Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-12-2015, 11:37 AM   #121
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,757
QuoteOriginally posted by Pioneer Quote
Interesting thing. I have been approached by a few Canon and Nikon users and have never been asked if I had full frame. Of course I was either packing the Pentax Q or the 645Nii. In the first case it was pretty obvious, in the second I think they may have been afraid to ask.

My advice, if you are tired of being asked whether or not your camera is full frame you have to stop wasting time with the little stuff. You have to pack a BIG gun! Otherwise get over yourself and quit being so sensitive.
I'm not tired of it... I find it amusing.... Full Frame Fanaticism is truly funny.
I think one of the biggest reasons I get asked if I'm using an FF is, I'm usually using a tripod.
Meanwhile, 6 ,months after the release of the 645z it looks like my dream of getting a used 645D for under $3000 is as far way as ever. I have seen $3400 a few times.
That being said, a Sony A7r is still a possibility should I find one at a great price. I'm not opposed to FF at all, as long as it doesn't cost me more than about $1500. That's still 3x more than I'd pay for an APS_c right now, but if one is available when my tax return comes, who knows. At my age, it's all about the tax return.

01-12-2015, 12:12 PM   #122
Veteran Member
Flugelbinder's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Toronto - missing the ocean
Posts: 466
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
...as long as it doesn't cost me more than about $1500. That's still 3x more than I'd pay for an APS_c right now...

I completely agree with this, and IMHO, many more think along the same lines. Pentax should keep this in mind also. These are the numbers that really 'make sense' in today's market.
01-12-2015, 12:19 PM   #123
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,757
QuoteOriginally posted by Sliver-Surfer Quote
Sorry to say but K3 will not take as good picture than a 4-5K FF Canon or Nikon..In any equal conditions. You want to beat those cameras for landscape you have to go to the pentax 645
Do you really expect us to buy into this hot air, just because you say so?

A buddy of mine and I had the good fortune to get images of a wolf a while ago. Me with my K-3 and 60-250, him with his Canon FF and 200mm lens. The images are practically identical when cropped and framed. So, I have some real world experience here, and I just am not seeing what you're claim to be true. I've also posted images elsewhere on the site of images taken with D800 and a K-5, and again, at web size no one can tell the difference. NO one has ever defned exactly where the point is where the 36 MP FF image starts to be better than even a 16 MP image.

So here's what we know... at 1080, people can't tell the difference.
People speculate that at some resolution, you will start to see a difference.
No one seems to be able to define where that point is, or if there even is such a point.
People doing blind tests with prints of 16 MB images and 36 MP images have been unable to determine that they like one image better than the other.

Over the years this debate has gone on and on, people make this extraordinary claim that 36 Mp FF is better than 16 MP APS-c, but actual evidence to support that is actually quite lacking. At this point, the lack of evidence is starting to look suspiciously like evidence of a fallacy. You have to believe , if something is true, sooner or later someone proves it. Or at least present some evidence apart from Full Frame lovers high on Full Frame fumes gushing over their pricey cameras.

And you want us to believe that any FF is better than any APS-c, just based on price? You haven't been around for long have you? We aren't so gullible.

Last edited by normhead; 01-12-2015 at 12:35 PM.
01-12-2015, 01:29 PM - 1 Like   #124
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,241
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Do you really expect us to buy into this hot air, just because you say so?

A buddy of mine and I had the good fortune to get images of a wolf a while ago. Me with my K-3 and 60-250, him with his Canon FF and 200mm lens. The images are practically identical when cropped and framed. So, I have some real world experience here, and I just am not seeing what you're claim to be true. I've also posted images elsewhere on the site of images taken with D800 and a K-5, and again, at web size no one can tell the difference. NO one has ever defned exactly where the point is where the 36 MP FF image starts to be better than even a 16 MP image.

So here's what we know... at 1080, people can't tell the difference.
People speculate that at some resolution, you will start to see a difference.
No one seems to be able to define where that point is, or if there even is such a point.
People doing blind tests with prints of 16 MB images and 36 MP images have been unable to determine that they like one image better than the other.

Over the years this debate has gone on and on, people make this extraordinary claim that 36 Mp FF is better than 16 MP APS-c, but actual evidence to support that is actually quite lacking. At this point, the lack of evidence is starting to look suspiciously like evidence of a fallacy. You have to believe , if something is true, sooner or later someone proves it. Or at least present some evidence apart from Full Frame lovers high on Full Frame fumes gushing over their pricey cameras.

And you want us to believe that any FF is better than any APS-c, just based on price? You haven't been around for long have you? We aren't so gullible.
Ive been using slr's including dslr's for almost 30yrs. Made my own print's in my own darkroom for 5 years. Shot weddings portraits and events professionally. Took a 2 year College level photography course in the 90's. I can tell the difference of the same lens without PP cropping on an aps-c and a FF camera if your feet did the zooming even at 1080. I think most of the of the people who take photography seriously could.

01-12-2015, 01:39 PM   #125
Pentaxian
todd's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Basement
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,807
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
at 1080, people can't tell the difference.
Are you saying 1080 pixels? There are often times when I am browsing images, say over at flickr for example, and I come across certain images and will wager internally (to Mr. Self) that it's from FF or above, and I am usually correct... This doesn't refute your claim of course, because it's not a comparison and there are also times when I am blown away to find an image was made with a p&s... Of course this is where we talk about all the other factors that make quality images like glass, tripods, light, processing, color profiles...
01-12-2015, 02:07 PM   #126
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,757
QuoteOriginally posted by todd Quote
Are you saying 1080 pixels? There are often times when I am browsing images, say over at flickr for example, and I come across certain images and will wager internally (to Mr. Self) that it's from FF or above, and I am usually correct... This doesn't refute your claim of course, because it's not a comparison and there are also times when I am blown away to find an image was made with a p&s... Of course this is where we talk about all the other factors that make quality images like glass, tripods, light, processing, color profiles...
There is s certain style narrow DOF, completely obliterated OOF areas, where FF is a distinct advantage, and people who shoot those images tend to be FF shooters. But how do you determine how many of those images could have been taken with APS-c. How many actually were at the extremes of FF performance, which is where they'd have to be to consider Format a Factor. IN other words, you have a nice FF image taken at ƒ5.6 which is the sharpest point of many lenses, you could easily have taken the same image with APS_c. When you have an ƒ1.4 lens shot wide open, now you're in an area APS-c won't give you the same look, but how many images are actually taken at that extreme? Most people stop down a bit.

As soon as you stop down, APS-c can match it.
01-12-2015, 02:15 PM   #127
Pentaxian
todd's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Basement
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,807
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
narrow DOF
Again, not arguing this really but am saying just from my experience that I can do this regardless of style of image, and often notice it with landscape images, for example... I also often view images bigger than 1080 pixels long, I should add. I browse with them as big as I can get them on my 24 inch lcd monitor (1920x1080)..
01-12-2015, 02:22 PM   #128
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,757
QuoteOriginally posted by Sliver-Surfer Quote
Ive been using slr's including dslr's for almost 30yrs. Made my own print's in my own darkroom for 5 years. Shot weddings portraits and events professionally. Took a 2 year College level photography course in the 90's. I can tell the difference of the same lens without PP cropping on an aps-c and a FF camera if your feet did the zooming even at 1080. I think most of the of the people who take photography seriously could.
Ya well I took first year of a 2 year course, taught photography for 15 years, and have some advice..., try a few double blind tests ....as I've said, what you've posted amounts to a pile of hot air. People almost always in situations like this, don' know what they think they know.

01-12-2015, 02:27 PM   #129
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2013
Photos: Albums
Posts: 817
QuoteOriginally posted by todd Quote
I browse with them as big as I can get them on my 24 inch lcd monitor (1920x1080)..
Somewhat unrelated, I just picked up a Lenovo yoga 2 pro 13" laptop, with a 3200x1800 screen. Oddly it's somewhat changed my viewing habits a little, because it's the detail in an image that really stands out now, and lovely buttery bokeh is being relegated into second place! :/
01-12-2015, 02:28 PM - 3 Likes   #130
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,241
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Ya well I took first year of a 2 year course, taught photography for 15 years, and have some advice..., try a few double blind tests ....as I've said, what you've posted amounts to a pile of hot air. People almost always in situations like this, don' know what they think they know.
I bet you took the first year and thought you knew everything, hot air indeed. You don't like what you hear you just move to the insults.
01-12-2015, 02:30 PM - 2 Likes   #131
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,475
Uh Oh.
01-12-2015, 02:36 PM - 1 Like   #132
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,241
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Uh Oh.
Oh I forgot the emoticons that he likes to add so people don't take his smugness and anger too seriously
01-12-2015, 02:37 PM   #133
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Parallax's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Dakota
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,107
Say goodnight, Gracie.
:closed:
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, advantages, aps-c, doubts, ff, ff vs, formats, frame, full-frame, images, k-5, lenses, light, market, nikon, pentax, people, pixel, pm, post, print, sensor, sensors, size
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How & Why Sensor Size Affects Image Quality (APS-C vs FF vs compact) Adam Photography Articles 28 01-02-2015 09:38 PM
FF vs APS-C light gathering / noise CypherOz General Photography 21 06-13-2014 10:25 AM
35mm FF vs 35mm crop angle of view on APS-C camera QCdude Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 01-26-2014 11:16 AM
Quick question regarding field of view - FF vs APS-C glass? Julie Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 12-23-2012 05:33 PM
APS-C vs FF again bobrapp Pentax News and Rumors 45 03-22-2008 02:59 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:06 AM. | 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