Do you really need a FF ? Why ?

lesmore49 · 04-20-2014, 04:50 PM

As far as FF bokeh, blur etc....I do find that my Limited series of lenses coupled with my ASP-C K-5, Km, K10D.... are really quite wonderful at isolating and making a very sharp portrait....with very nice blur behind the subject. I don't know if a FF would make a significant improvement on this picture type.

I have the 21, 40 and 70 Limiteds....I cannot recommend them enough.

Parallax · 04-20-2014, 06:06 PM

Originally posted by lesmore49

As far as FF bokeh, blur etc....I do find that my Limited series of lenses coupled with my ASP-C K-5, Km, K10D.... are really quite wonderful at isolating and making a very sharp portrait....with very nice blur behind the subject.......

You lie! That's not possible with a sensor smaller than 24x36mm.

lesmore49 · 04-20-2014, 06:12 PM

Originally posted by Parallax

You lie! That's not possible with a sensor smaller than 24x36mm.

I know...I know....you caught me !

aleonx3 · 04-20-2014, 06:21 PM

If there is such a scenario in the future when the cost of producing FF sensor is more economical than other bigger or smaller sensors because no one would buy it (hence no market or no money to make for camera makers), then I would 'want' a FF but I still don't 'need' one as everybody will be dumping the smaller APS-C or 4/3 sensor cameras and they will be virtually 'free'. But then, I realise that it can only happen in a dream...

Honestly, AFAIC, biggest draw for me would be a bigger/brighter viewfinder and ability to use FA lens in its native focal length; shadower DOF is a bonus.

lesmore49 · 04-21-2014, 07:59 AM

I'm the OP. I would ask if we can we get back to my thread. Thank you. I appreciate it.

If you want to continue to discuss your issue, please start another thread. Again thank you.

Les

Parallax · 04-21-2014, 08:22 AM - **2 Likes**

I have deleted several posts here. Let's start over, shall we?

**Rondec** · 04-21-2014, 08:28 AM

Originally posted by Parallax

I have deleted several posts here. Let's start over, shall we?

Beautiful. It is like a brand new thread!

normhead · 04-21-2014, 08:33 AM

I need an FF camera, because one would probably end once and for all my fantasy of owning a 645D or Z. There's more difference between APS-c and FF than there is between an FF and and a 645D. If the gap between FF and APS-c is too small for me to contemplate, then the gap between FF and a 645D is even smaller and less conceivable as an upgrade. An FF could save me a pile of money, should I give into temptation and buy one. Half of me says, hold out for a 645D or Z, the other half says, if Pentax comes out with an FF, go for it... save yourself a pile of money.

.

Parallax · 04-21-2014, 08:44 AM

Originally posted by normhead

I need an FF camera, because one would probably end once and for all my fantasy of owning a 645D or Z

Norm, if you can actually make your mind work that way, I envy you. I can't begin to add up the money I've wasted over the years by having convinced myself I could make do with something that was less than what I really wanted. I almost always have ended up buying what I really wanted later.
My first digital wasn't a DSLR as I wanted, it was Sony's best compact. That appeased me for about a month. Off to Ritz Photo. "I don't need the K10D, the K100D will be just fine". Yeah, right. 2 months after that I was the proud owner of the K10D, having wasted the money difference between what I paid and sold the Sony and the K100D for. Unless you have some super-human power, save yourself some money; buy the 645z.

**fretlessdavis** · 04-21-2014, 08:45 AM

The difference between FF and digital MF is actually quite large. The 44x33 sensor is 1.68 times the size of a 24x36 size sensor. For small prints it's not huge, but big prints it starts making a difference.

Also, keep in mind, resolution is dictated by lens and sensor/film size. I think we've gotten to practical limits of resolution for APS-C, and we're close with FF sensors. Higher MP sensors in the future will be more of a difference on MF than FF or APS-C. Also, with the exception of the latest generation of the 25mm, everything is still compatible with film, so there's room to grow.

If the next generation sensor came out from Sony, and was 40x50mm or even a full 42mmx56mm, Pentax really could slap the sensor in the next 645D camera, and more or less have everything work.

---------- Post added 04-21-14 at 08:50 AM ----------

Woops-- I've been back and forth between here and the 645Z thread. Sorry for the FF dissing =/.

I'd love an FF, too-- but I think an APS-C, and a digital MF like the Pentax would be the perfect one two punch...

... With a Q in the pocket to capture every situation

I'm glad I don't have the $$$ to feed my addiction with digital gear.... I'm in enough trouble as it is with all my film gear, hehe.

normhead · 04-21-2014, 08:53 AM

Originally posted by Parallax

Norm, if you can actually make your mind work that way, I envy you. I can't begin to add up the money I've wasted over the years by having convinced myself I could make do with something that was less than what I really wanted. I almost always have ended up buying what I really wanted later.
My first digital wasn't a DSLR as I wanted, it was Sony's best compact. That appeased me for about a month. Off to Ritz Photo. "I don't need the K10D, the K100D will be just fine". Yeah, right. 2 months after that I was the proud owner of the K10D, having wasted the money difference between what I paid and sold the Sony and the K100D for. Unless you have some super-human power, save yourself some money; buy the 645z.

(Said with fingers in ears.) Noooo... noooo!!!! I'm not listening.

Originally posted by fretlessdavis

The difference between FF and digital MF is actually quite large. The 44x33 sensor is 1.68 times the size of a 24x36 size sensor. For small prints it's not huge, but big prints it starts making a difference.

Also, keep in mind, resolution is dictated by lens and sensor/film size. I think we've gotten to practical limits of resolution for APS-C, and we're close with FF sensors. Higher MP sensors in the future will be more of a difference on MF than FF or APS-C. Also, with the exception of the latest generation of the 25mm, everything is still compatible with film, so there's room to grow.

If the next generation sensor came out from Sony, and was 40x50mm or even a full 42mmx56mm, Pentax really could slap the sensor in the next 645D camera, and more or less have everything work.

The whole question will soon become does your style dictate more resolution. My feeling is that high resolution is a niche...the 24 Mp of the K-3 for me has completely removed any desire for a D800. It allows me to crop comfortable and my comfort level for images seems to be about 4000x3000 pixels, and that's obtainable from a K-5. A K-3 lets me crop 2000 pixels and still attain that. For someone who always wants the absolute max in resolution, that's not going to cut it. I just don't think many of us are really like that.

**fretlessdavis** · 04-21-2014, 09:46 AM

Originally posted by normhead

(Said with fingers in ears.) Noooo... noooo!!!! I'm not listening.

The whole question will soon become does your style dictate more resolution. My feeling is that high resolution is a niche...the 24 Mp of the K-3 for me has completely removed any desire for a D800. It allows me to crop comfortable and my comfort level for images seems to be about 4000x3000 pixels, and that's obtainable from a K-5. A K-3 lets me crop 2000 pixels and still attain that. For someone who always wants the absolute max in resolution, that's not going to cut it. I just don't think many of us are really like that.

It's not about pixels for me... the quality of the pixels on bigger sensors is better. Even with high-resolution APS-C, I personally can't get away with that much cropping. For web usage and small prints it's OK, but I tend to print my work at 8x10 to 12x16 in all formats I use. Cropping out half of a high-res APS-C, the printing at 11x14, and comparing it side by side with a full frame print from TMAX 100 out of my MX, the MX looks miles ahead for detail, but is grainy (in a way that doesn't detract from the image.

I do put my nose right up in all my prints, though, which not everyone does.

cali92rs · 04-21-2014, 10:11 AM

Who really needs a APS-C camera?
With a micro 4/3 camera, you can get bokeh. The APS-C camera doesnt offer more DOF control. Most of the time, i want MORE depth of field, so that's a plus with micro 4/3.
How will an APS-C improve your photography?
(Remember, u4/3 is much closer to APS-C than APS-C is to FF.)

ElJamoquio · 04-21-2014, 10:11 AM

8x10 is so small!

---------- Post added 04-21-14 at 10:12 AM ----------

Originally posted by cali92rs

Who really needs a APS-C camera?
With a micro 4/3 camera, you can get bokeh. The APS-C camera doesnt offer more DOF control. Most of the time, i want MORE depth of field, so that's a plus with micro 4/3.
(Remember, u4/3 is much closer to APS-C than APS-C is to FF.)

You can stop-down a APS-C lens.

LFLee · 04-21-2014, 10:39 AM

I don't know, but just like car, if you can have Ferrari, why would you settle for Chevy? Ferrari will be useful to have in certain situations, as they also called 'chick magnet'...

kidding aside, yes, I want a FF, more so after I start shooting with P67. Now I will settle that need with 35mm film camera.

but I am certain that if Pentax come out a FF camera, it will be an awesome camera.

04-21-2014, 07:59 AM	#50
lesmore49 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Western Canada Posts: 12,337 Original Poster	I'm the OP. I would ask if we can we get back to my thread. Thank you. I appreciate it. If you want to continue to discuss your issue, please start another thread. Again thank you. Les Last edited by Parallax; 04-21-2014 at 08:21 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax ff and why do I need that.	soled	Welcomes and Introductions	6	02-20-2015 03:50 AM
Filters, do you really need them?	peterjcb	Pentax DSLR Discussion	17	01-16-2014 06:10 PM
Do i really need a FF DSLR	simple mick	Pentax DSLR Discussion	21	12-26-2012 07:02 PM
Do you really want a FF???	i83N	Photographic Industry and Professionals	48	10-09-2012 01:52 PM
Why Do You Want FF?	tkj365	Photographic Industry and Professionals	193	09-26-2012 11:09 PM

04-20-2014, 04:50 PM	#46
lesmore49 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Western Canada Posts: 12,337 Original Poster	As far as FF bokeh, blur etc....I do find that my Limited series of lenses coupled with my ASP-C K-5, Km, K10D.... are really quite wonderful at isolating and making a very sharp portrait....with very nice blur behind the subject. I don't know if a FF would make a significant improvement on this picture type. I have the 21, 40 and 70 Limiteds....I cannot recommend them enough.

04-20-2014, 06:06 PM	#47
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	Originally posted by lesmore49 As far as FF bokeh, blur etc....I do find that my Limited series of lenses coupled with my ASP-C K-5, Km, K10D.... are really quite wonderful at isolating and making a very sharp portrait....with very nice blur behind the subject....... You lie! That's not possible with a sensor smaller than 24x36mm.

04-20-2014, 06:12 PM	#48
lesmore49 Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Western Canada Posts: 12,337 Original Poster	Originally posted by Parallax You lie! That's not possible with a sensor smaller than 24x36mm. I know...I know....you caught me !

04-20-2014, 06:21 PM	#49
aleonx3 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Brampton, Ontario Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,996	If there is such a scenario in the future when the cost of producing FF sensor is more economical than other bigger or smaller sensors because no one would buy it (hence no market or no money to make for camera makers), then I would 'want' a FF but I still don't 'need' one as everybody will be dumping the smaller APS-C or 4/3 sensor cameras and they will be virtually 'free'. But then, I realise that it can only happen in a dream... Honestly, AFAIC, biggest draw for me would be a bigger/brighter viewfinder and ability to use FA lens in its native focal length; shadower DOF is a bonus.

04-21-2014, 08:22 AM - 2 Likes	#51
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	I have deleted several posts here. Let's start over, shall we?

04-21-2014, 08:28 AM	#52
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,650	Originally posted by Parallax I have deleted several posts here. Let's start over, shall we? Beautiful. It is like a brand new thread!

04-21-2014, 08:33 AM	#53
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	I need an FF camera, because one would probably end once and for all my fantasy of owning a 645D or Z. There's more difference between APS-c and FF than there is between an FF and and a 645D. If the gap between FF and APS-c is too small for me to contemplate, then the gap between FF and a 645D is even smaller and less conceivable as an upgrade. An FF could save me a pile of money, should I give into temptation and buy one. Half of me says, hold out for a 645D or Z, the other half says, if Pentax comes out with an FF, go for it... save yourself a pile of money. .

04-21-2014, 08:44 AM	#54
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	Originally posted by normhead I need an FF camera, because one would probably end once and for all my fantasy of owning a 645D or Z Norm, if you can actually make your mind work that way, I envy you. I can't begin to add up the money I've wasted over the years by having convinced myself I could make do with something that was less than what I really wanted. I almost always have ended up buying what I really wanted later. My first digital wasn't a DSLR as I wanted, it was Sony's best compact. That appeased me for about a month. Off to Ritz Photo. "I don't need the K10D, the K100D will be just fine". Yeah, right. 2 months after that I was the proud owner of the K10D, having wasted the money difference between what I paid and sold the Sony and the K100D for. Unless you have some super-human power, save yourself some money; buy the 645z.

04-21-2014, 08:45 AM	#55
fretlessdavis Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Port Angeles, WA Photos: Gallery Posts: 505	The difference between FF and digital MF is actually quite large. The 44x33 sensor is 1.68 times the size of a 24x36 size sensor. For small prints it's not huge, but big prints it starts making a difference. Also, keep in mind, resolution is dictated by lens and sensor/film size. I think we've gotten to practical limits of resolution for APS-C, and we're close with FF sensors. Higher MP sensors in the future will be more of a difference on MF than FF or APS-C. Also, with the exception of the latest generation of the 25mm, everything is still compatible with film, so there's room to grow. If the next generation sensor came out from Sony, and was 40x50mm or even a full 42mmx56mm, Pentax really could slap the sensor in the next 645D camera, and more or less have everything work. ---------- Post added 04-21-14 at 08:50 AM ---------- Woops-- I've been back and forth between here and the 645Z thread. Sorry for the FF dissing =/. I'd love an FF, too-- but I think an APS-C, and a digital MF like the Pentax would be the perfect one two punch... ... With a Q in the pocket to capture every situation I'm glad I don't have the $$$ to feed my addiction with digital gear.... I'm in enough trouble as it is with all my film gear, hehe.

04-21-2014, 08:53 AM	#56
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by Parallax Norm, if you can actually make your mind work that way, I envy you. I can't begin to add up the money I've wasted over the years by having convinced myself I could make do with something that was less than what I really wanted. I almost always have ended up buying what I really wanted later. My first digital wasn't a DSLR as I wanted, it was Sony's best compact. That appeased me for about a month. Off to Ritz Photo. "I don't need the K10D, the K100D will be just fine". Yeah, right. 2 months after that I was the proud owner of the K10D, having wasted the money difference between what I paid and sold the Sony and the K100D for. Unless you have some super-human power, save yourself some money; buy the 645z. (Said with fingers in ears.) Noooo... noooo!!!! I'm not listening. Originally posted by fretlessdavis The difference between FF and digital MF is actually quite large. The 44x33 sensor is 1.68 times the size of a 24x36 size sensor. For small prints it's not huge, but big prints it starts making a difference. Also, keep in mind, resolution is dictated by lens and sensor/film size. I think we've gotten to practical limits of resolution for APS-C, and we're close with FF sensors. Higher MP sensors in the future will be more of a difference on MF than FF or APS-C. Also, with the exception of the latest generation of the 25mm, everything is still compatible with film, so there's room to grow. If the next generation sensor came out from Sony, and was 40x50mm or even a full 42mmx56mm, Pentax really could slap the sensor in the next 645D camera, and more or less have everything work. The whole question will soon become does your style dictate more resolution. My feeling is that high resolution is a niche...the 24 Mp of the K-3 for me has completely removed any desire for a D800. It allows me to crop comfortable and my comfort level for images seems to be about 4000x3000 pixels, and that's obtainable from a K-5. A K-3 lets me crop 2000 pixels and still attain that. For someone who always wants the absolute max in resolution, that's not going to cut it. I just don't think many of us are really like that.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

04-21-2014, 09:46 AM	#57
fretlessdavis Site Supporter Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Port Angeles, WA Photos: Gallery Posts: 505	Originally posted by normhead (Said with fingers in ears.) Noooo... noooo!!!! I'm not listening. The whole question will soon become does your style dictate more resolution. My feeling is that high resolution is a niche...the 24 Mp of the K-3 for me has completely removed any desire for a D800. It allows me to crop comfortable and my comfort level for images seems to be about 4000x3000 pixels, and that's obtainable from a K-5. A K-3 lets me crop 2000 pixels and still attain that. For someone who always wants the absolute max in resolution, that's not going to cut it. I just don't think many of us are really like that. It's not about pixels for me... the quality of the pixels on bigger sensors is better. Even with high-resolution APS-C, I personally can't get away with that much cropping. For web usage and small prints it's OK, but I tend to print my work at 8x10 to 12x16 in all formats I use. Cropping out half of a high-res APS-C, the printing at 11x14, and comparing it side by side with a full frame print from TMAX 100 out of my MX, the MX looks miles ahead for detail, but is grainy (in a way that doesn't detract from the image. I do put my nose right up in all my prints, though, which not everyone does.

04-21-2014, 10:11 AM	#58
cali92rs Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Long Beach, CA Posts: 3,354	Who really needs a APS-C camera? With a micro 4/3 camera, you can get bokeh. The APS-C camera doesnt offer more DOF control. Most of the time, i want MORE depth of field, so that's a plus with micro 4/3. How will an APS-C improve your photography? (Remember, u4/3 is much closer to APS-C than APS-C is to FF.)

04-21-2014, 10:11 AM	#59
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	8x10 is so small! ---------- Post added 04-21-14 at 10:12 AM ---------- Originally posted by cali92rs Who really needs a APS-C camera? With a micro 4/3 camera, you can get bokeh. The APS-C camera doesnt offer more DOF control. Most of the time, i want MORE depth of field, so that's a plus with micro 4/3. (Remember, u4/3 is much closer to APS-C than APS-C is to FF.) You can stop-down a APS-C lens.

04-21-2014, 10:39 AM	#60
LFLee Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Southern California Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,292	I don't know, but just like car, if you can have Ferrari, why would you settle for Chevy? Ferrari will be useful to have in certain situations, as they also called 'chick magnet'... kidding aside, yes, I want a FF, more so after I start shooting with P67. Now I will settle that need with 35mm film camera. but I am certain that if Pentax come out a FF camera, it will be an awesome camera.