Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-09-2014, 10:10 AM   #61
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,258
QuoteOriginally posted by carrrlangas Quote
I just finished reading the Lumolab paper on "Camera equivalence" LumoLabs -- Camera Equivalence -- Whitepaper
I suggest anyone to read it if with doubts about how to proceed on a format comparison. I conclude that the Dr.Camera analysis is not valid but hes onto something with using available lenses for each system... Which is the most cost effective solution?
I don't think there is an easy answer. What people tend to do is compare low end full frame lenses with high end APS-C lenses (how many of those are there?) and then come to the conclusion that full frame is "cost effective." This is all even more confusing, when you consider that you are completely able to shoot a 50mm f1.8 or, an 85mm f1.8 on a crop body. If you are someone who shoots long glass a lot, APS-C definitely can be more cost effective -- considering that there just aren't "equivalent" full frame options. You can get a 300mm f4 that is pretty reasonable, but can you get a full frame 450mm f5.6 that is going to be sharp wide open? The closest I can see is the Sigma 50-500 and that is most definitely not sharp wide open.

Anyway, to me, there is no particular cost to APS-C, since I have built a lens line up that fits APS-C. If I needed a 30mm f0.9 lens, then of course I would be struggling, but I don't.

04-09-2014, 10:30 AM   #62
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Parallax's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Dakota
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,623
QuoteOriginally posted by cali92rs Quote
There are more than one variable in every single system in the universe.
Right, so perhaps I should have said more than one significant variable. You can't give a test group of people over 60 a cardiac drug, and another test group of people under thirty Flintstones vitamins and then declare that, because the second group had fewer heart attacks over the 5 year study period, Flinstones vitamins are more effective than the cardiac drug.
This was clearly a case of designing tests and cherry picking data to validate the author's assumption/theory/prejudice.
04-09-2014, 10:37 AM   #63
Veteran Member
Nesster's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NJ USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 13,047
QuoteOriginally posted by Parallax Quote
Right, so perhaps I should have said more than one significant variable. You can't give a test group of people over 60 a cardiac drug, and another test group of people under thirty Flintstones vitamins and then declare that, because the second group had fewer heart attacks over the 5 year study period, Flinstones vitamins are more effective than the cardiac drug.
Well, you can do that, but you might not be right

So, I don't have a non-AA APS-C camera. But I have a D600 and a K-x and a K whatwasit the thing before the 50? K30? And I have some Adaptall lenses. Let's say I use the 90/2.5 macro.

To make things comparable, do I change the distance to my target to get the same size on the sensor (i.e. closer for the FF), OR do I keep the distance the same so the APS-C is a crop of the FF image? And then what do I do? What does that show? How do I normalize the pixels? What does that mean anyway? And do I have to compensate the aperture between the two bodies? And which color and character Flintstone vitamin will be sharpest? I think Wilma. I think Fred's the softest. Though sometimes I wonder about Barney too.
04-09-2014, 11:12 AM   #64
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Parallax Quote
This was clearly a case of designing tests and cherry picking data to validate the author's assumption/theory/prejudice.
It's clearly not that case, IMO.

---------- Post added 04-09-14 at 10:13 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by carrrlangas Quote
I just finished reading the Lumolab paper on "Camera equivalence" LumoLabs -- Camera Equivalence -- Whitepaper
I suggest anyone to read it if with doubts about how to proceed on a format comparison. I conclude that the Dr.Camera analysis is not valid but hes onto something with using available lenses for each system... Which is the most cost effective solution?
I've read both and I conclude that it is incredibly valid. The question at hand was whether a 24MP APS-C with/without AA filter had results close to a 24MP FF.

04-09-2014, 11:58 AM   #65
Pentaxian
cali92rs's Avatar

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 3,346
QuoteOriginally posted by Parallax Quote
This was clearly a case of designing tests and cherry picking data to validate the author's assumption/theory/prejudice.
I disagree...I think what is clearly going on is that PRIC has not yet released a FF camera, so Pentax loyalists downplay the improvement.

However, that will all go away once PRIC does decide to release a FF camera. The it will be best thing since sliced bread.
04-09-2014, 12:12 PM   #66
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,345
How about Pentaxians who are waiting for one? Are they "downplaying the improvement" too?
04-09-2014, 12:12 PM   #67
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,258
QuoteOriginally posted by cali92rs Quote
I disagree...I think what is clearly going on is that PRIC has not yet released a FF camera, so Pentax loyalists downplay the improvement.

However, that will all go away once PRIC does decide to release a FF camera. The it will be best thing since sliced bread.
I don't know. I just don't know that 24 megapixel full frame provides a lot of benefit over 24 megapixel APS-C if you are shooting in the f4 to f8 range. If you are shooting wide open a lot on APS-C, then you are much more likely to see a bump in resolution.

I do hope if Ricoh releases full frame (they probably will), they choose to go with the 36 megapixel sensor.
04-09-2014, 12:26 PM   #68
Pentaxian
cali92rs's Avatar

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 3,346
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
How about Pentaxians who are waiting for one? Are they "downplaying the improvement" too?
No, I was overgeneralizing. It's just a common theme in the FF forum.

04-10-2014, 05:49 AM   #69
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by Nesster Quote
And which color and character Flintstone vitamin will be sharpest? .
They are equally photogenic, but cherry-flavored ones taste superior to all other colors. Especially those 'orange' pieces of crap, bleh.
04-11-2014, 07:14 AM - 1 Like   #70
Veteran Member
awaldram's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Hampshire
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 720
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
The assumption is that you are using one format to recreate the shots you take on another format. This isn't actually totally untrue. If I would get full frame, I would probably want a 20-ish mm prime and I guess I would shoot at f11, since I use a DA 15 limited at f8 on APS-C and I am shooting for "everything in focus."
I have a problem with this

why is 35mm the golden shot?

taking the concept logically you should be shooting for plate (as in larger than MF) if DoF is the goal?

The whole idea of 'equivalence ' is nothing but willy waving for a 35mm wanna be's

I don't pick up a 1/2.33 sensor camera and envision a 35mm shot I use it as a 1/2.33 camera!

The whole concept of xx format is better than yy format and any manufacturer the doesn't produce xx format fans are only saying it because they don't have xx.

OMG it's like a three year old ...... have a big lolly you don't have big lolly you only have a small lolly la la la !!!

To produce pseudo 'papers' on the subject is so far right field the men in white coats should be put on alert !!

There are reasons for anyone to use a variety of format sensors non are better than other unless you want to wave your willy and use 'equivalence': lol:

any other conclusion and your probably not shooting the correct format for your photography today.

As to the op question the smallest sensor with the highest pixel density offers the highest resolution as far as sensor go , But the lens will limit that to the point where no gains are available.

But in the APs-c Vs FF then at present as no 50 MP FF exists today and FF lens can be used on APS-c and neither format is out resolving the lens at all apertures then today APS-c out-resolves FF.

Of cause if you push equivalence the other way and use a 300 aps-c and force 450mm on FF then we can be even more anal.

Last edited by awaldram; 04-11-2014 at 07:22 AM.
04-11-2014, 07:24 AM   #71
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
Original Poster
I want to take the picture I want to take.

I want to know whether it's going to be a $5000 system or a $3000 system.
04-11-2014, 07:25 AM   #72
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,258
QuoteOriginally posted by awaldram Quote
I have a problem with this

why is 35mm the golden shot?

taking the concept logically you should be shooting for plate (as in larger than MF) if DoF is the goal?

The whole idea of 'equivalence ' is nothing but willy waving for a 35mm wanna be's

I don't pick up a 1/2.33 sensor camera and envision a 35mm shot I use it as a 1/2.33 camera!

The whole concept of xx format is better than yy format and any manufacturer the doesn't produce xx format fans are only saying it because they don't have xx.

OMG it's like a three year old ...... have a big lolly you don't have big lolly you only have a small lolly la la la !!!

To produce pseudo 'papers' on the subject is so far right field the men in white coats should be put on alert !!

There are reasons for anyone to use a variety of format sensors non are better than other unless you want to wave your willy and use 'equivalence': lol:

any other conclusion and your probably not shooting the correct format for your photography today.

As to the op question the smallest sensor with the highest pixel density offers the highest resolution as far as sensor go , But the lens will limit that to the point where no gains are available.

But in the APs-c Vs FF then at present as no 50 MP FF exists today and FF lens can be used on APS-c and neither format is out resolving the lens at all apertures then today APS-c out-resolves FF.
I disagree with OP, in that I don't think that there is that much difference in resolution for most lenses in most situations. I do think that if I have a favorite focal length on APS-C, it makes sense that I would like a similar focal length on another format.

Unfortunately, many people use equivalence as a battle axe to bludgeon folks who happen to like a smaller format than full frame into submission.
04-11-2014, 07:29 AM   #73
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
Unfortunately, many people use equivalence as a battle axe to bludgeon folks who happen to like a smaller format than full frame into submission.
Yup. We should make a special forum for ff-folk to talk about their nonsense so the APS-C people can carry on in peace...

04-11-2014, 07:42 AM   #74
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,258
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
Yup. We should make a special forum for ff-folk to talk about their nonsense so the APS-C people can carry on in peace...

Funny.

I understand the point/need of full frame. I understand equivalence. I just don't always see all the benefits that others seem to say that they see.

04-11-2014, 09:11 AM   #75
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by awaldram Quote

The whole idea of 'equivalence ' is nothing but willy waving for a 35mm wanna be's
No, it's simply a way to predict how your lenses or focal lengths and F-stops will 'look' on a different format. It's especially useful if you're going to be shooting two formats that can share the same lenses - like FF and aps-c.


QuoteQuote:
To produce pseudo 'papers' on the subject is so far right field the men in white coats should be put on alert !!
Yes, Falk Lumo and Joseph James need to listen to you!

Also, Note that nothing in either of those sites/papers say FF is across the board better than aps-c or a smaller format - they just help point out areas where a larger sensor can bring an advantage, and other areas where it doesn't. Joseph James is certainly not an FF 'advocate'. People who get mad at equivalence baffle me, it's like getting mad at F=MA.

.



---------- Post added 04-11-14 at 10:15 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
Yup. We should make a special forum for ff-folk to talk about their nonsense so the APS-C people can carry on in peace...

Yes - why doesn't a subforum like that exist?

.

Last edited by jsherman999; 04-11-2014 at 09:23 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, aperture, aps-c, camera, check, da, dof, equivalence, f/8, ff, ff resolution, full-frame, lenses, mf, pentax, photo, photography, post, practice, reasons, resolution, sensor, shot, shutter, theory, time, wrong
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How to shoot a wedding with APS-C and FF nick52 Photographic Technique 8 08-05-2013 05:14 PM
K-5IIs reviews at Amazon - Better than FF Canon? Docrwm Pentax K-5 4 02-19-2013 12:12 PM
Quick question regarding field of view - FF vs APS-C glass? Julie Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 12-23-2012 05:33 PM
APS-C does not increase focal length over FF, it decreases field of view. TomTextura Photographic Technique 135 06-09-2012 04:58 PM
What is your best example for FF over APS-C? leeak Pentax DSLR Discussion 21 12-11-2008 12:25 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:45 PM. | 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