Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-10-2014, 01:49 PM   #1
New Member




Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Doha
Posts: 10
Pentax & the Full frame

Hi guys, i started photography recently and properly with the K5ii and added in total of 6 lenses per my need. I have a question why Pentax is without any FF camera todate and what is the real need of a FF when you have crop camera, i mean where do we lag...


Thanks

12-10-2014, 01:55 PM   #2
Pentaxian
Na Horuk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Slovenia, probably
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,875
Hey, welcome!There is no consensus on your questions, but there is a lot of debate and anguish over it.
12-10-2014, 01:58 PM   #3
New Member




Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Doha
Posts: 10
Original Poster
Thanks, but what do one actually lose by not using the FF
12-10-2014, 03:02 PM   #4
Site Supporter
enoeske's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Surprise, Az
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,925
QuoteOriginally posted by BuSaif Quote
Thanks, but what do one actually lose by not using the FF
Imaging taking a picture with a APS-C camera and being able to UN-crop the image, essentially zooming out even further. And being able to shoot cleaner images at higher ISO. That's about all you get with Full Frame. Some people want that. Some don't have a use for it.

12-10-2014, 03:07 PM   #5
Pentaxian
Na Horuk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Slovenia, probably
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,875
Literally, the edges. Crop sensor is simply smaller than FF, so the same lens (the same focal length) on a crop sensor will have a narrower field of view (this is what people then call equivalent focal length, which is slightly misleading, since the focal length does not change. It is a lens property. Only the field of view changes, since the film canvas/sensor is smaller). Since the sensor is smaller, the camera costs less (sensors are complicated to make, and a bigger one has a bigger chance of having a defect, so it becomes more expensive to produce good big sensors). The camera can also be smaller. Since the lenses only need to project a smaller image circle, they can be smaller as well. (Here it must be added that many "crop" lenses are actually full frame lens designs, so this advantage is not necessarily true for all lenses).
There is one possible downside of smaller sensors, which has to do with pixel density. The people who sell cameras like to point at a number to legitimize to customers why the product is good. This is why megapixels (MP) became a war - the battle of who will have more MP! So a given sensor area will have more and more resolution. This means each of the little photosites is smaller than on a bigger sensor with the same total count of MP. So crop sensors would perform slightly worse, they would have more noise, and lower bit depth. But this is no longer a big issue, because technology has advanced a lot, so crop sensors are really good, and full frame sensors have a high pixel density as well - the gap is getting smaller.
Then there is a bunch of nonsense about how crop sensors have "a bigger DoF", "gather less light", and that generally bigger is better and we need big to prove we are big boys. Herp derp how can you take good photos if you have a smaller sensor? Of course, crop sensors also have advantages, since they appear to have a bigger magnification and make the lenses "longer" (a 200mm lens on crop camera will appear to bring the subject closer, than a 200mm lens on a full frame would). Of course, full frame has the advantage with wide angles. 24mm is very wide on full frame, but on crop sensor it is not that wide. This argument is also losing power, because more and more ultra wide angle lenses for corp sensors are on the market now. The problem with finding equivalences is that you need to chose one or two things and establish them as the "base" and then calculate all the other things as equivalent. The real difference is that full frame cameras are expensive machines, so there are higher expectations of them. And this is why some full frame cameras are better - just like a Ferrari will be better than a Ford, even though the Ford might already be more than one needs, even though the Ford might be a more sensible solution for most people, even though most of us just fantasize about a Ferrari and will never actually spend money on one.
So this is why there is so much debate over this. There is even a Full Frame subforum here, just for this silly debate to keep going on forever.
Do most of us wish Pentax would release a full frame? Sure, we would like to see a big, varied lineup, with different cameras and lenses. Do most of us need a full frame camera? I don't think so, but some disagree.

Edit: Oh, and just to be clear on the technicalities, "full frame" is 35mm film. The reasons why this size became the "golden standard" is under debate, as well. Anyway, crop sensor is like smaller film.
12-11-2014, 03:08 AM   #6
New Member




Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Doha
Posts: 10
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by enoeske Quote
Imaging taking a picture with a APS-C camera and being able to UN-crop the image, essentially zooming out even further. And being able to shoot cleaner images at higher ISO. That's about all you get with Full Frame. Some people want that. Some don't have a use for it.
Thank you enoeske... and nice work (your albums) TC

---------- Post added 12-11-14 at 01:09 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Na Horuk Quote
Literally, the edges. Crop sensor is simply smaller than FF, so the same lens (the same focal length) on a crop sensor will have a narrower field of view (this is what people then call equivalent focal length, which is slightly misleading, since the focal length does not change. It is a lens property. Only the field of view changes, since the film canvas/sensor is smaller). Since the sensor is smaller, the camera costs less (sensors are complicated to make, and a bigger one has a bigger chance of having a defect, so it becomes more expensive to produce good big sensors). The camera can also be smaller. Since the lenses only need to project a smaller image circle, they can be smaller as well. (Here it must be added that many "crop" lenses are actually full frame lens designs, so this advantage is not necessarily true for all lenses).
There is one possible downside of smaller sensors, which has to do with pixel density. The people who sell cameras like to point at a number to legitimize to customers why the product is good. This is why megapixels (MP) became a war - the battle of who will have more MP! So a given sensor area will have more and more resolution. This means each of the little photosites is smaller than on a bigger sensor with the same total count of MP. So crop sensors would perform slightly worse, they would have more noise, and lower bit depth. But this is no longer a big issue, because technology has advanced a lot, so crop sensors are really good, and full frame sensors have a high pixel density as well - the gap is getting smaller.
Then there is a bunch of nonsense about how crop sensors have "a bigger DoF", "gather less light", and that generally bigger is better and we need big to prove we are big boys. Herp derp how can you take good photos if you have a smaller sensor? Of course, crop sensors also have advantages, since they appear to have a bigger magnification and make the lenses "longer" (a 200mm lens on crop camera will appear to bring the subject closer, than a 200mm lens on a full frame would). Of course, full frame has the advantage with wide angles. 24mm is very wide on full frame, but on crop sensor it is not that wide. This argument is also losing power, because more and more ultra wide angle lenses for corp sensors are on the market now. The problem with finding equivalences is that you need to chose one or two things and establish them as the "base" and then calculate all the other things as equivalent. The real difference is that full frame cameras are expensive machines, so there are higher expectations of them. And this is why some full frame cameras are better - just like a Ferrari will be better than a Ford, even though the Ford might already be more than one needs, even though the Ford might be a more sensible solution for most people, even though most of us just fantasize about a Ferrari and will never actually spend money on one.
So this is why there is so much debate over this. There is even a Full Frame subforum here, just for this silly debate to keep going on forever.
Do most of us wish Pentax would release a full frame? Sure, we would like to see a big, varied lineup, with different cameras and lenses. Do most of us need a full frame camera? I don't think so, but some disagree.

Edit: Oh, and just to be clear on the technicalities, "full frame" is 35mm film. The reasons why this size became the "golden standard" is under debate, as well. Anyway, crop sensor is like smaller film.
Great information and views Na Horuk.. I guess i still have to explore my Ford :-) and get things right... Thanks again.


Like your pictures...
12-11-2014, 03:41 AM   #7
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,258
I think there are a few areas where full frame cameras give definite benefit. First of all, they do better at high iso -- this is with the caveat that it will only be as long as you are OK with less depth of field than your crop sensor camera. Second, they (generally) have bigger, nicer viewfinders. Third, they are capable of a little bit more narrow depth of field images -- particularly on the wide end. Finally, they can print bigger images than crop cameras can.

All of that said, you will tend to see the differences at the extremes. If you are shooting at iso 800 and below on your K5 II and aren't printing more than 30 inches on a side, I doubt you would see a big difference.
12-11-2014, 03:55 AM   #8
New Member




Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Doha
Posts: 10
Original Poster
Ok.. great info...Thanks.


I see that you shoot LS, so what gears you got..

12-12-2014, 01:41 PM   #9
Moderator PEG Judges
Kerrowdown's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Highlands of Scotland.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 32,872
QuoteOriginally posted by BuSaif Quote
what do one actually lose by not using the FF
Welcome aboard, in answer to your question... my FF lenses to behave as the are supposed too.
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!
camera, cameras, crop, dslr vs ff, ff, ford, frame, full frame, lens, lenses, pentax, people, sensor, sensors
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is the Pentax Full Frame Just Around the Corner? PF Staff Homepage & Official Pentax News 9 09-25-2014 04:48 PM
Photokina Predictions: Is the Pentax Full-Frame Coming? Adam Homepage & Official Pentax News 19 09-16-2014 04:43 PM
FA31mm Ltd Filters & Full Frame Dr Orloff Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 02-26-2014 08:34 AM
From Full-Frame Sony... to Pentax... to Full-Frame Canon Mr_Canuck Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 42 01-21-2014 12:50 AM
Creative financing on the Pentax Full Frame cheekygeek Pentax Full Frame 12 03-25-2013 06:32 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:43 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