When it comes to image quality......

RonHendriks1966 · 04-05-2013, 01:41 PM - **1 Like**

Pentax did make a statement that it is all about image quality. Don't know where or about, but I guess it was around the 645D.

Looking at the test from DxO:
DxOMark - Compare cameras side by side

It is very easy to make the statement that when Pentax want to bring image quality to a next level for K-mount the sensor has to grow. The Nikon D7100 24mp camera only gaint one point, so that is not the big winner.

Choices to make:

Sensor size:

The small step in this format would be a large APS-H sized sensor!
The big step would be a full frame sized sensor!

Pixelcount:

1) Choosing real large pixels would make up for a fast sportscamera for working in real low light, (16mp on FF).
2) Choosing large pixels (6micro) would give a lower pixelcount, but better performance in low light, (24mp on FF).
3) Choosing the pixels from the K-5 would give more pixels and still a good performance in low light, (around 36mp on FF).
4) Choosing a real hi pixelcount with small sensils (like in D7100) would give a huge amount off pixels, mainly for studiowork (57mp on FF).

Body choice:

A retro look camera (like LX) would apeal to a lot off people. A smaller camera probably does mean limited use for intensive shootings (like sports or so).
A K-5-styled camera would make a great camera (maybe a little bigger then K-5).
A K-5-styled camera with integrated grip, making room for electronics would make up for a real workhorse. More electronics does mean more functionality.
A mirrorless K-mount body would make for a great camera, but just attracting a small amount off users.
A large-sensor compact camera (no lens changing) would make a nice camera, but expensive and not targeted at a large usergroup. More options would be possible, since there could be a different type off lens for different targeted users.

Offcourse once Pentax has a sensor and the electronics around it it can be made in different forms (dslr/ilc/compact), but honestly I'm not expecting more then one camera in the first year.

I'm probably going to buy whatever camera that is coming, but I do have my prefferances:

My first choice would be:
An (large) APS-H sized sensor with large sensils (like in D600), so around 16mp (like in K-5 II) in a K-5-styled body.

What would you choose or ad?

Kunzite · 04-05-2013, 01:46 PM

APS-H talks are off topic in this section, I'd think, looking how it's named ("Pentax Full Frame").
Besides, how many times do you want us to explain why APS-H is a bad idea?

RonHendriks1966 · 04-05-2013, 01:56 PM

Originally posted by Kunzite

APS-H talks are off topic in this section, I'd think, looking how it's named ("Pentax Full Frame").
Besides, how many times do you want us to explain why APS-H is a bad idea?

Lucky that there more choices or preferences to make.

**Ash** · 04-05-2013, 01:56 PM

All I can say is: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/general-photography-industry/209882-next-...oh-pentax.html

Tesla · 04-05-2013, 04:21 PM

@Ash .. LOL

I would like a true FF 24mp (not aps-h) in a body similar to the K-5, but special pewter or graphite color finish. (like the af k-3

)

If you get too high mp and you get lower ISO, less fps, more processing power required.. less battery life.

jsherman999 · 04-05-2013, 05:25 PM

K5-styled camera (no integrated grip) at 57MP would be sweetness, indeed.

cali92rs · 04-06-2013, 08:48 AM

Originally posted by Tesla

If you get too high mp and you get lower ISO, less fps, more processing power required.. less battery life.

Yes because everyone is so disappointed in the D800's image quality and performance /sarcasm

RonHendriks1966 · 04-06-2013, 10:51 AM

Originally posted by cali92rs

Yes because everyone is so disappointed in the D800's image quality and performance /sarcasm

Well don't forget about enourmous files you get in RAW with a 36mp or 57mp sensor. This is for all your images, and that might even be disapointing from time to time.

Parallax · 04-06-2013, 11:56 AM

Originally posted by RonHendriks1966

Well don't forget about enourmous files you get in RAW with a 36mp or 57mp sensor. This is for all your images, and that might even be disapointing from time to time.

There are dozens and dozens of considerations when choosing what brand, format, etc. File size should be dead last, if at all, on anyone's

**RobA_Oz** · 04-06-2013, 12:18 PM

Originally posted by Kunzite

APS-H talks are off topic in this section, I'd think, looking how it's named ("Pentax Full Frame").
Besides, how many times do you want us to explain why APS-H is a bad idea?

Well, consistency is a virtue, of sorts...

As for being off-topic, all regular DSLR users (excepting those who buy the "best", just to take photos of the kids) know what is intended by the term "full frame" but it is a meaningless term, in itself. Consequently, Ron's quite entitled to use it to describe the APS-H format, if he wants to.

OK, maybe to avoid confusion he could refer to it as the "Glass Half Full Frame" or GHFF, given his optimistic nature. Others of a less sunny disposition could call it the GHEF.

Kunzite · 04-06-2013, 12:32 PM

Errare humanum est, sed perseverare diabolicum.

RonHendriks1966 · 04-06-2013, 12:49 PM

Originally posted by Parallax

There are dozens and dozens of considerations when choosing what brand, format, etc. File size should be dead last, if at all, on anyone's

Well I used the 645D for 15 days last year. Coming home with those enourmous files was fun, but it slowed down my workprocess on the computer and did fill up my harddrive fast. No to worry about when all those files where there for work, but also some familysnapshots where among them and spending 80MB on a snapshot is a little too much. Going to a 57 megapixel 14-bit RAW would give files over 100MB large. That is pretty much.

Originally posted by RobA_Oz

Well, consistency is a virtue, of sorts...

OK, maybe to avoid confusion he could refer to it as the "Glass Half Full Frame" or GHFF, given his optimistic nature. Others of a less sunny disposition could call it the GHEF.

Me like!

Butt this is not about me wanting APS-H. The first statement I made was that when wanting better image quality (for a K-mount camera) the sensor has to grow over APS-C! So there are historicly two options. Both will deliver on that demand, with offcourse the full frame sensor winning on this game. Pentax could also choose for a different format sensor, like 4:5 or 4:3 and make a different kind off full frame sensor. Choosing full frame is going for the maximum possible sensor-size where aps-h (and other formats) would settle for something less (if your glass is Always half empty) wich still would winn over aps-c.

TeaTree · 04-06-2013, 01:17 PM

My ME Super lasted for 10 years, I only "upgraded" when it broke.... I'm quite happy with my K5 and don't really "need" a full frame Camera.
But if Pentax would like to sell me a new camera without waiting another eight years (ok, it might not last as long), the new camera would need to be significantly better. Considering how small the difference is even between K10 and K5, I'm pretty sure using the biggest sensor that fits in a k-mount camera is the logical way to get the best image quality convincing me to invest!

ElJamoquio · 04-10-2013, 09:20 PM

Originally posted by RonHendriks1966

Well I used the 645D for 15 days last year. Coming home with those enourmous files was fun, but it slowed down my workprocess on the computer and did fill up my harddrive fast. No to worry about when all those files where there for work, but also some familysnapshots where among them and spending 80MB on a snapshot is a little too much. Going to a 57 megapixel 14-bit RAW would give files over 100MB large. That is pretty much.

My K-5 14-bit files are 14-18 MB on average. The 57 MP files will be about 50-60 MB, not 100.

vonBaloney · 04-10-2013, 09:30 PM

It is not just the file size itself (storage requirements), it is the computer processing power and amount of RAM you need to do post on such images. That's not a small concern -- certainly wouldn't be last on my list. I'd like 36MP at FF and 24MP in crop mode. That is plenty MPs enough to make nice big prints...

04-05-2013, 01:41 PM - 1 Like	#1
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675	When it comes to image quality...... Pentax did make a statement that it is all about image quality. Don't know where or about, but I guess it was around the 645D. Looking at the test from DxO: DxOMark - Compare cameras side by side It is very easy to make the statement that when Pentax want to bring image quality to a next level for K-mount the sensor has to grow. The Nikon D7100 24mp camera only gaint one point, so that is not the big winner. Choices to make: Sensor size: The small step in this format would be a large APS-H sized sensor! The big step would be a full frame sized sensor! Pixelcount: 1) Choosing real large pixels would make up for a fast sportscamera for working in real low light, (16mp on FF). 2) Choosing large pixels (6micro) would give a lower pixelcount, but better performance in low light, (24mp on FF). 3) Choosing the pixels from the K-5 would give more pixels and still a good performance in low light, (around 36mp on FF). 4) Choosing a real hi pixelcount with small sensils (like in D7100) would give a huge amount off pixels, mainly for studiowork (57mp on FF). Body choice: A retro look camera (like LX) would apeal to a lot off people. A smaller camera probably does mean limited use for intensive shootings (like sports or so). A K-5-styled camera would make a great camera (maybe a little bigger then K-5). A K-5-styled camera with integrated grip, making room for electronics would make up for a real workhorse. More electronics does mean more functionality. A mirrorless K-mount body would make for a great camera, but just attracting a small amount off users. A large-sensor compact camera (no lens changing) would make a nice camera, but expensive and not targeted at a large usergroup. More options would be possible, since there could be a different type off lens for different targeted users. Offcourse once Pentax has a sensor and the electronics around it it can be made in different forms (dslr/ilc/compact), but honestly I'm not expecting more then one camera in the first year. I'm probably going to buy whatever camera that is coming, but I do have my prefferances: My first choice would be: An (large) APS-H sized sensor with large sensils (like in D600), so around 16mp (like in K-5 II) in a K-5-styled body. What would you choose or ad?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Where to get start when it comes to learning "the how"	jtkratzer	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	44	07-22-2012 04:43 PM
What comes to mind when...	Clicker	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	6	02-17-2012 07:48 PM
Is it really worth upgrading *Ist DS to K-r in term of Image Quality	fgpinarli	Pentax K-r	16	03-01-2011 06:09 AM
KX in camera noise reduction shut it off to improve image quality	jlaubza	Pentax DSLR Discussion	14	04-27-2010 01:11 PM
when it comes to Flash, I'm a real Dummie	racinsince55	Flashes, Lighting, and Studio	5	12-29-2007 12:29 PM

04-05-2013, 01:46 PM	#2
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	APS-H talks are off topic in this section, I'd think, looking how it's named ("Pentax Full Frame"). Besides, how many times do you want us to explain why APS-H is a bad idea?

04-05-2013, 01:56 PM	#3
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675 Original Poster	Originally posted by Kunzite APS-H talks are off topic in this section, I'd think, looking how it's named ("Pentax Full Frame"). Besides, how many times do you want us to explain why APS-H is a bad idea? Lucky that there more choices or preferences to make.

04-05-2013, 01:56 PM	#4
Ash Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Toowoomba, Queensland Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 23,920	All I can say is: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/general-photography-industry/209882-next-...oh-pentax.html

04-05-2013, 04:21 PM	#5
Tesla Pentaxian Join Date: Mar 2013 Location: Washington State Posts: 589	@Ash .. LOL I would like a true FF 24mp (not aps-h) in a body similar to the K-5, but special pewter or graphite color finish. (like the af k-3 ) If you get too high mp and you get lower ISO, less fps, more processing power required.. less battery life.

04-05-2013, 05:25 PM	#6
jsherman999 Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,237	K5-styled camera (no integrated grip) at 57MP would be sweetness, indeed.

04-06-2013, 08:48 AM	#7
cali92rs Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 3,354	Originally posted by Tesla If you get too high mp and you get lower ISO, less fps, more processing power required.. less battery life. Yes because everyone is so disappointed in the D800's image quality and performance /sarcasm

04-06-2013, 10:51 AM	#8
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675 Original Poster	Originally posted by cali92rs Yes because everyone is so disappointed in the D800's image quality and performance /sarcasm Well don't forget about enourmous files you get in RAW with a 36mp or 57mp sensor. This is for all your images, and that might even be disapointing from time to time.

04-06-2013, 11:56 AM	#9
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,333	Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 Well don't forget about enourmous files you get in RAW with a 36mp or 57mp sensor. This is for all your images, and that might even be disapointing from time to time. There are dozens and dozens of considerations when choosing what brand, format, etc. File size should be dead last, if at all, on anyone's

04-06-2013, 12:18 PM	#10
RobA_Oz Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Tasmania, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,209	Originally posted by Kunzite APS-H talks are off topic in this section, I'd think, looking how it's named ("Pentax Full Frame"). Besides, how many times do you want us to explain why APS-H is a bad idea? Well, consistency is a virtue, of sorts... As for being off-topic, all regular DSLR users (excepting those who buy the "best", just to take photos of the kids) know what is intended by the term "full frame" but it is a meaningless term, in itself. Consequently, Ron's quite entitled to use it to describe the APS-H format, if he wants to. OK, maybe to avoid confusion he could refer to it as the "Glass Half Full Frame" or GHFF, given his optimistic nature. Others of a less sunny disposition could call it the GHEF.

04-06-2013, 12:32 PM	#11
Kunzite Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Romania Posts: 15,132	Errare humanum est, sed perseverare diabolicum.

04-06-2013, 12:49 PM	#12
RonHendriks1966 Banned Join Date: Jan 2009 Photos: Gallery Posts: 9,675 Original Poster	Originally posted by Parallax There are dozens and dozens of considerations when choosing what brand, format, etc. File size should be dead last, if at all, on anyone's Well I used the 645D for 15 days last year. Coming home with those enourmous files was fun, but it slowed down my workprocess on the computer and did fill up my harddrive fast. No to worry about when all those files where there for work, but also some familysnapshots where among them and spending 80MB on a snapshot is a little too much. Going to a 57 megapixel 14-bit RAW would give files over 100MB large. That is pretty much. Originally posted by RobA_Oz Well, consistency is a virtue, of sorts... OK, maybe to avoid confusion he could refer to it as the "Glass Half Full Frame" or GHFF, given his optimistic nature. Others of a less sunny disposition could call it the GHEF. Me like! Butt this is not about me wanting APS-H. The first statement I made was that when wanting better image quality (for a K-mount camera) the sensor has to grow over APS-C! So there are historicly two options. Both will deliver on that demand, with offcourse the full frame sensor winning on this game. Pentax could also choose for a different format sensor, like 4:5 or 4:3 and make a different kind off full frame sensor. Choosing full frame is going for the maximum possible sensor-size where aps-h (and other formats) would settle for something less (if your glass is Always half empty) wich still would winn over aps-c.

04-06-2013, 01:17 PM	#13
TeaTree New Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Toronto Posts: 4	My ME Super lasted for 10 years, I only "upgraded" when it broke.... I'm quite happy with my K5 and don't really "need" a full frame Camera. But if Pentax would like to sell me a new camera without waiting another eight years (ok, it might not last as long), the new camera would need to be significantly better. Considering how small the difference is even between K10 and K5, I'm pretty sure using the biggest sensor that fits in a k-mount camera is the logical way to get the best image quality convincing me to invest!

04-10-2013, 09:20 PM	#14
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Originally posted by RonHendriks1966 Well I used the 645D for 15 days last year. Coming home with those enourmous files was fun, but it slowed down my workprocess on the computer and did fill up my harddrive fast. No to worry about when all those files where there for work, but also some familysnapshots where among them and spending 80MB on a snapshot is a little too much. Going to a 57 megapixel 14-bit RAW would give files over 100MB large. That is pretty much. My K-5 14-bit files are 14-18 MB on average. The 57 MP files will be about 50-60 MB, not 100.

04-10-2013, 09:30 PM	#15
vonBaloney Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Albuquerque, NM Posts: 6,029	It is not just the file size itself (storage requirements), it is the computer processing power and amount of RAM you need to do post on such images. That's not a small concern -- certainly wouldn't be last on my list. I'd like 36MP at FF and 24MP in crop mode. That is plenty MPs enough to make nice big prints...