Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-31-2015, 03:33 PM   #31
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,660
QuoteOriginally posted by Na Horuk Quote
Do FF viewfinders have better coverage % and magnification?
Not that I have been able to discern from using a D610. And some FF viewfinders (like the D610's) even appear to be darker than the viewfinder of cameras like the K-3/K-5, perhaps due to stuff like the overlays in them (framing grid, AF points etc). FF reality in that department may not always match expectations.

03-31-2015, 04:40 PM   #32
Pentaxian
todd's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Basement
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,853
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
FF reality in that department may not always match expectations.
Especially considering the fantasies we are having based on that big bulge on the top of the mock up we've all seen.
03-31-2015, 07:32 PM - 1 Like   #33
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by Volker76 Quote

From a mf POV the difference between apsc and 35mm is... ridiculous.
Medium format film, you mean? Because the sensor area delta between aps-c & FF is greater than that between FF and say the 645Z (MFD is really 'cropped' MF.).

.

---------- Post added 03-31-15 at 08:51 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by jonby Quote
The best way to make qualitative comparisons between FF and APS-C is to imagine a world where there is no real difference in price or availability. Which one would you choose then?
^ Good exercise.

QuoteQuote:
... I think that eventually the two will cross over quite substantially, with high end APS-C being a lot more expensive than low-end FF.
I just don't see that happening, unfortunately. The sensor is still the most expensive single part in a DSLR by far, with a FF sensor still costing the manufacturers between 4x and 8x (depending on the sensor) the cost of an aps-c sensor. Then there's the market - will people really want to buy a flagship body, for more money, that can't achieve the same IQ as a larger-sensored, less expensive body? It's possible, but the smaller-sensored body would have to *really* have some bells & whistles the larger-sensored body left out... it just seems like a backwards marketing move to me.
03-31-2015, 07:55 PM   #34
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,550
QuoteOriginally posted by oculus Quote
From what I can discern the advantages of the FF vs. APSC are essentially:

1. Lenses which perform at their "true" focal length.
2. Larger prints at higher resolutions.
3. More dramatic DOF.
4. Having the cachet of a professional.

Am I missing something?
Call a rental company and get you a premium lens and any current FF body. DSLR or A7 line. Image quality.... image quality.... Image quality. I own the K-3 and the A7II. Both excellent cameras, and the K-3 is a better camera than the A7II, but the RAW files from the A7II are really great to work with. Love the Sony/Zeiss FE 55mm F/1.8.

Don't ask on the internet. Spend a few dollars on a rental and find out for yourself.

03-31-2015, 07:58 PM - 1 Like   #35
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by Volker76 Quote
f1.2 on full frame and apsc is exactly the same.

Really people.

The DoF is exactly the same. Put the same lens on both, shoot from the same distance. DoF will be identical.
Same lens from same position on both formats? The image FOV will be radically different as well, with the aps-c shot 1.5x tighter.

For the same FOV from the same position, same framing, which is what photographers actually do - they don;t shoot all their portraits tighter when they move to aps-c or wider when they move to FF - then the FF shot will have about 1.3 stops less DOF than the aps-c, even though they were both shot at f/1.2.
03-31-2015, 08:11 PM   #36
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,550
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
I just don't see that happening, unfortunately. The sensor is still the most expensive single part in a DSLR by far, with a FF sensor still costing the manufacturers between 4x and 8x (depending on the sensor) the cost of an aps-c sensor. Then there's the market - will people really want to buy a flagship body, for more money, that can't achieve the same IQ as a larger-sensored, less expensive body? It's possible, but the smaller-sensored body would have to *really* have some bells & whistles the larger-sensored body left out... it just seems like a backwards marketing move to me.
i think it is possible we see high end APS-C sensors become as expensive or more expensive than entry level FF. There are a couple of different technologies entering the market. Back with BSI sensors were announces Sony said they would never be used in larger cameras because of the heat that they generate and the cost. They are more expensive then FSI CMOS sensors. Samsung has managed to build a BSI APS-C sensor that doesn't seem to have heat issues. Can they increase the size to a 36x24mm sensor? Fuji and Panasonic are having the same problem with organic sensors. Organic sensors will probably appear in a high end m4/3 Panasonic camera before the appear in a Fuji APS-C because the bigger sensor has more of an issue with heat. We may be a several years away from seeing BSI or organic sensors in a FF body. We could have a period of time where premium APS-C cameras using BSI or Organic technology are more expensive than traditional CMOS FF low res (24MP) sensors. Fuji appears to be banking on this to help it compete against the FF competition.
04-01-2015, 02:20 AM   #37
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,336
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
Same lens from same position on both formats? The image FOV will be radically different as well, with the aps-c shot 1.5x tighter.

For the same FOV from the same position, same framing, which is what photographers actually do - they don;t shoot all their portraits tighter when they move to aps-c or wider when they move to FF - then the FF shot will have about 1.3 stops less DOF than the aps-c, even though they were both shot at f/1.2.
So it's the framing and not the DOF that's different? So unless you want a really large print APSC can do the same narrow DOF as full frame. As the defence against losing the extra 'length' that ASPC gives at the long end is to crop if using full frame why isn't this valid at shorter lengths to get DOF?
04-01-2015, 06:42 AM   #38
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 24,305
QuoteOriginally posted by AtitG Quote
but then you have to stitch 2.25x the image of apsc to get the same picture.
If you want the same picture. For wildlife we often crop APS-c images, think how much you'd have to crop your FF using the same lens, and how much less resolution you'd have because you shot FF. And in fact your eventual IQ would be a lot less. None of these things are absolutes. For every situation you can envision to make something appear logical, there is a contravening situation that makes it a fallacy. What we need here are a lot more contributors that see both sides of an assumption.

04-01-2015, 06:52 AM - 1 Like   #39
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,073
QuoteOriginally posted by oculus Quote
From what I can discern the advantages of the FF vs. APSC are essentially:

1. Lenses which perform at their "true" focal length.
2. Larger prints at higher resolutions.
3. More dramatic DOF.
4. Having the cachet of a professional.

Am I missing something?
Yes. You are missing the point.
FF has the potential for better image quality. That is the advantage. The rest is mostly disadvantages that might or might not bother you.
You use the format that fits your need and tastes.

1. Focal length is focal length regardless of format. Same focal length gives different angle of view on different formats. There is no correct angle of view for a focal length.
2. Usually, yes, but depends on what sensor we are talking about.
3. One stop longer shutterspeed for the same DOF.
4 Most pros use APS.....

Last edited by Pål Jensen; 04-01-2015 at 07:51 AM.
04-01-2015, 07:06 AM   #40
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 24,305
QuoteQuote:
1. Lenses which perform at their "true" focal length.
There is no "true focal length". Only the focal length for which the lens is designed... APS_c K mount can use both APS_c and FF lenses at full resolution... an FF can not.

QuoteQuote:
2. Larger prints at higher resolutions.
if and only if, for some reason, 24 MP is not enough for you.

QuoteQuote:
3. More dramatic DOF.
An advantage when shooting lenses wide open, stop down one stop and you can do on one what you can do on the other. While FF gives you more narrow DoF possibilities, APS-c gives you more wide DoF possibilities. Which is more dramatic? It's a trade-off. Not the same but pretty much equal.

QuoteQuote:
4. Having the cachet of a professional.
Shooting FF doesn't give you the cachet of a professional. Being a professional gives you the cachet of a professional. I know lots of guys shooting FF that have the cachet of a point and shoot shooter.
04-01-2015, 07:08 AM   #41
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,073
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
Same lens from same position on both formats? The image FOV will be radically different as well, with the aps-c shot 1.5x tighter.

For the same FOV from the same position, same framing, which is what photographers actually do - they don;t shoot all their portraits tighter when they move to aps-c or wider when they move to FF - then the FF shot will have about 1.3 stops less DOF than the aps-c, even though they were both shot at f/1.2.
DOF is not dependent on focal length and aperture alone. It is dependent on focusing distance and magnification as well. It is meaningless to talk about DOF without stating at what focus distance.
If you have two lenses (APS and FF) giving the same angle of view on their respective formats and the same maximum speed, the APS lens will have the thinnest minimum DOF. This is because of the higher magnification of the smaller format. You won't necessarily have the same position cause the APS system can yield position impossible with FF. By comparing everything to FF, you are ignoring the characteristics unique for the smaller format.
Likewise, at the other end of the focusing scale where everything in the image is near or at infinity, the DOF of the image is identical whether it is shot at F:22 or F:1.2. So the concept of thinner DOF is too simplistic; it depends on the situation.

Last edited by Pål Jensen; 04-01-2015 at 07:15 AM.
04-01-2015, 07:11 AM   #42
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 24,305
QuoteQuote:
and the K-3 is a better camera than the A7II, but the RAW files from the A7II are really great to work with.
Now that is totally believable. Personally, I've reverted to using my K-5 for some landscapes, I just find the K-5 files a bit easier to work with. The K-3 files are definitely not the easiest to work with, even for Pentax cameras. Part of the reason I'm now looking at a Ks-2. Maybe a 20 MB file with a bit more of that K-5 magic is the best APS-c compromise, for anything but wildlife. Unfortunately my wildlife is so much of my focus right now, it's hard to imagine using anything but a K-3.
04-01-2015, 09:38 AM   #43
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 232
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
If you want the same picture. For wildlife we often crop APS-c images, think how much you'd have to crop your FF using the same lens, and how much less resolution you'd have because you shot FF. And in fact your eventual IQ would be a lot less. None of these things are absolutes. For every situation you can envision to make something appear logical, there is a contravening situation that makes it a fallacy. What we need here are a lot more contributors that see both sides of an assumption.
What I was trying to convey is that to simply state that an F1.2 lens would give similar results for an apsc and FF sensor is misleading. While an f1.2 will technically give the same DOF on an apsc and FF sensor, compensating for the cropped factor by stitching photos would be impractical for most purposes. Cheers.

Last edited by AtitG; 04-01-2015 at 09:52 AM.
04-01-2015, 10:10 AM   #44
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 8,662
One advantage - a likely one IMO, but should not be taken for granted - is that a FF flagship will be a higher-end product compared to an APS-C flagship; i.e. built to better standards, more reliable, more precise and overall nicer to use.
04-01-2015, 11:25 AM   #45
Senior Member




Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 232
Agree. I have a feeling that the upcoming FF camera will also be the best pentax APSC camera on release.
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, advantage, advantages, aps-c, background, benefit, body, cameras, distance, dof, ff, fov, frame, full-frame, identical, image, images, lens, pentax, people, photographer, position, sensor, share, shoot, shot, shutter
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
With only APS-C glass, does FF offer any advantages? Newtophotos Pentax Full Frame 27 09-23-2014 09:14 PM
What are the advantages and dis-advantages of using a Focusing Screen? HoBykoYan Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 16 10-06-2011 12:28 PM
Advantages of 360fgz? AND flash future? FastPhotography Flashes, Lighting, and Studio 3 07-20-2008 11:59 PM
Advantages of buying Pentax DSLRs ckanthon Pentax DSLR Discussion 35 06-30-2008 09:10 PM
Advantages of Prime Lenses stafford588 Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 14 12-29-2007 06:34 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:07 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