[mee]

Well.. he does have arguments.. you simply disagree with his point of view.

[jsherman999]

Well.. he does have arguments.. you simply disagree with his point of view.

Quote:

[Class A]

Well.. he does have arguments.. you simply disagree with his point of view.

I didn't say he has no arguments.

I said he has no real arguments.

If you want to buy a 200mm lens from me and I deny it to you based on the fact that you have a 100mm lens already and that if you want to step up, you really need to buy that 500mm lens. Do you think I have a real argument?

Who is he to decide for me that the difference between APS-C and FF is not big enough to care about? In particular, when he does not really understand the real differences.

[mee]

I didn't say he has no arguments.

I said he has no real arguments.

What is the difference between both statements?

Seems to me if you believe one doesn't have any real arguments.. you are saying they have no (valid) arguments.

If you want to buy a 200mm lens from me and I deny it to you based on the fact that you have a 100mm lens already and that if you want to step up, you really need to buy that 500mm lens. Do you think I have a real argument?

Who is he to decide for me that the difference between APS-C and FF is not big enough to care about? In particular, when he does not really understand the real differences.

He isn't denying anything to anyone though. And he never claimed there wasn't a difference, just that the difference was minor in relation to all of the arguments and hype on the internet. The man is shooting for HGTV with a camera containing an APS-C sized sensor. He is saying the differences shouldn't limit you from getting the job done. And there are advantages, for him, in taking the smaller camera.


But you're welcome to disagree... and that was my point.. you simply disagree. That is OK.

[Class A]

What is the difference between both statements?

As you say, I meant that some of his arguments are not valid and some are not convincing.

But you're welcome to disagree... and that was my point.. you simply disagree. That is OK.

And you seem to be disagreeing with me, which is fine too.

I do make a point, though, of the difference between disagreeing because one has different opinions (that's fine) and because one party has valid arguments and the other doesn't. When I point out that the other party does not have any valid arguments, I'm not just disagreeing, I'm implicitly stating that no rational person should subscribe to the party that promotes their point without any valid arguments.

Many people will agree with his kind of reasoning, but that does not distract from the fact that he does not put forward any arguments that withstand scrutiny.

One may agree with him that the difference in performance is not worth caring, but if I care about the difference then that's the end of the story. His video is not just saying "If you think you need FF, perhaps think again". The video's message (besides telling you that you should buy a Fuji) is essentially saying that anyone caring about the difference between APS-C and FF is wrong. And he (obviously, because the facts are against him) fails in supporting this claim.

[mee]

As you say, I meant that some of his arguments are not valid and some are not convincing.


And you seem to be disagreeing with me, which is fine too.

I do make a point, though, of the difference between disagreeing because one has different opinions (that's fine) and because one party has valid arguments and the other doesn't. When I point out that the other party does not have any valid arguments, I'm not just disagreeing, I'm implicitly stating that no rational person should subscribe to the party that promotes their point without any valid arguments.

Many people will agree with his kind of reasoning, but that does not distract from the fact that he does not put forward any arguments that withstand scrutiny.

One may agree with him that the difference in performance is not worth caring, but if I care about the difference then that's the end of the story. His video is not just saying "If you think you need FF, perhaps think again". The video's message (besides telling you that you should buy a Fuji) is essentially saying that anyone caring about the difference between APS-C and FF is wrong. And he (obviously, because the facts are against him) fails in supporting this claim.

Right.. ehh I think you're thinking too hard about this.

The man isn't stopping you from buying what you want. But you seem to feel the need to get upset with him because his points (which I find all valid, btw, even if I don't agree with all of them) seem to have hit a nerve with you. This is one guy's opinion.. yet he is informed and working in the field commercially. I've read your post on the other thread with your points about his points and it seems your mind is already made up you want a FF sensor in your camera. That is fine. But anyone who wants something can find a way to argue their desired desire and devalue the other person's claim. The guy is a professional.. it is clear.. I've yet to meet one that is concerned with the gear as much as non professionals are.

Enthusiasts argue and debate on forums.. professionals use what they have that fits the need of the project to get the job done. We're enthusiasts.

How many A list landscape or wedding photographers sit on the boards and argue they require the FF body or they can't get the job done? Don't think many. However one, Jerry Ghionis, submitted images taken with an iPhone to WPPI and actually ranked highly! Of course hes not going to give up his D4S and fancy lenses for an iPhone. But he, too, was making the same point as the guy in the video you vehemently disagree with.. that the technology has come to a level where the person behind the camera matters more than the camera itself.

It isn't as if because he sees it one way, and you another that you won't get what you want.

[Nicolas06]

Jerry Ghionis, submitted images taken with an iPhone to WPPI and actually ranked highly! Of course hes not going to give up his D4S and fancy lenses for an iPhone. But he, too, was making the same point as the guy in the video you vehemently disagree with.. that the technology has come to a level where the person behind the camera matters more than the camera itself.

It isn't as if because he sees it one way, and you another that you won't get what you want.

For me this is even more than that. Before without AF (or maybe even without optical view finder or metering) you needed a pro to take just a technically correct photo. Thus it included many more use for a pro.

Now many common usage can be managed by anybody with a phone or even more by a machine automatically (for ID cards). News magazine and websites more and more get images from anybody, shoot by anything. They don't care for 4MP or whatever crap as the picture will be showed at 640x480 no more.

While I agree that a FF or even better an old MF film camera can get a some rendering that are not easily made by an APSC (You can always use Brenizer method), this is not the bread & butter or photography as a whole.

Some pro may decide that actually an FF and a set of f/2.8 zoom from tamron are in the end less expensive and more practical than an APSC + set of f/2 primes and be perfectly right...

On the opposite, a pro can choose APSC (and many do) and get the job done, and get perfectly good results.

Of course FF can do more than APSC... Is it needed anymore? Not really. This is still important in many people mind (enthousiats and pro), but for the final result and the persons looking at it, they don't give a shit at it.

[mecrox]

Right.. ehh I think you're thinking too hard about this.

The man isn't stopping you from buying what you want. But you seem to feel the need to get upset with him because his points (which I find all valid, btw, even if I don't agree with all of them) seem to have hit a nerve with you. This is one guy's opinion.. yet he is informed and working in the field commercially. I've read your post on the other thread with your points about his points and it seems your mind is already made up you want a FF sensor in your camera. That is fine. But anyone who wants something can find a way to argue their desired desire and devalue the other person's claim. The guy is a professional.. it is clear.. I've yet to meet one that is concerned with the gear as much as non professionals are.

Enthusiasts argue and debate on forums.. professionals use what they have that fits the need of the project to get the job done. We're enthusiasts.

How many A list landscape or wedding photographers sit on the boards and argue they require the FF body or they can't get the job done? Don't think many. However one, Jerry Ghionis, submitted images taken with an iPhone to WPPI and actually ranked highly! Of course hes not going to give up his D4S and fancy lenses for an iPhone. But he, too, was making the same point as the guy in the video you vehemently disagree with.. that the technology has come to a level where the person behind the camera matters more than the camera itself.

It isn't as if because he sees it one way, and you another that you won't get what you want.

I'm wary of generalizations about formats which often turn out not to apply in individual cases. The differences between FF and APS-C are very hard to get a grip on, since they are almost always used by propagandists on either side to make whatever point is obsessing them that day. And as for that iPhone user - good luck to him but I suspect the point is self-serving in a not very subtle way. What it says is "I am so absolutely brilliant that I am the one photographer in 10,000 who can make this work. Hire me immediately." The rest of us need all the help we can get. And if the APS-C brand someone is using doesn't make lenses that turn in excellent images at their widest apertures, or which doesn't have lenses with particularly wide apertures to begin with, then the choice is going to be made for you. No names, no pack drill, er hem.

Then there is the small matter of workflow and connectivity. The moment someone has clicked the shutter, the attitude of almost the entire camera industry seems to be "Not our problem, old boy. You wanted a camera. We never said we had any interest in what you propose to do with it." The industry generally seems quite happy to throw the user to the lions, leaving them to struggle with third-party software that often lacks optimal RAW conversion routines, lens profiles and all the rest. Because some camera-makers are too idle or obsessed with lock-in to provide any. And, of course, often no gps or wifi or with a wifi chip costing 20 cents inside a dongle which the camera-maker will happily sell you for hundreds of bucks. Again, in this situation the user needs all the help they can get. Look at the situation with the recently released Nikon D810. An extremely expensive flagship camera with utterly shafted software. Do Nikon care? Apparently not. But how likely is it that, say, Apple would release a flagship laptop with what Apple themselves said was a first Alpha of their software on it?

Going FF in such circumstances is rather like buying an insurance policy. You may never need it and there is certainly a cost involved. However, set against an industry which seems hell-bent on suicide in many regards, because it is having such trouble coming to terms with the modern world, many might be justified in feeling that FF is the best insurance against the vagaries of clients, technology and forked-tongue videos or blogs. Naturally, there are boasts from many that they've never needed such insurance and only suckers take it out. I'm not so sure these are voices to listen to. So often, the speakers turn out to be salesmen or loonies. Were the many hundreds of photographers using high-end Canon FF cameras at the recent World Cup deluded, for example? Would each one of them have saved themselves thousands of bucks by using Fuji equipment instead? I don't think so.

[Nicolas06]

Were the many hundreds of photographers using high-end Canon FF cameras at the recent World Cup deluded, for example? Would each one of them have saved themselves thousands of bucks by using Fuji equipment instead? I don't think so.

To be honest if you wasn't an official shooter of the Fifa (and this mean a few selected persons), you will not enter with what look like pro gear (= big). And if you are one of the authorized photographers, you are likely to work for fifa and it's fifa that will make most of the money with theses photos, not you.

You might enter with a mirorless FF from Sony or an APSC Fuji and a a few small lenses.

[mecrox]

To be honest if you wasn't an official shooter of the Fifa (and this mean a few selected persons), you will not enter with what look like pro gear (= big). And if you are one of the authorized photographers, you are likely to work for fifa and it's fifa that will make most of the money with theses photos, not you.

You might enter with a mirorless FF from Sony or an APSC Fuji and a a few small lenses.

Ah, but we're not talking about the money but about the equipment which does the job. Didn't notice rows of Sony and Fuji users capturing the action "with a few small lenses" from the photographers' pits. I don't imagine there would be much difference at any other major event like that.

[Fogel70]

So often, the speakers turn out to be salesmen or loonies. Were the many hundreds of photographers using high-end Canon FF cameras at the recent World Cup deluded, for example? Would each one of them have saved themselves thousands of bucks by using Fuji equipment instead? I don't think so.

Not that long ago there where no pro action DSLR with FF sensors, but photographers could capture great sport images anyway.
It was less than 5 years ago that Canon choose to limit sensor size to APS-H in their top of the line "action" DSLR (1D mk 4). I bet there is still photographers that use this camera on important sport events with satisfying result. They might save themselves thousands of bucks not upgrading to the latest FF DSLR and new lenses.

The size of the sensor is probably not the most important reason for using a top of the line DSLR for action, but the reliability/speed of AF and available lenses well suited for the job.

[Rondec]

Honestly, you will shoot with the camera that is with you. If I happen to take a K-01 out with a FA 31, I don't sit around thinking about how I wish it was a 0.95 aperture lens or, that I wish that it was 20 percent wider. I don't think about any other format. I try to frame photos and shoot with enough depth of field to capture the image I see in my mind.

For whatever reason, people tend to trot out the extreme situations in these kinds of discussion, comparing an iphone to a 645z. But APS-C and full frame are pretty close. There is about a stop difference between them. That stop maybe enough to allow you to take better photos in some situations, but probably in others, it will be a wash. I don't have any high aspirations. I'm not making art and I wouldn't be making art if I own a K-1 or whatever Pentax will call their full frame camera. But I enjoy photography and some day I do hope Pentax has a full frame option so I can shoot with it and enjoy it. But I'm not fretting about it in the meantime.

[PTCLG]

there is a market (however small) for a Pentax FF camera and Pentaxians are a hard bunch with a whole lot of pent-up tension. Those who need a FF camera are very few indeed because it is well recognized especially here that the camera does not make the photographer. Notwithstanding, there are a few who need a FF camera. Those who want a FF however are the majority and reasons vary from perceived DoF,

Simply to say, you are lying since you even don't have a statistic of the market for the needs of FF Pentax DSLR. Why doesn't the Pentax company release 10000 FF DSLRs to the market and see the response? Disputing here is helpless and meaningless.

[Fogel70]

Why doesn't the Pentax company release 10000 FF DSLRs to the market and see the response?

Pentax management would probably prefer playing russian roulette with a fully loaded revolver, than release FF DSLR like this.

If a Pentax FF DSLR is to be released it will follow a long term strategic plan, not just "release and hope for the best".

[zoolander]

When you get into digital photography, most folks go with either Canon or Nikon - Nikon in my case. In the Canikon sphere, the mantra is: "Buy a crop body camera, don't waste money on DX or EFS lenses, and upgrade to a FF camera once you get the hang of digital photography".

The Canikon uses this mantra to push over priced cameras to consumers. There is no real reason for a hobbyist to throw a truckload of money on a FF kit.

Can I use a crop lens on a FF camera ? Not really (yeah I know theres DX mode) Can I use a FF lens on a crop body ? Yes ! It also can increase the range with the crop factor (A 500mm lens becomes 750mm). There are huge advantages to crop body cameras, plus some of the best and sharpest lenses are for crop body only, like the Sigma 18-35mm 1.8 which can negate the hi ISO advantage of a FF at that focal lenght. Plus the lenses for crop body are substantially smaller than FF, just compare the Pentax DA* 50-135 with its FF equivalent 70-200.

The glass is not half empty with crop body ! To me, I believe I'll continue with it, and maybe in the future I'll get an illusive Pentax FF to compliment my crop body kit. But that FF had better blow my socks off, and maybe match or exceed the high ISO of the Canon 6D.

Bottom line is this: I chose Pentax because the image quality blew my socks off compared to the other brands in crop body. It had SR and all lenses have stabilization, plus I didn't even realize Pentax bodies had horizon correction, and that also blew my socks off too (note to Pentax marketing dept). Who could be bothered straightening images in post with a Canikony ....... I hate and rarelly use it !

You don't hear Pentax marketing say: buy a crop camera, and once you get the hang of digital photography, upgrade to a $10,000 to $20,000 645z kit. I'm having trouble justifying the cost of upgrading my k-5 to a K-3 ! Because it ain't cheap.

I'm over Canikon, I'm over that marketing mantra - which is becoming a slave to creative destruction ........ Buy it, then throw it away, and keep upgrading.

Do you see Fujifilm jump on the FF wagon? They're developing crop sensor mirrorless cameras and everyone is just raving about the lens range. I see people rushing into camera stores downgrading from FF to fujifilm because its all the rave - pro's buying the XT-1. Even I tried it out, the OIS is inconsistent like VR and IS. OIS is bad joke to me now !

The sphere of the photography world is all over the place. When we see a Pentax FF, THEN we will judge what it offers. But Image quality would be the 1st consideration.