Pentax FF with Sony 12MP sensor?

DSims · 04-13-2014, 07:20 PM

Originally posted by normhead

The D4s image is sharper and has more Dynamic Range... at 25,600 ISO you can believe the images, or believe the frauds.

The D4s image sure looks better. And the "actual" measured ISO is nearly identical on the 2 cameras, according to DxO - so that's a fair comparison. But the photos look like they had to use a different lens, or at least a different FL on a zoom.

EDIT: I was wrong - they're still using the Sigma 70mm macro on both these cameras, as they've done for a while.

Last edited by DSims; 04-13-2014 at 07:59 PM.

ElJamoquio · 04-13-2014, 07:56 PM

Jpg's......

Imaging resource.....

BwahahahahHahahahHHahahaha

DSims · 04-13-2014, 08:00 PM

Journalists, sports photographers, BwahahahahHahahahHHahahaha

ElJamoquio · 04-13-2014, 08:13 PM

How many times do I have to say that frame rate improves with 12 mp? Is this the third time? Fourth time?

It's the same story with file size. ...

normhead · 04-14-2014, 04:24 AM

IN other words as usual ElJay, you got nothing. Ridicule is so often the debating tool used by people who have nothing to offer.

ElJamoquio · 04-14-2014, 05:59 AM

" I have plenty ", Norm. I've done my own analysis. I'm not calling anyone's toddler fat. I have my own analysis, and I it agrees with DxOMark. There are obvious potential errors (comparing jpg engines, comparing pictures at unequal magnification, comparing raw but then disallowing noise reduction) that people can make, and I've pointed them out.

There are advantages to smaller resolutions. Those advantages are frame rate and storage size.

**Rondec** · 04-14-2014, 06:53 AM

Originally posted by normhead

IN other words as usual ElJay, you got nothing. Ridicule is so often the debating tool used by people who have nothing to offer.

I'm not sure why you are so doubting of the DXO Mark site? I am not a big fan of their lens testing, but I do think they do a better job of evaluating sensors than any one out there. DP Review and Imaging Resource tend to demonstrate efficacy of jpeg engines -- handy if you shot jpegs (I don't), but not worth so much otherwise.

Edit: You have made the point in other threads, Norm, that the amount of high iso (greater than 6400) you do is minimal, so I would think you would be in the camp where you would want significantly better performance in the below iso 6400 range, than slightly better performance above that.

Last edited by Rondec; 04-14-2014 at 07:11 AM.

jcdoss · 04-14-2014, 06:59 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by johnmflores

A niche of a niche has worked quite well for GoPro, Red, BlackMagic, etc...

Some might begin to think that Pentaxians are actually the Knights Who Say Niche!

ElJamoquio · 04-14-2014, 07:11 AM

Originally posted by Rondec

I'm not sure why you are so doubting of the DXO Mark site? I am not a big fan of their lens testing, but I do think they do a better job of evaluating sensors than any one out there. DP Review and Imaging Resource tend to demonstrate efficacy of jpeg engines -- handy if you shot jpegs (I don't), but not worth so much otherwise.

DxO has 'always' been the best tester-of-sensors.

I used to hate-hate-hate DxOMarks' lens testing. Recently I realized that their testing is fine and objective, it's just that

1) trying to summarize all of the objective tests into one number is a bit too much
1.1) and that doesn't even try to get into the subject of test validity- what is a valid test or metric for a wide-angle, small aperture lens and a normal prime and a 100mm macro are quite different
2) there appears to be no weighting for size/weight/price
3) there's still quite a bit of subjectivity required in lens tests
4) even in their objective measurements, it would be better if they spec'd some/more numbers rather than just all color-contour plots.

I suspect their actual testing is top notch, but their analysis of the tests is sub-par.

**Rondec** · 04-14-2014, 07:14 AM

Originally posted by ElJamoquio

DxO has 'always' been the best tester-of-sensors.

I used to hate-hate-hate DxOMarks' lens testing. Recently I realized that their testing is fine and objective, it's just that

1) trying to summarize all of the objective tests into one number is a bit too much
1.1) and that doesn't even try to get into the subject of test validity- what is a valid test or metric for a wide-angle, small aperture lens and a normal prime and a 100mm macro are quite different
2) there appears to be no weighting for size/weight/price
3) there's still quite a bit of subjectivity required in lens tests
4) even in their objective measurements, it would be better if they spec'd some/more numbers rather than just all color-contour plots.

I suspect their actual testing is top notch, but their analysis of the tests is sub-par.

You may be right. However their lens data is probably based on one or two copies of a lens, which can give skewed results -- the Sigma 35mm f1.4 sure looks a lot better on the D7100 than the K3, but that is probably copy variation -- otherwise can't really explain the results.

jogiba · 04-14-2014, 08:36 AM

Originally posted by Winder

What if Pentax chose to go the opposite direction with the K-1 (or what ever they will call it)? Instead of going 24 or 36 MPs they chose to use the new 12MP sensor from Sony.

Ricoh should come out with all three (12,24 and 36mp.).

Winder · 04-15-2014, 01:56 PM

Originally posted by jogiba

Ricoh should come out with all three (12,24 and 36mp.).

That would be really nice. Of course the safe bet is 24 or 36. The 36MP with select-able AA filter is probably the safest choice. I think Ricoh plays it safe, but they keep talking about being different. The 12MP would be different and if it does offer 2-stops better than the D800 then it will have a market.

I used my 12MP 5D for years and I have no problem going back to 12MP if it gives my better high ISO and DR. I shoot mainly events and music so I see the need.

**monochrome** · 04-15-2014, 02:31 PM

Originally posted by Winder

but they keep talking about being different.

645z is Capital-D Different!

**Lowell Goudge** · 04-15-2014, 02:56 PM

Originally posted by DSims

If it happens, it won't be their only FF model, and it won't be first.

But it could be their last because at the price no now will ever purchase one

If it were a data back to go into a film body at a good price I can see a 12MP sensor sure, but a FF DSLR with the resolution of the *istD. No thanks unless it can do something like ISO25 with absolutely no noise at all

DSims · 04-15-2014, 04:54 PM

Originally posted by Lowell Goudge

But it could be their last because at the price no now will ever purchase one

If it were a data back to go into a film body at a good price I can see a 12MP sensor sure, but a FF DSLR with the resolution of the *istD. No thanks unless it can do something like ISO25 with absolutely no noise at all

Don't you think it would have zero noise at ISO 25 (at least insofar as is possible with digital)?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Nature Horses - SMC DA 40mm XS on Pentax FF with Kodak sensor	manntax	Post Your Photos!	13	07-13-2013 12:32 PM
New Sony Sensor with phase detection AF pixels on sensor!	Docrwm	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	8	08-22-2012 04:28 AM
Fist the Nikon D800, now Sony so is Pentax next with the 36mp FF sensor ?	jogiba	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	19	02-14-2012 10:15 AM
New Sony sensor SNR on par with D3 FF!	JohnBee	Pentax News and Rumors	38	09-19-2010 05:19 PM
POLL - Pentax K7 using the 12mp Sony CMOS	eigelb	Pentax DSLR Discussion	28	12-11-2009 11:29 AM

04-13-2014, 07:20 PM	#46
DSims Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,236	Originally posted by normhead The D4s image is sharper and has more Dynamic Range... at 25,600 ISO you can believe the images, or believe the frauds. The D4s image sure looks better. And the "actual" measured ISO is nearly identical on the 2 cameras, according to DxO - so that's a fair comparison. But the photos look like they had to use a different lens, or at least a different FL on a zoom. EDIT: I was wrong - they're still using the Sigma 70mm macro on both these cameras, as they've done for a while. Last edited by DSims; 04-13-2014 at 07:59 PM.

04-13-2014, 07:56 PM	#47
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Jpg's...... Imaging resource..... BwahahahahHahahahHHahahaha

04-13-2014, 08:00 PM	#48
DSims Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,236	Journalists, sports photographers, BwahahahahHahahahHHahahaha

04-13-2014, 08:13 PM	#49
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	How many times do I have to say that frame rate improves with 12 mp? Is this the third time? Fourth time? It's the same story with file size. ...

04-14-2014, 04:24 AM	#50
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	IN other words as usual ElJay, you got nothing. Ridicule is so often the debating tool used by people who have nothing to offer.

04-14-2014, 05:59 AM	#51
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	" I have plenty ", Norm. I've done my own analysis. I'm not calling anyone's toddler fat. I have my own analysis, and I it agrees with DxOMark. There are obvious potential errors (comparing jpg engines, comparing pictures at unequal magnification, comparing raw but then disallowing noise reduction) that people can make, and I've pointed them out. There are advantages to smaller resolutions. Those advantages are frame rate and storage size.

04-14-2014, 06:53 AM	#52
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	Originally posted by normhead IN other words as usual ElJay, you got nothing. Ridicule is so often the debating tool used by people who have nothing to offer. I'm not sure why you are so doubting of the DXO Mark site? I am not a big fan of their lens testing, but I do think they do a better job of evaluating sensors than any one out there. DP Review and Imaging Resource tend to demonstrate efficacy of jpeg engines -- handy if you shot jpegs (I don't), but not worth so much otherwise. Edit: You have made the point in other threads, Norm, that the amount of high iso (greater than 6400) you do is minimal, so I would think you would be in the camp where you would want significantly better performance in the below iso 6400 range, than slightly better performance above that. Last edited by Rondec; 04-14-2014 at 07:11 AM.

04-14-2014, 06:59 AM - 1 Like	#53
jcdoss Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: Ingelheim am Rhein, Germany Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,769	Originally posted by johnmflores A niche of a niche has worked quite well for GoPro, Red, BlackMagic, etc... Some might begin to think that Pentaxians are actually the Knights Who Say Niche!

04-14-2014, 07:11 AM	#54
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Originally posted by Rondec I'm not sure why you are so doubting of the DXO Mark site? I am not a big fan of their lens testing, but I do think they do a better job of evaluating sensors than any one out there. DP Review and Imaging Resource tend to demonstrate efficacy of jpeg engines -- handy if you shot jpegs (I don't), but not worth so much otherwise. DxO has 'always' been the best tester-of-sensors. I used to hate-hate-hate DxOMarks' lens testing. Recently I realized that their testing is fine and objective, it's just that 1) trying to summarize all of the objective tests into one number is a bit too much 1.1) and that doesn't even try to get into the subject of test validity- what is a valid test or metric for a wide-angle, small aperture lens and a normal prime and a 100mm macro are quite different 2) there appears to be no weighting for size/weight/price 3) there's still quite a bit of subjectivity required in lens tests 4) even in their objective measurements, it would be better if they spec'd some/more numbers rather than just all color-contour plots. I suspect their actual testing is top notch, but their analysis of the tests is sub-par.

04-14-2014, 07:14 AM	#55
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	Originally posted by ElJamoquio DxO has 'always' been the best tester-of-sensors. I used to hate-hate-hate DxOMarks' lens testing. Recently I realized that their testing is fine and objective, it's just that 1) trying to summarize all of the objective tests into one number is a bit too much 1.1) and that doesn't even try to get into the subject of test validity- what is a valid test or metric for a wide-angle, small aperture lens and a normal prime and a 100mm macro are quite different 2) there appears to be no weighting for size/weight/price 3) there's still quite a bit of subjectivity required in lens tests 4) even in their objective measurements, it would be better if they spec'd some/more numbers rather than just all color-contour plots. I suspect their actual testing is top notch, but their analysis of the tests is sub-par. You may be right. However their lens data is probably based on one or two copies of a lens, which can give skewed results -- the Sigma 35mm f1.4 sure looks a lot better on the D7100 than the K3, but that is probably copy variation -- otherwise can't really explain the results.

04-14-2014, 08:36 AM	#56
jogiba Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Millstone,NJ Posts: 6,491	Originally posted by Winder What if Pentax chose to go the opposite direction with the K-1 (or what ever they will call it)? Instead of going 24 or 36 MPs they chose to use the new 12MP sensor from Sony. Ricoh should come out with all three (12,24 and 36mp.).

04-15-2014, 01:56 PM	#57
Winder Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Tennessee Posts: 6,617 Original Poster	Originally posted by jogiba Ricoh should come out with all three (12,24 and 36mp.). That would be really nice. Of course the safe bet is 24 or 36. The 36MP with select-able AA filter is probably the safest choice. I think Ricoh plays it safe, but they keep talking about being different. The 12MP would be different and if it does offer 2-stops better than the D800 then it will have a market. I used my 12MP 5D for years and I have no problem going back to 12MP if it gives my better high ISO and DR. I shoot mainly events and music so I see the need.

04-15-2014, 02:31 PM	#58
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Originally posted by Winder but they keep talking about being different. 645z is Capital-D Different!

04-15-2014, 02:56 PM	#59
Lowell Goudge Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 17,888	Originally posted by DSims If it happens, it won't be their only FF model, and it won't be first. But it could be their last because at the price no now will ever purchase one If it were a data back to go into a film body at a good price I can see a 12MP sensor sure, but a FF DSLR with the resolution of the *istD. No thanks unless it can do something like ISO25 with absolutely no noise at all

04-15-2014, 04:54 PM	#60
DSims Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,236	Originally posted by Lowell Goudge But it could be their last because at the price no now will ever purchase one If it were a data back to go into a film body at a good price I can see a 12MP sensor sure, but a FF DSLR with the resolution of the istD. No thanks unless it can do something like ISO25 with absolutely no noise at all Don't you think it would* have zero noise at ISO 25 (at least insofar as is possible with digital)?