Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-07-2015, 04:12 AM   #181
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,243
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
Is the whole goal of photography narrow depth of field and clear high iso?
It has kept a lot of threads going for far longer than they should

11-07-2015, 04:20 AM   #182
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,969
QuoteOriginally posted by mohb Quote
It has kept a lot of threads going for far longer than they should
It just aggravates me. There is a thread to post your f1.2 shots and the majority of the photos in that thread would have been better stopped down. There are only a few situations where wide open, soft, super narrow depth of field actually works in a photo and yet people act like it is some sort of holy grail.
11-07-2015, 04:25 AM   #183
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,832
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
s the whole goal of photography narrow depth of field and clear high iso? Then what is the point. Clearly full frame is better in both of those situations, but those aren't landscape situations. The reason why the 645z does well is because it is a beast in low iso situations and the glass for it is pretty amazing with regard to its rendering. There are plenty of times that I would like a little more dynamic range, but a 6D was never the camera that came to mind in those situations as my K5 II has more low iso dynamic range than a 6D. A D810 sensor on the other hand...
That also my current line of thinking. Cameras systems have their sweet spots where they perform better in a situation then other systems. For example, you could consider a A7RII, it is small and will perform well in most situations, while there are situation where the A7RII system will be embarrassing compared to other camera systems. I could consider a Nikon D4 + Nikon 200 f2, that would kill my K-3 for indoor sports, but then if I also want to use the Nikon D4 + 200f2 for mountain landscapes, it's so heavy that I can't carry that combo in my backpack. So, that's the problem... we can't have all the advantages built in one single camera, although the DSLR + interchangeable lenses concept is designed for maximum versatility while not being the best at for the cost, size, and weight. We always have to tradeoff. None mentioned flash to compensate for high iso limits... (I'm surprised actually) arrrhhh to bad, the flash works up to a certain distance, it is indeed limited to specific conditions again. Regarding the 6D, well, I like to Canon support and lens selection, but the D750 as a camera is better specs than the 6D. Anyway, the never ending story of camera tradeoffs... Pixel shift is an extension that pushes the K-3II to a slightly higher image quality in one specific condition, comparing a K-3II pixel shift to a 6D and drawing a general conclusion about which one is better is like looking a the word through a keyhole.

---------- Post added 07-11-15 at 12:34 ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
It just aggravates me. There is a thread to post your f1.2 shots and the majority of the photos in that thread would have been better stopped down. There are only a few situations where wide open, soft, super narrow depth of field actually works in a photo and yet people act like it is some sort of holy grail.
That for sure, most lenses are usually not best performing wide open, that's why I'd still get better image from using my 70-200 @f4 on a FF versus the same lens @ f2.8 on a K-3. The size of the glass gets larger heavier and most costly, but yet, you still have to stop down that fast lens to get the best results. f4 lenses are generally not at bad wide open as f2.8 lenses etc... You can nearly use a f4 lens from f4, while you have to stop down the f2.8 lens by half a stop. That's why I don't think we can say a f4 lens on FF is the same as a f2.8 lens on APSC, the FF f4 combo will deliver better images.
11-08-2015, 06:06 AM   #184
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,558
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
None mentioned flash to compensate for high iso limits... (I'm surprised actually) arrrhhh to bad, the flash works up to a certain distance, it is indeed limited to specific conditions again.
Because it is not the same usage and I try to be honest in my position and argumentation. But if we are at it, regardless of format, mastered flash and tripod shoots taken at low iso will usually look much better and give much more possibility for control and creativity. Maybe many of best shoot are taken witch such kind of setup but to be honest, this is not always practical. I can go out for a walk with my camera and my primes handled. Don't really want to take a strobist kit and a tripod.

QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
Regarding the 6D, well, I like to Canon support and lens selection, but the D750 as a camera is better specs than the 6D. Anyway, the never ending story of camera tradeoffs... Pixel shift is an extension that pushes the K-3II to a slightly higher image quality in one specific condition, comparing a K-3II pixel shift to a 6D and drawing a general conclusion about which one is better is like looking a the word through a keyhole.
I don't think people think that pixel shift is something you can always count on. But for a landscape photographer with a tripod, that may have more value that the ability to shoot at f/4 instead of f/2.8 or the hability to have more acceptable noise levels at 6400 isos. Depend of the practice. And again for a landscape shoot, the 6D isn't neither giving more dynamic range neither more sharpness. It bring nothing, even when we remove pixel shift from the equation.

A wedding shooter is going to appreciate much more a 6D, that's for sure, and he will likely have the 2 standard f/2.8 zoom + a few primes to help. (And maybe even 2 cameras). But the lanscape photographer would be more interrested in A7R-II or D810 if we speak of FF than a 6D or D750.

QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
That for sure, most lenses are usually not best performing wide open, that's why I'd still get better image from using my 70-200 @f4 on a FF versus the same lens @ f2.8 on a K-3. The size of the glass gets larger heavier and most costly, but yet, you still have to stop down that fast lens to get the best results. f4 lenses are generally not at bad wide open as f2.8 lenses etc... You can nearly use a f4 lens from f4, while you have to stop down the f2.8 lens by half a stop. That's why I don't think we can say a f4 lens on FF is the same as a f2.8 lens on APSC, the FF f4 combo will deliver better images.
The 70-200 f/4 may beat the 50-135 at f/2.8 on reviews, in particulars on borders. But I had this guy a while ago, and I can say to you, the f/2.8 shoots are pixel sharp. Maybe the 70-200 f/4 would get a significant edge a 42MP, but that would be valuable for 30x40" shoot to see the facial air in all their glory:

f/2.8 shoot (full picture):



And in attachement, the 100% crop. This is from a K5 with a low pass filter. Yet I'll ask you to not advertise it too much because if the subject find it, she will curse me forever thinking it is much too sharp already. And you can already see that the right of the 100% crop is out of focus... This not the lens that limit the sharpness anymore... I would have needed f/5.6 to have everything in focus there.


Last edited by Nicolas06; 01-31-2017 at 02:03 PM.
11-08-2015, 06:25 AM   #185
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,558
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
That your hypothesis. You sort of mentioned that FF @ f4 = APSC @ f2.8. So, a FF @ f2.8 is the same as a 645z @ f4. But the FF is a lot cheaper. I follow you and extrapolate across formats. But now you seem to say, no it's not the same. I'm confused.
You are not confused: the argument for MF is not low light capabilities or even less deph of field. That's it. The reality lies elsewhere. Maybe to get a 51MP shoot in one picture (until the 5DS arrived), maybe for the better out of focus / in transition a longer focal length provide? Or maybe that you have access to greater lenses than what is available in classical FF mounts ?

But that's not for the low light performance, even if many are impressed by the what a 645Z at 1600 (or even 12800 isos) can produce.
11-10-2015, 07:50 PM   #186
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Eastern Oregon
Posts: 604
Wow, go away for a week or two...


The big problem for me with the 6D was the AA filter. If I were only shooting weddings, the 6D would be great. The AF feels better for sure.


On the other hand, shooting weddings is a bit of an issue with the K3II because of lack of lenses. There is no getting around the fact that a FF with a 28mm 1.8, 50 1.8 or 1.4 and 85mm 1.8 is absolutely the BOMB for shooting weddings. If the Pentax FF was available today, the 31mm 1.8, 43mm or 50mm 1.4 and 77mm would work. But in APS-c there just are not the fast equals available. At least not in a satisfying way that I've found.
11-10-2015, 09:55 PM   #187
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 223
QuoteOriginally posted by Qwntm Quote
Wow, go away for a week or two...
meaning you have a life, unlike some of the trolls on here :P

QuoteOriginally posted by Qwntm Quote
shooting weddings is a bit of an issue with the K3II because of lack of lenses
your forgetting 3rd party lens and you don't really need speed for 28mm and wider but it is nice to have
11-11-2015, 06:58 AM   #188
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,558
QuoteOriginally posted by Qwntm Quote
Wow, go away for a week or two...


The big problem for me with the 6D was the AA filter. If I were only shooting weddings, the 6D would be great. The AF feels better for sure.


On the other hand, shooting weddings is a bit of an issue with the K3II because of lack of lenses. There is no getting around the fact that a FF with a 28mm 1.8, 50 1.8 or 1.4 and 85mm 1.8 is absolutely the BOMB for shooting weddings. If the Pentax FF was available today, the 31mm 1.8, 43mm or 50mm 1.4 and 77mm would work. But in APS-c there just are not the fast equals available. At least not in a satisfying way that I've found.
Sure weddings is the typicall application for FFs.

11-11-2015, 07:25 AM   #189
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,785
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
Sure weddings is the typicall application for FFs.
With film, weddings was the application for 645 or 6x7. What's changed?
11-11-2015, 08:17 AM   #190
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,558
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
With film, weddings was the application for 645 or 6x7. What's changed?
The far better high iso performance of sensors and great/fast f/2.8 zoom associated with typicall FFs?

I think that MF use is growing for weddings actually, but for now the practical and dependanble digital camera are too expensive in MF to see wide adoption.
11-11-2015, 09:09 AM   #191
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,785
I actually think MF weddings will come back here too. We're just a little behind.
11-11-2015, 10:54 AM   #192
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2013
Posts: 223
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
Sure weddings is the typicall application for FFs.
quite a few wedding photographers have started carrying fujifilm x100s as a second camera (flash sync speed upto 1/2000s, build in ND filter for nice outdoor shots with a bit of fill light, and extremely discrete thanks to the leaf shutter)

QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
With film, weddings was the application for 645 or 6x7. What's changed?
people got lazy that's what changed, no one likes hauling around equipment like that, others don't like the smell of developer or darkrooms
11-11-2015, 11:29 AM   #193
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,785
QuoteQuote:
people got lazy that's what changed, no one likes hauling around equipment like that, others don't like the smell of developer or darkrooms
Hmmmmph, Wat Wid dat?

I actually know w few camera salesmen who developed allergies to darkroom chemicals and ended up behind the sales counter as a result/
11-12-2015, 02:59 PM - 1 Like   #194
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,234
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
With film, weddings was the application for 645 or 6x7. What's changed?
Photographer upper body strength


...could not resist...


Steve
11-24-2015, 12:06 AM   #195
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Eastern Oregon
Posts: 604
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
With film, weddings was the application for 645 or 6x7. What's changed?


That was only due to the lack of IQ in the films. You had to go MF in order to get the IQ. By the mid 90's, when the film's got better, the majority of wedding photogs and studios started shooting 35mm. It wasn't the gear but the film that changed.


I shot about 40-50 weddings a year for various studios from 1985 - 1998. In 2003-2006 I jumped back in due to furloughs in the airline industry and by then it was all APS-c digital. 20D's and D70s. And I've just started it up again: www.sonnetphotography.com


Most of that work was from 20D's and D70s from 2004-2006.
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!
art, camera, canon, canon 6d, dslr, frame, images, k-3, k3, k3 ii test, k3ii, lens, panorama, pentax, pentax k-3, people, pixel, pixel shift, print, prints, resolution, shift, shift on k3, shot, test, test v canon
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K3II: Pixel Shift First Test DDoram Pentax K-3 168 11-24-2015 10:15 AM
Testing K3 II pixel shift with dcraw tduell Pentax K-3 5 08-31-2015 10:59 PM
K-3 II Pixel shift for Macro? Omestes Pentax K-3 6 06-12-2015 08:13 PM
K3 II pixel-shift samples on IR. I'm impressed jonby Pentax K-3 42 06-02-2015 12:28 AM
K3 or Canon 6d - That is the question zorza Pentax K-3 95 05-08-2015 12:07 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:52 AM. | 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