[PPPPPP42]

I would say the lengths people go to around here to convince other people their photographic wants/needs are incorrect borders on idiotic, but unfortunately we crossed that border and lost sight of it a long time ago.

Meanwhile Pentax and the market at large will do what they will do independent of any conclusions you arrive at here. Just relax and let it happen.

[bossa]

I agree.

That is a sweet shot mate. So subtle.. the colour..

[Rondec]

That is a sweet shot mate. So subtle.. the colour..

Thank you.

[OldNoob]

I was surprised to read this assessment from Mike Johnstone, Online Photographer, The Online Photographer

QuoteQuote:
Many have said that full frame (24x36mm) is taking over (2012 was the Year of FF, no question), but I think the opposite: Micro 4/3 is almost too big for most people and most uses. FF will die out, I think, except as the "medium format" for professionals, and the public will end up with smaller-than-APS-C sensors in the cameras it uses almost exclusively for video and stills in electronic display formats. I just really hope that the eventual standard will be something as large as 1-inch.


Read more at: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/169-pentax-full-frame/247156-online-photo...#ixzz2rwh2lbfJ

I don't believe anyone out there knows how the future will work itself out. Mike is not only saying that there will be a lot fewer FF cameras, but fewer APS as well "and just hopes that the eventual standard is as large as 1 inch".

Overhead costs of production go down as more customers buy into a product. I don't think personally that FF cameras will take over the majority of DSLRS - they are about 9% of DSLRs now, i think. But who really needs DSLRs with FF or APS, there's only a small percentage of professional photographers out there. For the rest of us, its art or a social activity that drives us, not an activity that is central to our survival.

So are there enough professionals out there to sustain FF by themselves - i doubt it. But there probably is enough enthusiast interest to sustain FF where it is today - about 10% of the more professional cameras - so called DSLRs. IMO. Can't see APS going away anytime soon.

Obviously the writer has not gotten his hands on a A7r

[texaspentaxeon]

As sad as it is... my Photography and photojournalism classes have been urging me to upgrade to a modern camera.

What is modern you ask? An iPhone!

They have had more and more professional photographers coming into lecture telling us that they do most of their professional work with their smart phones.

I'm only 22ys old, but call me an old curmudgeon. I think DSLR's offer far better flexibility in the creation of images due to their high resolution, interchangeable lenses, and yes, a Prism Viewfinder! The images I capture have been well recieved and yet I am told that I am using a system that is archaic.

I say YES to a Pentax Full Frame as a so-called "modern medium format" and I will continue to buy APS-C censored Pentax bodies as they are upgraded and enhanced.

[ElJamoquio]

Phones are ok in a pinch, but their user interface is wretched. I'd rather use a p&s.

[OldNoob]

As sad as it is... my Photography and photojournalism classes have been urging me to upgrade to a modern camera.

What is modern you ask? An iPhone!

They have had more and more professional photographers coming into lecture telling us that they do most of their professional work with their smart phones.

I'm only 22ys old, but call me an old curmudgeon. I think DSLR's offer far better flexibility in the creation of images due to their high resolution, interchangeable lenses, and yes, a Prism Viewfinder! The images I capture have been well recieved and yet I am told that I am using a system that is archaic.

I say YES to a Pentax Full Frame as a so-called "modern medium format" and I will continue to buy APS-C censored Pentax bodies as they are upgraded and enhanced.

Well there is a 40mp and 41mp smart phone out now. but the image quality looks like a 16mp dslr. but very noisy for a 40mp camera http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=Lumia+1020

---

Last edited by OldNoob; 02-01-2014 at 05:26 PM.

[Rondec]

As sad as it is... my Photography and photojournalism classes have been urging me to upgrade to a modern camera.

What is modern you ask? An iPhone!

They have had more and more professional photographers coming into lecture telling us that they do most of their professional work with their smart phones.

I'm only 22ys old, but call me an old curmudgeon. I think DSLR's offer far better flexibility in the creation of images due to their high resolution, interchangeable lenses, and yes, a Prism Viewfinder! The images I capture have been well recieved and yet I am told that I am using a system that is archaic.

I say YES to a Pentax Full Frame as a so-called "modern medium format" and I will continue to buy APS-C censored Pentax bodies as they are upgraded and enhanced.

I phones are tough to use as a real photographic tool -- at least my i phone 5 is. There is just not much way to adjust settings. If you want to stabilize it, it is not easy to do. Some other phones have more photographic capability, but none are great in my opinion.

To me, the biggest thing that makes SLRs better is the glass that you can mount on them. As to OVF versus EVF, it isn't a big deal to me, as long as the electronic viewfinder doesn't lag, but the ones I have used give me eye strain and don't feel natural to me. But I'm sure over time they will improve.

[Ash]

The Nokia with a 41Mp camera isn't much to write home about. The Mp race to me is overrated. The glass in front of the sensor has exponentially greater value to the photographer and result that the number of Mp a phone camera has is largely irrelevant IMO. I'd have a *ist D with DA primes ahead of that Nokia any day for photography, but clearly the cost and size of the SLR + lenses puts a pragmatic spin to its utility.

My iPhone is admittedly used a lot for photos, but rarely if ever for photos I want to have as keepsakes.

[jsherman999]

The Nokia with a 41Mp camera isn't much to write home about. The Mp race to me is overrated. The glass in front of the sensor has exponentially greater value to the photographer and result that the number of Mp a phone camera has is largely irrelevant IMO. I'd have a *ist D with DA primes ahead of that Nokia any day for photography, but clearly the cost and size of the SLR + lenses puts a pragmatic spin to its utility.

My iPhone is admittedly used a lot for photos, but rarely if ever for photos I want to have as keepsakes.

The IQ is still radically different in most important ways:



Folks can take a well-lit shot where the the single FL plays well and claim they see 'DSLR quality', but the image doesn't hold up to even a small amount of PP, cropping or enlargement. Forget about any quality beyond base ISO.

And you know what? The IQ isn't even the biggest problem with phone cameras - the ergonomics and shooting interface is, followed by the lack of FL variety and AF lock.

This is coming form a guy who shoots his phone camera constantly, and likes the results - and understands how they rate in comparison to the cheapest DSLR + kit lens (not well.)

Summer Ball, iphone


.

[OldNoob]

For journalism though,, its becoming less print oriented and more web publishing , where a crappy noisy 41mp image can be shrunken down to a 72dpi 6x4 image for a web article.. and image quality is not that big of a deal for a news story that will be totally out of circulation in a weeks time. SADLY. However for Advertising, Portrait, Event and Published Literature work, the phone has yet a long way to go to prove itself.

[philbaum]

For journalism though,, its becoming less print oriented and more web publishing , where a crappy noisy 41mp image can be shrunken down to a 72dpi 6x4 image for a web article.. and image quality is not that big of a deal for a news story that will be totally out of circulation in a weeks time. SADLY. However for Advertising, Portrait, Event and Published Literature work, the phone has yet a long way to go to prove itself.

I was about to write something similar, you've summed it up great. I know for our local newspaper, in a small town, the photographer usually used a PS or bridge camera 5 or more years back. I can see where a smart phone would do just fine.

Fine art photos, published prints such as wildlife books, travel books, event photography like NFL :-), would require something more robust.

By all means - see if you can convince a lot of fellow students to throw out their DSLRs in favor of smart phones. The less competition the better :-), IMO.

[rrstuff]

I was surprised to read this assessment from Mike Johnstone, Online Photographer, The Online Photographer



I don't believe anyone out there knows how the future will work itself out. Mike is not only saying that there will be a lot fewer FF cameras, but fewer APS as well "and just hopes that the eventual standard is as large as 1 inch".

Overhead costs of production go down as more customers buy into a product. I don't think personally that FF cameras will take over the majority of DSLRS - they are about 9% of DSLRs now, i think. But who really needs DSLRs with FF or APS, there's only a small percentage of professional photographers out there. For the rest of us, its art or a social activity that drives us, not an activity that is central to our survival.

So are there enough professionals out there to sustain FF by themselves - i doubt it. But there probably is enough enthusiast interest to sustain FF where it is today - about 10% of the more professional cameras - so called DSLRs. IMO. Can't see APS going away anytime soon.

I can see why. I am annoyed with the low depth of focus and expensive lenses of bigger sensors. And if you look at sensor performance, when scaled down to a working aperture, it is the same regardless of the sensor size. For example the OM-D E-M5 has a dxomark iso of around 800. The Nikon D800 around 3200. However, you will need to stop down two stops to have the same field of depth on D800 so you will end up with four times higher iso and noise levels identical for both cameras.
All comes to the same point at a several times more expensive price point!

[jogiba]

I think full frame compact mirrorless cameras will outsell large full frame DSLRs in the future and the top selling cameras will be the mirrorless smartphone cameras just like today that are selling at a billion a year rate that will shoot 4K videos for the 4K UHD TVs that will drop in price to todays 1080p HDTVs. Todays smallest mirrorless APS-C system cameras are not that much larger than the Pentax Q and will have EVFs that will be better than any OVF. The people that still want a large retro DSLR are getting up in age and camera companies know that so what you see today will be the last of that niche camera category.

[jsherman999]

I can see why. I am annoyed with the low depth of focus and expensive lenses of bigger sensors.

And if you look at sensor performance, when scaled down to a working aperture, it is the same regardless of the sensor size. For example the OM-D E-M5 has a dxomark iso of around 800. The Nikon D800 around 3200. However, you will need to stop down two stops to have the same field of depth on D800 so you will end up with four times higher iso and noise levels identical for both cameras.

You assume that everyone always wants huge depth of field and are just fine with noise, so they're always stopping down their FF cameras to match the ideal look of micro 4/3? (Do m/43 shooters ever wish, in their deepest REM dreams, to go the other way? Occasionally get less DOF, less noise? )

All comes to the same point at a several times more expensive price point!

You have to stop down your OM-D several times to match the deep DOF of the Nokia phone camera! This means that you've overpaid for your OMD!

.