Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-11-2013, 11:19 PM   #31
Forum Member
jqsk's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 81
QuoteOriginally posted by emr Quote
APS-H? Blaah. But how about a new size between APS-H and FF?
You are going places.

08-12-2013, 12:29 AM   #32
Banned




Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NY/Germany
Posts: 1,183
QuoteOriginally posted by twitch Quote
APS-H would be about the dumbest thing Pentax could ever do.
And this company has done many dumb things. The gaping hole in their lens lineup of no fast 35mm equivalent is one that is brought up over and over. The fact they have none is certainly a warning sign to many to stay away, unfortunately. I also believe that the K-01 should have been released with a fast 24XS and then it might have made it less controversial and the rest of us could have inherited that lens.

So, there are dumber things Pentax has done. One of the "classic" focal lengths in photographic history, popularized again by such cams like the X100 (which the K-5 is often compared to) and Pentax, the company that prides itself on primes, has no fast 35 equivalent.
08-12-2013, 12:48 AM   #33
Pentaxian
Fogel70's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,738
QuoteOriginally posted by tram57 Quote
DxoMark has already demonstrated that the new 24MP APS-C sensor in the D7100 is not as good as the 16MP sensor in the k5 when it comes to dynamic range and noise. One could preserve these performance characteristics of the k5 and go up to 24MP for resolution by expanding to APS-H using the k5 sensor waffer. would be a pretty good result, I'd think.
There is virtually no difference in DR and noise between the 24MP sensor in Nikon D7100 and the 16MP sensor in K5II. K5II has a small DR advantage because having ISO80, but otherwise they are close to identical in performance.

But it's important to use the "print" tab when comparing different pixel sized sensors, as "screen" data is compared both in 100% magnification giving larger pixels a clear advantage.

From DxOMark
QuoteQuote:
Print versus Screen mode
To compare DxOMark Camera Sensor scores between cameras with different resolutions, you need to look at the “Print” results. The overall DxOMark Camera Sensor score is “Print” level only, which is fine. For the next level of detail a viewer gets to choose between Print and Screen. This is less fine: Screen is not normally useful for end users (it can be useful for debugging your own calculations). The lowest level of data is presented in “Screen” mode only, but is not labeled as such. I would prefer to see all data to be labeled Print/Screen or –better yet– Normal/100%. Normal would stress that this is what matters. And 100% is similar to pixel peeping: here you look at the noise at the 100% crop level and loose the overview of what it means at the image level.
08-12-2013, 12:40 PM   #34
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Chicago suburb, IL, USA
Posts: 1,535
I really have no interest in either APS-H or FF, but I think it should be mentioned that for long term purposes, for a small producer, using odd format sensors is probably not a good idea since future sensor development for the format will be a very low priority for sensor mfgs, and therefor very slow -- unless others adopt the format and it becomes popular. Pentax, unlike Canon, is not big enough to command special consideration from sensor producers or to make their own sensors, so choosing sensors in already popular formats, then either having them tweaked or adjusting their own processing engines to taste is really the best road to economical production.

Scott

08-13-2013, 02:40 PM   #35
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2012
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,728
QuoteOriginally posted by snostorm Quote
I really have no interest in either APS-H or FF, but I think it should be mentioned that for long term purposes, for a small producer, using odd format sensors is probably not a good idea since future sensor development for the format will be a very low priority for sensor mfgs, and therefor very slow -- unless others adopt the format and it becomes popular. Pentax, unlike Canon, is not big enough to command special consideration from sensor producers or to make their own sensors, so choosing sensors in already popular formats, then either having them tweaked or adjusting their own processing engines to taste is really the best road to economical production.

Scott
Excellent point. If Pentax tries to use what Nikon uses, they will almost guarantee they will have state-of-the-art parts to design and produce a camera.
08-13-2013, 02:42 PM   #36
Site Supporter




Join Date: Sep 2012
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,728
QuoteOriginally posted by snake Quote
And this company has done many dumb things. The gaping hole in their lens lineup of no fast 35mm equivalent is one that is brought up over and over. The fact they have none is certainly a warning sign to many to stay away, unfortunately. I also believe that the K-01 should have been released with a fast 24XS and then it might have made it less controversial and the rest of us could have inherited that lens.

So, there are dumber things Pentax has done. One of the "classic" focal lengths in photographic history, popularized again by such cams like the X100 (which the K-5 is often compared to) and Pentax, the company that prides itself on primes, has no fast 35 equivalent.
Would it be possible to design a 24mm XS? Seems I recall some conventional wisdom that a true pancake lens has to have focal length and register distance fairly similar.
08-13-2013, 10:36 PM   #37
Banned




Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NY/Germany
Posts: 1,183
QuoteOriginally posted by IchabodCrane Quote
Would it be possible to design a 24mm XS? Seems I recall some conventional wisdom that a true pancake lens has to have focal length and register distance fairly similar.
They could certainly make it smaller than conventional ways and one is the XS design that would have worked with a mirrorless, but again, Pentax dropped the ball...badly, by not focusing on a classic and popular focal length.

Even if it wasn't an SLR, it's a huge warning sign that they don't have one for their SLR line. A good, fast 24 practically sells itself.
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, dslr, pentax, photography, pixel, sensor, size
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:18 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