Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-05-2010, 04:52 PM   #16
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,580
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
..The benefits of a FF sensor are very real. My 5 year old Canon 5D is still better than any APS-C on the market when it comes to low-light, color depth, & DR.
low-light - yes
color-depth - no
DR - no

The benefits you describe might have been the case five years ago. But according to dxomark.com, things have changed. Low-light ISO is the only area where a FF box like the 5D or even the newer 5D2 retains any sensor advantage against any decent APS-C camera like the Nikon D90 or K-x, at base ISO.

08-05-2010, 06:32 PM - 1 Like   #17
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
Pentax had already re-released some of their old FF lenses. this includes the manual focus A50/1.2 and the previously defunct FA35/2. we might be seeing some kind of a trend here. Pentax users are just fine with the old FF lenses, so there's no a real mandatory need to come up with new FF lenses ASAP but rather re-release these old ones for use for the camera. new lenses can wait and can always come out for some other time.

just for twist, so what's wrong with these lenses >>> K15, FA20, FA24, FA31, FA43, A50/1.2, DA55, DA70, FA77, FA/DFA 100, A135/1.8, FA135, FA200/2.8 or F4 Macro, DA200, DA300, FA300/4 or macro.

FA28-70, FA20-35, DA60-250, FA80-200, FA250-600.

these lenses are more than enough to satisfy every Pentaxians wet dream.

who cares about SDM and WR?

the only thing that Pentax needs to do is to build an FF body and put their old lenses back into circulation. for sure, developing such body is much cheaper than how much Pentax invested with the 645D and it's new lenses.
08-05-2010, 11:13 PM   #18
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: kobe/japan
Posts: 510
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
Pentax had already re-released some of their old FF lenses. this includes the manual focus A50/1.2 and the previously defunct FA35/2. we might be seeing some kind of a trend here. Pentax users are just fine with the old FF lenses, so there's no a real mandatory need to come up with new FF lenses ASAP but rather re-release these old ones for use for the camera. new lenses can wait and can always come out for some other time.

just for twist, so what's wrong with these lenses >>> K15, FA20, FA24, FA31, FA43, A50/1.2, DA55, DA70, FA77, FA/DFA 100, A135/1.8, FA135, FA200/2.8 or F4 Macro, DA200, DA300, FA300/4 or macro.

FA28-70, FA20-35, DA60-250, FA80-200, FA250-600.

these lenses are more than enough to satisfy every Pentaxians wet dream.

who cares about SDM and WR?

the only thing that Pentax needs to do is to build an FF body and put their old lenses back into circulation. for sure, developing such body is much cheaper than how much Pentax invested with the 645D and it's new lenses.

+1


agree on everything.
08-05-2010, 11:23 PM   #19
Senior Member
eigelb's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Italy
Posts: 174
Nikon D3x sensor: DR 13.7 Evs - 1 step higher and basta
!

08-05-2010, 11:56 PM   #20
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,580
D3x is a pretty special camera. But for USD$9200 it only gives you +1 EV over the K-x's 12.5 DR.

And it's interesting that the D3x is the ONLY FF body in the whole dxomark.com database to exceed the DR of the K-x. Even the D3s and 5D2 have lower DR.


So once again, DR isn't an arena where FF has inherent advantages over smaller sensors.
08-06-2010, 12:07 AM   #21
Senior Member
eigelb's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Italy
Posts: 174
QuoteOriginally posted by Eric Seavey Quote

Eigelb, All the items (except nostalgia) that you mentioned can dealt with at a technical level, including DOF.

I just still do not see the benefits outweighing....
yes it can but it will cost way more than a FF camera with lenses. For the DOF and FOV of a 50mm f/1,7 lens on 35mm format you need a 35mm f/1,2 lens. A 35mm f/1,2 lens even doesnt exist in K mount or im wrong, and will cost 30x as much a Pentax-a 50mm 1,7. And thats only one lens!!
for a 35mm 0,75x Viewfinder you need a 1,6x aps-c viewfinder and this will be worser and costier than the 35mm VF.
show me a aps-c sensor with 24mpx and the same DR and nois performance like the D3x
or a 12mpx aps-c sensor with high iso performance like the D3s
08-06-2010, 12:22 AM   #22
Senior Member
eigelb's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Italy
Posts: 174
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
D3x is a pretty special camera. But for USD$9200 it only gives you +1 EV over the K-x's 12.5 DR.


So once again, DR isn't an arena where FF has inherent advantages over smaller sensors.
D3x can be found for $6,729.95 and thats not the price for the sensor its a big and massiv camera , 5.0 fps at24mpx ...etc.etc
A pentax camera with a similar sensor will not cost that much.


DR:
rawr:
What FF boxes - eg like the D700 or 5D2 - do have, however, is a superior ability to hold onto a usable range of DR as you move up the ISO scale. So while they may not have a higher DR at base ISO, they can hold onto their DR better.

As you go past 800 ISO (811 to be exact, according to DXO), the K-x's ability to hold onto a decent level of DR (9 EV is what DXO uses to define decent DR) starts to decline. However the FF 5D2 it can still hold onto 9EV of DR up until 1815 ISO, and then the decline sets in. The D700 can hold onto 9EV up until about 2300 ISO, then it starts to lose DR.


Thats an advantage
08-06-2010, 12:28 AM   #23
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,580
Yeah, wides being wides, nice bright viewfinders and high-ISO are really the only strengths of FF over APS-C. No-one disputes any of that. If anyone needs those things they should get FF. But those things do come at a price premium.

BTW in K-mount there are affordable Sigma 20mm f1.8, a Sigma 24mm 1.8, Sigma 28mm 1.8 and Sigma 30mm f1.4. As well as the Pentax FA 31mm f1.8, 35mm f2 etc... So APS-C users can still get by even on that DOF and FOV issue you raise.

08-06-2010, 04:11 AM   #24
Pentaxian
TaoMaas's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Oklahoma City
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,145
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
just for twist, so what's wrong with these lenses >>> K15, FA20, FA24, FA31, FA43, A50/1.2, DA55, DA70, FA77, FA/DFA 100, A135/1.8, FA135, FA200/2.8 or F4 Macro, DA200, DA300, FA300/4 or macro.

FA28-70, FA20-35, DA60-250, FA80-200, FA250-600.
The same things would be wrong with them now that were wrong with some of these lenses when EVERY SLR was FF....they'll be too expensive for most people to afford and there won't be very many of them.
08-06-2010, 06:53 AM   #25
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Boston MA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 273
Original Poster
FF sensors have much more capability than APS-C, that is very clear. Does it make sense to have two lines of DSLRs (FF and APS-C) with two lines of lenses? Is the performance the Nikon D300 and Canon 7D not what we would like to see in a K-7 sucessor? Those cameras easily beat the K-7 (yes at a much higher price), though that performance is getting pretty close to what can be squeezed out of APS-C... Is sounds like many want even better performance than that.
The main problems with Pentax DLRS is the low light AF and high ISO noise performance..that is what I would find most important! Perhaps in order to get a larger sensor (with its' technological benefits) while still maintaining approx APS-C is to switch to 3:4 format instead of 2:3...
08-06-2010, 07:14 AM   #26
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,951
I agree that the issues with high iso are holding on to dynamic range. John Bee has done some amazing demonstrations of cleaning up iso 6400 on the K20, but there is no doubt that the images look a little flat. I don't see that full frame has any particular advantage over APS-C when it comes to auto focus in low light.

The problem with using the same lenses on APS-C that you use on full frame is that the focal lengths feel wrong. I don't really like 50mm on APS-C, but I really liked it on film. i would far rather use a 50 - 135mm than a 70-200mm, both from a size and focal length stand point. Since Nikon does not tend to make high end APS-C lenses, this tends to push their photographers into full frame, whether or not they really "need it." This is not a problems with Pentax, where the focal lengths have been specifically selected to fill APS-C needs.
08-06-2010, 07:26 AM   #27
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Boston, PRofMA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,053
QuoteOriginally posted by Eric Seavey Quote
Does it make sense to have two lines of DSLRs (FF and APS-C) with two lines of lenses?
Yes because of the free 1.5x telecrop that makes your APS-C lenses "longer" for sports/wildlife, etc...
08-06-2010, 10:14 AM   #28
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
QuoteOriginally posted by TaoMaas Quote
The same things would be wrong with them now that were wrong with some of these lenses when EVERY SLR was FF....they'll be too expensive for most people to afford and there won't be very many of them.
that's the idea of FF. although I don't think that all full-frame lenses would be too expensive for most people. aside from that, the supply and demand factor also played a part in the affecting the price of these lenses.
08-06-2010, 10:26 AM   #29
Pentaxian
TaoMaas's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: Oklahoma City
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,145
QuoteOriginally posted by Pentaxor Quote
that's the idea of FF. although I don't think that all full-frame lenses would be too expensive for most people. aside from that, the supply and demand factor also played a part in the affecting the price of these lenses.
You're right...not all FF lenses will be too expensive. It's just that you had some VERY nice glass listed. lol Even when those lenses first came out, Pentax wasn't selling enough of them to get the cost down, so they cost a bit more than comparable Nikon or Canon lenses.
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, fa, ff, pentax, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hi All. Hoping Someone Here Can Help Me! MonicaRose Welcomes and Introductions 3 12-19-2009 05:26 AM
Pentax K10D Lightroom Develop Settings Robert S Donovan Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 7 06-26-2009 07:45 PM
Hello, hoping to be a Pentax user soon... Jonathan Mac Welcomes and Introductions 5 05-21-2009 12:04 AM
Why doesn't Pentax develop full frame DSLR? fast_boat Pentax DSLR Discussion 18 12-11-2008 08:46 PM
Should Pentax Develop their own sensor benjikan Pentax DSLR Discussion 30 02-26-2007 11:54 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:04 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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