Pentax Full Frame - An official statement from Pentax (they listened!)

Zygonyx · 02-14-2012, 03:19 PM

Hum, it seems this tread has forgotten about FF, isn't it ?

Chex · 02-14-2012, 03:21 PM

Originally posted by Zygonyx

Hum, it seems this tread has forgotten about FF, isn't it ?

Just the same as Pentax has.. now there are two camps IMO.. those apathetic, who may have one day upgraded to FF if it was available.. and the ones who are about to jump ship because they are not going to wait any longer. Pentax has helped divide the one camp of FF hopeful people and push some off to other brands.

Spare Tire · 02-14-2012, 03:46 PM

If i can't get a pentax FF, i'll jump ship... to µ4/3.

falconeye · 02-14-2012, 04:19 PM

Originally posted by RXrenesis8

For example, the FA 43 1.9 can resolve 53 lp/mm in the center of the frame when stopped down to &fnof;/5.6.

Oh man, so much wrong information again ...

The FA 43 is certainly in one league with Zeiss SLR glass which means it resolves about 300 lp/mm in the center at its sweet spot aperture. You'll find threads of mine where I resolved 2μm details with such lenses myself, translating to 250 lp/mm. You did not understand that lens tests on the current internet are eventually limited by the testing camera's Nyquist frequency, at least in the way how they are typically done.

But it isn't your fault alone. There was a time when lenses were tested on an optical bench and correct figures were published.

Another wrong information I do constantly read is that the Bayer mosaic or AA filter reduces the sensor's resolution. This is false. The luminance channel has the same Nyquist frequency and sharpening techniques can cancel the lower MTF caused by the Bayer mosaic and AA filter. Only the color information has a lower spatial resolution which remains invisible because the human eye has the same deficit. The only real effect is that sharpening increases pixel noise or may fail with an image blurred because of other reasons.

Last edited by falconeye; 02-14-2012 at 04:24 PM.

**Ash** · 02-14-2012, 04:20 PM

It's fine to hope for a FF camera, but the expectation that Pentax will come out with one now, next year, the year after, etc. will cause unnecessary disgruntlement and bitterness.

I like many others here share the desire in getting the most out of my FA Limiteds in the form of a FF camera, even if the real world differences between APS-C and FF results are not obvious. But in the meantime, I am enjoying what the K-5 has to offer - and it is sweet with good lenses...

RXrenesis8 · 02-14-2012, 05:07 PM

Originally posted by falconeye

You'll find threads of mine where I resolved 2μm details with such lenses myself, translating to 250 lp/mm.

That's pretty awesome! And I agree, it is unfortunate that lens benchmarks are published online with consumer cameras as the test platform. What equipment did you use, or could you point me in the direction of that thread?

Originally posted by falconeye

You did not understand that lens tests on the current internet are eventually limited by the testing camera's Nyquist frequency, at least in the way how they are typically done.

I understood that the camera was the weak point of the test and correctly warned the reader about it, but for the wrong reasons (I have now corrected that post). At your behest I have also started reading up on the nyquist frequency and it's aliasing effects on camera sensors. I am currently reading Norman Koren's thoughts on the matter but would love any further reading you can supply.

Thanks!

eddie1960 · 02-14-2012, 05:09 PM

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

The D800E costs more??!? What's the justification?

they have to send it out to these guys first

Hot Rod Visible

eddie1960 · 02-14-2012, 05:11 PM

Originally posted by Spare Tire

If i can't get a pentax FF, i'll jump ship... to µ4/3.

where's the smiley

lol if i can't get the superior sensor i'll opt for the inferior one
roflmao

Spare Tire · 02-14-2012, 05:36 PM

Originally posted by eddie1960

where's the smiley

lol if i can't get the superior sensor i'll opt for the inferior one
roflmao

Well, olympus has great weather sealing and small bodies, qualities we all like in pentax. If i can't have a pentax FF to use with the small FA limiteds, µ4/3 and their pancakes seems a reasonable choice for me.

Kunzite · 02-14-2012, 11:39 PM

A smaller than APS-C sensor is a reasonable alternative to FF? Am I missing something?

Pentaxor · 02-15-2012, 06:48 AM

Originally posted by Spare Tire

Well, olympus has great weather sealing and small bodies, qualities we all like in pentax. If i can't have a pentax FF to use with the small FA limiteds, µ4/3 and their pancakes seems a reasonable choice for me.

you are confusing my man. you are looking for a FF sensor then you are shifting to a much smaller sensor than an APS-C because Pentax might not be able to produce a FF? your logic seems illogical. are you just looking for a way out?

sandilands · 02-15-2012, 08:20 AM

Originally posted by Chex

Just the same as Pentax has.. now there are two camps IMO.. those apathetic, who may have one day upgraded to FF if it was available.. and the ones who are about to jump ship because they are not going to wait any longer. Pentax has helped divide the one camp of FF hopeful people and push some off to other brands.

Well, I don't think I fall into either "camp". Ricoh/Pentax has limited R&D resources, and maybe there is a camp of us who think those Yen are better spent solving more immediate needs than FF. I'm certainly not going to jump ship and give up the best of Pentax just because my ancient glass might work better on a FF sensor.

So Pentax, spend your money to take the K-5 to new heights. Don't break was isn't broke. Give us best in class AF. Give us the least noise and highest ISO (and lowest) in the industry. Bring your flash system into the 21st (or for that matter 20th) century. Provide the best line of pro lenses in the industry.

Do those things, and I think all camps will be happier. Those pining for FF will be temporaily placated, and the rest of us will be proud as peacocks showing off the results from our best in indusrty K-5+.

ogl · 02-15-2012, 08:52 AM

Originally posted by Spare Tire

If i can't get a pentax FF, i'll jump ship... to µ4/3.

Yes...FF and crop 2 are the same.

Ubuntu_user · 02-15-2012, 09:28 AM

Originally posted by Ash

I like many others here share the desire in getting the most out of my FA Limiteds in the form of a FF camera, even if the real world differences between APS-C and FF results are not obvious. But in the meantime, I am enjoying what the K-5 has to offer - and it is sweet with good lenses...

Yep. I couldn't have said it better myself...

drougge · 02-15-2012, 09:49 AM

Originally posted by Kunzite

A smaller than APS-C sensor is a reasonable alternative to FF? Am I missing something?

It could be. I don't know about him, but for me it's all about the finder. If the finder is traditional, FF gets me something. If it's electronic, sensor size doesn't matter, only how good the EVF is.

(I hate current EVFs, but I don't doubt they will one day be good enough for me. I also don't doubt that most people's lower expectations will have made them my only option in new cameras before that happens, but at least they will be big and bright despite tiny sensors.)

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
Pentax A 50/1.2 on Full Frame	aegisphan	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	23	10-28-2010 04:16 PM
News Regarding Advertising on PentaxForums.com: An Official Statement	Adam	Site Suggestions and Help	5	03-24-2010 07:37 PM
Official: New DSLR Body is Coming; Full Frame Model is Under Planning!	RiceHigh	Pentax News and Rumors	78	08-04-2008 06:18 PM

02-14-2012, 03:19 PM	#2476
Zygonyx Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2011 Location: Ile de France Posts: 4,033	Hum, it seems this tread has forgotten about FF, isn't it ?

02-14-2012, 03:21 PM	#2477
Chex Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,678	Originally posted by Zygonyx Hum, it seems this tread has forgotten about FF, isn't it ? Just the same as Pentax has.. now there are two camps IMO.. those apathetic, who may have one day upgraded to FF if it was available.. and the ones who are about to jump ship because they are not going to wait any longer. Pentax has helped divide the one camp of FF hopeful people and push some off to other brands.

02-14-2012, 03:46 PM	#2478
Spare Tire Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Montréal Posts: 118	If i can't get a pentax FF, i'll jump ship... to µ4/3.

02-14-2012, 04:19 PM	#2479
falconeye Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Munich, Alps, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,871	Originally posted by RXrenesis8 For example, the FA 43 1.9 can resolve 53 lp/mm in the center of the frame when stopped down to &fnof;/5.6. Oh man, so much wrong information again ... The FA 43 is certainly in one league with Zeiss SLR glass which means it resolves about 300 lp/mm in the center at its sweet spot aperture. You'll find threads of mine where I resolved 2μm details with such lenses myself, translating to 250 lp/mm. You did not understand that lens tests on the current internet are eventually limited by the testing camera's Nyquist frequency, at least in the way how they are typically done. But it isn't your fault alone. There was a time when lenses were tested on an optical bench and correct figures were published. Another wrong information I do constantly read is that the Bayer mosaic or AA filter reduces the sensor's resolution. This is false. The luminance channel has the same Nyquist frequency and sharpening techniques can cancel the lower MTF caused by the Bayer mosaic and AA filter. Only the color information has a lower spatial resolution which remains invisible because the human eye has the same deficit. The only real effect is that sharpening increases pixel noise or may fail with an image blurred because of other reasons. Last edited by falconeye; 02-14-2012 at 04:24 PM.

02-14-2012, 04:20 PM	#2480
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	It's fine to hope for a FF camera, but the expectation that Pentax will come out with one now, next year, the year after, etc. will cause unnecessary disgruntlement and bitterness. I like many others here share the desire in getting the most out of my FA Limiteds in the form of a FF camera, even if the real world differences between APS-C and FF results are not obvious. But in the meantime, I am enjoying what the K-5 has to offer - and it is sweet with good lenses...

02-14-2012, 05:07 PM	#2481
RXrenesis8 Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: Orlando, FL (USA) Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 523	Originally posted by falconeye You'll find threads of mine where I resolved 2μm details with such lenses myself, translating to 250 lp/mm. That's pretty awesome! And I agree, it is unfortunate that lens benchmarks are published online with consumer cameras as the test platform. What equipment did you use, or could you point me in the direction of that thread? Originally posted by falconeye You did not understand that lens tests on the current internet are eventually limited by the testing camera's Nyquist frequency, at least in the way how they are typically done. I understood that the camera was the weak point of the test and correctly warned the reader about it, but for the wrong reasons (I have now corrected that post). At your behest I have also started reading up on the nyquist frequency and it's aliasing effects on camera sensors. I am currently reading Norman Koren's thoughts on the matter but would love any further reading you can supply. Thanks!

02-14-2012, 05:09 PM	#2482
eddie1960 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,667	Originally posted by ElJamoquio The D800E costs more??!? What's the justification? they have to send it out to these guys first Hot Rod Visible

02-14-2012, 05:11 PM	#2483
eddie1960 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,667	Originally posted by Spare Tire If i can't get a pentax FF, i'll jump ship... to µ4/3. where's the smiley lol if i can't get the superior sensor i'll opt for the inferior one roflmao

02-14-2012, 05:36 PM	#2484
Spare Tire Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Montréal Posts: 118	Originally posted by eddie1960 where's the smiley lol if i can't get the superior sensor i'll opt for the inferior one roflmao Well, olympus has great weather sealing and small bodies, qualities we all like in pentax. If i can't have a pentax FF to use with the small FA limiteds, µ4/3 and their pancakes seems a reasonable choice for me.

02-14-2012, 11:39 PM	#2485
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	A smaller than APS-C sensor is a reasonable alternative to FF? Am I missing something?

02-15-2012, 06:48 AM	#2486
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by Spare Tire Well, olympus has great weather sealing and small bodies, qualities we all like in pentax. If i can't have a pentax FF to use with the small FA limiteds, µ4/3 and their pancakes seems a reasonable choice for me. you are confusing my man. you are looking for a FF sensor then you are shifting to a much smaller sensor than an APS-C because Pentax might not be able to produce a FF? your logic seems illogical. are you just looking for a way out?

02-15-2012, 08:20 AM	#2487
sandilands Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Lewiston, NY Posts: 108	Originally posted by Chex Just the same as Pentax has.. now there are two camps IMO.. those apathetic, who may have one day upgraded to FF if it was available.. and the ones who are about to jump ship because they are not going to wait any longer. Pentax has helped divide the one camp of FF hopeful people and push some off to other brands. Well, I don't think I fall into either "camp". Ricoh/Pentax has limited R&D resources, and maybe there is a camp of us who think those Yen are better spent solving more immediate needs than FF. I'm certainly not going to jump ship and give up the best of Pentax just because my ancient glass might work better on a FF sensor. So Pentax, spend your money to take the K-5 to new heights. Don't break was isn't broke. Give us best in class AF. Give us the least noise and highest ISO (and lowest) in the industry. Bring your flash system into the 21st (or for that matter 20th) century. Provide the best line of pro lenses in the industry. Do those things, and I think all camps will be happier. Those pining for FF will be temporaily placated, and the rest of us will be proud as peacocks showing off the results from our best in indusrty K-5+.

02-15-2012, 08:52 AM	#2488
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by Spare Tire If i can't get a pentax FF, i'll jump ship... to µ4/3. Yes...FF and crop 2 are the same.

02-15-2012, 09:28 AM	#2489
Ubuntu_user Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,545	Originally posted by Ash I like many others here share the desire in getting the most out of my FA Limiteds in the form of a FF camera, even if the real world differences between APS-C and FF results are not obvious. But in the meantime, I am enjoying what the K-5 has to offer - and it is sweet with good lenses... Yep. I couldn't have said it better myself...

02-15-2012, 09:49 AM	#2490
drougge Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Malmö Photos: Gallery Posts: 787	Originally posted by Kunzite A smaller than APS-C sensor is a reasonable alternative to FF? Am I missing something? It could be. I don't know about him, but for me it's all about the finder. If the finder is traditional, FF gets me something. If it's electronic, sensor size doesn't matter, only how good the EVF is. (I hate current EVFs, but I don't doubt they will one day be good enough for me. I also don't doubt that most people's lower expectations will have made them my only option in new cameras before that happens, but at least they will be big and bright despite tiny sensors.)