Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-26-2013, 05:58 PM   #16
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Southern California
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,082
QuoteOriginally posted by aleonx3 Quote
Very interesting analysis.... I think you left out your assumption that once you get a FF system (body and lenses), you would not want to own or carry a cropped camera/lens. You see once you have a FF system, you may still want to keep or acquire a better cropped sensor camera or lens. The end result will really blow your budget...

I currently don't have a desire to get the FF unless I find some new money I can spare or until FF becomes a main stream DSLR offering.
I still have my NEX 6. What I am keeping can be had for about 1500.

16mm/2.8 w UWA adapter(12mm), Sigma 19mm/2.8, Sigma 30mm/2.8, Sony 50mm/1.8, Sony 55-210. It's good enough for me, and it's much more portable than a K-5. It is a bit of a luxury though, and I'd probably be satisfied with an RX100. I think an RX100 and a DSLR make a fantastic combo.

09-26-2013, 06:20 PM   #17
Pentaxian
aleonx3's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Brampton, Ontario
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,903
QuoteOriginally posted by kenafein Quote
I still have my NEX 6. What I am keeping can be had for about 1500.

16mm/2.8 w UWA adapter(12mm), Sigma 19mm/2.8, Sigma 30mm/2.8, Sony 50mm/1.8, Sony 55-210. It's good enough for me, and it's much more portable than a K-5. It is a bit of a luxury though, and I'd probably be satisfied with an RX100. I think an RX100 and a DSLR make a fantastic combo.
Absolutely, it is not a matter selling the Pentax system (currently APS-C) and move to or rather replace it with Canikon FF system. One would still need to replace the Pentax system with another cropped sensor system (APS-C or M4/3) for a more less-heavy system. I am seeing many of the members with FF system here are doing that...
09-26-2013, 06:29 PM - 1 Like   #18
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Southern California
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,082
QuoteOriginally posted by aleonx3 Quote
Absolutely, it is not a matter selling the Pentax system (currently APS-C) and move to or rather replace it with Canikon FF system. One would still need to replace the Pentax system with another cropped sensor system (APS-C or M4/3) for a more less-heavy system. I am seeing many of the members with FF system here are doing that...
To be fair, many of the D primes are small enough to compete with the Pentax primes; so a compact FF system can be had. The D600 isn't much heavier or much larger than the k-5 either. I thought the K-5 was too big for a lot of what i wanted to do, so the NEX was a great option. m4/3 is, potentially, an even better choice for a portable alternative to lugging around FF Zooms, which are ridiculously huge. The Panasonic 35-100/2.8 is the size of a can of soda, internal focusing, stabilized, and very light.
09-26-2013, 08:27 PM - 1 Like   #19
Veteran Member
gbeaton's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Montreal
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 348
One thing I discovered is that although the DOF of an f1.4 is very shallow, its real benefit is a bright image when framing and focusing. My FA50F1.4 doesn't get sharp until you get past f2.0 but its nice and bright to use.

09-27-2013, 12:37 AM   #20
Veteran Member




Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 818
QuoteOriginally posted by gbeaton Quote
One thing I discovered is that although the DOF of an f1.4 is very shallow, its real benefit is a bright image when framing and focusing. My FA50F1.4 doesn't get sharp until you get past f2.0 but its nice and bright to use.
Finally... somebody did mention this after countless of threads...
09-27-2013, 01:23 AM - 1 Like   #21
Pentaxian
Clavius's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: De Klundert
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,122
...But what's your personal preference? And do you really need the complete focal range? What's your shooting style?

Taking myself as an example, when I look in lightroom, I notice that less then 1% of my shooting is done with focal lengths over 50mm. I always reside in the normal to ultra wide ranges. Then why wouldn't I just keep my trusty APS-C kit with that ultra zoom for that <1%? The Pentax resale value is abismal at best. I just kept my existing Pentax kit and added an FF body with two primes of my most used focal lengths. Off course slowly but steadily I've been replacing more Pentax crop lenses with FF ones.

I'd rather shoot FF with only one excellent primes that I use all the time, then APS-C with a complete range of mediocre lenses of which most I won't use that much.
09-27-2013, 07:35 AM   #22
Veteran Member
gbeaton's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Montreal
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 348
@SyncGuy - I once thought the darker image was somehow a property of my pentax or that it was an APS-C because I would look through my (pentax) FF film camera and be blown away by the size and brightness and try Nikons in the store and they seemed bright. Then I tried a friends new Nikon and it was a shade dark too. Finally it came to me that it was the lens. Like you said... how come I nobody ever mentions this! Now I'm in the mood to replace my F4.0 zoom :-P

@Clavius - I've been thinking of getting 35mm (equiv.) lens or even the Fuji x100 for my all purpose camera. My 50mm (75mm equiv.) most often feels to close, and zooms are a bit conspicuous and heavy. Somebody pointed out that zoom lenses are typically used at their two endpoints only so maybe two good primes is better!? However, I'm thinking if you need a tele then its going to be big so maybe zoom is just as well, like my 60-250mm; then you need a wider more general purpose lens so a 35mm(equiv.). There you go... two lenses for all occasions :-)
09-27-2013, 07:44 AM - 1 Like   #23
Veteran Member
gbeaton's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Montreal
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 348
Can someone answer me this question... Why are Digital FF cameras so big?!!! (I have a FF film and its small and light with a big FOV.)

2nd question: Why are modern digital lenses so big?!!! Again, there are many FF lenses from film cameras and they are at least half the size of the equivalent Digital lens. And can't be all motors and electronics. The amount of glass seems to be quite a bit larger.

09-27-2013, 08:10 AM   #24
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
QuoteOriginally posted by LFLee Quote
With the announcement of 6D and D600, FF seems 'affordable', and I am tempted to switch. I made the following budget sheet for myself, mainly, I put down the lenses I think I would like to have if I get a 6D or D600. For zoom lenses, A wide angle zoom, a normal zoom, and a telephoto zoom. For prime, a 35mm, 50mm, and 85mm. Then I list the approximate similar lenses from PENTAX lineup (wide angle have no match), that I also currently have. To make the comparison in PRICE worthwhile, I select the high-end lenses available possible.

As a side note, I also want to see what the cost will be if I uses Sigma lenses instead of Canon or Nikon lenses (with the ART series lenses getting so much praises, one can look forward to solely using Sigma lenses, I think). So I put in the prices for Sigma lenses as well.
Of course, there are few focal length that doesn't match perfectly... so please pardon that. Also, if one buy used lenses instead of new lenses... price will be different, but lets not go into that. And here is it:
Attachment 188963

So, this is what I found:
1. You need about 12k to get into either Nikon or Canon full-frame with the lenses I choose;
- on one hand, with this money, you can buy PENTAX + all the FA and DA ltd lenses to play around.
- on the other hand, if you own these PENTAX gear, you can probably switch brand and not lost a lot in money.

2. It cost about the same cost with PENTAX system (minus the FA + DA ltd lenses), if you get FF body + Sigma lenses.
- well, if you are okay with third party lenses, you can spend a little and switch (plus get to keep your FA, DA ltd)

My own conclusion for my situation?
- I can sell of all my PENTAX gear and switch to FF system + good lenses anytime. So this is really a tough question: to switch or not to switch.
- and I can see why so many long time Pentaxians switched, cost wise, they probably could.

For others, it maybe a good way to look into this comparison before you decide to go into a system.

** This is intended for FF vs PENTAX system comparison, other factors such as weight, WR, ergonomics, not included **
For me, I'd save money, after selling on my lenses, having equivalent performance on Nikon.
09-27-2013, 08:49 AM   #25
New Member




Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 4
In my opinion , i would rather stay in non ff rather than to change side.. I mean if u have a little less quality or the same quality but u just have to give small amount of money to spent, doesnt it sounds great?
And as in my wallet opinion, taking shot is about the image quality right? So why should spend a lot of money to get the same image quality?
09-27-2013, 09:24 AM   #26
Pentaxian
Wired's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Edmonton, AB
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,525
QuoteOriginally posted by gbeaton Quote
Can someone answer me this question... Why are Digital FF cameras so big?!!! (I have a FF film and its small and light with a big FOV.)

2nd question: Why are modern digital lenses so big?!!! Again, there are many FF lenses from film cameras and they are at least half the size of the equivalent Digital lens. And can't be all motors and electronics. The amount of glass seems to be quite a bit larger.
all the electronics, the rear screen, the computer that does all the fancy stuff, the AF system, and then probably a heat sink to deal with all the heat generated by said electronics.


modern lenses have AF motors built in. So they are naturally larger. a FF series "D" lens from NIkon are still pretty tiny.
09-27-2013, 10:21 AM   #27
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2011
Location: Southern California
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,082
QuoteOriginally posted by gbeaton Quote
Can someone answer me this question... Why are Digital FF cameras so big?!!! (I have a FF film and its small and light with a big FOV.)

2nd question: Why are modern digital lenses so big?!!! Again, there are many FF lenses from film cameras and they are at least half the size of the equivalent Digital lens. And can't be all motors and electronics. The amount of glass seems to be quite a bit larger.
Old film cameras, aside from the shutter, mirror and winding mechanism are pretty much empty boxes. Wait till next month and you will see a new and small Full Frame camera from Sony. You will be losing the optical viewfinder though. I'm sure, with the electronics minimization revolution, you could make a traditional dslr in the same form factor as a Spotmatic or whatever, but smaller isn't always better. I think a lot of pros want a bigger camera. It helps with huge pro zooms. The NEX FF will be there for those that want a small primes platform.
09-27-2013, 10:37 AM   #28
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Aristophanes's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,924
QuoteOriginally posted by gbeaton Quote
Can someone answer me this question... Why are Digital FF cameras so big?!!! (I have a FF film and its small and light with a big FOV.)

2nd question: Why are modern digital lenses so big?!!! Again, there are many FF lenses from film cameras and they are at least half the size of the equivalent Digital lens. And can't be all motors and electronics. The amount of glass seems to be quite a bit larger.
Circuit board, displays, battery, etc. all take up space.

But across all brands the issue is the sensor.

Film was flat and pressed onto a plate. It has some elasticity even.

But sensors cannot move if they are to work properly. They need to be protected against all sorts of shocks and damped against vibrations. Today's DSLR's are bulked up to protect the sensor and its surrounding circuitry in a manner that was never required with film. Even the space gained from loss of the spool and roll container is more than offset by the effort to place a small computer into the camera body.

A for the glass, again the sensor plays a role, as does the new medium of digital viewing. The digital sensor is flat and light needs to hit as near perpendicular as possible. With film an oblique angle still had more than enough of the right wavelength to trigger the chemicals, so a change in optics is necessary for digital. Wider lenses need to have a greater iris and other adjustments as a result, not to mention the capacity to pixel peep frame edge to frame edge invites widespread criticism where sensors are unforgiving.

So we get a little more glass. I'm just touching on a few of the issues. There's more.
09-27-2013, 11:19 AM   #29
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,152
FF can be small, if it sticks to the essentials. My Leica M9 is barely larger than my old M6, and still takes all the same lenses. Leica knew there was a market for a high quality camera without autofocus, power zoom, shake reduction, etc. I use it 98% of the time, and the K-5 the other 2%. Nearly all of my K-5 use is with old, small, manual focus, single-focal-length lenses.
09-27-2013, 11:58 AM   #30
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Seattle
Posts: 7,145
QuoteOriginally posted by TomB_tx Quote
FF can be small, if it sticks to the essentials. My Leica M9 is barely larger than my old M6, and still takes all the same lenses. Leica knew there was a market for a high quality camera without autofocus, power zoom, shake reduction, etc. I use it 98% of the time, and the K-5 the other 2%. Nearly all of my K-5 use is with old, small, manual focus, single-focal-length lenses.
I still shoot a film rangefinder (M7II). A digital version of a film rangefinder still as similar rangefinder limitations compared to the general purpose DSLR. It's understandable why there is a market for the two types of shooters.
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!
cost, da, fa, ff, full-frame, lenses, ltd, pentax, sigma, switch, system
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ned Bunnell giving a final hint of what the new FF will look like? Unsinkable II Photographic Industry and Professionals 6 10-12-2012 07:33 PM
Would you buy the first FF if it is a K-01 or wait for the FF DSLR? slackercruster Pentax DSLR Discussion 19 07-18-2012 10:09 PM
Nature Not good enough to print but worth a look. normhead Post Your Photos! 11 03-22-2012 02:18 PM
Dining at IHOP? Don't forget your wallet OR your sidearm MRRiley General Talk 69 09-09-2011 01:19 PM
Is it not time we take a serious look at ending the two party system? Chwisch87 General Talk 62 11-10-2010 10:06 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:39 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