Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-18-2014, 12:59 AM   #166
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,576
QuoteOriginally posted by calsan Quote
I was surprised to see the K-3 smokes the 5dMkii in low light, when shooting alongside a friend.
I was surprised over a year ago to see even the K-5 did better than the 5D2 in low light. I was asked by someone to process and prepare a couple hundred classical musician portraits shot with a 5D2 by another photographer under ambient light in a low-light interior. The 5D2 images had lots more ugly noise than I expected from the DxOMark scores relative to the K-5, and the images looked lifeless and fell apart when the shadows were pushed even lightly. Plus banding was a problem. I certainly expected much better from the 5D2.

09-18-2014, 02:48 AM   #167
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,940
QuoteOriginally posted by calsan Quote
I meant smoked the 5dmkii, as in: my photos are ALL in focus - whereas, you don't have a single shot in focus. Pentax K3 with siggy 17-70 (oldest version) vs 5DMkii with L24-105 f/4.
Tungsten lighting only. This used to kill the K7, but the K3 can focus under any lighting.

This is why I think it's more important to have the latest generation camera, than the largest sensor.
I agree. Some folks will say that any full frame, even an original 5D, is going to have better output and results than current generation APS-C. That's just crazy. The older cameras, particularly on the low end of things, just don't have the specs to keep up with a camera like the K3, even if they can shoot with more narrow depth of field.
09-18-2014, 05:31 AM   #168
Loyal Site Supporter
GlassJunkie's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: St Petersburg
Photos: Albums
Posts: 326
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I agree. Some folks will say that any full frame, even an original 5D, is going to have better output and results than current generation APS-C. That's just crazy. The older cameras, particularly on the low end of things, just don't have the specs to keep up with a camera like the K3, even if they can shoot with more narrow depth of field.
You are right. And to be a jerk about it, the FF is better group is today's equivalent of the 1490's star attraction, the Flat Earth Collective... Good luck with that...
09-18-2014, 05:42 AM   #169
Pentaxian
Clavius's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: De Klundert
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,115
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I agree. Some folks will say that any full frame, even an original 5D, is going to have better output and results than current generation APS-C. That's just crazy. The older cameras, particularly on the low end of things, just don't have the specs to keep up with a camera like the K3, even if they can shoot with more narrow depth of field.
Doesn't that completely depend on the results you're after?

09-18-2014, 06:10 AM   #170
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,940
QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
Doesn't that completely depend on the results you're after?
Not particularly. A K3 has similar dynamic range (better at base iso), SNR to a 5D and more resolution. Unless you need narrow depth of field, there is no area in which you will get better results with the 5D than a K3. In addition, with some of the older full frame cameras, you may struggle with focus, frame rate, build as compared to some of the newer APS-C cameras. It doesn't really matter how awesome a sensor is, if your photos are out of focus, then it doesn't really matter, does it?
09-18-2014, 07:40 AM   #171
Pentaxian
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
I was surprised over a year ago to see even the K-5 did better than the 5D2 in low light. I was asked by someone to process and prepare a couple hundred classical musician portraits shot with a 5D2 by another photographer under ambient light in a low-light interior. The 5D2 images had lots more ugly noise than I expected from the DxOMark scores relative to the K-5, and the images looked lifeless and fell apart when the shadows were pushed even lightly. Plus banding was a problem. I certainly expected much better from the 5D2.
I'd have to say you did something wrong with processing, or processed them with different parameters, or the photog did something odd, like underexpose. (Did you have shots taken with the K5 in that same situation, same event?)

---------- Post added 09-18-14 at 08:44 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by GlassJunkie Quote
You are right. And to be a jerk about it, the FF is better group is today's equivalent of the 1490's star attraction, the Flat Earth Collective... Good luck with that...
Really? I see the majority of science denial among m43 and aps-c groupies, case in point, "K3 is better than 5DII in SNR, because, I just know!"

Last edited by jsherman999; 09-18-2014 at 07:50 AM.
09-18-2014, 07:53 AM   #172
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,940
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
I'd have to say you did something wrong with processing, or processed them with different parameters, or the photog did something odd, like underexpose. (Did you have shots taken with the K5 in that same situation, same event?)

---------- Post added 09-18-14 at 08:44 AM ----------



Really? I see the majority of science denial among m43 and aps-c groupies, case in point, "K3 is better than 5DII in SNR, because, I just know!"
The 5D Mk II is a fine camera, but if it under exposes, it is very prone to banding. Something which the K5 and K3 are not prone to. DXO Mark does not address banding in their testing protocol, but to me, this a major source of loss of shadow dynamic range and is much more present in Canon sensors (both APS-C and full frame) than in those of other makers.
09-18-2014, 08:09 AM   #173
Pentaxian
redcat's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Paris
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,804
Pentax, please release FF soon, before I got enough $ for the D610 (I'm not rich and D610 rated 4th on DXOmark !!!). Pentax (Ricoh) is on the way from good to great !
For now, I'm pleased with the result of my K5 IIs but begins to see its limits ! I'm not a very patient guy when it comes to buying stuff =_=
I want to concentrate on the light, composition and mood, not to worry about my gear ! For post-processing I will abuse my RAW file and try to make the photo stunning @_@

09-18-2014, 08:24 AM   #174
Pentaxian
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
The 5D Mk II is a fine camera, but if it under exposes, it is very prone to banding. Something which the K5 and K3 are not prone to. DXO Mark does not address banding in their testing protocol, but to me, this a major source of loss of shadow dynamic range and is much more present in Canon sensors (both APS-C and full frame) than in those of other makers.
Good point. If the issue was banding-related, the newer Pentaxes or an older Nikon beats anything before the Canon 6D, I think.
09-18-2014, 11:49 AM - 1 Like   #175
Senior Member
Paul MaudDib's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 292
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I agree. Some folks will say that any full frame, even an original 5D, is going to have better output and results than current generation APS-C. That's just crazy. The older cameras, particularly on the low end of things, just don't have the specs to keep up with a camera like the K3, even if they can shoot with more narrow depth of field.
Nah, that's rarely what's argued, I think you're seeing what you want to see and then arguing against those strawmen.

FF is advantageous compared to a contemporary APS-C, not one that's 5 years newer. So for Canon that's a T1i, which the 5d2 beats handily especially in low light. For a K-3 you should be comparing to something like a D800E, which again trounces the APS-C fairly easily. Not surprising, both use Sony sensors. Which, by the way, are rather outperforming Canon generally these days.

Moving up in format is certainly less bang for your buck than APS-C - you can probably buy a generation newer APS-C for the same money. But apples to apples, comparing contemporary cameras, FF outperforms APS-C, and you get that IQ bump across all your lenses.

Similarly, MF is better, but much more expensive, than a contemporary FF camera. Does that make MF "worse" than FF because you can buy a new D800E for the price of a used 645D? Pentax makes a 645, so forumites here consider that a legitimate decision, but Pentax doesn't make FF so this forum doesn't consider that a legitimate option. That's really the logic that's operating here.

And really, even a 5D classic suffices for many kinds of shooting. Some guy was shooting weddings with that camera 5 years ago, after all. Are you printing this shot so large that you need the extra megapixels of a modern camera? Do you not have an APS-C camera you could use in low light situations? Do you not own f/1.4 primes, or a 24-70 f/2.8, or a flash? Those arguments cut both ways.

Last edited by Paul MaudDib; 09-18-2014 at 12:12 PM.
09-18-2014, 12:44 PM   #176
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,940
QuoteOriginally posted by Paul MaudDib Quote
Nah, that's rarely what's argued, I think you're seeing what you want to see and then arguing against those strawmen.

FF is advantageous compared to a contemporary APS-C, not one that's 5 years newer. So for Canon that's a T1i, which the 5d2 beats handily especially in low light. For a K-3 you should be comparing to something like a D800E, which again trounces the APS-C fairly easily. Not surprising, both use Sony sensors. Which, by the way, are rather outperforming Canon generally these days.

Moving up in format is certainly less bang for your buck than APS-C - you can probably buy a generation newer APS-C for the same money. But apples to apples, comparing contemporary cameras, FF outperforms APS-C, and you get that IQ bump across all your lenses.

Similarly, MF is better, but much more expensive, than a contemporary FF camera. Does that make MF "worse" than FF because you can buy a new D800E for the price of a used 645D? Pentax makes a 645, so forumites here consider that a legitimate decision, but Pentax doesn't make FF so this forum doesn't consider that a legitimate option. That's really the logic that's operating here.

And really, even a 5D classic suffices for many kinds of shooting. Some guy was shooting weddings with that camera 5 years ago, after all. Are you printing this shot so large that you need the extra megapixels of a modern camera? Do you not have an APS-C camera you could use in low light situations? Do you not own f/1.4 primes, or a 24-70 f/2.8, or a flash? Those arguments cut both ways.
You were the one that brought up the 5D, I didn't.

Everything is a matter of degree. A K30 is going to be adequate for many kinds of shooting as well. So what? Your argument was that full frame, generally speaking, were the sports cars of the photography world, while APS-C cameras are the knock around cars that may get your by. But full frames differ greatly in features and sensors -- from your ancient 5D to a 6D/D600 low level (but current full frame) to D800E or D4s.

Why I have to compare my K3 to a camera that costs 3 times as much, is beyond me.

Obviously there are degrees of expense and each photographer will choose what they shoot based on what they need and can afford. I will say again that current APS-C cameras are better than most of the photographic gear sold in photographic history.
09-18-2014, 06:36 PM   #177
Loyal Site Supporter
GlassJunkie's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: St Petersburg
Photos: Albums
Posts: 326
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
I'd have to say you did something wrong with processing, or processed them with different parameters, or the photog did something odd, like underexpose. (Did you have shots taken with the K5 in that same situation, same event?)

---------- Post added 09-18-14 at 08:44 AM ----------



Really? I see the majority of science denial among m43 and aps-c groupies, case in point, "K3 is better than 5DII in SNR, because, I just know!"
I think they are related to the "trial by combat" group..

I am one of the Heretics. I like the dark arts including capturing essence through light...
09-19-2014, 01:01 AM   #178
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2012
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 587
confirmed now http://petapixel.com/2014/09/18/confirmed-pentax-working-full-frame-dslr-deb...ses-photokina/
09-19-2014, 05:38 AM   #179
Veteran Member
Andi Lo's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia
Posts: 2,925
Isnt that article just reiterating what we already know or am I not reading it carefully enough?
09-19-2014, 08:05 AM   #180
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,286
QuoteOriginally posted by Andi Lo Quote
Isnt that article just reiterating what we already know or am I not reading it carefully enough?
I have read everything I can find and honestly it is nothing more than was said at last Photokina, two years ago. We are working on FF, and when things are right we might release one. I know Pentax news is a bit thin these days but this is really building a rumor out of almost nothing.

I guess it shows how desperate both Pentaxians and web site news mongers are for anything that even hints of a rumor.
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, analysis, bodies, body, camera, da*, discussions, dslr, ff, focus, forum, frame, full-frame, glass, glasses, lenses, level, line, money, pentax, people, photography, premium, price, sony, tamron, time
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
why is a full frame Pentax such a holy grail? adwb Pentax Full Frame 427 07-24-2015 12:32 PM
From Full-Frame Sony... to Pentax... to Full-Frame Canon Mr_Canuck Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 42 01-21-2014 12:50 AM
Interesting link on full frame vs film ChopperCharles Pentax DSLR Discussion 7 09-14-2012 09:26 AM
Is a full frame camera worth $1k to $1.3k feasible to make? mannyquinto Pentax DSLR Discussion 17 04-19-2012 01:36 PM
Is a full frame lens on an aps-c, a negative? outsider Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 36 03-30-2011 09:34 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:03 PM. | See also: NikonForums.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