Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-10-2010, 10:15 PM   #16
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 301
QuoteOriginally posted by Wheatfield Quote
You aren't taking subject movement into account, and also, the smaller format shows up shake faster, so in the absence of SR, you need to have two stops higher shutter speed with the 4/3 camera.
Also, while f/1.4 lenses aren't at their best wide open, saying they need to be stopped down 2 stops to be acceptable is not true. Generally stopping them down 1/2 stop takes them into the range of acceptable, one stop and they have gotten very good.
The DOF thing is a canard. At normal shooting distances of 10-15 feet, even f/1.4 on 135 format (this is the correct term for what you refer to as full frame) has sufficient DOF to turn out a decently sharp picture, enough so that you would need to go to at least f/4 to get a noticable improvement.

At the moment, the K5 is near the top of the heap for high ISO noise, I fully expect that new 135 format cameras from Nikon or Canon will use similar sensor technology to what the K5 is using, and will have hugely improved low light capabilities.
Whether or not this matters at this point is topic for another thread. At some point, one needs to look at the technology as it relates to what one does with it rather than comparing specs on paper to see who wins this weeks peeing match.
At this point, I am pretty content that APS-C is "good enough" WRT high ISO noise, I suspect that 4/3 would be as well.
thanks for clearing that up, I knew my maths was a mess on that one- makes sense, thanks

regarding high iso unless the k5 is some sort of physics defying machine (I await the comparometer results with interest) then iso 6400 (as clean as it may well be) will never look like iso 100, so with that in mind I try to use a tripod and flash my way to low ISO's, that works for what I shoot- I see the advantage of high iso capability but I trained on an ist Dl which was noisy at ISO 400- now I have been let loose with a 1dmk3 and high iso is nice, but it's obviously not as clean as low iso so I try to keep it under 800 if I can.

QuoteOriginally posted by Lowell Goudge Quote
Clark

While 4/3 may give an advantage on focal length and therefore lens size compared to full frame at the tele end. Look what happens at the wide end. To get a 12-24 equivalent on 4/3 just does not exist

Having said that see my comment on a mirrorles camera. By removing the mirror and shortening the registry distance ultra wides are much easier to make
I really like the 4/3 system but I refuse to buy into another mount- I already run a canon and a pentax system, i'd like to see either of them come out with a mirrorless

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, mirrorless, pentax help, photography, slr
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
[RUMOR] Canon's First Mirrorless Camera! jct us101 Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 12 09-14-2010 08:08 PM
Pentax mirrorless camera in LX like design body ogl Pentax News and Rumors 94 03-23-2010 04:21 AM
Pentax KM-good and bad about this camera lesmore49 Pentax DSLR Discussion 48 03-06-2009 10:50 PM
Camera Armor -- good/bad? yenemy Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 9 01-24-2009 05:56 AM
Beach Camera experiences? Good or Bad? rdrum76 Photographic Technique 12 01-10-2008 11:06 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:01 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