Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-07-2011, 10:00 AM   #61
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,235
It will happen sooner otr later in any case as the sensor tech keeps moving forward, i would imagine we are about 1.5-2 years from a FF 645 as they already exist in cameras 4 x the price, so no reason the body couldn't be made more basic (no WR, maybe a little more plastic) keep the existing sensor and drop the price while introducing a FF loaded model at a slightly higher price than current and include missing features. (i don't see it hitting $4000 any time soon though, but down to the price of the FF canikons pro cams for sure)

02-07-2011, 10:26 AM   #62
Veteran Member
ghelary's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 617
QuoteOriginally posted by dlacouture Quote
Simple, take a DoF calculator, choose one output format, viewing distance, 24x36, 50/1.4 and a focus distance (so the circle of confusion is taken care of).
Then, keep the same output format, viewing distance and focus distance, select APS-C, try to approximate the FoV (hence the 32mm)...
Now search for the aperture that will give the same DoF...
So, except if those DoF calculators are wrong, I don't see why my assertion is false
Well that's exactly what I say, DOF calculators that are florishing on the Internet are wrong. Just have a look at the thread regarding hyperfocal calculation in this forum section to understand, that there is a lot more to understand.

I don't mean to be agressive, but this is the MF forum section, there is already plenty of threads dedicated to FF in the news & rumors or general photography sections. There the pros and cons for FF cameras for users and for Pentax as a business have already been discussed.

If you need it, then Canon, Nikon and Sony have something for you, but please bear in mind that APSC already provides something better than anything we had with 35mm film. We are kind of spoiled childs, having seen orginal Cartier-Bresson prints, I can tell that there is much less technical quality in early Leica pictures than on any digicam available now. 35mm wasn't meant for shallow DOF, this appeared only with better more defined film and faster lenses, for such effect, one would use a MF camera.

Now if your photography philosophy tends toward the Ansel Adams side, you have to keep in mind that he was working with heavy glass plate technical camera. Not a cheap or easy to carry option. And so where the Rolleiflexes, Hasselbalds and other MF cameras.

Pentax decided to go on their own way in making high end products, so far the 645D has been such a success that they can't cope with demand. Why would they cheap out for some obscure theorical DOF reason? Once the 645D 40Mpx sales start declining, and once they release a better improved model (full 645 or not) then maybe they will lower down the 645D price.

I seriously doubt that Pentax would release a FF, or a cheaper MF as their main model is already cheap and successful. Sony did so only because their Alpha 900 wasn't successful enough.

As a photographer, I certainly understand the benefits of a FF camera, I just don't see why Pentax shall make one at a loss while we have 3 other brands offering good cameras with their own strength and weaknesses (and with very good lenses available)
02-07-2011, 10:45 AM   #63
Veteran Member
ghelary's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 617
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Last edited by ghelary; 02-07-2011 at 10:46 AM. Reason: Editing as duplicate
02-07-2011, 11:52 AM   #64
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Var, South of France
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,071
I never said Pentax has to issue a FF camera, neither that I wanted one (I'm pretty happy with my K5!).

Neither did I want to hijack this MF thread with silly "Pentax must go FF" messages...

I just pointed out that "FF=expensive lenses" is a misconception...

And I do know that at very close and far focus distance, it's no longer exactly true, but I didn't want to go into details...


Last edited by dlacouture; 02-07-2011 at 11:57 AM.
02-08-2011, 02:58 AM   #65
Veteran Member
ghelary's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Paris, France
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 617
QuoteOriginally posted by dlacouture Quote
I never said Pentax has to issue a FF camera, neither that I wanted one (I'm pretty happy with my K5!).

Neither did I want to hijack this MF thread with silly "Pentax must go FF" messages...

I just pointed out that "FF=expensive lenses" is a misconception...

And I do know that at very close and far focus distance, it's no longer exactly true, but I didn't want to go into details...
Well, from you post, you point that FF lenses being no more cost, Pentax shall do a FF. I've expressed my feeling about a FF camera, but I think you reasonning is still flawed, wide angles are more expensive for FF than for APSC at the same equivalent focal and aperture, tele are easier to have covering the full image circle so designing FF lenses vs APSC is less of an issue. Saying that an APSC lens shall be faster than its FF equivalent for DOF concerns is flawed, and I think I've expressed why this is not good reasonning.
02-08-2011, 05:17 AM   #66
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Var, South of France
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,071
QuoteOriginally posted by ghelary Quote
Well, from you post, you point that FF lenses being no more cost, Pentax shall do a FF.
Never said this...
Here is my wording "And I'm pretty confident that Pentax could issue a FF body roughly the size of a K20, as there is nothing preventing it (maybe SR?)."

"Could", as in "would be able to"... I was just referring to the bulk argument.

QuoteOriginally posted by ghelary Quote
I've expressed my feeling about a FF camera, but I think you reasonning is still flawed, wide angles are more expensive for FF than for APSC at the same equivalent focal and aperture,
Sure, so let's take a real example:
- Sigma 12-24/4.5-5.6, DG version, 87x100mm : 789€
- Sigma 8-16/4-5.6, DC version, 74,4x105,7mm: 719€

Well, that's not what I call a whooping price difference...
And (without giving any numbers ) the 12-24 will have a narrower DoF than its APS counterpart...

QuoteOriginally posted by ghelary Quote
Saying that an APSC lens shall be faster than its FF equivalent for DOF concerns is flawed, and I think I've expressed why this is not good reasonning.
Did you mean the other way around?
02-08-2011, 06:25 AM   #67
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,434
QuoteOriginally posted by dlacouture Quote
Never said this...
Here is my wording "And I'm pretty confident that Pentax could issue a FF body roughly the size of a K20, as there is nothing preventing it (maybe SR?)."

"Could", as in "would be able to"... I was just referring to the bulk argument.



Sure, so let's take a real example:
- Sigma 12-24/4.5-5.6, DG version, 87x100mm : 789€
- Sigma 8-16/4-5.6, DC version, 74,4x105,7mm: 719€

Well, that's not what I call a whooping price difference...
And (without giving any numbers ) the 12-24 will have a narrower DoF than its APS counterpart...



Did you mean the other way around?
I would just suggest for the majority of situations, for the majority of photographers it is a much bigger to issue to get adequate depth of field, rather than try to minimize depth of field. No one in their right mind will shoot at f1.4 (either on APS-C or full frame) if they can get away with stopping down to 2 or 2.8, except in certain artistic situations.

To me, the depth of field arguments between formats are not the reason to pick a format and in fact, obscure the picture for those who are seriously trying to discern the differences between them.
02-08-2011, 06:44 AM   #68
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Var, South of France
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,071
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
To me, the depth of field arguments between formats are not the reason to pick a format and in fact, obscure the picture for those who are seriously trying to discern the differences between them.
And the lenses bulk/price argument (which is often a deciding factor) is also a bad one IMO (at least between APS-C and FF, as I'm not that used to 645 lenses and as the registration distance is different...).

EDIT: so as not to end up an ass by affirming things not verified (and thus possibly false!), I've spent the afternoon doing DoF tests to validate my affirmations.
And for all practical purposes, from 18mm to 135mm, from close to near infinity focus, what I said is true... Truly equivalent lenses between APS-C and FF have about a 1-1/3 stop of DoF difference, meaning that a 18/3.5 APS-C lens will have roughly the same FoV and DoF as a 28/5.6 on FF, or that the 70-200/2.8 equivalent would be a 50-135/1.8...
Macro could be another matter... I don't have any macro lens...


Last edited by dlacouture; 02-08-2011 at 10:12 AM.
02-10-2011, 02:46 PM   #69
Veteran Member
rparmar's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,783
This thread is officially dead, as it has decayed into the old DOF equivalence argument. How about we get back to the 645D?

I see the possibility of both a "stripped down" model with fewer pixels and a "stripped up" model with larger sensor (true 645). If you look at the new 25mm lens literature, it is full of talk about its full-sized image circle. With a lens line in place and sufficient income from the first body, of course Pentax will want to leverage their system with other offerings.
02-10-2011, 04:01 PM   #70
Loyal Site Supporter
eddie1960's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 12,235
QuoteOriginally posted by rparmar Quote
This thread is officially dead, as it has decayed into the old DOF equivalence argument. How about we get back to the 645D?

I see the possibility of both a "stripped down" model with fewer pixels and a "stripped up" model with larger sensor (true 645). If you look at the new 25mm lens literature, it is full of talk about its full-sized image circle. With a lens line in place and sufficient income from the first body, of course Pentax will want to leverage their system with other offerings.

My feelings exactly. There are already FF 645 sensors on the market, they are just wildly expensive, in 2 years i can see a 645 ff and a 645 like the current one and possibly a cropped 67, in 4 years add maybe a 67 ff sooner or later it will happen and pentax is poised to provide both quite nicely

Personally at this point in time i have more camera lust for a 645d than a k5
02-25-2011, 06:51 PM   #71
Senior Member
Spare Tire's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Montréal
Posts: 120
I already don't upgrade to the 645D from a 645n. If they think i'm gonna do it if they crop the sensor size even more...
Would rather have an FF 35mm DSLR, come on pentax!
02-26-2011, 08:15 PM   #72
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Fowlmere, UK
Photos: Albums
Posts: 700
QuoteOriginally posted by eddie1960 Quote
Personally at this point in time i have more camera lust for a 645d than a k5
So do I—even though I just mounted a first generation Takumar 1.4/50mm on my K-x and have been astounded by the results, even so early on (just a few low light test shots). Great to have 1.4, too, with a bit of EV correction. Although the small viewfinder makes manual focussing much harder than I expected. That for me would be a real plus of FF. Still, I'd choose the 645D any time if I could.
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!
645d, camera, medium format
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Stocking stuffer for the "masses" ;) jeffkrol General Talk 0 12-19-2010 09:06 AM
645d!!! insulinguy Pentax News and Rumors 1 10-12-2010 07:36 AM
645D is here ... frank Pentax News and Rumors 810 03-24-2010 10:14 AM
Using the 645D... HawaiianOnline Pentax Medium Format 13 03-23-2010 07:17 PM
Cheap lighting for the masses! codiac2600 Post Your Photos! 17 02-23-2008 05:50 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:06 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