Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-02-2015, 03:06 PM   #61
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,663
I have DA*16-50. Love it.

07-02-2015, 03:28 PM   #62
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,716
QuoteQuote:
I think at the end of the day if your a landscape photographer FF IS A MUST.....end of story..
Is there some law that says the more cliches you put into a post, the more likely people are to believe you?

If it's just landscape, you need a 645z.
07-02-2015, 03:57 PM   #63
Site Supporter
Fries's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Gauw
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,828
After I a spend a whole lot of money on something I'll will have no trouble to justify that the money was well spend. I will find reviews and other stuff that inforce my believe that my purchase was a good thing! I am sure this will work like a charm when and if I buy a full frame camera... After I have convinced my self I need one I am sure all the reasons mentioned in this (and other topics) topic help me stay the course. Thanks for that!
07-02-2015, 04:32 PM   #64
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,761
Until I know the capabilities of the particular FF, I do not know how or even whether it will improve my photographs. At the moment, I am doing a lot of birding, and I don't see myself getting lenses which are 1.5 times as long, if such even exist. My hope is that there will be improvements in low light capabilities, and that could be very helpful for dance photos, which is the other thing I shoot a lot. It might or might not improve some studio portraits. For travel, I probably would not even bring it along. My Canon friends with whom I have traveled usually have a 60d or 70d along. I rarely see a friend with a 5d or 6d on a vacation.

07-02-2015, 08:01 PM   #65
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,576
QuoteOriginally posted by jcdoss Quote
I want to experience huge viewfinder nirvana.
I keep hearing this, but folks should prepare to be dissappointed.

No digital FF is going to bring back the huge, bright optical viewfinder of a MX or LX.

We've discussed this before, but in terms of viewfinder brightness, cameras like the old MX didn't have to offer light-robbing stuff like viewfinder overlays for AF points, grid display etc, nor did it require AF sub-mirrors either.

In terms of viewfinder size and coverage, I also think that 95% coverage at 0.97x magnification like the MX had are a thing of the past, unless you go EVF. Even the top of the line Nikon's (eg D810 - 100%/0.7) or Canon's (1Dx - 100%/0.76) don't come close.

Last edited by rawr; 07-02-2015 at 08:09 PM.
07-02-2015, 08:57 PM - 1 Like   #66
osv
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: So Cal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,080
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
You don't get more DOF control with FF.
"An important consideration when choosing systems is to compare available lenses in equivalent terms of the same format. Often, lenses may have the same AOV, but not the same maximum aperture diameter. For example, the Canon 50 / 1.4 has the same AOV as the 30 / 1.4 on 1.6x and the 25 / 1.4 on 4/3, but it's max aperture diameter (50mm / 1.4 = 36mm) is larger than either. To match the aperture diameter of the 50 / 1.4 on FF, we would need a 30 / 0.9 on 1.6x and a 25 / 0.7 on 4/3, neither of which exist."

how do you match the 50/1.4 aov and dof on crop?

QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
You get less DOF at the same aperture at the same angle of view..
that's true, but when the dof doesn't match like that, is it an equivalent comparison:

-The photos all have the same diagonal angle of view (25mm x 2 = 31mm x 1.6 = 33mm x 1.5 = 50mm) and aperture diameter (25mm / 1.4 = 31mm / 1.8 = 33mm / 1.9 = 50mm / 2.8 = 18mm).

-The photos all have the same perspective when taken from the same position.

-The photos all have the same DOF (as well as diffraction softening) when they are taken from the same position with the same focal point and have the same display size.

Equivalence
07-02-2015, 10:42 PM   #67
Senior Member




Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 268
Let's hope that there is an improvement on the viewfinder. I do find now in the digital era especially with my k5 I really struggle to get a good view and I really rely on my AF auto focus, which half the time really sucks
07-03-2015, 06:48 AM   #68
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,761
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
I keep hearing this, but folks should prepare to be dissappointed.

No digital FF is going to bring back the huge, bright optical viewfinder of a MX or LX.

We've discussed this before, but in terms of viewfinder brightness, cameras like the old MX didn't have to offer light-robbing stuff like viewfinder overlays for AF points, grid display etc, nor did it require AF sub-mirrors either.

In terms of viewfinder size and coverage, I also think that 95% coverage at 0.97x magnification like the MX had are a thing of the past, unless you go EVF. Even the top of the line Nikon's (eg D810 - 100%/0.7) or Canon's (1Dx - 100%/0.76) don't come close.
Agreed, especially about the finder on the MX, which is my favorite overall.

07-03-2015, 10:03 AM   #69
Site Supporter
6BQ5's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Nevada, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,064
I took a glance throw my mother-in-law's Canon T3i viewfinder. Yikes! That's a teeny tiny viewfinder! We're spoiled with our K-bodies. How much sweeter will the viewfinder be in the FF body? Ahhh .... ahhh!
07-03-2015, 10:33 AM   #70
Site Supporter
jcdoss's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Kansas City, MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,804
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
I keep hearing this, but folks should prepare to be dissappointed.
No digital FF is going to bring back the huge, bright optical viewfinder of a MX or LX....
Hmmm... well if this is true, I might as well pick up an A7 or A7ii and be done with it.
07-03-2015, 10:58 AM   #71
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,430
I'll probably enjoy the fishing more, but I probably won't catch any more fish.
07-03-2015, 01:56 PM   #72
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,064
QuoteOriginally posted by osv Quote
"An important consideration when choosing systems is to compare available lenses in equivalent terms of the same format. Often, lenses may have the same AOV, but not the same maximum aperture diameter. For example, the Canon 50 / 1.4 has the same AOV as the 30 / 1.4 on 1.6x and the 25 / 1.4 on 4/3, but it's max aperture diameter (50mm / 1.4 = 36mm) is larger than either. To match the aperture diameter of the 50 / 1.4 on FF, we would need a 30 / 0.9 on 1.6x and a 25 / 0.7 on 4/3, neither of which exist."

how do you match the 50/1.4 aov and dof on crop?
The point is that if two lenses has different DOF wide open at the same angle of view (and the same maximum aperture), the one with the thinnest DOF does not display more control over DOF. The control is the same, the range is different. What range is most desireable depends on the photographer and is purely subjective.
Equivalence only work for DOF measuring devices wide open at fixed distances, and not even all distances. It has little value for photography. The system is by definition based on exposure and stops, not DOF, and this is whats labeled on the lenses. No. They are not mislabeled. F:4 is equivalent to F:4 cause it yields the same exposure whatever format you use.
People choose different formats because they are not equivalent. There's no right DOF for wide open at a certain F:stop and angle of view,. It is totally subjective. Hence there's no more need to expect an APS lens to behave like an FF lens than vice versa. They don't anyway.

You do not buy a 645z in order for it to be equivalent to your cell phone camera.....

"how do you match the 50/1.4 aov and dof on crop?"

Easily. By buying a 35/1.4 lens (on APS). it has thinner minimum DOF than an 50/1.4 lens on FF due to higher maximum magnification. The calculation use in "equivalence" is oversimplified. DOF is not defined by focal length and aperture alone, but focusing distance and subject magnification as well, and they won't be the same cross format for the same angle of view on their respective formats. This is deliberately left out cause it muddles the water. The example above won't give the same image but who's to say where the photographer want the thin DOF? At 10m or at 0.12m? That's purely subjective.
DOF is subjective and dependent on a number of factors. Exposure isn't. That's why the industry standard equivalence is based on exposure and not DOF (no more than shutterspeed is defined by subject motion).
Different formats are not DOF equivalent and every attempt to make them so is an exercise in futility and only works if ignore the whole picture and the reason why people choose one format over another.

Last edited by Pål Jensen; 07-03-2015 at 02:56 PM.
07-03-2015, 03:17 PM   #73
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,576
QuoteOriginally posted by jcdoss Quote
Hmmm... well if this is true, I might as well pick up an A7 or A7ii and be done with it.
On the bright side , the big pentaprism 'hump' that featured on the Pentax FF mockup is intriguing, and suggests that they might be planning something special for the FF viewfinder. It might be worth waiting to see what they are doing there.

It would certainly be a useful differentiator and selling point, in my opinion, if a new Pentax FF could claim to outdo it's rivals with a bigger, brighter OVF.
07-03-2015, 11:47 PM   #74
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,663
Okay, no more excuses...then it will not make any impact on my shots. I just want that thing. First pentax D FF which will come available...after so long wait. There.
07-04-2015, 02:44 PM - 2 Likes   #75
Pentaxian
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
You don't get more DOF control with FF.
You most certainly do, with the lenses available for each.

Just like aps-c gives you more DOF control than micro 4/3, or 1'', or phone.

.

---------- Post added 07-04-15 at 03:48 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by slip Quote
Will having a FF sensor improve your photography?
Getting a nicer/faster car doesn't make you a better driver, but it can improve your drive (and increase your fun.)

Going FF doesn't necessarily make you a better photographer, but it can improve your photographs (and increase your fun!)

.
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, cameras, control, count, diffraction, dof, f/2, ff, film, frame, frame sensors, full-frame, images, increase, lens, manufacturers, megapixel, observation, pentax, rock, sensor, sensors, size
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How to improve your photographic creations pursang Photographic Technique 15 03-21-2015 10:39 PM
Night Trying to Learn Night Photography v3; How can I improve? Hexism Photo Critique 14 01-14-2015 08:19 PM
Ten household items that can improve your food photography interested_observer Photographic Technique 2 11-17-2013 06:07 PM
Thematic try it backward to improve your photography slip Mini-Challenges, Games, and Photo Stories 2 08-26-2012 07:40 AM
Food How to improve my food photography? ddekadt Photo Critique 12 06-22-2012 08:45 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:02 PM. | 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