Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-17-2013, 12:12 PM   #361
Veteran Member
Parry's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 541
Can I have all that too?

Yup.

I have people for lifting and trucks. Don't worry about all that.

11-17-2013, 08:49 PM   #362
Site Supporter
Shanti's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Western Denmark
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 896
BIF

QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
BIF is easier in my experience... it's far easier to track with 'extra' space around the bird.
so if I use my DA300 on a Sony A7r with MF it will be easier to track then? I wonder how the Da300 does with 36MP,can the lens resolve them?
11-17-2013, 09:05 PM   #363
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,892
QuoteOriginally posted by Shanti Quote
so if I use my DA300 on a Sony A7r with MF it will be easier to track then? I wonder how the Da300 does with 36MP,can the lens resolve them?
It will be easier to put them in the frame. With the combo you specify it'll be tough to manage AF, I think.

The pixel density is the same on the A7R and the K-5. The K-5 outresolved the lens slightly but not very much. You should be able to get ~3600 lp/ph, which is quite good.
11-18-2013, 11:29 PM   #364
Senior Member
Paul MaudDib's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 292
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote


I am sorry to say, but I fear Hubble doesn't have that good of a high iso performance. I heard they are using incredibly long exposure times and an amazingly wide aperture diameter to cope with that.

Before I go to my drawing board to make your dream camera, please assure you can hand-hold a 1 ton camera for, say, 2 hours steadily without the smallest shake
It would be really really interesting to rebuild the sensor array with modern high-ISO sensors. And it would have definite spinoff benefits for larger format sensor chips. Assuming, of course, that they could survive the radiation.

If you want to make steady long-exposure while moving, you can get a gyro unit - same thing the Hubble uses. Or you can track moving stars with a tracking unit, which will need to be guided at that length.


Last edited by Paul MaudDib; 11-18-2013 at 11:35 PM.
11-18-2013, 11:55 PM   #365
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,892
I think the range of wavelengths for the Hubble is quite large... and the operating temperature, I'm guessing, is quite low (a benefit).

They replaced at least one of the sensors in ~2009 or so. I imagine they'll replace them again in the future... but quantum efficiency being what it is now, I'm not sure that it'll be all that much of an improvement. Maybe at some oddball wavelengths.

The sensor they replaced is about 60mm x 30mm, fun fact.
05-03-2015, 01:12 PM   #366
Veteran Member
patarok's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 351
finally i would like to answer the question.
A full frame pentax is a holy grail, because a holy grail is a holy grail.
05-04-2015, 06:03 PM   #367
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Rochester, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,816
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
I think the range of wavelengths for the Hubble is quite large... and the operating temperature, I'm guessing, is quite low (a benefit).

They replaced at least one of the sensors in ~2009 or so. I imagine they'll replace them again in the future... but quantum efficiency being what it is now, I'm not sure that it'll be all that much of an improvement. Maybe at some oddball wavelengths.

The sensor they replaced is about 60mm x 30mm, fun fact.
The last mission to Hubble was in 2009. We no longer have the capability to service the unit since the Space Shuttle is now a defunct program. In fact, at the moment we do not even have a ship capable of putting people in orbit. A newer telescope is in the works. It is the James Webb Telescope. It will have a 6 meter segmented mirror. It is currently scheduled for launch in 2018.
05-04-2015, 08:24 PM   #368
New Member




Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 6
QuoteOriginally posted by RobA_Oz Quote
Well, you could spend a lot of time reading through all the threads and posts here and elsewhere, but, seeing you've asked, the answers are, in no particular order:
  1. Nostalgia for the 35mm film frame size (or era);
  2. Desire for better low light noise performance;
  3. Desire to keep up with the Big Two;
  4. Need for a bigger and brighter optical viewfinder; and
  5. Desire to use all the available image circle from their collection of FA and earlier Pentax-mount lenses.
There are probably others, but my principal reasons for wanting one are mainly 4 and 5.

PS: I don't complain about the lack of a "full frame" Pentax, but I'm content to wait for one to appear, as many of us think will be inevitable. In the meantime, I'll be quite happy to consider their next APS-C DSLR, post the K-5II/s.
Yes, those are all good reasons especially the last point on being able to use the old lenses. Also, the larger sensor size should have greater noise immunity compared to the smaller apsc format, which is a plus in low light. Have a friend with a Nikon FF and the quality is impressive. He can't go back to the smaller format.

05-04-2015, 10:11 PM   #369
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,892
QuoteOriginally posted by gaweidert Quote
The last mission to Hubble was in 2009. We no longer have the capability to service the unit since the Space Shuttle is now a defunct program. In fact, at the moment we do not even have a ship capable of putting people in orbit. A newer telescope is in the works. It is the James Webb Telescope. It will have a 6 meter segmented mirror. It is currently scheduled for launch in 2018.
I liked the 'overwhelmingly large telescope' name better myself.
05-08-2015, 11:03 PM - 1 Like   #370
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Houston TX
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 209
APSC - at the same pixel count - requires lenses that are higher resolution than full frame; the smaller sensor requires more lines per mm out of a lens to get the same resolution in the final image. Another way of looking at this is that a full frame takes advantage of lines of resolution from full frame lenses that are being thrown away by APSC. The bottom line: a full frame sensor has the potential of producing higher resolution images with film era lenses than APSC can achieve. While I am happy with the images my K3 is producing with my film era lenses I am going to be even happier with what the K2(?) will produce with them. Besides, I am going to love being able to put my 12-24mm Full Frame Sigma on a digital camera and getting that full 12mm wide angle view.
07-08-2015, 07:04 PM   #371
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 153
I think it's all a bit anachronistic now. 10 years ago a Pentax FF would have been very exciting. I'm sure it will be a superb camera, but honestly, is it going to produce images noticeably better than the K-3 ii? Noise is so well controlled now. It also seems like the market is going towards mirror less and smaller now with big flippy screens and EVFs. I see that FF will have two major advantages: bigger optical finder and better wide angle options.
Pentax' greatest strength is the 645s IMO. If you want ultimate iQ, that's where to go, not FF.
07-08-2015, 10:00 PM   #372
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 8,937
QuoteOriginally posted by plooksta Quote
I think it's all a bit anachronistic now.... Noise is so well controlled now.
Please have a look at the "The true reasons for a full frame camera" article and you'll see that FF still makes sense.

QuoteOriginally posted by plooksta Quote
If you want ultimate iQ, that's [645] where to go, not FF.
The sensor size difference between APS-C and FF is bigger than that between FF and digital MF (645). Also, digital MF is in an entirely different price league.

Most importantly, though, what if one wants the ultimate IQ with the lenses one already has?
07-09-2015, 05:34 AM   #373
Senior Member




Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 153
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
Please have a look at the "The true reasons for a full frame camera" article and you'll see that FF still makes sense.


The sensor size difference between APS-C and FF is bigger than that between FF and digital MF (645). Also, digital MF is in an entirely different price league.

Most importantly, though, what if one wants the ultimate IQ with the lenses one already has?
My point is mainly that the FF advantage has been significantly squeezed over the last ten years, to the point where, in ordinary use, you aren't going to see a major difference between equivalent 24MP APS-C sensors' and 24MP FF sensors' images. The 645 sensor is 1.7X the FF size and FF is 2.3X the APS-C size. The 645 sensor is however 3.8X the APS-C sensor size. That is a significant difference, one I'd def get excited about (especially when I see the gorgeosity coming out of the 645Ds and Zs). It is currently out of my budget though, but I do see masses of old manual 645 lenses on the market for relatively peanuts. We will see what price the FF camera comes in at, but I'd wager you could pay as much for it, with some high quality lenses as you would for a 645 and some used manual lenses.

Something to get even more excited about would be a full size 645 sensor. I don't know if Pentax will do that eventually. I guess one day it will come.
07-09-2015, 05:54 AM - 1 Like   #374
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 8,937
QuoteOriginally posted by plooksta Quote
My point is mainly that the FF advantage has been significantly squeezed over the last ten years, to the point where, in ordinary use, you aren't going to see a major difference between equivalent 24MP APS-C sensors' and 24MP FF sensors' images.
If you read the article, you'd realise that your point doesn't stand.

But it's OK, I don't want to start a debate.

Regarding 645, many people don't need that kind of performance, but would appreciate to use the FF lenses they have to their full potential. So it is definitely not a case of "either go all the way or don't at all".
07-09-2015, 06:12 AM   #375
Pentaxian
Clavius's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: De Klundert
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,115
Biggest advantage of FF for me was the fov. I have my own modest studio. Modest in size. It was built in the 35mm film era. APS-C made it to small. APS-C often dictates the use of 35mm because of it. Needless to say, being able to use 50mm and even 85mm for portraits was quite an improvement. And, even though I am currently using the A7R & Zeiss lenses, still a much cheaper solution then rebuilding my studio.

Frankly, to do my work, all I needed was the bigger sensor for the least cost as possible. All the other fancy modern features like blazing AF, ever increasing ISO performance, WR, etc, can be stolen for all I care. I only upgraded from 5D to A7r because my 5D was falling apart and the refurbished A7r was a total steal. (5D had ~475000 actuations!) So, for my professional work it certainly doesn't need "pitching it as a high-end model to professionals at a higher price point than what Pentaxians are used to". I do this work to make a buck, not to get rid of it as quickly as possible.

Last edited by Clavius; 07-09-2015 at 07:02 AM.
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, benefit, depth, ff, field, filter, frame, frame pentax, fuji, full-frame, goldilocks, iq, iso, noise, pentax, picture, resolution, sensor, terms
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
So.... Pentax Full Frame is a sure thing? LFLee Photographic Industry and Professionals 25 11-02-2012 12:55 PM
Why is the K7 so terrible? or rather why am i having such a problem with it? runslikeapenguin Pentax DSLR Discussion 60 05-01-2012 01:16 PM
Why do people want a Full Frame sensor? RobG Pentax DSLR Discussion 98 02-15-2012 09:12 AM
Is there such a thing as a decent superzoom (for Pentax)? DanielT74 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 22 06-21-2011 05:57 AM
Full-Frame Image Sensor Holy Grail - Why? stewart_photo Pentax DSLR Discussion 82 10-10-2007 03:00 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:56 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