Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

View Poll Results: Will you buy a FF Pentax, if one was available?
Yes, if it is a Pentax branded camera. 7918.20%
Yes, if it is a Pentax and/or Ricoh branded camera. 10023.04%
Yes, if it had the sort of specs you mention. 6013.82%
Yes, but only if it's priced no higher than, for instance, the D750. 5713.13%
No, I've bought a FF made by a different supplier. 173.92%
No, I don't need or want FF. 8319.12%
No - I would like to, but I cannot afford to buy a new camera. 276.22%
Yes, but only if it's available in forty-seven color combinations. 112.53%
Voters: 434. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-08-2014, 10:01 AM   #121
Pentaxian
mattb123's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Colorado High Country
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 7,602
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
The 645z, with available lenses, doesn't have any more low-light performance than the K-5 with available lenses.
I was thinking the larger pixels would produce less noise at a given sensitivity. Am I mistaken?

10-08-2014, 10:28 AM   #122
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,830
You have to parse statements like that very carefully. First he's not talking about low light performance in a theoretical sense he's talking about the fact that there are 1.4 lenses available to the K-5 and 2.8 lenses available for the 645z. Now if you were to change the parameters so they were using 2.8 lenses or any lens but shooting ƒ5.6, then his assertion is nonsense. As per usual, his statement seems to say something it doesn't based on undefined parameters. If it was a Full Frame vs APS-c argument, it would be that the Full Frame creates it's image with more light, and therefore has a better signal to noise ratio. However it would seem that the same argument is never extended to MF vs. FF. In any case there are many ways of looking at this topic, and in most of them the 645z has better low light performance than a K-5. But there is this one where you might make that argument, if you just like arguing.

Last edited by normhead; 10-08-2014 at 11:02 AM.
10-08-2014, 10:33 AM   #123
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
QuoteOriginally posted by mattb123 Quote
I was thinking the larger pixels would produce less noise at a given sensitivity. Am I mistaken?
Yup. But there's 1.4 lenses available for the K-5 and there's only 2.8 lenses available for the 645Z. So the K-5 does as well as the 645Z in noise. No one should purchase the 645 system for low-light, it's not the right tool for the job.

Normhead's comparison (both lenses shot at 5.6) is complete nonsense, don't let it confuse you. The DOF of the two shots would be incredibly different, and we were talking about moon shots anyway, so it's pretty irrelevant IMO.
10-08-2014, 10:55 AM   #124
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,830
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
Yup. But there's 1.4 lenses available for the K-5 and there's only 2.8 lenses available for the 645Z. So the K-5 does as well as the 645Z in noise. No one should purchase the 645 system for low-light, it's not the right tool for the job.

Normhead's comparison (both lenses shot at 5.6) is complete nonsense, don't let it confuse you. The DOF of the two shots would be incredibly different, and we were talking about moon shots anyway, so it's pretty irrelevant IMO.
Just because you say it's "complete nonsense" dude, doesn't make it so. Funny, how I can explain your post, and it's context, but you can't understand what I'm saying or any other context. Which of us do you suppose is seeing the whole picture?

I used ƒ5.6 because it's where many lenses are sharpest, and even when I'm shooting the moon I use ƒ5.6 or ƒ8. I guess in your mind, if it's dark you have to shoot ƒ1.4? Is that where you are coming from?

I'm getting tired of explaining your rather cryptic statements.


Last edited by normhead; 10-08-2014 at 11:04 AM.
10-08-2014, 11:08 AM   #125
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Just because you say it's "complete nonsense" dude, doesn't make it so. Funny, how I can explain your post, and it's context, but you can't understand what I'm saying or any other context. Which of us do you suppose is seeing the whole picture?

I used 5.6 because it's where many lenses are sharpest, and even when I'm shooting the moon I use 5.6 or 8. I guess in your mind, if it's dark you have to shoot 1.4? Is that where you are coming from?

I'm getting tired of explaining your rather cryptic statements.
I just used the nonsense term, because you always use it, norm. I don't know why you're upset.

You're still comparing the wrong things, FYI.
10-08-2014, 11:15 AM   #126
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,830
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
I just used the nonsense term, because you always use it, norm. I don't know why you're upset. .
Upset, dude I'm messing with you, upset... ya right. And oh ya, you do everything I do. In fact every stupid thing you do is probably my fault because I probably did it first. I see your logic there.

QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
You're still comparing the wrong things, FYI.
In your opinion, I guess.. but then, you are hardly the supreme arbitrator of what are the right and wrong things to compare.
10-08-2014, 11:57 AM   #127
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,327
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
The 645z, with available lenses, doesn't have any more low-light performance than the K-5 with available lenses.
And let's not forget you're always supposed to use it from ISO 400 upwards. ISO 100 and 200 breaks some formula, causing the Universe to collapse

Last edited by Kunzite; 10-08-2014 at 12:02 PM.
10-08-2014, 12:03 PM   #128
Pentaxian
mattb123's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Colorado High Country
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 7,602
I was thinking f-stops aside, if I needed to shoot something at ISO 3200, either to be able to stop down for DOF/sharpness or because my lens is only so fast (just because faster glass exists, doesn't necessarily mean I would get it) that a given shot exposed similarly would have less noise from a 645Z than a K-3/K-5 would.

A friend of mine recently got one and he was amazed at how little noise there was in his images for the ISO he was using. He doesn't have any other Pentax bodies so he wasn't comparing to a K-5. He comes from a Canon full frame system so I was thinking he was using that as a benchmark for comparison. We only spoke briefly so I'll try to get more info when we talk again.

10-08-2014, 12:59 PM   #129
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
At equal iso, the 645z will trounce almost everything.
10-16-2014, 11:41 AM   #130
New Member
Galileo'sDog's Avatar

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Seffner, Florida
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8
I've been really wanting to upgrade to the K-3 when I'm ready but with a strong possibility of Pentax/Ricoh introducing a full format DSLR to their lineup I am willing to hold out for that, particularly since I own enough full frame lenses it would be great to use them to their full potential. Image my 28mm actually working as a wide angle lens.
10-16-2014, 05:39 PM   #131
Moderator
Site Supporter
MarkJerling's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: Wairarapa, New Zealand
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,547
Original Poster
Here's the updated results of this poll, today 17 October 2014, NZ time.

Total respondents: 272 of 64,087 forum members, being a sample of 1 in 236.
The minimum number of forum members, according to the poll, to date, that would like a FF Pentax/Pentax-Ricoh camera is 57% with a margin of error of 5.5%.

Based upon these figures, the number of members who would buy a FF Pentax/Pentax-Ricoh is somewhere between 19,000 and 47,000.
The minimum number of (forum member) buyers, if the camera is branded as a Pentax = 5,600.
The minimum number of (forum member) buyers, if the camera is branded as either a Pentax or Ricoh camera = 12,500.
The minimum number of (forum member) buyers, if the camera has reasonably high specs = 3,600.
The minimum number of (forum member) buyers, if the price point is near the D750 = 10,000.


From these numbers, the most likely lower number of potential FF buyers, from this forum, is about 24,000, all factors considered, with the upper (and unlikely) number no more than 64,000.
The minimum number is highly unlikely to be smaller than 36,500. At a price point of US$2,200 that means about $80 million, with a 95% rate of certainty.


Please note that the graph below is the raw data graph so you won't get these percentage to add up to the data posted above after the various polling mathematical formulae have been applied.



---------- Post added 10-17-14 at 01:41 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Galileo'sDog Quote
I've been really wanting to upgrade to the K-3 when I'm ready but with a strong possibility of Pentax/Ricoh introducing a full format DSLR to their lineup I am willing to hold out for that, particularly since I own enough full frame lenses it would be great to use them to their full potential. Image my 28mm actually working as a wide angle lens.
I'm on the same boat as you!
Attached Images
 

Last edited by MarkJerling; 10-16-2014 at 05:50 PM.
10-16-2014, 05:55 PM - 1 Like   #132
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 140
Honestly, if Nikon released a full frame camera with a K-mount I'd probably buy it. The only thing locking me into the K-mount right now is the lenses I already invested in.
10-16-2014, 10:22 PM   #133
Moderator
Site Supporter
MarkJerling's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: Wairarapa, New Zealand
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,547
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Drake Avenue Quote
Honestly, if Nikon released a full frame camera with a K-mount I'd probably buy it. The only thing locking me into the K-mount right now is the lenses I already invested in.
Well lets hope Pentax / Ricoh beats them to the post!
11-01-2014, 03:09 PM   #134
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,775
QuoteOriginally posted by mattb123 Quote
I was thinking f-stops aside, if I needed to shoot something at ISO 3200, either to be able to stop down for DOF/sharpness or because my lens is only so fast (just because faster glass exists, doesn't necessarily mean I would get it) that a given shot exposed similarly would have less noise from a 645Z than a K-3/K-5 would.

A friend of mine recently got one and he was amazed at how little noise there was in his images for the ISO he was using. He doesn't have any other Pentax bodies so he wasn't comparing to a K-5. He comes from a Canon full frame system so I was thinking he was using that as a benchmark for comparison. We only spoke briefly so I'll try to get more info when we talk again.
True. I own quite a few lenses with f-stops larger than f/2. I still don't manage to use those stops very often, especially not just because the light is low. Whether the light is low or not, you still want the frame in focus and the lens sharp. What makes the 645z attractive is that its .8 crop factor is not that far off classic FF 35mm and the loss of DOF on my film 645 (with a greater crop) is desirable about as often as it is not. If only it were not quite so expensive....
11-01-2014, 03:54 PM   #135
Pentaxian
aleonx3's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Brampton, Ontario
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,888
QuoteOriginally posted by Drake Avenue Quote
Honestly, if Nikon released a full frame camera with a K-mount I'd probably buy it. The only thing locking me into the K-mount right now is the lenses I already invested in.
Even if Nikon release a K-mount camera, I don't think I will bite unless they employ the same or similar ergonomics and features such as the k-3. Sorry, not just a camera that I can mount k-mount lenses.
Closed Thread

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, agree, aps-c, argument, buttons, features, ff, ff poll, full frame poll, full-frame, kit, lenses, list, market, nikon, options, pentax, pentax poll, pm, poll to gauge, post, price, ricoh, sake, screen, shot, touch, unicorn
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Would you buy a Pentax Full Frame DSLR? extended poll i83N Pentax Full Frame 113 04-02-2015 07:12 AM
Would you buy a Pentax FF? ozlizard Pentax News and Rumors 119 12-12-2009 05:29 AM
How many forum members does it take to change a lightbulb? Gooshin General Talk 24 12-02-2008 08:29 AM
Would you buy a FF Pentax? bymy141 Pentax DSLR Discussion 52 04-14-2008 09:50 PM
How many forum members does it take to change a light bulb? photo_mom General Talk 11 04-28-2007 04:50 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:05 AM. | 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