FF & APS C combined?

redpigeons · 02-10-2009, 10:32 AM

Originally posted by Gooshin

then its a joke lens, wtf, only proves pentax is aiming at the "compact" market.

aps-c is not compact if I would need a compact camera (and I need one) I would get Olympus/ Panasonic.

my 31mm on my k20D giving me less bokeh then my 50mm f2 on my k1000. I always have to add DOF in PP
I don't need a FF the K20D have great resolution and I don't mind adding bokeh in photo shop. what I do need is a good mid range fast zoom.
the 16-50 2.8? perfect but its a lens for rent and not for buying as I will be renting it for 3-4 years until the world will move to FF and I will have to toss it away.
my wish is for Pentax to give me fast 24-70 and 70-300 in addition the the amazing 31, 43, 77 and 50 and all my worries about my Pentax gear will go away and I could love my Pentax for ever. and have better lenses than canon and nikon have

Kunzite · 02-10-2009, 10:38 AM

"joke lens"? What are you talking about?
A FF 15mm f/4 lens would be big/heavy/expensive. The Pentax 15mm f/3.5 lenses were exactly like this.
I can't blame them for making a compact ultrawide limited, only for APS-C. It it's optically good and not very expensive, I'd say everything is OK.

Gooshin · 02-10-2009, 10:42 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

"joke lens"? What are you talking about?
A FF 15mm f/4 lens would be big/heavy/expensive. The Pentax 15mm f/3.5 lenses were exactly like this.
I can't blame them for making a compact ultrawide limited, only for APS-C. It it's optically good and not very expensive, I'd say everything is OK.

exactly!

its not a serious lens, small, slow, compact, gets the job done. So boring.

Kunzite · 02-10-2009, 11:01 AM

So any small, compact lens that gets the job done is "a joke"? OK, I've learned something new

Both directions: small, compact, affordable lenses with good quality and big premium lenses should be pursued, as there is nothing wrong with either approach - in fact that's a requirement for having a complete lens line. My 2 (euro)cents.

mithrandir · 02-10-2009, 11:55 AM

FF sensors are much more expensive to make than APS-C and may not be necessary with the new sensor technology that is being developed:

Fujifilm UK - Press centre

Pentax would do well to develop ideas like those on the new Fuji CCD EXR sensors. This way they could produce an outstanding product with lower production costs than Canikons. We would win by being able to use all Pentax lenses to their fullest.

**Lowell Goudge** · 02-10-2009, 12:02 PM

there have been for years, lenses for full frame cameras that do not cover the entire film frame, but which offer a circular or semi circular image.

they are called fish eye lenses.

If I had a full frame DSLR, all I would want, is that that camera take what ever image was projected on to the sensor. If I put an ASP-C spefified lens on it, I would want the option to have either a circular full frame image or a cropped to ASP C image.

after all, if I put my only ASP-C lens (sigma 10-20) on my PZ-1, it works just fine except for vignetting below 13 mm, but I would hapily accept what ever image I got with it, scan it and decide in post processing what I would do

kenyee · 02-10-2009, 12:20 PM

Originally posted by mithrandir

Pentax would do well to develop ideas like those on the new Fuji CCD EXR sensors.

The EXR technique sounds good in concept, but you really have to check how it performs in the real world.
Folks in the Fuji DPR forum (including me) think it's still 1 stop less performance than our old Fuji F3x P&S cameras. The K10D was 1-1.5 stops better but images were sharper because of the lenses. Other P&S cameras were 2-3 stops less performance than the F3x...

So I still stick w/ my "big photosites = better high iso performance" mantra...

axl · 02-10-2009, 01:43 PM

Originally posted by Gooshin

then its a joke lens, wtf, only proves pentax is aiming at the "compact" market.
....

?!? then I suppose that DA40/2.8 would be joke for compact market too!!!
sorry gooshin, but you coulnd't be more wrong...

Originally posted by Gooshin

exactly!

its not a serious lens, small, slow, compact, gets the job done. So boring.

Again, I will draw comparison to DA40. Let's assume that new DA15 will render as good as 40 (and 21 and 70 for that matter). It has metal built, excellent optics, offers decent coverage (FOV), and is very small coparing to other offerings.
You call that boring? well if you're bored feel free and jump the ship, and then when you will get arthritis from carrying around those lupms of L glass...

personaly I don't think there is anything wrong with building up a set of ltds. If you want big and heavy and faster, go for DA*s. But it's nic to have an option so one can choose. Not everybody needs/wants/can pay for DA* !
BR

Gooshin · 02-10-2009, 02:06 PM

like i mentioned before, i want shallow depth of field

the current pentax line up is very good for the casual photographer, or one that doesnt care about depth of field

Ben has been having excellent results with the DA lineup, but you should check out his exif info once in awhile.

i want shallow depth of field, pentax's new offering does not deliver, thats all i'm saying.

axl · 02-10-2009, 02:10 PM

Yes, it's true I'm not too concerned about shallow DOF, I like it big..
but now 55/1.4 is coming out, hopefuly soon 30/1.4 and I don't think it's going to stop there...

kenyee · 02-10-2009, 02:13 PM

Originally posted by Gooshin

like i mentioned before, i want shallow depth of field

If you really want DOF, grab a Nikon D700 and the 200/2. That's one drool worthy lens

Gooshin · 02-10-2009, 02:16 PM

Originally posted by kenyee

If you really want DOF, grab a Nikon D700 and the 200/2. That's one drool worthy lens

I'm currently armed with an MZ-S and some takumar primes, good for now.

Kunzite · 02-10-2009, 02:35 PM

Gooshin, there is nothing wrong with what you want.
But others want different kind of lenses; I am thinking the 15mm Limited is perfect for what I need (of course, I'll have to see how well it perform and the price). So, please understand why the raised eyebrows when you call such lens "a joke".
For other lenses, i.e. longer focal lengths, I'd also like a fast aperture, FF compatibility just in case and so on.

Gooshin · 02-10-2009, 02:40 PM

i am reflecting more on the original topic of this thread.

people are hypothesising for full frame, yet pentax's lens strategy is leading to believe otherwise.

Kunzite · 02-10-2009, 02:45 PM

Well, Nikon just launched a DX prime lens - the 35mm f/1.8.
You can't draw any conclusion from this; IMO regardless if Pentax will launch (in the near future) a FF camera or not, the 15mm Limited was needed.
OTOH, the DA* 55mm seems to cover FF. So Pentax is not blindly cut their way to a FF system

02-10-2009, 12:02 PM	#21
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,887	why all the fuss? there have been for years, lenses for full frame cameras that do not cover the entire film frame, but which offer a circular or semi circular image. they are called fish eye lenses. If I had a full frame DSLR, all I would want, is that that camera take what ever image was projected on to the sensor. If I put an ASP-C spefified lens on it, I would want the option to have either a circular full frame image or a cropped to ASP C image. after all, if I put my only ASP-C lens (sigma 10-20) on my PZ-1, it works just fine except for vignetting below 13 mm, but I would hapily accept what ever image I got with it, scan it and decide in post processing what I would do

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Architecture Old and new combined in Ottawa's Museum of Nature	newmikey	Post Your Photos!	8	09-06-2010 04:17 PM
do you agree the point that aps system restricts the pentax lens sales&development?	weikle	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	23	08-11-2010 01:32 AM
For Sale - Sold: (AUS) SMC Pentax-M 50mm/1.4 & A35-105mm/3.5 & MV1 body & DB1 Grip (AUS)	ddhytz	Sold Items	4	04-22-2010 03:28 AM
Would you buy a Pentax P&S with APS-C sensor?	NorthPentax	Pentax News and Rumors	20	04-01-2009 10:47 AM
Combined Locks Newbie	ombre	Welcomes and Introductions	2	10-30-2007 11:07 AM

02-10-2009, 10:32 AM	#16
redpigeons Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: NYC Posts: 943	Originally posted by Gooshin then its a joke lens, wtf, only proves pentax is aiming at the "compact" market. aps-c is not compact if I would need a compact camera (and I need one) I would get Olympus/ Panasonic. my 31mm on my k20D giving me less bokeh then my 50mm f2 on my k1000. I always have to add DOF in PP I don't need a FF the K20D have great resolution and I don't mind adding bokeh in photo shop. what I do need is a good mid range fast zoom. the 16-50 2.8? perfect but its a lens for rent and not for buying as I will be renting it for 3-4 years until the world will move to FF and I will have to toss it away. my wish is for Pentax to give me fast 24-70 and 70-300 in addition the the amazing 31, 43, 77 and 50 and all my worries about my Pentax gear will go away and I could love my Pentax for ever. and have better lenses than canon and nikon have

02-10-2009, 10:38 AM	#17
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	"joke lens"? What are you talking about? A FF 15mm f/4 lens would be big/heavy/expensive. The Pentax 15mm f/3.5 lenses were exactly like this. I can't blame them for making a compact ultrawide limited, only for APS-C. It it's optically good and not very expensive, I'd say everything is OK.

02-10-2009, 10:42 AM	#18
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610	Originally posted by Kunzite "joke lens"? What are you talking about? A FF 15mm f/4 lens would be big/heavy/expensive. The Pentax 15mm f/3.5 lenses were exactly like this. I can't blame them for making a compact ultrawide limited, only for APS-C. It it's optically good and not very expensive, I'd say everything is OK. exactly! its not a serious lens, small, slow, compact, gets the job done. So boring.

02-10-2009, 11:01 AM	#19
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	So any small, compact lens that gets the job done is "a joke"? OK, I've learned something new Both directions: small, compact, affordable lenses with good quality and big premium lenses should be pursued, as there is nothing wrong with either approach - in fact that's a requirement for having a complete lens line. My 2 (euro)cents.

02-10-2009, 11:55 AM	#20
mithrandir Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Maryland Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,895	FF sensors are much more expensive to make than APS-C and may not be necessary with the new sensor technology that is being developed: Fujifilm UK - Press centre Pentax would do well to develop ideas like those on the new Fuji CCD EXR sensors. This way they could produce an outstanding product with lower production costs than Canikons. We would win by being able to use all Pentax lenses to their fullest.

02-10-2009, 12:20 PM	#22
kenyee Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Boston, PRofMA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,026	Originally posted by mithrandir Pentax would do well to develop ideas like those on the new Fuji CCD EXR sensors. The EXR technique sounds good in concept, but you really have to check how it performs in the real world. Folks in the Fuji DPR forum (including me) think it's still 1 stop less performance than our old Fuji F3x P&S cameras. The K10D was 1-1.5 stops better but images were sharper because of the lenses. Other P&S cameras were 2-3 stops less performance than the F3x... So I still stick w/ my "big photosites = better high iso performance" mantra...

02-10-2009, 01:43 PM	#23
axl Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,183	Originally posted by Gooshin then its a joke lens, wtf, only proves pentax is aiming at the "compact" market. .... ?!? then I suppose that DA40/2.8 would be joke for compact market too!!! sorry gooshin, but you coulnd't be more wrong... Originally posted by Gooshin exactly! its not a serious lens, small, slow, compact, gets the job done. So boring. Again, I will draw comparison to DA40. Let's assume that new DA15 will render as good as 40 (and 21 and 70 for that matter). It has metal built, excellent optics, offers decent coverage (FOV), and is very small coparing to other offerings. You call that boring? well if you're bored feel free and jump the ship, and then when you will get arthritis from carrying around those lupms of L glass... personaly I don't think there is anything wrong with building up a set of ltds. If you want big and heavy and faster, go for DAs. But it's nic to have an option so one can choose. Not everybody needs/wants/can pay for DA ! BR

02-10-2009, 02:06 PM	#24
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610	like i mentioned before, i want shallow depth of field the current pentax line up is very good for the casual photographer, or one that doesnt care about depth of field Ben has been having excellent results with the DA lineup, but you should check out his exif info once in awhile. i want shallow depth of field, pentax's new offering does not deliver, thats all i'm saying.

02-10-2009, 02:10 PM	#25
axl Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Nove Zamky, Slovakia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,183	Yes, it's true I'm not too concerned about shallow DOF, I like it big.. but now 55/1.4 is coming out, hopefuly soon 30/1.4 and I don't think it's going to stop there...

02-10-2009, 02:13 PM	#26
kenyee Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Boston, PRofMA Photos: Albums Posts: 3,026	Originally posted by Gooshin like i mentioned before, i want shallow depth of field If you really want DOF, grab a Nikon D700 and the 200/2. That's one drool worthy lens

02-10-2009, 02:16 PM	#27
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610	Originally posted by kenyee If you really want DOF, grab a Nikon D700 and the 200/2. That's one drool worthy lens I'm currently armed with an MZ-S and some takumar primes, good for now.

02-10-2009, 02:35 PM	#28
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Gooshin, there is nothing wrong with what you want. But others want different kind of lenses; I am thinking the 15mm Limited is perfect for what I need (of course, I'll have to see how well it perform and the price). So, please understand why the raised eyebrows when you call such lens "a joke". For other lenses, i.e. longer focal lengths, I'd also like a fast aperture, FF compatibility just in case and so on.

02-10-2009, 02:40 PM	#29
Gooshin Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Toronto, the one in Canada. Posts: 5,610	i am reflecting more on the original topic of this thread. people are hypothesising for full frame, yet pentax's lens strategy is leading to believe otherwise.

02-10-2009, 02:45 PM	#30
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Well, Nikon just launched a DX prime lens - the 35mm f/1.8. You can't draw any conclusion from this; IMO regardless if Pentax will launch (in the near future) a FF camera or not, the 15mm Limited was needed. OTOH, the DA* 55mm seems to cover FF. So Pentax is not blindly cut their way to a FF system