Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-15-2015, 01:39 PM   #16
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,600
QuoteOriginally posted by kentster Quote
When would one need to justify moving to a full frame camera?
If you look at dxomark.com, it's pretty clear that there is one metric where full-frame stands substantially above APS-C: low-light/high ISO performance. Every other full-frame sensor metric is practically the same as APS-C nowadays.

So in terms of justifying full-frame, one could (in-part) work backwards from that as a FF justification.

However, the need to 'justify' FF seems a relic of the past.

In the days when FF were very expensive, 'elite' equipment, people in forums and elsewhere often felt it necessary to justify spending the considerable extra $$ on FF over APS-C with complex and un-convincing personal rationalizations.

But nowadays with cameras like the A7, D610 and 6D being so affordable, there's no longer any need to pretend there's something special about ones needs in order to justify buying a FF. Just spend a small amount of extra money and 'get one if you feel like it' is how it works now..

12-15-2015, 01:40 PM   #17
Pentaxian
bertwert's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Golden, BC
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,902
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
I'm reading the K-7 as 4672 by 3104
D810 crop format 4800 x 3200.
Looks like the D810 crop has more resolution.
12-15-2015, 01:45 PM   #18
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,786
QuoteOriginally posted by bertwert Quote
Looks like the D810 crop has more resolution.
Not enough to see though. a K-3 with 6000x4000 pixels translates to at best 3000 lw/ph, so the best you can hope for on these big res Sony sensors is half the resolution of the sensor, in measurable resolution.

So you're talking 50 lw/ph on a 3000 lw/ph image. Those images are functionally identical. You can't see the difference. I'm not convinced you can see 100 lw/ph. I suspect possible a 150 lw/ph difference might be visible pixel peeping, but, I'm not even convinced of that.

You can see the difference between a K-3 and a K-5 in the Imaging resources colour swatches, but that's a difference of 500 lw/ph, so, I'm convinced you can tell the difference at 17%. , 1.7 % not so much.
12-15-2015, 01:49 PM - 1 Like   #19
Pentaxian
bertwert's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Golden, BC
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,902
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Not enough to see though. a K-3 with 6000x4000 pixels translates to at best 3000 lw/ph, so the best you can hope for on these big res Sony sensors is half the resolution of the sensor, in measurable resolution.

So you're talking 50 lw/ph on a 3000 lw/ph image. Those images are functionally identical. You can't see the difference. I'm not convinced you can see 100 lw/ph. I suspect possible a 150 lw/ph difference might be visible pixel peeping, but, I'm not even convinced of that.
OK.

Honestly I don't really care - we just need to argue on PF all day long

12-15-2015, 01:51 PM - 2 Likes   #20
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,786
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
If you look at dxomark.com, it's pretty clear that there is one metric where full-frame stands substantially above APS-C: low-light/high ISO performance. Every other full-frame sensor metric is practically the same as APS-C nowadays.
And even that is the same if you normalize the DoF. FF gives you the advantage of going to ridiculously narrow DoF, to get a one stop better noise on your images, assuming the narrow DoF doesn't ruin the picture. Shooting for the same DoF, they are pretty much the same.

But. one stop is usually insignificant, and if you're not shooting wide open, on your FF, you can match everything on APS-c.

---------- Post added 12-15-15 at 03:54 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by bertwert Quote
OK.

Honestly I don't really care - we just need to argue on PF all day long
Damn, I was counting on a better come back than that, what am I supposed to do now?

Ok how about.. "you're ugly and yo momma dresses you funny." ? Huh, huh? What do you think?
12-15-2015, 02:27 PM   #21
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,969
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
If you look at dxomark.com, it's pretty clear that there is one metric where full-frame stands substantially above APS-C: low-light/high ISO performance. Every other full-frame sensor metric is practically the same as APS-C nowadays.

So in terms of justifying full-frame, one could (in-part) work backwards from that as a FF justification.

However, the need to 'justify' FF seems a relic of the past.

In the days when FF were very expensive, 'elite' equipment, people in forums and elsewhere often felt it necessary to justify spending the considerable extra $$ on FF over APS-C with complex and un-convincing personal rationalizations.

But nowadays with cameras like the A7, D610 and 6D being so affordable, there's no longer any need to pretend there's something special about ones needs in order to justify buying a FF. Just spend a small amount of extra money and 'get one if you feel like it' is how it works now..
Honestly, the biggest two reasons that you should get a full frame are because (a) you want it and (b) you can afford it. If you can't afford it, wait awhile and buy a used one, I suppose.
12-15-2015, 03:44 PM   #22
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,501
I don't understand all that technical mumbo jumbo. I just want a digital k-mount camera that reads the entire image circle ALL my lenses project.
12-15-2015, 04:00 PM   #23
Moderator PEG Judges
Kerrowdown's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Highlands of Scotland.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 30,701
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
I just want a digital k-mount camera that reads the entire image circle ALL my lenses project.
That sounds good to me too, I have "Ladies" in waiting.

12-15-2015, 05:27 PM   #24
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,786
Everybody wants one, that's for sure. Probably 100 guys 100 different reasons. I want one just because it's there. I want every friggin thing.
12-15-2015, 05:33 PM   #25
Pentaxian
bertwert's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Golden, BC
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,902
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
I want every friggin thing.
Like me to have better comebacks
12-15-2015, 06:15 PM   #26
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,501
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
I want one just because it's there. I want every friggin thing.
it seems like I BUY every friggin thing.
12-15-2015, 07:33 PM   #27
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,539
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
I don't understand all that technical mumbo jumbo. I just want a digital k-mount camera that reads the entire image circle ALL my lenses project.
Then the new FX format camera will not satisfy you, it will only record a 36X24mm rectangle not the entire 45mm+/- area illuminated by your lenses.

/smartarse.

Last edited by Digitalis; 12-15-2015 at 07:40 PM.
12-15-2015, 07:59 PM   #28
Lens Buying Addict
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,501
QuoteOriginally posted by Digitalis Quote
Then the new FX format camera will not satisfy you, it will only record a 36X24mm rectangle not the entire 45mm+/- area illuminated by your lenses.

/smartarse.
/barndooropen
12-15-2015, 08:19 PM   #29
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Alabama
Posts: 2,450
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
/barndooropen
For reals!
12-16-2015, 10:09 AM   #30
Site Supporter
kentster's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2015
Location: Bremerton, Washington
Posts: 287
Original Poster
One more full frame question.


If you are comparing 2 cameras... one FF One CS. both rated at 25 mega pixels.


If you shoot the FF in a Crop mode.... is It now less than 25 mega pixels ?


Shooting same subject...same conditions with a CS and a FF in 1.5 crop mode...will the IQ be the same ?
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, aps-c, camera, change, crop, dof, dslr, ff, film, format, frame, full-frame, ken, ken rockwell, lens, pentax, people, photography, resolution, rockwell, sensor, size, trucks, types, vs
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
When do you expect the new Full Frame in shops? RonHendriks1966 Pentax Full Frame 47 01-15-2016 11:11 PM
Why Pentax SHOULD make a full frame, an answer to the link on homepage cyberjunkie Pentax Full Frame 302 02-01-2015 07:39 PM
Why full frame? VoiceOfReason Pentax DSLR Discussion 208 07-28-2012 08:09 AM
full frame DSLR camera, when? yxy728 Photographic Technique 34 04-29-2011 09:29 AM
Full-Frame Image Sensor Holy Grail - Why? stewart_photo Pentax DSLR Discussion 82 10-10-2007 03:00 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:29 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