Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-04-2012, 10:58 PM - 1 Like   #586
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,160
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
Who prints?
It doesn't matter whether you print images or view images on a monitor.

The point made referred to the different enlargement factor between APS-C and FF that is required to achieve the same output size. I'm sure Anvh just used "print" as a shorthand for "same output size".

Because FF has a lower enlargement factor, it is easier to produce sharp images (less AF precision required, lenses need not be as sharp). It also means that in order to achieve the same DOF, one must multiply the f-ratio by the crop factor (not only the focal length) when converting the APS-C parameters into FF parameters.

Any DOF differences between APS-C and FF zooms alluded to earlier probably result from converting focal lengths, but not converting f-ratios.

The fact that no one prints anymore is a non-argument. If you mean to imply that you are only looking at your images in 5x7 size on a monitor as well then a much smaller camera with smaller lenses would satisfy your needs.

BTW, the smaller the images (prints) you are looking at, the more important FF becomes. If we all viewed images at a distance that corresponds to the image diagonal then it wouldn't matter. But typically, the smaller the image, the higher the quotient between viewing-distance/image-diagonal. This means the relevant circle of confusion becomes smaller, i.e., more things appear to be in focus. Hence, in order to still achieve shallow DOF effects with small image size, the DOF must be shallower in an absolute sense. This is more easily achieved with an FF sensor.

Thus, I'm arguing that your "small prints"-argument either means that APS-C (in particular with its FF-sized lenses) is overkill (if shallow DOF does not matter) or that FF becomes even more important (if shallow DOF matters).

06-05-2012, 01:57 AM   #587
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Manila
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,190
QuoteOriginally posted by mikeossur Quote
This is true but Pentax is competing in the Pro market as is Canon/Nikon/Sony... It is Flag ship camera against Flagship camera. Not one format against another.
As far as I understand, the K-5 is Pentax's "flagship camera" in an APS-C lineup, where Pentax's "main army" is. The 645D is the only camera in that line, so I really can't call it a "flagship". The reviews comparing the 645D vs. Canikon's FF range are all comparing their capabilities to see if the FF's can catch up to the MF.
06-05-2012, 07:47 AM   #588
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,862
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
It doesn't matter whether you print images or view images on a monitor.

The point made referred to the different enlargement factor between APS-C and FF that is required to achieve the same output size. I'm sure Anvh just used "print" as a shorthand for "same output size".

Because FF has a lower enlargement factor, it is easier to produce sharp images (less AF precision required, lenses need not be as sharp). It also means that in order to achieve the same DOF, one must multiply the f-ratio by the crop factor (not only the focal length) when converting the APS-C parameters into FF parameters.

Any DOF differences between APS-C and FF zooms alluded to earlier probably result from converting focal lengths, but not converting f-ratios.

The fact that no one prints anymore is a non-argument. If you mean to imply that you are only looking at your images in 5x7 size on a monitor as well then a much smaller camera with smaller lenses would satisfy your needs.

BTW, the smaller the images (prints) you are looking at, the more important FF becomes. If we all viewed images at a distance that corresponds to the image diagonal then it wouldn't matter. But typically, the smaller the image, the higher the quotient between viewing-distance/image-diagonal. This means the relevant circle of confusion becomes smaller, i.e., more things appear to be in focus. Hence, in order to still achieve shallow DOF effects with small image size, the DOF must be shallower in an absolute sense. This is more easily achieved with an FF sensor.

Thus, I'm arguing that your "small prints"-argument either means that APS-C (in particular with its FF-sized lenses) is overkill (if shallow DOF does not matter) or that FF becomes even more important (if shallow DOF matters).
While all technically correct, one does not need a Ferrari to drive to the corner store for milk!

DOF is its own bag of hurt and does not impact noticeably a great many photos. It's half-fetish for a few and very difficult to objectively analyse, especially for market preference.

And the ability to tell FF in print (film or digital) from APS-C up to 5x7 is like chasing Leprechauns looking for gold. Someone told you it's there, but darned hard to find in 99% of the photos anyone takes.

As you can tell, I'm mostly concerned with the market rationale for any product.
06-05-2012, 11:44 AM   #589
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
It doesn't matter whether you print images or view images on a monitor.

The point made referred to the different enlargement factor between APS-C and FF that is required to achieve the same output size. I'm sure Anvh just used "print" as a shorthand for "same output size".
Yes i did

06-05-2012, 11:47 AM   #590
Veteran Member
Anvh's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 4,616
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
DOF is its own bag of hurt and does not impact noticeably a great many photos.
Portrait, product and Macro photography, the first one is often done so i won't call it not important/noticeable.

However i agree that we don't really need faster lenses for APS-C though for the reason you state.
06-05-2012, 01:41 PM   #591
Pentaxian
redrockcoulee's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Medicine Hat
Posts: 2,119
It does not matter how big or even if the majority of people print, it is what size the photographer or his or her's client wants to print that counts. Not that I am in the camp of those wanting a full frame but it matters not what my neighbour does with his images because when I am printing for an exhibition the gallery or myself does not poll the community to see what size them may or may not print. AS far as a Ferrari goes, I do not need any car to go to the corner grocery store and am sure that the majority of Km or miles a sports car is driven is not to the store. And race cars are built to go faster than we can on the street and still what does it matter. Never compared crop sensor to full frame but did a D3 to scanned medium format and the film was much better. True few print to 60 by 80 inches but when one is exhibiting this size again what does it matter that the neigbour only views them on a monitor. The majority of bike riders only ride around on the streets but for a hard core down hiller or track rider they need a bike for their needs not for mine.

I am content with the current size of the sensor (and with the film sizes I still shoot) and do not think it is life or death for Pentax to make a so called full frame to survive but I do recognize that some one else's needs (needs not wants) may be considerabley different and they should not base their needs or even their wants one what I do or need.
06-05-2012, 02:12 PM   #592
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
I think people are arguing that the market size is small (for people who would purchase a pentax branded 'full format' sensor). They're arguing that people who, justifiably or not, want a FF Pentax camera, won't be enough to make a profit for Pentax.
06-05-2012, 08:02 PM   #593
Pentaxian
redrockcoulee's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Medicine Hat
Posts: 2,119
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
I think people are arguing that the market size is small (for people who would purchase a pentax branded 'full format' sensor). They're arguing that people who, justifiably or not, want a FF Pentax camera, won't be enough to make a profit for Pentax.
In that I think they are correct. But that still does not mean that some of us still print rather than just look at images on the monitor.

06-06-2012, 08:41 AM   #594
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,862
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
I think people are arguing that the market size is small (for people who would purchase a pentax branded 'full format' sensor). They're arguing that people who, justifiably or not, want a FF Pentax camera, won't be enough to make a profit for Pentax.
The market size for FF is small because of the price an FF sensor commands.

And once you pay a high price, you not only limit the customer base, you also limit who can supply an FF sensor.

Then, once you are at a high price point, to justify the expense even further, it is pretty much required that top-line major features also be included in the camera at least to the level of one's competition.

Then you need lenses.

Those how want to cut costs or create a new niche for Pentax FF by going mirrorless ignore a fundamental point:

The DSLR market is huge and dominant precisely because it is a DSLR. It has an OVF and mirror and works well with legacy glass, has a proven form factor, and can accommodate a huge range of shooting needs from macro to professional portrait, from photojournalism to the over-spending backyard with the kids prosumer. No other camera design has been so successful or enduring.
06-06-2012, 09:28 AM   #595
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
And the ability to tell FF in print (film or digital) from APS-C up to 5x7 is like chasing Leprechauns looking for gold. Someone told you it's there, but darned hard to find in 99% of the photos anyone takes.
It might indeed feel like chasing leprechauns if you were confused about equivalence and were looking for the difference in the wrong way.


QuoteQuote:
As you can tell, I'm mostly concerned with the market rationale for any product.
Then you should know that if someone wanted to market "more DOF control" they could do so, without even having to make the use-case for the buyer.


.
06-06-2012, 10:14 AM   #596
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,862
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
Then you should know that if someone wanted to market "more DOF control" they could do so, without even having to make the use-case for the buyer.
Clearly there is not enough demand, or FF would be here already.
06-06-2012, 10:22 AM   #597
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,714
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote
The market size for FF is small because of the price an FF sensor commands.

How much does D800 change that market, or is it just a temporary rush from customers to that camera (either replacing older FF or starting into FF) and will the FF market in six months go back to where it was six months ago?
06-06-2012, 10:26 AM   #598
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
How much does D800 change that market, or is it just a temporary rush from customers to that camera (either replacing older FF or starting into FF) and will the FF market in six months go back to where it was six months ago?
There's no way the D800 can sustain it's torrid pace through 2013, but we may see another Canon model and a D600 (and perhaps some Sony models) before too long, and we'll probably see a continued rush that way.
06-06-2012, 11:55 AM   #599
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,862
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
There's no way the D800 can sustain it's torrid pace through 2013, but we may see another Canon model and a D600 (and perhaps some Sony models) before too long, and we'll probably see a continued rush that way.
Those who cannot afford the very high prices points for the Canon III and the D800 will have more price appropriate models introduced as soon as sales peak.

Thus it has always been in the world of camera sales.

I do not buy into the $1,500 D600 price optimism. I'm going for $2,199.
06-06-2012, 12:20 PM   #600
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,264
QuoteOriginally posted by Aristophanes Quote

I do not buy into the $1,500 D600 price optimism. I'm going for $2,199.
maybe $1999, the only way i see $1500 is if it in fact is apsc and is a combined D7000/D300 replacement (which is a possibility)
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!
24x36mm, aps-c, camera, capacity, company, d4s, dont, ff, followers, frame, full-frame, idea, im, iso, k-3, lens, lenses, letter, light, lw/ph, nikon, page, pentax, release, time, traffic
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The full frame Pentax that never was dj_saunter Pentax DSLR Discussion 23 05-06-2011 04:06 AM
Pentax and Full Frame oppositz Pentax DSLR Discussion 58 03-18-2011 09:39 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



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:08 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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