Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-23-2018, 06:59 AM - 4 Likes   #1
Pentaxian
Cipher's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 397
Ming Thein on format equivalence, engineering and practical envelope

A great article by Ming Thein on a complex subject:



Format equivalence, engineering and practical envelope ? Ming Thein | Photographer


Be sure to read the comments!

05-23-2018, 01:42 PM - 1 Like   #2
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: mid nth coast,nsw
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,068
Mings writings are always quite interesting,i've long thought that M43 is the ideal "extra" system to compliment FF.
05-23-2018, 02:16 PM - 4 Likes   #3
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 19,788
I think probably the biggest thing (to me) is that it is awfully handy to have different sensor sizes, but that use the same mount. This is the biggest reason that I shoot with APS-C and full frame. Sharing lenses, for those of us who don't have unlimited resources is a big deal. And honestly, all of my lenses become manual focus, short to long telephoto lenses on a micro four thirds camera (except the DFA 15-30 which is amazingly big normal zoom).

I like full frame a lot. It provides sort of compromise -- cheaper than medium format, but better image quality (dynamic range/high iso) than smaller formats. Lenses are relatively reasonably priced. If I was shooting with Sony/Nikon/Canon, I still wouldn't go with micro four thirds as a second camera, but rather would use an APS-C camera with the same mount. Basically you have a little smaller camera that typically would have faster frame rates, but would take the same lenses.
05-23-2018, 02:53 PM - 2 Likes   #4
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
UncleVanya's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2014
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,159
I've shot m43 and apsc together for years. I have thought that moving to full frame might be better to stretch the format differences.

05-23-2018, 03:35 PM - 2 Likes   #5
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 32,713
Shoot the format to suit the subject, style of photography, and field conditions and don't worry about equivalence. I seem to be equally happy with my cell-phone photos as with the 4x5" stuff.


Steve

(...easily pleased, I am...)
05-23-2018, 05:57 PM   #6
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2017
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 322
Yeah, I'm with Rondec. m4/3 would be good, except it requires all new lenses or adapters and reduced performance. With my K-70 and K-1 I can share lenses.

Plus from an ergonomic standpoint, there's a limit to how small the grip can get for me and still feel good, particularly if I have a big lens on the front.
05-23-2018, 07:15 PM   #7
Pentaxian
Cipher's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 397
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by SteveinSLC Quote
Yeah, I'm with Rondec. m4/3 would be good, except it requires all new lenses or adapters and reduced performance. With my K-70 and K-1 I can share lenses.

Plus from an ergonomic standpoint, there's a limit to how small the grip can get for me and still feel good, particularly if I have a big lens on the front.
I really like the small sensor Qs I have. The APS-C bodies I have are really a great value but the sensors and lenses between those sizes seem kind of awkward for a system camera and cost as much or more than the APS-C lenses. A full frame or MF system would be nice, but out of my price range.
05-24-2018, 05:50 AM   #8
Resident fiddler
Loyal Site Supporter
LensBeginner's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,525
QuoteOriginally posted by surfar Quote
Mings writings are always quite interesting,i've long thought that M43 is the ideal "extra" system to compliment FF.

First Theorem of Photographic Freebies: any complimentary camera system is the perfect one...

05-24-2018, 09:16 AM   #9
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 1,055
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I think probably the biggest thing (to me) is that it is awfully handy to have different sensor sizes, but that use the same mount. This is the biggest reason that I shoot with APS-C and full frame. Sharing lenses, for those of us who don't have unlimited resources is a big deal. And honestly, all of my lenses become manual focus, short to long telephoto lenses on a micro four thirds camera (except the DFA 15-30 which is amazingly big normal zoom).

I like full frame a lot. It provides sort of compromise -- cheaper than medium format, but better image quality (dynamic range/high iso) than smaller formats. Lenses are relatively reasonably priced. If I was shooting with Sony/Nikon/Canon, I still wouldn't go with micro four thirds as a second camera, but rather would use an APS-C camera with the same mount. Basically you have a little smaller camera that typically would have faster frame rates, but would take the same lenses.
I agree 100%. It makes no sense to carry two separate systems (bodies, lenses, etc.). M43 does not have a bigger brother but KP has K1 and 645Z as its bigger brother. In case of the K1 and APSc, the lenses can be shared to some extent cutting down on carrying a lot of extra gear.
05-24-2018, 10:30 AM - 2 Likes   #10
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 19,788
QuoteOriginally posted by SteveinSLC Quote
Yeah, I'm with Rondec. m4/3 would be good, except it requires all new lenses or adapters and reduced performance. With my K-70 and K-1 I can share lenses.

Plus from an ergonomic standpoint, there's a limit to how small the grip can get for me and still feel good, particularly if I have a big lens on the front.
Back before Pentax had full frame, people were always saying things that indicated if you weren't satisfied with APS-C then you should go all the way up to the 645D. Of course, that would have been a significant step up from, say, the K7, but it didn't really satisfy the situation since it would have needed all new lenses, regardless of what brand it was.

Currently my smallest (decent quality) camera is the K-01 with the DA 40 limited. It has many limitations, but it still can serve the purpose.

05-24-2018, 03:54 PM   #11
Pentaxian
MJKoski's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 1,330
Aspect ratio of m4/3 is the key difference. 4:3 is far more useful than 3:2 which is not wide enough for panoramas but also fails with scenes containing tall subjects. K-1 is almost useful in emulating 4:3 with maximum up/down sensor shift. Cropping to certain aspect ratio in post is totally different than composing in proper aspect ratio. Former equals the case "Failing to plan is part of the plan".
05-24-2018, 05:24 PM   #12
Moderator
Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Sandy Hancock's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,756
I also prefer the 4:3 aspect ratio of my Q and 645 systems over the 3:2 of K-mount. But I prefer the K-mount ecosystem.

I suspect there were engineering reasons for the choice - like a smaller vertical dimension allowing a more nimble mirror in a more compact box.

Thinking outside the box (or is it inside?), I wonder if there might be a case for a K-mount crop camera with a 4:3 sensor, given there is all that full frame space to swing the mirror around. Call it the K-43 and style it for hipsters
05-24-2018, 07:22 PM   #13
Pentaxian
Cipher's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2016
Location: Minnesota
Posts: 397
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Sandy Hancock Quote
Thinking outside the box (or is it inside?), I wonder if there might be a case for a K-mount crop camera with a 4:3 sensor, given there is all that full frame space to swing the mirror around. Call it the K-43 and style it for hipsters

That would be interesting, if it was smaller than FF (28x21) it would effectively improve the corner sharpness on all pre-existing FF K-mount lenses. But who would make a sensor that size?

Last edited by Cipher; 05-25-2018 at 08:07 AM.
05-25-2018, 06:21 AM   #14
Resident fiddler
Loyal Site Supporter
LensBeginner's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,525
QuoteOriginally posted by MJKoski Quote
Aspect ratio of m4/3 is the key difference. 4:3 is far more useful than 3:2 which is not wide enough for panoramas but also fails with scenes containing tall subjects. K-1 is almost useful in emulating 4:3 with maximum up/down sensor shift. Cropping to certain aspect ratio in post is totally different than composing in proper aspect ratio. Former equals the case "Failing to plan is part of the plan".
I wouldn't call it "far more useful"... that's a Ken Rockwell-style hyperbole...

I routinely crop my pictures when developing from RAW, and use the ones that I'd call "most used aspect ratios" ("used", not "useful", it's a convention), that is 16:9, 3:2, 4:3 and 1:1.
I guess one picture in 10 (maybe even less) ends up in a 4:3 format, very few in 16:9 (mostly landscape) and I think about the same (little) amount in square format.

4:3 is IMHO a little easier to compose into, since it's more static than 3:2, but I almost always feel that - unless the picture is in landscape orientation and the subject occupies a small portion of its length - 4:3 gives the subject far too little "breathing space", and 3:2 is often a much more elegant solution.

Bottom line is, both a.r. are useful, it's just a matter of knowing when to use one or the other.
05-25-2018, 06:30 AM - 1 Like   #15
Pentaxian
Site Supporter
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 32,767
Yet I can only buy frames in 4x5 formats.
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!
equivalence, format, ming, ming thein, photography, thein on format
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Ming Thein - new Chief of Strategy for Hasselblad. interested_observer Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 25 03-31-2017 04:58 AM
Ming Thein: The ultimate lens list interested_observer Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 9 11-19-2016 05:29 AM
How to design mirrorless right by Ming Thein interested_observer General Photography 5 11-04-2015 04:35 PM
Sony A7RII - The Good, Bad & Ugly - Ming Thein interested_observer Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 25 08-28-2015 07:48 AM
Ming Thein and the 645Z Adam G Pentax Medium Format 4 05-13-2014 02:20 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:40 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