Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-27-2014, 04:51 PM   #46
Veteran Member
rburgoss's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: San Jose, Costa Rica
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 972
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote

You have a gold mine there. Yes, you will love K-mount FF methinks. I want your FA 20 2.8, FA* 24 2.0 and that FA 135 2.8 especially.
I know. I really miss using me SMC-A 15 and the F17-28 fisheye zoom. I have nothing comparable in angle coverage with the DA zooms. Just the 12-24 can "replace" the 20, 24 anf 28... but its not the same IQ.

Regardless of resolution or megapixel count, I do have a valid reason for wanting a ff body, but as I've been saying before and still stand by my words, I don' believe a ff body can outrun any good apc-c system under same shooting circumstances.

How much would I pay for an ff body with the same built and specs level as the K3?

I don't know... but show me a DA 10mm f3.5 (or 2.8) RECTILINEAR so I can replace my 15... and I'll stay with thr aps format, which btw, turned my beloved FA* 200 / 2.8 (cost around $ 1,200 when new) into an instant $4,000 potato masher equivalent! (300 / 2.8).


Last edited by rburgoss; 09-27-2014 at 05:07 PM. Reason: typos - posting from smartphone
09-27-2014, 05:04 PM   #47
osv
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: So Cal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,080
QuoteOriginally posted by rburgoss Quote
Of course, dumping Pentax and switching brands if out of the question.... would you care to calculate how much it will cost to replace my glass arsenal in any other brand?
you don't have to switch brands, and you don't have to replace anything.

just add a mirrorless body to your arsenal, and use it with the pentax glass that you have... as long as the lens has a manual aperture ring, it'll work on mirrorless.

losing the ovf would be a *huge* improvement in your manual focusing capabilities.

downside is that some lenses may be disappointing on digital ff, if you are competent enough to see the differences, and you care about p.q.

plus side is that you can use just about any lens that's ever been made, instead of having to rely on the lens shortcomings of only one brand.

today i shot seven 50/55's, using three different mounts... canon fdn, takumar, mamiya sekor, and konica.

i can pick the one with the best p.q., and dump the rest, instead of being limited to only the pentax mount, like i used to be.
09-27-2014, 05:23 PM   #48
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
Heck the Sony A7R works without an aperture ring. Just get an adapter with an aperture function.
09-27-2014, 06:22 PM   #49
Veteran Member
rburgoss's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: San Jose, Costa Rica
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 972
Original Poster
Sony a7R Alpha Mirrorless Digital Camera ILCE7R/B Sony a7R at B&H Photo

Ha!!!! Just checked what is available and cost of a nicely featured full frame, mirrorless body...

Before... a short story: About 10 yrs ago, my doctor suggested grabbing some kind of outdoor exercise, like hiking, biking or such. I went into this bike stores and asked for what was available and cost, considering I was a begginer. They had Trek stuff plus some other fancy brands.

Considering my size, this guy showed me two Trek models that looked pretty similar. The differece was that one cost $280 and the other next to $800. When I asked for what was the difference to justify the price gap, it happened that the expensive one was fitted with pro components, which were as reliable as the consumer grade stuff, but shedding 3.6 pounds of weight on the expensive bike...

I looked this guy in the eye and told him: look at me, I weigh around 320 pounds right now, so I will take the $280 bike and on my way home, I'll stop by the drugstore, get a couple of Ex-Lax thingies, and I can guarantee you that by tomorrow morning I would have shed TWICE the weight off the bike/rider compound, than what you offered me to shed just from the bike by dumping $500 extra....




Now, back to the full frame mirrorless body. Not even considering the Leica stuff, just any of the nicely featured Sonys sell for twice (or more) the K3, so getting the K3 and maybe a Sigma 10-20 or Tamron 10-24, would still leave me with next to $1000 for some entra toys (like the DA 10-17 fisheye zoom!!!).... without loosing Af on those 10 ff lenses in my cabinet.

Interesting suggestion, but financially awkward IMHO. It would be like driving from Miami to Orlando, but taking a "shortcut" through New Orleans...


Last edited by rburgoss; 09-27-2014 at 06:34 PM.
09-27-2014, 06:30 PM   #50
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
Sony A7 ($1700 new at B+H) + $100 adapter = 1800
Sony A7 ($1100 used at B+H) + 100 adapter = 1200

Pentax K-3 ($1100 new at B+H) + Sigma 10-20 ($650) + $1000 extra = 2750
Pentax K-3 ($930 used at B+H) + Sigma 10-20 ($650) + $1000 extra = 2580

Are you comparing the A7S, new , or something? The A7 is great.
09-27-2014, 09:14 PM   #51
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Canberra, Australia
Posts: 401
QuoteOriginally posted by johnmflores Quote
No, I've never been sentenced to shoot a wedding. But if I had to shoot one tomorrow, I'd switch to Nikon as much for their AF and strobes as for their FF. Pentax is a long way from cracking that market.

And I wouldn't equate "Pro" to "Wedding". It's just one market. And related to the topic of this thread, I'd hazard a guess that most "Pro" work gets viewed as frequently (or more frequently) on a screen these days versus in print. And it just so happens that smaller sensor cameras have gotten better just at a time when viewing formats have become smaller.

I've got one friend, a working pro, that's ditched his FF Canon in favor of the Panasonic GH4 and the F2.8 zooms. He couldn't be happier. And he shoots events. Often very dark ones. For his personal work, he's even put away his medium format and is using the GH4. And his pictures are great. You know why? Because of him.

A couple of years ago I did a motorcycle trip with a couple of other journalists. One guy had a Canon 7D. The other a 5D. I had the K-5. I got the better shots. Another time I had an editor email me requesting use of one of my photos because the guy he sent to the event didn't take a good shot with his Nikon. What did I have? A Panasonic GH2.

And that's my greater point–if we photographers continue to place gear above talent and skill then we can't complain when the unwashed massed come up to us and say, "That's a nice camera! It must take nice pictures!"



Don't give the camera credit. I bet the photog, given a 35mm or a 5DII, would have still managed to do something special. Not the same as the 6x7, but special nonetheless. He's the talented one, not the camera. He's the pro, not the camera.
LOL...the old "I've never had that sentence" comment. I did a workshop with a working commercial advertising photographer several months ago. He had a major issue with wedding photographers (although readily admitted he'd never done one himself, so I'm still curious why he had the authority to comment), but also looked at me with disbelief when I said my camera was an APS-C. He shot with Hass MF and Canon FF.

I've already said I have no problem with APS-C, and I believe I get the best I can out of it. And I've already said what creative benefits a FF would give me. I didn't say the wedding market accounts for 'pro', per-se, but I have said previously in this forum that if Pentax were to follow a few wedding shooters around and develop a FF DSLR based on their observations they would have a very powerful, all-round camera system on their hands. That is my point. And, regardless of your opinions, I think there are many other photographers out there who give Pentax a miss because the believe the same thing (which is bad for the brand).

Your starry-eyed 'only the photographer counts' sentiments are admirable, but they aren't entirely true, and they certainly don't reflect market opinions.

Last edited by Poit; 09-28-2014 at 02:52 PM.
09-27-2014, 10:50 PM   #52
Veteran Member
rburgoss's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: San Jose, Costa Rica
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 972
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
Sony A7 ($1700 new at B+H) + $100 adapter = 1800
Sony A7 ($1100 used at B+H) + 100 adapter = 1200

Pentax K-3 ($1100 new at B+H) + Sigma 10-20 ($650) + $1000 extra = 2750
Pentax K-3 ($930 used at B+H) + Sigma 10-20 ($650) + $1000 extra = 2580

Are you comparing the A7S, new , or something? The A7 is great.
I used the A7R as reference since that was the suggested model. I do not know Sony well enough as to know which model compares (in specs) to the K3 or any other Pentax camera. Checked price as new at $2300. The K3 is listed for $1,100 and considering the Sigma (at $400) or the Tamron (at $500), still leaves me some cash to get the Pentax DA 10-17 fisheye zoom (listed at $550) and get my F 17-28 replaced by exactly the same optical performace and usability.

But anyway, as I said, this path will leave me using my legacy glass in manual mode and manual focus.... so it makes no sense (at least for me).
09-27-2014, 11:44 PM   #53
Pentaxian
todd's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Basement
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,928
QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
When I go to the the big camera stores, or even the electronics stores, there's rows upon rows of good digital cameras, lenses and other options. But any dedicated digital display methods? No, zero. The digital photoframes are lagging seriously behind compared to the cameras. They are completely gone in most stores.
Good point/observation. It was being awed by photos on my first LCD monitor back in 2006/2007 that even got me into photography in the first place and I've been pretty glued to monitors ever since... I like printed photos but I rarely print because digital display is nice too and where I spend most my time and it's just so much more convenient and has so much potential. That said, all this talk is making me want to buy some new ink cartridges for my printer. It's just like the sensor format choice... I just want it all...

QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
Like I said, I print my best pictures on giant acrylic plate
I don't think I've ever seen a photo presented like this. Must be amazing. I am going to have to go look this up..

09-28-2014, 10:06 AM   #54
Senior Member
Paul MaudDib's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Michigan
Posts: 292
QuoteOriginally posted by rburgoss Quote
I don't know... but show me a DA 10mm f3.5 (or 2.8) RECTILINEAR so I can replace my 15... and I'll stay with thr aps format, which btw, turned my beloved FA* 200 / 2.8 (cost around $ 1,200 when new) into an instant $4,000 potato masher equivalent! (300 / 2.8).
Samyang 10mm f/2.8, 12mm f/2.0, or 14mm f/2.8, depending on your desired FoV (15mm, 18mm, and 21mm equivalent respectively). All rectilinear.

Or there's probably a couple ultrawide zooms with f/2.8 apertures.

Last edited by Paul MaudDib; 09-28-2014 at 11:48 AM.
09-28-2014, 10:31 AM   #55
osv
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: So Cal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,080
QuoteOriginally posted by rburgoss Quote
replaced by exactly the same optical performace and usability.
no... the k3 is a sweet little camera, but the sony a7 performs better in just about every measurable parameter.

plus, with the a7 you get one of the top evfs' on the market, which allows you to do manual focusing better than you ever dreamed of.

you don't strike me as a manual focus kinda guy, so that may not be a factor, but the a7 still wins on performance... ff is superior to crop sensor.

Sony A7 versus Pentax K-3 - Side by side camera comparison - DxOMark
Attached Images
 
09-28-2014, 02:52 PM   #56
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,229
FTR, "every measurable parameter" and "whatever DXOMark is measuring" are very different things.
09-28-2014, 06:04 PM   #57
Pentaxian
johnmflores's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Somerville, NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,147
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
I have to give the camera credit for enabling those specific shots. I don't believe those specific shots could have been made with other gear and apparently not by another photographer if what we've seen of wedding prints over the years is an indication (I could be wrong, of course). Our (her) guy was primarily a studio portraitist - looks like he viewed the setting as a metaphorical studio.

My point is, gear enables, shooter creates. Can't have specific product without both.

Msot consumers only understand the gear part - it takes only moments to spend money on a FF camera. Who wants to invest years of work in skill and technique and experience and knowledge and accept the gift of creativity or photographer's eye, when buying gear is so quick and easy?
The way you describe it, he not only had the gear, but he was very good at taking advantage of what little available light there was and using it to his advantage. That second part is what I'm talking about and what gets short shrift among consumers and even here. I'm not suggesting that he could have achieved the same shots with lesser gear, but since it sounds like he had some talent, he could have taken lesser gear and maximized its potential.

The great architect Louis Kahn was said to have picked up a brick and said to it, "What do you want to be, brick?" A talented photographer will pick up any camera and say, "What can I do with you?"


QuoteOriginally posted by Poit Quote
LOL...the old "I've never had that sentence" comment. I did a workshop with a working commercial advertising photographer several months ago. He had a major issue with wedding photographers (although readily admitted he'd never done one himself, so I'm still curious why he had the authority to comment), but also looked at me with disbelief when I said my camera was an APS-C. He shot with Hass MF and Canon FF.

I've already said I have no problem with APS-C, and I believe I get the best I can out of it. And I've already said what creative benefits a FF would give me. I didn't say the wedding market accounts for 'pro', per-se, but I have said previously in this forum that if Pentax were to follow a few wedding shooters around and develop a FF DSLR based on their observations they would have a very powerful, all-round camera system on their hands. That is my point. And, regardless of your opinions, I think there are many other photographers out there who give Pentax a miss because the believe the same thing (which is bad for the brand).

Your starry-eyed 'only the photographer counts' sentiments are admirable, but they aren't entirely true, and they certainly don't reflect market opinions.
I may have sounded dismissive, but I have a lot of respect for a good wedding photographer as it takes talent and grace under pressure. And I've mentioned elsewhere that Fuji doesn't get nearly as much gruff as Pentax does for not having a FF camera. If anything, they're proving that you don't need full frame to be respected within the industry. Pentax has bodies and glass that can stand toe to toe with Fuji and they also have what appears to be a stellar 645Z (and to prove that I do appreciate good gear, I lust after that camera). Yet they still get criticism.

And I don't think that "only the photographer counts". It depends upon the genre. BIF is 70% camera/30% photographer. Photojournalism is 90% photographer/10% gear. And "photographer" doesn't just mean photographic skill but knowledge, access, timing, etc. This explains why BIF is often an arms race for the longest and fastest while a noob with a cell phone can capture a historic moment that ends up on the front page, and a Magnum photog like Pinkhassov can take great Instagram photos with his iPhone.

My rant is that the photographer doesn't get enough credit.
09-29-2014, 03:34 AM   #58
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,997
QuoteOriginally posted by Poit Quote
LOL...the old "I've never had that sentence" comment. I did a workshop with a working commercial advertising photographer several months ago. He had a major issue with wedding photographers (although readily admitted he'd never done one himself, so I'm still curious why he had the authority to comment), but also looked at me with disbelief when I said my camera was an APS-C. He shot with Hass MF and Canon FF.

I've already said I have no problem with APS-C, and I believe I get the best I can out of it. And I've already said what creative benefits a FF would give me. I didn't say the wedding market accounts for 'pro', per-se, but I have said previously in this forum that if Pentax were to follow a few wedding shooters around and develop a FF DSLR based on their observations they would have a very powerful, all-round camera system on their hands. That is my point. And, regardless of your opinions, I think there are many other photographers out there who give Pentax a miss because the believe the same thing (which is bad for the brand).

Your starry-eyed 'only the photographer counts' sentiments are admirable, but they aren't entirely true, and they certainly don't reflect market opinions.
My wife shoots weddings and does so with APS-C cameras. At this point, APS-C is good enough that she is very happy with it. Back in the K20 days, not so much. But, she is the opposite of a gear head. If I talk about sensor sizes and auto focus modules, her eyes glaze over and she tunes out. Equivalence is pretty meaningless to her. She knows what framing different lenses give and where they shine and she uses them with good results.

There are an awful lot of working photographers that just aren't "gear-centric." Their goal is a particular image or, style of image and as long as they are able to achieve that, they are happy and the world is good.
09-29-2014, 07:57 AM   #59
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
reasonable filters

QuoteOriginally posted by johnmflores Quote
The great architect Louis Kahn was said to have picked up a brick and said to it, "What do you want to be, brick?" A talented photographer will pick up any camera and say, "What can I do with you?"
And if the brick says, "I want to be the Taj Mahal," and the P&S says, "I want to shoot sports at -1 EV," the architect and photographer will simply do their bidding and make it so.



QuoteQuote:
...And I've mentioned elsewhere that Fuji doesn't get nearly as much gruff as Pentax does for not having a FF camera. If anything, they're proving that you don't need full frame to be respected within the industry.
If Pentax had a new MILC-friendly mount that didn't natively support FF, and were no longer making aps-c DSLR (both like Fuji,) they would probably get a pass too. Pentax has not embraced what many think is the future either way - MILC on lower-mid tier, FF DSLR on mid-upper end. I guess you could categorize the Q as an attempt at some of this, and the K-01, but neither of those really stand up to the competition we've seen from Fuji, Panasonic, Olympus, Sony.

Thus, criticism.

And (digression...) their problem is that it's probably less easy to really embrace a strong MILC solution without ditching K-mount, or shifting resources to another mount that supports large sensors and MILC with a shorter register distance to allow thinner, smaller bodies. So... Does Pentax do that? Or do they double-down on K-mount and offer FF? I don't see how aps-c DSLR sustains them more than 10 (5?) years longer in the face of MILC and lower-cost FF. Remember - past "Pentax is doomed!" exclamations came before we had this MILC and lower-cost FF disruption.

.

Last edited by jsherman999; 09-29-2014 at 08:05 AM.
09-29-2014, 08:10 AM   #60
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,229
In other words, people are overly fixated on certain paths (be it FF or MILC), not seeing the reality around them (APS-C DSLRs dominating the ILC market) and criticizing Pentax for not fitting on their "Pentax suxx, other brands are better" scenario?
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, acrylic, camera, darkroom, era, ff, film, frame, full-frame, gear, giant, instagram, instruments, moments, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, people, photography, pictures, post, prints, quality, resolution, rules, technology, twinkle
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Misc "You Forgot To Put Your Bike Away!" rbefly Photo Critique 5 07-22-2013 12:07 PM
What are your thoughts on "upgrading" to a K5II/s after reading the review? jpzk Pentax DSLR Discussion 90 07-05-2013 06:48 AM
When the FF is fixed, we will have the unmatched "SUPER CAMERA" Eric Seavey Pentax K-5 58 10-08-2012 11:10 AM
Have we lost some "love" for the weekly contests?? Peter Zack Photographic Technique 16 01-13-2010 03:02 PM
Some more from the "big mac" DuckysDoll Post Your Photos! 8 07-07-2008 08:25 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:52 PM. | 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