Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-16-2016, 05:02 PM   #31
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 768
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
What do you think will happen to APS-C over the next 10 years?
Point & Shoot and Bridge Cameras will be eliminated completely. APS-C will shrink slowly as the Cell Phone developes I Q and those budding artist decide to stay with the cell phone and don't move on to more expensive APS-C to satisfy their artistic thirst. Quasi Artists like myself and shrinking numbers of Newbies will stay with the APS-C to satisfy our thirst for 20"X24", 16"X 20" , Canvases, slide shows on the 55" Smart T V and digital PP etc. The F F crowd will be similar to the Medium Format Crowd of the 80's - a small niche mostly pros with a smattering of semi pros but Advanced Video will take over most of that crowd within the 10 years.

03-16-2016, 05:09 PM   #32
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 604
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
OK, this is great. So, in your view, sensor performance is the only potential advantage between the formats? That's cool. I disagree, but it's fine that we disagree, and I respect your opinion

---------- Post added 03-16-2016 at 11:53 PM ----------



Sorry for the late reply Yeah, that's pretty much where I'm at too... I don't know enough about m43 to comment knowledgeably...

EDIT: And, repeating what I've said several times elsewhere on the forum (so apologies if I'm getting on anyone's wick with it!), I have a non-Pentax FF camera with 24-70 and 70-200 f/2.8 lenses, and I absolutely *love* that kit... but for me personally I would not choose them over my Pentax APS-C bodies and lenses for a day's shooting unless (a) I needed what they can achieve, or (b) I just wanted to use them (which is quite frequently!! ). None of which is to detract from the awesome setup that the K-1 + fast lenses will offer.

Yes, only sensor performance is the real advantage. Huge viewfinders used to be a FF advantage but not anymore. Some m43 have larger viewfinders than FF. Shallow DoF is a problem not a feature.
03-16-2016, 05:17 PM   #33
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North-East of England
Posts: 16,042
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by dtmateojr Quote
Yes, only sensor performance is the real advantage. Huge viewfinders used to be a FF advantage but not anymore. Some m43 have larger viewfinders than FF. Shallow DoF is a problem not a feature.
What you say makes sense, given what you've been saying. Now I understand fully where you're coming from. Thanks again for the input. It's very valid - there will be others who think the same, I'm sure, and that guides who buys what

EDIT: For the record - for other readers - while I respect this view, I most definitely disagree with it... I firmly believe sensor performance is just one advantage of FF over APS-C over m43 over 1" over 2/3" etc. etc... But I'm no expert

Last edited by BigMackCam; 03-16-2016 at 05:25 PM.
03-16-2016, 05:28 PM   #34
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 604
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
What you say makes sense, given what you've been saying. Now I understand fully where you're coming from. Thanks again for the input. It's very valid - there will be others who think the same, I'm sure, and that guides who buys what

EDIT: For the record - for other readers - while I respect this view, I most definitely disagree with it... I firmly believe sensor performance is just one advantage of FF over APS-C over m43 over 1" over 2/3" etc. etc... But I'm no expert

Do you want to hear the disadvantages of FF? :-)

03-16-2016, 05:33 PM   #35
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North-East of England
Posts: 16,042
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by dtmateojr Quote
Do you want to hear the disadvantages of FF? :-)
If you wish... I'm happy to hear your thoughts on it, though my original post was based on a conversation between myself and another forum member on why APS-C might or might not be replaced by m43 (remember, I'm primarily an APS-C shooter, but also have a non-Pentax FF camera and lenses - as well as a 2/3" P&S and others). I know what I think the limitations of FF are, but that wasn't really the point of the original post. However, go ahead. FF buyers will be most interested

Last edited by BigMackCam; 03-16-2016 at 05:56 PM.
03-16-2016, 05:38 PM - 1 Like   #36
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Working From Home
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,274
@BigMackCam

RE: What I think will happen to APSc format. A lot depends on the Nikon / Canon / Sony business model, and what happens in the global economy in the next decade. Once the drawdown from the 2013 consumption peak works its way through the market, if developed market consumers feel wealthy again and the next 'acquisitive cohort' buys cameras - and IF they buy ILC's - then CaNikon will drive the sensor format that meets the demand. We have to accept that consumers don't have arguments about whether m43 can produce equivalent DoF. They shoot Green for a few years, plus holidays with a kit lens. Oly and Panny may do fine but they're not likely to change the market. MILC might change the market, but only when CaNikon move. If they move with APS sensors then everything else will keep using APS. If they move with FF sensors because the capital cycle favors the investment then APS will be downgraded to budget cameras.

My bet is in ten years MILC will be the dominant technology, it will be both FF and APS, and dSLR will be specialty uses both FF and APS, for the few things mirrorlless doesn't do very well.

Temper that notion with some potential disruptive technology we don't see yet (that self-focusing camera tube thing Apple is backing, for instance). IOW, the odds favor incremental development, but there are plenty of potholes.
03-16-2016, 05:51 PM   #37
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North-East of England
Posts: 16,042
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
@BigMackCam

RE: What I think will happen to APSc format. A lot depends on the Nikon / Canon / Sony business model, and what happens in the global economy in the next decade. Once the drawdown from the 2013 consumption peak works its way through the market, if developed market consumers feel wealthy again and the next 'acquisitive cohort' buys cameras - and IF they buy ILC's - then CaNikon will drive the sensor format that meets the demand. We have to accept that consumers don't have arguments about whether m43 can produce equivalent DoF. They shoot Green for a few years, plus holidays with a kit lens. Oly and Panny may do fine but they're not likely to change the market. MILC might change the market, but only when CaNikon move. If they move with APS sensors then everything else will keep using APS. If they move with FF sensors because the capital cycle favors the investment then APS will be downgraded to budget cameras.

My bet is in ten years MILC will be the dominant technology, it will be both FF and APS, and dSLR will be specialty uses both FF and APS, for the few things mirrorlless doesn't do very well.

Temper that notion with some potential disruptive technology we don't see yet (that self-focusing camera tube thing Apple is backing, for instance). IOW, the odds favor incremental development, but there are plenty of potholes.
What an unusually good and balanced view (whether I agree or not - although there's much in here I agree with!). Who knows what will actually happen, but this is excellent!
03-16-2016, 06:02 PM   #38
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 604
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
If you wish... I'm happy to hear your thoughts on it, though my original post was based on a conversation between myself and another forum member on why APS-C might or might not be replaced by m43 (remember, I'm primarily an APS-C shooter, but also have a non-Pentax FF camera and lenses - as well as a 2/3" P&S and others). I know what I think the limitations of FF are, but that wasn't really the point of the original post. However, go ahead. FF buyers will be most interested

Let's start with something controversial :-)

Contrary to common belief that FF is better than m43 in low light, it is not. In low light your camera can't focus properly. In low light you will open up your aperture and this will result in shallower DoF which will only multiply the difficulty in getting the right focus. When you are not in focus then noise performance is the least of your problems. m43 on the other hand, will happily give you two stops deeper DoF with the same f-stop at equivalent focal length. So if this was a 5DS vs E-M5 battle then the tiny m43 wins.

03-16-2016, 06:15 PM   #39
Senior Member




Join Date: Oct 2015
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 108
The speed at which my g7 works might get folks to try a mirrorless and they have the potential to be much faster. You can always blur in post even though you can get bokeh with my Q, M4/3 and apsc systems. will see in 10 years if anybody wants to carry a big camera.
03-16-2016, 06:20 PM - 1 Like   #40
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North-East of England
Posts: 16,042
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by dtmateojr Quote
Let's start with something controversial :-)

Contrary to common belief that FF is better than m43 in low light, it is not. In low light your camera can't focus properly. In low light you will open up your aperture and this will result in shallower DoF which will only multiply the difficulty in getting the right focus. When you are not in focus then noise performance is the least of your problems. m43 on the other hand, will happily give you two stops deeper DoF with the same f-stop at equivalent focal length. So if this was a 5DS vs E-M5 battle then the tiny m43 wins.
So, now, based on your earlier confirmation, only sensor performance is potentially (but not necessarily) an advantage for APS-C and FF, but now m43 has the advantage over both too?

You know, I started to reply with a tdetailed breakdown, but instead I will just say, enjoy your m43 camera. So long as it does everything you need, it is indeed better than APS-C, FF or medium format. I'll leave it there. I'm sure you will see that as some sort of weakness that I won't show you why APS-C or FF (or any other format) may be better in certain circumstances, but that's fine.

EDIT: Please let all the APS-C and FF camera buyers (and manufacturers) know where they're going wrong, unless it's purely for IQ (other than noise, as you've shown). They can all concentrate on m43 and everyone will be happy!

Last edited by BigMackCam; 03-16-2016 at 06:56 PM.
03-16-2016, 06:32 PM   #41
Veteran Member
Ikarus's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: California
Photos: Albums
Posts: 484
QuoteOriginally posted by dtmateojr Quote
If the FF maintained sane pixel densities then FF will have an advantage over aps-c and m43. For example if FF, aps-c and m43 all had 16Mp then the larger sensor will have an advantage in noise performance. But that is not happening anymore. FF sensors are really just aps-c but bigger.
That does not compute. If they all have 16MP, different size sensors can't have the same pixel density, so what do you mean - same density or same total number of pixels?

I'm also curious about how you obtained your plot. When I go to DxO mark here and click on Measurements -> SNR 18%, the plot looks rather different and shows a pretty sizable advantage of the Canon over the Olympus.
03-16-2016, 06:40 PM   #42
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North-East of England
Posts: 16,042
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by honey bo bo Quote
Point & Shoot and Bridge Cameras will be eliminated completely. APS-C will shrink slowly as the Cell Phone developes I Q and those budding artist decide to stay with the cell phone and don't move on to more expensive APS-C to satisfy their artistic thirst. Quasi Artists like myself and shrinking numbers of Newbies will stay with the APS-C to satisfy our thirst for 20"X24", 16"X 20" , Canvases, slide shows on the 55" Smart T V and digital PP etc. The F F crowd will be similar to the Medium Format Crowd of the 80's - a small niche mostly pros with a smattering of semi pros but Advanced Video will take over most of that crowd within the 10 years.
That's an interesting and valid point of view!
03-16-2016, 06:50 PM - 1 Like   #43
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2008
Location: Maryland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 387
Sounds to me like there will be different formats for different users even 10 years from now!!
03-16-2016, 06:59 PM   #44
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 402
QuoteOriginally posted by bschriver11 Quote
Sounds to me like there will be different formats for different users even 10 years from now!!
I agree. There will still be all sorts of different sizes and people will still be talking about which is best. When they really should be taking photos like a camera was built to do.
03-16-2016, 07:10 PM   #45
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 604
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
So, now, based on your earlier confirmation, only sensor performance is potentially (but not necessarily) an advantage for APS-C and FF, but now m43 has the advantage over both too?



You know, I started to reply with a tdetailed breakdown, but instead I will just say, enjoy your m43 camera. So long as it does everything you need, it is indeed better than APS-C, FF or medium format. I'll leave it there. I'm sure you will see that as some sort of weakness that I won't show you why APS-C or FF (or any other format) may be better in certain circumstances, but that's fine.



EDIT: Please let all the APS-C and FF camera buyers (and manufacturers) know where they're going wrong, unless it's purely for IQ (other than noise, as you've shown). They can all concentrate on m43 and everyone will be happy!

Why does it bother you so greatly that a smaller format has IQ advantages over larger formats in certain situations?

Firstly you were the one who started imposing unrealistic restrictions to justify FF and now I'm giving you very realistic situations and you can't accept it? Your bias is showing inspite of your claims to be "fair" and only here for "discussion purposes".
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!
aps-c, background, camera, cameras, depth, distance, dof, equipment, f/1.8, ff, format, formats, iq, iso, lens, lenses, m43, move, performance, photo, photography, post, print, quality, respect, sensor, situation, subject, wall
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Will you leave APS-C for the K1? SteveM Pentax Full Frame 95 02-21-2016 07:00 PM
What do you think the Pentax FF kit lens will be? Sagitta Pentax Full Frame 70 02-16-2015 10:47 AM
What do you think the K70 is going to have? Painter Pentax DSLR Discussion 49 07-10-2014 12:55 AM
What would make you upgrade to the next flagship APS-C? Wired Pentax K-5 & K-5 II 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 04:46 AM. | 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