Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-30-2009, 07:08 PM   #106
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 198
I would like to ask, what do you a camera for?
If you are taking photos for your own purpose and to share amongest family and friends, then FF isn't really worth all the fuss, and that's why Canon has so many different levels of DSLR's.
However, if you are talking photos and having them published in magazines then maybe a FF is worth the investment. But then again its the art dept of magazines that have the final say as to which photo they use to go with the story, and most of them couldn't careless as to brand of DSLR its all about the photo, and I have photos published here in Aus and the US, and I use PENTAX..like I have done for some twenty years.

If I had a say in what I would like in a new Pentax DSLR is that they go back to the K10/20 body and up the FPS to 6 as in the K7 (I would prefer 9), and have two SD card slots. I would be very happy with this..

08-30-2009, 07:40 PM   #107
Veteran Member
schmik's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sydney Aus
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 527
QuoteOriginally posted by RussellW Quote
However, if you are talking photos and having them published in magazines then maybe a FF is worth the investment. But then again its the art dept of magazines that have the final say as to which photo they use to go with the story, and most of them couldn't careless as to brand of DSLR its all about the photo, and I have photos published here in Aus and the US, and I use PENTAX..
Even for magazine work APS.C is more than enough... I got a cover shot for a sports mag with the lowly 6mp of the k100d. Like you said "its all about the photo".

The world has changed... 'they' need to sell you a new body every 2-3 years. But before they can sell it to you 'they' need to convince you that you need it.

mike
08-30-2009, 08:07 PM   #108
K-9
Pentaxian
K-9's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,962
QuoteOriginally posted by rparmar Quote
... A smaller sensor will always be cheaper and smaller. So the cameras can be cheaper and smaller. Not to mention various advantages of the cropped sensor. It seems to me that if a variety of point'n'shoot sensors can exist and find a market then so can APS-C. The evidence is right in front of you: APS-C cameras sell 10x or more than full-frame. ...
For now, but when Full Frame DSLR's begin to drop to a price where APS-C bodies used to be, that will become the better selling norm. Full frame sensor DSLR's will surely be under $1000 in a few years time.

QuoteOriginally posted by rparmar Quote
... For some this is small sensor, cropped sensor, full-frame, medium format... why can these not all exist to serve different markets?

Remember that this holy grail, full-frame, was introduced originally as an amateur format. Want a "professional" system? Go out and shoot medium or large format.

Heck, I know I will.
Because like it or not, digital cameras have become just like TV's and computers. An electronic device that can quickly upgrade with newer technology, so companies can continually change and revamp them as soon as sales slow on one model, and they will quickly pick back up again on another. The days of keeping a 35mm film format for 50 years are long gone.

Electronic and computer companies adapt new technology faster than they can release them. They have to milk each level for a short time, before going on to the next. Full frame sensors will surely start to fit into smaller and cheaper bodies, and IMO, will eventually fully replace APS-C sized sensors in DSLR's. Those will probably only become the norm in point and shoot cameras. The full frame sensors will then be for amateurs and semi-pros, and the pros will still be using the $14,000 Mamiyas and Hasselblads that will undoubtedly fall in price over the years as well.

One side note about those Hasselblads. I saw a magazine article (forget which mag, will have to go through my piles) where Alan Strutt was using a Hassy with a monstrous megapixel Leaf back, however the full page photos in the magazine looked shoddy! It surely must have been either poor quality at the editing stage or printing stage, because I can't imagine it being the system he was using. That's the thing about those elite set-ups. If you haven't got other areas up to that level, they're just about useless. The magazine his shots appeared in clearly, at some level, could not translate that awesome megapixel detail and luxurious camera system into print.
08-30-2009, 08:55 PM   #109
Veteran Member
schmik's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sydney Aus
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 527
QuoteQuote:
If you haven't got other areas up to that level, they're just about useless. The magazine his shots appeared in clearly, at some level, could not translate that awesome megapixel detail and luxurious camera system into print.
That's the thing, for 95% of users the rest of the system will let them down. They will print at A3 or A4 and view on 50(ish) inch monitors (or smaller). Sheeeet! a good P&S will satisfy their needs.

Just because technology is out there doesn't mean it will be used or baught. Just look at computers. Once upon a time we all screamed for more RAM and better processors on our work desktop machines and now..... I am using the same POS for the last 3 years with no desire to upgrade. It does what it needs. And if it did get replaced it would be for sub $1000 unlike the $2000 it would have cost 5 years ago.

It is satisfying to know that hi tech gizmos get to a point where they are good enough for their purpose.

The other thing to consider (and this contradicts my other statements) is that the price of a product is what someone is willing to pay for it. So it is possible that FF pro features DSLRs will always be above $2000 because it is considered pro.

mike

08-31-2009, 04:27 AM   #110
Senior Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Italy
Photos: Albums
Posts: 182
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
.... There are already plenty of photographers that are hoarding old FA lenses for the possibility of a full frame release.
I don't think is a good idea buy an old lens for the hope that will be equally good on a DSLR FF.

When an old FF lens is used on a aps-c system is used only the central portion of the lens so often the results are good (despite wide open isn't always true ...) but if you use the same lens on a digital FF is quite improbable hope obtain the same good result (especially in the corners of the frame).

But perhaps if Samsung develop a 12 megapixel FF this problematic will be not much visible.

Unfortunately i think that when Samsung develop a similar camera probably will go for 24 megapixel because the infamous race on megapixel isn't endend on FF.
Damn.
08-31-2009, 05:43 AM   #111
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,783
QuoteOriginally posted by K-9 Quote
For now, but when Full Frame DSLR's begin to drop to a price where APS-C bodies used to be, that will become the better selling norm.
Nope.

As cameras become electronic commodities, sales will be driven more and more by price differentials. APS-C will always be cheaper than full-frame. And so they will always sell more, especially since the advantages of full-frame are known to relatively few people who take pictures.

Most people are totally happy with their point and shoot. Heck, many are happy with their mobile phones. That's because these devices work to the expectations of the users. They don't need anything more. And they are not going to pay one penny extra for something they don't need.

So unless you think full frame cameras will one day be consistently cheaper than APS-C, your conclusion is faulty.
08-31-2009, 06:08 AM   #112
Banned




Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Savannah, U.S./Baguio City, P.H.
Posts: 5,979
QuoteQuote:
Most people are totally happy with their point and shoot. Heck, many are happy with their mobile phones. That's because these devices work to the expectations of the users. They don't need anything more. And they are not going to pay one penny extra for something they don't need.
then why are people paying big bucks for iPhones? I highly doubt they 'need' everything it offers, since it is just a phone. you underestimate peoples consumerist mindset.
08-31-2009, 06:46 AM   #113
K-9
Pentaxian
K-9's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,962
QuoteOriginally posted by rparmar Quote
Nope.

As cameras become electronic commodities, sales will be driven more and more by price differentials. APS-C will always be cheaper than full-frame. And so they will always sell more, especially since the advantages of full-frame are known to relatively few people who take pictures.

Most people are totally happy with their point and shoot. Heck, many are happy with their mobile phones. That's because these devices work to the expectations of the users. They don't need anything more. And they are not going to pay one penny extra for something they don't need.

So unless you think full frame cameras will one day be consistently cheaper than APS-C, your conclusion is faulty.
Remember when 5MP camera bodies were several thousand dollars, and now that MP size is only found in $150 point and shoots? The same will happen with Full Frame. The low prices that you speak of many people buying APS-C bodies at will soon be the price Full Frame cameras will be at.

Have you seen any 5MP DSLR's being made lately? No, so your theory of people choosing the cheaper APS size DSLR over the Full Frame DSLR will be irrelevant, because there won't be a choice to be made when APS-C is phased out of DSLR's, just as 5MP sensors were.

Full Frame sensor DSLR will fully replace the APS-C size sensor in the future. Simply because when a full frame DSLR body is ultimately sold at $800, there won't be a camera manufacturer out there who will feasibly be able to sell a $400 APS-C DSLR and make a profit. New technology replaces old technology at the lower price points, and the old technology keeps falling down the ladder. In this case, the APS-C will fall down to the point and shoot market only.

We've just had the $2000 full frame A850 announced, and some stores could sell it slightly cheaper than that. Then the next cheaper one, and the next cheaper one, and the next cheaper one appears, until they sell at the price point of the old APS-C. In my opinion, the $1300 price point on the APS K-7 is severely outdated and overpriced. They already had that in the K20d last year (which has already fallen to $500-$650) and this year's model should have certainly been full frame. They are very late to the game, and it can only hurt them.

Your point that the benefits of full frame are not known to many users will also be irrelevant, when camera stores begin to only stock full frame sensors. Like all new technology, people will be "forced" into it.

08-31-2009, 07:12 AM   #114
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,406
QuoteOriginally posted by K-9 Quote
when a full frame DSLR body is ultimately sold at $800
And when will that be?
08-31-2009, 07:48 AM   #115
Senior Member




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Italy
Photos: Albums
Posts: 182
QuoteOriginally posted by K-9 Quote
....

Full Frame sensor DSLR will fully replace the APS-C size sensor in the future. Simply because when a full frame DSLR body is ultimately sold at $800, there won't be a camera manufacturer out there who will feasibly be able to sell a $400 APS-C DSLR and make a profit. New technology replaces old technology at the lower price points, and the old technology keeps falling down the ladder. In this case, the APS-C will fall down to the point and shoot market only.

...
I don't think this is so automatic.

Also is possible for a productor sell an aps-c for 400 dollars and make profit it is sufficient don't increase the density of the sensor (or even better decrease it to 10 megapixel), so the costs of design and development have already been amortized, the noise is more easily controllable, the new electronic part are always more powerful and less expensive (year after year)so they could use better algorithm on the firmware.
08-31-2009, 08:20 AM   #116
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,783
QuoteOriginally posted by séamuis Quote
then why are people paying big bucks for iPhones? I highly doubt they 'need' everything it offers, since it is just a phone. you underestimate peoples consumerist mindset.
I am far from underestimating consumers, believe me. But the iPhone phenomenon only works for certain fetish objects. It doesn't work for the majority of the things people buy. I doubt it will ever work for full frame cameras because these simply are not needed to do the things people value, namely, to socialise, to communicate, and to assert their status. They aren't even needed by the majority of photographers, so how can one think the majority of everyday people would care?

QuoteOriginally posted by K-9 Quote
Have you seen any 5MP DSLR's being made lately? No, so your theory of people choosing the cheaper APS size DSLR over the Full Frame DSLR will be irrelevant, because there won't be a choice to be made when APS-C is phased out of DSLR's, just as 5MP sensors were.
You are somehow convinced full frame will take over the world, despite there being zero evidence for this. As soon as you have evidence I will be interested.

And no, the megapixel race is not the same thing. Besides, there are strong signs that race is done, which if anything is evidence against your assertion, not for it.
08-31-2009, 09:22 AM   #117
Nubi
Guest




Sensors will get bigger and cheaper. FA lenses will always be fine, I think.
08-31-2009, 09:43 AM   #118
RaduA
Guest




QuoteOriginally posted by K-9 Quote
Remember when 5MP camera bodies were several thousand dollars, and now that MP size is only found in $150 point and shoots? The same will happen with Full Frame. The low prices that you speak of many people buying APS-C bodies at will soon be the price Full Frame cameras will be at.

Have you seen any 5MP DSLR's being made lately? No, so your theory of people choosing the cheaper APS size DSLR over the Full Frame DSLR will be irrelevant, because there won't be a choice to be made when APS-C is phased out of DSLR's, just as 5MP sensors were.

In fact I would buy a modern 5Mp no thrills p&s camera if there would be one, but it isn't. The confusion that you make though is the one related to the fact that for p&s cameras while the Mps grew actually the sensor sizes shrunk over years from 2/3 and 1/1.8 to 1/1.7-1.6 and 1/2.33 hence the possibility of reducing the costs. From the 10Mp/cm2 we reached absurd levels such as 42Mp/cm2 in "modern" p&s but this has nothing to do with technical evolution per se. If Intel can squeeze hundreds of millions of transistors on a chip about the size of a small camera sensor it's pretty obvious that the challenge is not how many Mps a company can put on a fingernail sized sensor.

Full Frame sensor DSLR will fully replace the APS-C size sensor in the future. Simply because when a full frame DSLR body is ultimately sold at $800, there won't be a camera manufacturer out there who will feasibly be able to sell a $400 APS-C DSLR and make a profit. New technology replaces old technology at the lower price points, and the old technology keeps falling down the ladder. In this case, the APS-C will fall down to the point and shoot market only.

Pure nonsense in a word (well make that 2 )! You judge the whole world through your preferences regardless of "minute" details such as:

- For some even 100 dollars or Euro matters a lot or they won't invest over a threshold which is individual and not global. Even is the difference would be a not so big 400 USD for A LOT of people the iq difference won't be enough to justify than spending;
- One of my best friends won't buy a dslr vs his bridge camera purely based on bulk and weight. Yes, he's painfully aware of the pros regarding iq but he just won't carry such a camera around knowing that to somehow mimic his current reach from the S3Is he would need 2 lenses or a superzoom and the combo of body + lens(es) will be so much larger than his current camera.
- Let's assume for the sake of discussion that all the sensors are made with 100% yield and no geometrical waste. Even then the FF sensor will be more than 2,5 times more expensive than the APS-C one because it's a bit over 2,5 larger in area as well. It will probably draw 2.5 more power (for the same technology) and generate 2.5x more heat that needs to dissipate. For our type of IS the SR mechanism will need more space and more power to operate with the same lag. All the above say that using similar technologies a camera with a larger (significantly larger) sensor will never be as small as an APS-C one and neither will be as energy efficient. And IMO size and weight are in the top 3 of likes for the general audience.


We've just had the $2000 full frame A850 announced, and some stores could sell it slightly cheaper than that. Then the next cheaper one, and the next cheaper one, and the next cheaper one appears, until they sell at the price point of the old APS-C.

I agree with the ones who said Sony had no alternative than to liquidate its stocks of components without losing face in the process by severely discounting the A900. I am not an expert in Sony gear but besides the pentaprism I don't think there is one single hardware difference between A850-A900 because the fps are crippled via firmware and not a modified PB with one Bionz proc instead of two as rumored before. They just push in desperation a product that never sold enough anywhere judging by whatever sales statistics were available.

In my opinion, the $1300 price point on the APS K-7 is severely outdated and overpriced. They already had that in the K20d last year (which has already fallen to $500-$650) and this year's model should have certainly been full frame. They are very late to the game, and it can only hurt them.

Lots of speculations, about the price for an APS-C camera you may want to check out D300 and D300s first. The idea that Pentax cannot ask for the same only because they are perceived by some as a second tier company is offensive TBH. I agree that K20D at its launch was overpriced but I don't think this was because of the sensor size but because it was an incremental update in other areas to the K10D hence not so top notch at that moment. K-7 is much more of an upgrade IMHO and much more in touch with upper class of APS-C as of today PLUS has some unique features in an unique package PLUS 2 inexpensive and light weather resistant lenses.

Your point that the benefits of full frame are not known to many users will also be irrelevant, when camera stores begin to only stock full frame sensors. Like all new technology, people will be "forced" into it.

It only will take one company to continue APS-C or less (4/3) formats to deny your so called "forcing consumers into this". I think you already know the name of at least one of those.
........,
Radu
08-31-2009, 09:49 AM   #119
K-9
Pentaxian
K-9's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,962
QuoteOriginally posted by rparmar Quote
I am far from underestimating consumers, believe me. But the iPhone phenomenon only works for certain fetish objects. It doesn't work for the majority of the things people buy. I doubt it will ever work for full frame cameras because these simply are not needed to do the things people value, namely, to socialise, to communicate, and to assert their status. They aren't even needed by the majority of photographers, so how can one think the majority of everyday people would care?



You are somehow convinced full frame will take over the world, despite there being zero evidence for this. As soon as you have evidence I will be interested.

And no, the megapixel race is not the same thing. Besides, there are strong signs that race is done, which if anything is evidence against your assertion, not for it.
Technology is not whether or not the majority of people, care, know, or will ever get it. It moves fast and companies have to keep up. Do you think that Apple cared if anyone ever needed a G5 chip when there were still people who only used computers for chat rooms and used a dial up modem?

Companies base their new technologies and releases on current market trends and the competition, not what the guy who doesn't need the newer or faster technology is going to buy.

QuoteOriginally posted by RaduA Quote
.....Pure nonsense in a word (well make that 2 )! You judge the whole world through your preferences regardless of "minute" details ...
I don't judge the world through my own preferences. I judge it through years of experiencing technology evolve. I bet you were also saying Apple could never fit a G4 processor into a laptop, and how plasma screens couldn't get any bigger, and now 8GB of storage can't fit into a cell phone. Well, that's your preference if you think that way.

Last edited by K-9; 08-31-2009 at 09:56 AM.
08-31-2009, 10:22 AM   #120
RaduA
Guest




QuoteOriginally posted by K-9 Quote
I don't judge the world through my own preferences. I judge it through years of experiencing technology evolve. I bet you were also saying Apple could never fit a G4 processor into a laptop, and how plasma screens couldn't get any bigger, and now 8GB of storage can't fit into a cell phone. Well, that's your preference if you think that way.
I fully agree but your 2 assertions are far from being the same. Yes, plasma tech evolved and it is an alternative among LCD, OLED, DLP, projectors for big screen tv and video, a lot of processors are available and evolved tremendously but not a single one has eliminated all the others. And one more differences IMO is that all the general electronics has a luxury that sensors don't have. The chips can shrink and will shrink until physics lows won't allow it anymore.

So, yes all the technology will come down in price and increase in performance but the ratio of areas will pretty much remain the same (with the observation that the difficulty is not linear).

Radu
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!
frame, lot, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, users
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
No Pentax Full Frame DSLR, What to Do Now Then? RiceHigh Pentax DSLR Discussion 95 07-19-2014 10:57 AM
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
Pentax A 50/1.2 on Full Frame aegisphan Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 23 10-28-2010 04:16 PM
The almost full frame Pentax? denisv Photographic Technique 44 01-19-2009 04:01 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:33 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