Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-20-2016, 11:28 AM   #76
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Nelson B.C.
Posts: 3,267
As a friend said, I think we need one of each. Both have their strengths and weaknesses.

Thinking back over the year, a few thing come to mind. I shoot K3 primarily with 500mm, 300mm and a collection of macros, 43mm and 35mm. I'm pleased with what I got last year, and totally agree with norm about skill and being in the right place. I found the 500mm a bit too long, missing shots I couldn't get into the frame being too close. I found I was fighting shutter slap all the time, limiting low shutter speed potential. AF is always an issue. K3 low light performance is ok.

If this was an apsc offering with improved af I would have preordered.

The fast framerate of the K3 usually means lots of bad shots. With exceptions of course where I have gotten a stunning result due to capturing the moment.

So going through all the situations where I missed or managed to get nice shots, how would a full frame made a diffrrence?

Osprey. There was a nest near home and from july to the beginning of September i would spend the first daylight watching them. The quick bursts landing or taking off got me some nice shots, but lots of out of focus. Once in the air very few sharp ones. I was close and the focus wasn't quick enough. I would adjust exposure compensation as the sun came up to avoid blowing highlights. Lots of opportunities, lots of good results. Improved af in either sensor format would help. Would a sensor with more dr and less noise help? Not sure. I know that if the light isn't perfect the results are disappointing. A bigger frame (or shorter lens, 400 f4), a stop of dr, two stops better noise, better af would get me shots I didn't get. The K3 sensor gets nice results in a narrow band.

Bears. Lots of them, and lots of very nice shots this year. I find low contrast busy scenes give the af fits. 500mm was plenty and the effective length on a ff would be fine. As my wife asked, how close were you? Low light gave me no shots. The ones that turned out well were either in bright sunshine or early morning golden sun. One day, late afternoon in the fall the three grizzly cubs sacked out in a heap. I was close, handheld, the shot was in focus, no movement blur. The results were mud, no detail, noise, nothing to pull out. I want that shot. Another instance early morning just as the light was coming up a pose, a cub stood up and stared. Noise and inability to lock focus on low contrast details, a missed masterpiece. If the full frame widens that narrow band of the possible, I could use it.

Pros: better dynamic range and noise characteristics. If I can increase the effective limit I set from 3200 to 6400 that would make a big difference.
Better AF
Make my 500 a bit shorter.
Cons: heavier, low frame rate. I have yet to see the frame rate in afc mode; the k3 degrades by about 1/3. If it is 4.4 or close in afc, then no problem.

Pentax has had an uncanny ability to build what I want in the past, and I suspect that they have done it again.

02-20-2016, 11:43 AM   #77
Pentaxian
zzeitg's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South Bohemia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,614
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
Maybe it is too early / not aware of / but I'd think they come up with a 24M APSC and new AF , i.e would be the intermediate step to the next FF version 18 months later. On APSC, 24Mp is already pretty dense.

Now, this is confusing. 24 MP CMOS is what we have in K-3 / K-3 II. (Before there was 14,6 (K-7) and later 16,3 (K-5).) Each generation a little more, so probably that's not gonna change? But honestly I have no idea where are the current technology limits of the pixel density.
02-20-2016, 11:43 AM   #78
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,537
I think some are going to be surprised when moving from APSC to FF. APSC gives you the best of the lens sharpness (in the center). For all lenses, the maximum sharpness is in the center, and that's also why you still get good images with 1" sensors have a resolution pixels/mm way above the resolution of an APSC or 24x36 sensor. Where you had until now a decent edge to edge sharpness with your APSC camera, when pixel peeping , you'll see that your full frame images do not look as sharp, unless you buy yourself new larger heavier FF lenses and stop them down 2 stops to get sharp edges.

---------- Post added 20-02-16 at 19:47 ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by zzeitg Quote
Now, this is confusing. 24 MP CMOS is what we have in K-3 / K-3 II. (Before there was 14,6 (K-7) and later 16,3 (K-5).) Each generation a little more, so probably that's not gonna change?
No , confusing, I know that the K-3 has a 24Mp sensor. Why should the sensor change for every new camera is that would mean no overall increase in image quality? What would be more interesting is sensors having a variable pixel density, i.e higher pixel count in center and lower pixel count on the edges, like two censors in one.

Last edited by biz-engineer; 02-20-2016 at 11:48 AM.
02-20-2016, 11:51 AM   #79
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,864
I'm sure this exact issue will be the first thing people start exploring after the K-1 ships. But, someone on the forum once said "Your worst lens on FF is better than your best lens on APS-c." I'm really interested about putting my worst lens :FA-J 18-35 on 36 MP up against my K-3 and Sigma 8-16. Now there's a result I'm going to be interested in.

02-20-2016, 11:54 AM   #80
Pentaxian
zzeitg's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: South Bohemia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,614
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
Why should the sensor change for every new camera is that would mean no overall increase in image quality?

What I wanted to say was that even if the K-1 successor would offer higher amount of MPx for APS-C mode, it's probable that there will be an upgrade on the APS-C camera side as well. Leading to speculative conclusion that at least for next couple of years APS-C will be better system for shooting with long lenses anyway.
02-20-2016, 12:00 PM   #81
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,537
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
I'm sure this exact issue will be the first thing people start exploring after the K-1 ships. But, someone on the forum once said "Your worst lens on FF is better than your best lens on APS-c." I'm really interested about putting my worst lens :FA-J 18-35 on 36 MP up against my K-3 and Sigma 8-16. Now there's a result I'm going to be interested in.
Canon coworker had a 7D and bought a 5DIII one year ago. Before he got the 5DIII we were discussing advantages of full frame bla bla bla. After his 5DIII purchase he kind of was a little disappointed, he said, with APSC you get the best of the lens, now with the 5DIII edges aren't sharp. Now, he is still using the 7D most of the time and for two reasons: first, IQ is good enough from the 7D and he can't get the reach with 5DIII (if he would crop the 5DIII image , he would not get that many pixels...), and secondly when he is traveling he still takes the 7D because it's smaller to carry. So, finally he is using his 5DIII with two lenses: Zeiss 21 f2.8 for architecture, and a Tamy 28-75 for street/lansdcape. Still using the 7D more than the 5DIII. For example, to get the equivalent of a 100-400 on 5DIII, you need a big and very expensive lens, and image quality is not increase by as much as the price and weight of the system.

In Pentax land it's going the be the same story again.

Last edited by biz-engineer; 02-20-2016 at 12:06 PM.
02-20-2016, 01:34 PM   #82
Pentaxian
redrockcoulee's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Medicine Hat
Posts: 2,135
QuoteOriginally posted by MadMathMind Quote
People from that era were used to heavy things. Pretty much everything they bought and used growing up was made from cast iron and lead.
Even their bicycles were made of lead. 😊
02-20-2016, 01:42 PM   #83
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Nelson B.C.
Posts: 3,267
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
Canon coworker had a 7D and bought a 5DIII one year ago. Before he got the 5DIII we were discussing advantages of full frame bla bla bla. After his 5DIII purchase he kind of was a little disappointed, he said, with APSC you get the best of the lens, now with the 5DIII edges aren't sharp. Now, he is still using the 7D most of the time and for two reasons: first, IQ is good enough from the 7D and he can't get the reach with 5DIII (if he would crop the 5DIII image , he would not get that many pixels...), and secondly when he is traveling he still takes the 7D because it's smaller to carry. So, finally he is using his 5DIII with two lenses: Zeiss 21 f2.8 for architecture, and a Tamy 28-75 for street/lansdcape. Still using the 7D more than the 5DIII. For example, to get the equivalent of a 100-400 on 5DIII, you need a big and very expensive lens, and image quality is not increase by as much as the price and weight of the system.

In Pentax land it's going the be the same story again.
The 5diii is 22mp. A full frame with less pixels than the k3. No wonder he is dissatisfied with long lenses and cropping.

A friend uses the d810 for wildlife and is extremely happy.

I asked another friend who shoots Nikon D7200 about the D500, which has lots of advantages, but a non starter due to decreased resolution. He uses the resolution.

Ymmv.

02-20-2016, 02:05 PM   #84
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: North-East England
Posts: 73
Unlikey at the moment. A good chunk of what I shoot requires long lenses and I've just bought a 150-450 in November last year and a K3-ii in the summer. I've done a little with the 150-450 but not loads at the moment. I'm more interested in sorting out some of the lenses I've got and getting a 77 FA 1.8 limited (or seeing if there will be an 85 FA 1.4 at some point in the near future.)

The deal breaker for be will be how good the autofocus is with the new lenses. I had a play with a Canon 1D last year with some long glass at the photoshow in Birmingham and was really surprised at how much better it was than my K5-ii I had at the time. I'm not intending swapping systems as the K3-ii works fine for what I want (and it would cost a fortune for Canon gear - Don't like the ergonomics of Nikon). I'll have a play at the photoshow in Birmingham next month. I'm more likely to add one as a second body rather than replace the APS-C stuff.

Last edited by eonb; 02-22-2016 at 10:32 AM.
02-20-2016, 02:36 PM   #85
Junior Member




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Western Wisconsin
Posts: 26
Back to the original question...

QuoteQuote:
Will you leave APS-C for the K1?
Looking at the K1, there are some very impressive reasons to pick one up. I shoot both with FF and a crop (K3), but I might replace the K3 with the K1.

What about you? Crop has some benefits as does FF. Would you be happy with just FF?
Depends. I like my K-5, and I've got a couple of good APS-C lenses. The K-1 is about 300 g heavier. If the K-1 handles well & works well in crop mode with photo quality equal to or better than the K-5, I might try to sell the K-5. Otherwise I might just keep the K-5 and use it for screwin' around.

Bigger question is this - will I be upgrading my K-5 with a K-3ii or whatever the next APS-C Pentax is? There I think the answer is no. I'm a hobbyist, and while there are pluses & minuses for APS-C/FF, I have neither the $$ nor the need for both.
02-20-2016, 04:31 PM   #86
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
low light, moving subjects are not answered with FPS

QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
... Consumer grade full frame is better suited at photographing static subjects eventually in low light.
Depends on how you define 'consumer grade' I guess. the D800 is the best low-light, moving subject capture machine I've ever used (although I'm sure the D4/D5 and maybe Canon top-end match or beat it - and hopefully the K1! )

Low-light, moving subject photography can accidentally be done well with a high-FPS, spray & pray approach, but IMO that's just imprecise enough to suck the joy out of it, because it can't be depended on to get the one frame in the series you really wanted - and when it (rarely) is, then it didn't depend on any skill from you.

The best accurate, fast, low-light AF right now seems to be in the FF bodies, D800-level and up. It's a pleasure to see, and in that precise instant, capture . Makes the craft fun and your seeing/reaction skills are rewarded sans an AF hunt-hunt-miss frustration.

---------- Post added 02-20-16 at 05:33 PM ----------

What happens with people's aps-c bodies will depend, in a large part, on how good that K1 really is.

If it's as good as I think it could be, the reasons people find to keep two DSLR bodies will fade away, and it will be harder & harder to pick up the aps-c body again.

---------- Post added 02-20-16 at 06:05 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
... For all lenses, the maximum sharpness is in the center, and that's also why you still get good images with 1" sensors have a resolution pixels/mm way above the resolution of an APSC or 24x36 sensor. Where you had until now a decent edge to edge sharpness with your APSC camera, when pixel peeping , you'll see that your full frame images do not look as sharp, unless you buy yourself new larger heavier FF lenses and stop them down 2 stops to get sharp edges.[COLOR=Silver]
The edges that are cropped off in an smaller-sensored image can't be counted against a larger sensor This ^ has been debunked for years on dpreview - 'better edges' is not a good reason to go with a smaller sensor if IQ is really a priority.

For instance, to stay with your your 1'' example - the image from that 1'' sensor will have more conformity from center-edge, but the overall image taken with almost any lens on aps-c with the same angle of view would be much more pleasing, unless the lens on that 1'' camer is almost supernatural - even if there's a larger drop-off in MTF out to the edge in the aps-c image.

Same concept applies up one tier. Don't, I repeat, don't *not* buy a larger sensor because of 'the edges'.


.

Last edited by jsherman999; 02-20-2016 at 05:07 PM.
02-20-2016, 05:50 PM   #87
Site Supporter
Sailor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Coastal Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 18,811
QuoteOriginally posted by SteveM Quote
Looking at the K1, there are some very impressive reasons to pick one up. I shoot both with FF and a crop (K3), but I might replace the K3 with the K1.

What about you? Crop has some benefits as does FF. Would you be happy with just FF?
My guess is that I'll shoot with my K-3 more heavily than with the K-1. I've got 6 or 8 legacy lenses and an FA 31, FA 77 and DFA 100 - all of which could be nicely applied to a K-1. However, most of my modern AF lenses are DA primes and zooms, for which the K-3's high-res sensor and more diminutive bulk and weight are better suited than is the K-1. For travel, I'll bring either my K-3 and two or three DA limited primes or - more likely - my small Panasonic LX100. For all-day photographic excursions, the combination of my K-3 with a couple of primes and my DA 55-300 is just the ticket. The K-1 will, I suspect, be employed primarily with the FA Limiteds (I'll probably add the 43 to my collection) for landscapes, architecture, and low-light situations, but who knows?

To be honest, I can think of no good reason to buy a K-1 other than I want one, which - I suppose - is reason enough.

Jer
02-20-2016, 06:25 PM   #88
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,796
QuoteOriginally posted by MadMathMind Quote
People from that era were used to heavy things. Pretty much everything they bought and used growing up was made from cast iron and lead.
His camera was made of rather thick mahogany and solid brass fittings and thick canvas bellows with a solid plate ground glass. My 8X10 is made of ebony heartwood and solid titanium fittings and leather bellows with a fused silica ground glass. Even with the same 300mm f/6.3 lens that he used my 8X10 is several hundred grams lighter than his.

Last edited by Digitalis; 02-20-2016 at 10:39 PM.
02-20-2016, 07:30 PM   #89
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,687
I own a K20D, K-3 and Sony a6000. I rarely use the K20D. I've always been happy with APS-C, but the K-1 is exerting some pull due to its extraordinary value. I am in no hurry to buy into FF. I suspect it will be very tempting at some point in the future when the price drops. I have a bunch of FF compatible lenses; FA 28mm, FA 35mm, FA 50mm 1.4, D FA 100mm macro, A 135mm, Tamron 70-200mm, DA*300mm. All I need is a standard zoom for a full kit.

My main interest is in a K-3 II replacement and that will in all likelihood be my next purchase. I would never go exclusively FF, I need APS-C for birding.

Last edited by audiobomber; 02-20-2016 at 07:48 PM.
02-20-2016, 07:40 PM   #90
Site Supporter
boriscleto's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Liverpool, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 12,872
QuoteOriginally posted by redrockcoulee Quote
Even their bicycles were made of lead. 😊
And they had to walk to school. Uphill. Both ways.
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, aps-c, apsc, bodies, camera, center, change, crop, edge, ff, frame, full-frame, grade, images, k-3, k1, lenses, light, low-light, pentax, sensor, sharpness, subject, subjects, weight
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
When is an APS-C lens not really an APS-C? lightbox Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 17 03-27-2015 07:45 PM
Do you use your 50mm on APS-C? yusuf Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 43 04-23-2014 10:22 AM
APS-C K1 maybe. schufosi777 Photographic Industry and Professionals 71 06-22-2012 07:18 AM
What would make you upgrade to the next flagship APS-C? Wired Pentax K-5 101 12-16-2011 03:28 AM
Do you think Pentax will announce their EVIL APS-C size sensor camera soon? wll Photographic Technique 20 01-06-2011 06:14 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:34 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