Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

View Poll Results: How much would you pay for an FF body?
Less than 1800 8234.75%
1800-2399 9339.41%
2400-2999 5222.03%
3000-3499 72.97%
3500-4499 10.42%
4500 or more 10.42%
Voters: 236. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-22-2015, 07:45 PM   #91
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,801
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
A 59MP Sony sensor + the new Pentax high definition pixel shift tech would make an awesome DSLR detail machine.

But I doubt Ricoh would make a 59MP FF, at least not for a few more years. They already have a 50MP machine in the 645Z which is earning them good money, and no doubt has better overall IQ than any 'small-sensor' 59MP could deliver.

Plus Sony will likely give Nikon first dibs on their new 59MP chip, like they have done before with sensors, leaving Pentax to wait at the end of the queue. No great loss on this occasion, in my opinion. Let Nikon and Sony customers work out the bugs, and help bring the unit price of the chip down.
Has there ever been any evidence that Nikon had first dibs? Nikon worked with Sony on the sensor for the D3x and Nikon rented fad space from Sony. Hoya might have been too cheap to buy the latest technology, so they waited or used Samsung, but I think most of the new sensor announcements from Sony came mid cycle for Pentax cameras. Sony was cranking out a new DSLR model every year with a new sensor. For DSLRs there has only been the K-5/K5II or the K-3 that would have been at price point for a cutting edge sensor. The other Pentax cameras like the K-x or K-r were price point bodies and that is why they didn't use the newest sensors.

FF can never replace MF even if it has the same resolution. Hopefully Ricoh has a true 645 coming and will get away from the crop 645. There is a look you get with larger formats that you just can't duplicate with smaller formats and processing. Since the market has trended towards low quality images (2MP web) I don't think most people really know how good large prints from a larger format look.

I have no idea what sensor Ricoh would use, but I wouldn't be surprised or disappointed if it was the 59MP..... or the 36, or the 24, or even a 12MP.

05-22-2015, 07:48 PM   #92
Emperor and Senpai
VoiceOfReason's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Nashville, IN
Posts: 5,418
Original Poster
Well, if they did have the 59mp sensor and it did ISO 50-whatever high thing, 51200 or 102,400 with really awesome dynamic range they might just be able to pry 3k from my wallet...
05-22-2015, 08:47 PM   #93
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,801
QuoteOriginally posted by VoiceOfReason Quote
Well, if they did have the 59mp sensor and it did ISO 50-whatever high thing, 51200 or 102,400 with really awesome dynamic range they might just be able to pry 3k from my wallet...
It would be better than the K-3 DR. More DR is always better, but I shoot with print as my goal, and prints have a much narrower DR than back lit monitor displays. My target size is A3+ (13"x19") and my A7M2 prints out the same up to about 800 ISO. So from ISO 50-800 the prints really don't change. If I'm going B&W I don't think twice about 1600 or 3200 for A3+ or even 24 x 36.

I think 36MP is probably the sweet spot for FF since you don't need an AA filter at that point and you have plenty of resolution to work with. I think the glass is going to be more important than what sensor they pick. They need to get back to making Limited quality glass.
05-22-2015, 09:15 PM   #94
mee
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,917
QuoteOriginally posted by VoiceOfReason Quote
Well, if they did have the 59mp sensor and it did ISO 50-whatever high thing, 51200 or 102,400 with really awesome dynamic range they might just be able to pry 3k from my wallet...

Do you really expect 51,200 ISO to give you quality images? Even on the Df, ISO 3200 is noticeably grainy. And, by ISO 51,200, it is grainier than a rail car filled with Uncle Bens and at a significant loss in detail (blotchy).

We're looking at ISO 3200 at likely the cleanest usable high ISO setting before really having to work the noise reduction sliders... which still won't help at ISO 51,200 or higher (due to the loss in detail, unless you're into blurry, smooth abstract art).

I think manufacturers include those top end ISO values simply for marketing's sake.. bigger number must make it better type thinking.. similar to more megapixels, the better the camera.

05-22-2015, 09:19 PM   #95
Emperor and Senpai
VoiceOfReason's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Nashville, IN
Posts: 5,418
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by mee Quote
Do you really expect 51,200 ISO to give you quality images? Even on the Df, ISO 3200 is noticeably grainy. And, by ISO 51,200, it is grainier than a rail car filled with Uncle Bens and at a significant loss in detail (blotchy).

We're looking at ISO 3200 at likely the cleanest usable high ISO setting before really having to work the noise reduction sliders... which still won't help at ISO 51,200 or higher (due to the loss in detail, unless you're into blurry, smooth abstract art).

I think manufacturers include those top end ISO values simply for marketing's sake.. bigger number must make it better type thinking.. similar to more megapixels, the better the camera.
Nope, but I do expect it to give me more usable headroom for clean pictures. Let's say it gives a top ISO of 102,400. I would expect from something liek that I could get decently clean ISO 6400 pics, so I want that advertized high ISO because it will mean I get better low light performance with clean pics at a higher ISO than I would otherwise.
05-23-2015, 06:20 AM   #96
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,193
QuoteOriginally posted by mecrox Quote
Other manufacturers already have almost every imaginable corner of FF covered somewhere, after all.
The Pentax FF will be the only FF camera with in-body stabilisation and an optical viewfinder.

That is a rather nice combination.

It will also likely be the only FF camera with an optional Bayer-AA filter and probably "pixel shifting".

There are further aspects that will make it stand out amongst current offerings, but unfortunately, for many shooters AF performance, local availability of glass and support, etc. are more important than any of the above. As a result, Pentax will have to compete at the (somewhat) eroded FF price level set by other FF models, despite offering something truly original.

Still dreaming that Pentax may surprise us with something we do not know yet about the FF model. I personally wouldn't need something special added, but I care for Pentax and therefore hope that they will be able to attract some new shooters to become Pentaxians, rather than just stopping the current bleeding of Pentaxians to other brands.
05-23-2015, 08:14 AM   #97
Pentaxian
Wired's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Edmonton, AB
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,525
59mp is a lot.... A whole lot. My D800 has more than enough resolution, I couldn't handle more
05-23-2015, 08:20 AM   #98
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,864
QuoteQuote:
There are further aspects that will make it stand out amongst current offerings, but unfortunately, for many shooters AF performance, local availability of glass and support, etc. are more important than any of the above. As a result, Pentax will have to compete at the (somewhat) eroded FF price level set by other FF models, despite offering something truly original.
Some good points ..... but, A D7100 is very close in AF to a K-3. But D7500, D610 FF cameras are much faster. My guess is there's something about the FF sensor, like it's size that enables faster AF. So, I'm waiting to see the actual product. If the AF module is up to D610 speed, the same way the K-3 is up to D7100 speed, we'll all be over the moon, I'm sure.

05-23-2015, 08:31 AM   #99
Loyal Site Supporter
Rupert's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,014
I'm not interested for myself, but I do look forward to viewing the results from "qualified" buyers of the FF Pentax. I am betting that Pentax makes a winner with some nice features not found elsewhere. They almost have to if they hope to compete. Should be interesting to see the future!

Regards!
05-23-2015, 09:12 AM   #100
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,801
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Some good points ..... but, A D7100 is very close in AF to a K-3. But D7500, D610 FF cameras are much faster. My guess is there's something about the FF sensor, like it's size that enables faster AF. So, I'm waiting to see the actual product. If the AF module is up to D610 speed, the same way the K-3 is up to D7100 speed, we'll all be over the moon, I'm sure.
I think you forgot to take your medication this morning. There is no D7500 and the D610 AF system is not very impressive. The D610 has the same AF system as the D7100 including the AF point array which is why is looks so small in the OVF. Its a terrible camera for AF tracking and low light AF. Ricoh had better have something way better than the D610 AF. There is nothing about the sensor size that enables faster AF. The PDAF system is completely separate.
05-23-2015, 09:48 AM   #101
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,864
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
I think you forgot to take your medication this morning. There is no D7500 and the D610 AF system is not very impressive. The D610 has the same AF system as the D7100 including the AF point array which is why is looks so small in the OVF. Its a terrible camera for AF tracking and low light AF. Ricoh had better have something way better than the D610 AF. There is nothing about the sensor size that enables faster AF. The PDAF system is completely separate.
I was sure some site had measured a D610 and D750 at .1 seconds or something like that and the K-3 at .5 for some test they did. But if you have experience with the camera I'll take your word for it. But the information was an assumption made from the synthesis of different tests from different sites, , which is always gamble. And following thread from D610 owners on the forum, they all rave about how much better the AF system is than a K-3s. You should have a talk with them.
05-23-2015, 09:49 AM   #102
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,843
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
My guess is there's something about the FF sensor, like it's size that enables faster AF.
I recall Falconeye once noted:
"My personal opinion is that the accuracy of focus (both automatic and manual) is the strongest single argument in favour of full frame over APSC", but he didn't fully argue the case. But it kind of makes sense.

Note: he also made a more detailed 'equivalence' based case for better PDAF performance on FF here, where he said:
We find that autofocus performance is strongly sensor size dependent for equivalent cameras.

QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
[D610] Its a terrible camera for AF tracking and low light AF.
Awww, it's actually not too bad with either. But sure, it is a budget FF, meant to compete with the 6D, not D800's or 5D3's (or the later D750).

However, I certainly agree that a Pentax FF should aim to offer better than D610 class AF.

Last edited by rawr; 05-23-2015 at 09:58 AM. Reason: added extra falc link
05-23-2015, 10:48 AM   #103
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,801
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
Awww, it's actually not too bad with either. But sure, it is a budget FF, meant to compete with the 6D, not D800's or 5D3's (or the later D750). However, I certainly agree that a Pentax FF should aim to offer better than D610 class AF.
For center AF point in good light its fine. If you can keep the subject under the center AF point they work great. Better than the 5D or 5DII. The D7100 and D610 AF system is still a generation behind systems like the D750 or the 5DIII. The 5DIII with the 24-70L-II is a very fast combination. That is what Ricoh needs to be shooting for. If people think the D7100 or the D610 are fast, then I understand why they think the K-3 is fast. They are pretty much the same, but neither are fast enough for Ricoh to use in its new FF.

If Ricoh is going to make glass that is more expensive than the Canon/Nikon equivalent, then they need to perform to that level. The week link can't be the AF system in the body. In the case of the 70-200mm Pentax is producing a more expensive lens that lacks OIS compared to Canon & Nikon. OIS doesn't generate heat in the body like IBIS system do (IBIS generates a good bit when used continuously) and that is an advantage for people who shoot HD video. The Pentax lens is basically the same size (hair bigger) but lacks OIS. IF Canon/Nikon were to take out the OIS they would be smaller and lighter and even cheaper. If the extra size isn't getting you OIS then it better be due to better IQ or faster AF.

---------- Post added 05-23-15 at 12:57 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
I was sure some site had measured a D610 and D750 at .1 seconds or something like that and the K-3 at .5 for some test they did. But if you have experience with the camera I'll take your word for it. But the information was an assumption made from the synthesis of different tests from different sites, , which is always gamble. And following thread from D610 owners on the forum, they all rave about how much better the AF system is than a K-3s. You should have a talk with them.
I have used the D610 and used the Df many times. They have the same AF. The Df is simply a retro D610 with a 16MP sensor. I don't find AF to be impressive with either body. Single point in good light with the 85mm F/1.8G is great, but I know a couple of people who tried to use them for weddings and neither were happy. They both sold them for D750 bodies. One had the D800 and the D610 and sold both for a pair of D750 bodies. The other still has his Df and he also sold D810 for a D750. He keeps the Df for the 16MP sensor and the 58mm F/1.4 pretty much never comes off of it. The 58mm lens is so slow to focus it really doesn't matter what camera you put it on, but the iQ of the lens is excellent if you like the look.
05-23-2015, 12:34 PM   #104
mee
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,917
QuoteOriginally posted by VoiceOfReason Quote
Nope, but I do expect it to give me more usable headroom for clean pictures. Let's say it gives a top ISO of 102,400. I would expect from something liek that I could get decently clean ISO 6400 pics, so I want that advertized high ISO because it will mean I get better low light performance with clean pics at a higher ISO than I would otherwise.
But in practice has that really occurred? The K-3 is a downgrade in 'clean' high ISO settings over the K-5ii using the same settings.

I think they only advertise the high ISO values because of people thinking they're getting something better.. bigger is better after all.. more pixels.. more horsepower..
05-23-2015, 03:28 PM - 1 Like   #105
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,801
QuoteOriginally posted by mee Quote
But in practice has that really occurred? The K-3 is a downgrade in 'clean' high ISO settings over the K-5ii using the same settings.

I think they only advertise the high ISO values because of people thinking they're getting something better.. bigger is better after all.. more pixels.. more horsepower..
The K-3 is not a downgrade in clean high ISO. The S/N curves are practically identical across the ISO range. For print work the K-3 is better in every way.
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, af, body, camera, d610, d750, df, division, ff body, full-frame, k3, lens, minolta, ois, pentax, people, ricoh, system
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How much would you pay for S-M-C Takumar 85mm f1.8 ultraviolet Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 28 06-18-2013 03:36 PM
How much would you pay for your highest end soft sided gadget bag?? Medium FormatPro Photographic Industry and Professionals 3 03-25-2013 04:32 AM
How much would you pay for a FF Pentax DSLR? uccemebug Pentax DSLR Discussion 70 08-11-2010 09:01 PM
how much would you pay for ff? philmorley Pentax News and Rumors 70 02-16-2010 06:56 AM
how much would you pay for 645d? philmorley Pentax News and Rumors 13 02-04-2008 05:48 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:42 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