject (an old barn door). (I guess that is the old school equivalent to pixel peeping.) There is NO WAY that lens will provide an equivalent level of performance on my K10D. I know that for sure, I have tried!

This is spot on. We have heard from day one that even 2mp cameras are better than film but what people are referring to are edge sharpness and lack of grain. If you start to look at texture digital truly suck. Landscapes are the ultimate test. Grass in a distant (or not so ditant; even in the foreground!) hillside looks like fuzzy candy floss with my K10DGP ; the sensor cannot resolve enough. Any film (that I've tried) in my LX can do that, not to mention my 645NII. I've even seen images from a 22(?)mp digital back for a Mamiya that cannot do this either. It gives a weird effect of apparent selective focus; vegetations with big leves looks sharp whereas adjacent vegetation with small leaf or grass look out of focus!
I'll guess I'll stick to film a bit longer....
09-28-2008, 05:18 PM   #19
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,064
QuoteOriginally posted by Douglas_of_Sweden Quote
A week ago no one would have been able to dismiss FF in this way without considerable more resistance from those many strong advocates for FF at this forum. Were are they now, after a photokina without Pentax FF? Busy selling their Pentax gear and buying canikony?

Now if one just know that 645D would become true, one should start buying some old 645 lenses...I've seen some go quite cheaply and whenever Pentax really begins to produce a 645D, the old glass is likely to go up in price, right? I'm not thinking as an investment, but I've always wanted a 645, and even if Pentax tries a price below Hasselblad and others, it is likely to cost a bit. So it would help to be able to start with some old glass.

I believe the 645D is a great idea......two years ago....
I fear Pentax will be late to the game now. One can wonder what they have been doing the last few years. Leica have now made a bigger than FF camera; Nikon is rumored to be in the pipeline. Probably more to come.
THe Pentax 645D will be bigger than a Pentax FF, but not necessarily bigger than a pro Nikon or Canon. The lenses are larger than Pentax FF K-mount lenses but not necessarily larger than comparable Canon L-lenses. Whereas an FF camera can be used as a APS camera, the 645D is some ways a different beast. It is essentially a tripod camera; the lenses will be slower and thres significantly less DOF. For APS it is F:5.6 and be there; FF = F:8; 645 = F: 16 etc...
The rumored camera line up makes sense though. Move the K200D and K20D upmarket, add the K-m at the bottom and then the 645D. This is in line with my previous suggestions except for FF. A line up of KxxxxD (K-m), KxxxD, KxxD, KxD + FF and 645D, as suggested by some, never seemed realistic to me.

09-28-2008, 05:35 PM   #20
Veteran Member
*isteve's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London, England
Posts: 1,187
Dont you think its about time you changed your login?

Perhaps "NOT24X36YET"?
09-28-2008, 06:00 PM   #21
Veteran Member
deejjjaaaa's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: steel city / rust belt
Posts: 2,046
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
Grass in a distant (or not so ditant; even in the foreground!) hillside looks like fuzzy candy floss with my K10DGP ; the sensor cannot resolve enough.
not only lens&sensor matters - raw converter matters too...
09-28-2008, 06:56 PM   #22
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: CT, USA
Posts: 499
QuoteOriginally posted by *isteve Quote
Dont you think its about time you changed your login?

Perhaps "NOT24X36YET"?
Nah. More like a suggestion to Pentax than a statement about the current state of affairs
09-28-2008, 06:59 PM   #23
Veteran Member
Torphoto's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Trinidad W.I.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 620
Guys, Pentax is back to it's old ways of thinking, remember back when they had no pro 35mm camera and wanted "PROS" to buy 67 and 645!! they want the average joe to have APS-C and pros to have MF digital. They probably know that profit wise they will never be able to compete with the the big 3 so they need to go into an arena where large cameras that cost quite a bit will still sell with better profit margins and thats MF digital.

I don't know if the 67 or 645 are still in production but I can see the bodies and lenses are still available and in use by the few MF film guys around, having a 645D now makes sense with a larger than 35mm sized sensor but not at the super high costs of some other MF digital systems, we have 645 AF lesnes already that just need to have more digitally tuned ones added and presto!


Also they seem to think they can compete with FF with APS-c, if they can this will be a good thing as we will have near FF performance with out the costs.


Lets just see what they do, as it is now I'm just happy they are still around and looks like they will be around for some time as well.

09-28-2008, 08:27 PM   #24
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,233
QuoteOriginally posted by 24X36NOW Quote
Nah. More like a suggestion to Pentax than a statement about the current state of affairs
I am thinking that it is about time to make a suggestion to a manufacturer like Cosina and suggest that they make a "serious" digital camera as a companion to their wonderful Voigtländer K-mount lenses. Sort of a FF digital Bessaflex.

Steve
09-28-2008, 08:59 PM   #25
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Georgia
Posts: 376
I'm happy with the direction Pentax is moving. If and when they come out with a 645 MF camera I will be one of the first in line to buy one.

For everyone investing in Pentax lenses now they can feel assured that their investment in lenses now will not affect them in the near future.
09-28-2008, 09:47 PM   #26
Veteran Member
philmorley's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: in a house in Armidale, Australia
Posts: 472
snip

QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
I believe the 645D is a great idea......two years ago....
I fear Pentax will be late to the game now.
I wonder about this too...
09-28-2008, 11:29 PM   #27
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,161
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
So, why did I choose that particular print for comparison? It is because of the Technical Pan negative. The film is widely acknowledged to have had the ability to out-resolve the best optics that were put in front of it due to its virtually grainless thin emulsion. (Very, very difficult to use a grain focusing aid with, BTW.) There truly is nothing that compares in the current crop of consumer digital detectors or film, for that matter.
Steve
I agree but size of the media isn't the only thing. One might comapre this film with very early 135 film. Quite a bit less definition right? But wait,this is the same film size, no?

Size *does* matter, probably a lot, but the kind of media (film or sensor) does a lot as well. It's the combination of both (as well as lenses quality) which provides the stunning definition (or not) of a photography.
09-28-2008, 11:56 PM   #28
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Verona, Italy
Posts: 202
QuoteOriginally posted by Torphoto Quote
Guys, Pentax is back to it's old ways of thinking, remember back when they had no pro 35mm camera and wanted "PROS" to buy 67 and 645!! they want the average joe to have APS-C and pros to have MF digital.

This worked pretty well. Then ressurrecting 645D should be "quite cheap", being a project already finished [there are pre-series bodies working, they need only to mass produce, R&D are already paid].

Regarding lenses, Leica S2 aside, these system starts with only a pair of lenses [Nikon FF, Nikon D40, Sony FF...]. The main concern is doing a basic zoom very very wide for cropped sensor, 645 was a landscapist system, no wide angle no party. A fast, ultrawide, digital optimized MF lens is almost scifi...
09-29-2008, 01:35 AM   #29
ogl
Banned




Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,114
I hope that Pentax can offer 645D system for reasonable money for studio work and for landscapes photographers. I think that price will be less than Mamiya 645 with digital back and Canon EOS 1D Mark III.
09-29-2008, 05:49 AM   #30
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: midwest, United States
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,226
Have some problems with the film vs sensor comparison. 1st Tech Pan (TP) is an incredible film. Have shot a fair amount of it and developed it in Dick Delagi's custom developer. It probably does resolve more than an APS c camera. There is more information to be recorded than resolution. TP records in b&w. Not what I see when I look at a scene. Your K10D kills TP in this regard! It records much more color info. Would also consider a color pic with some ca closer to what I see than a b&w one.
There is a way to have K10/20D give the TP a run for its money in resolution. It requires a still subject. Your barn would work well. Merely take a stacked pano of it. With enough shots the digital will have more res than a single TP image. This doesn't require more res from the lens. Use some thing like a 50mm lens (not anymore expensive than your 28mm).
Could also get very close to the non grain of TP. Use Barts method of 9 multi exposures in one pic. This gives an approx. ISO noise of 12! We are lucky our Pentax cameras do this. No one elses do.
TP also has terrible gradation for B&W film. It really wants to do black or white and nothing in between (any other normal B&W film beats it at this). Probably also beat by K10/20D. Couple this with the new inkjet papers that have more D max than silver paper and digital might win this competition.

Darkroom Photography mag had a pro who shot nothing 4x5 film try an expensive digital back. Surprised that anything he shot was won by the digital! Didn't matter what film he tried.

If you want to do this comparison in B&W you could remove the rgb filter. Your blades of grass will then be very competitive vs film. WE will probably see B&W digital bodies one day. Great thing about digital is we have perfect "film flatness". Something the thin TP can't say.

Digital is capable of more than most imagine. It may take many shots of one subject but its doable for still subjects.
thanks
barondla
Check out POINT & SHOOT CONTEST #10 IN P&S forum. Enter #11. Ends soon. Enter now.
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!
development, full-frame, future, interview, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, sensor, thread
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Full frame pentax cem.kumuk Pentax DSLR Discussion 11 11-12-2010 03:13 PM
Pentax and Full Frame... Shutter-bug Photographic Technique 60 11-03-2010 10:03 AM
Hopes for the future? Pentax full frame (ff), K-5, and lenses Clinton Pentax DSLR Discussion 35 09-05-2010 05:07 PM
The almost full frame Pentax? denisv Photographic Technique 44 01-19-2009 04:01 AM
Need more megapix? Future possibilities and no need for full frame! rburgoss Pentax DSLR Discussion 57 10-16-2008 03:16 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:23 PM. | See also: NikonForums.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