Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-15-2011, 10:38 PM   #76
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 573
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
If Pentax released a smallish-bodied FF camera for under $2500 that matched the D700 performance with maybe held a next-gen 18mp sensor, this forum would be full of folks defending FF until the cows came home.
.
+1 This

05-15-2011, 10:46 PM   #77
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 573
QuoteOriginally posted by JohnBee Quote
May be possible, though I'd question the resolution differences and the effects of downsampling the K-5 to 12MP.

Along these same lines, I do recall a test conducted near the K-5 announcement date in which the 5D was included. And I think the K-5 held the upper hand up until ISO3200, at which point it took a hit due to low level NR. However... I think it still maintained a lead due to noise.

Might be worth a look.
Reids Reviews showed much the same. The 12MP 5D MKI compared to the K5. The 5D was better until 3200, then the K5 matched. The 5D doesn't go higher than 3200. There was more noise in the K5 images from base iso on up.

Yes the newest crop sensors are great. Just wait until that tech hits the full frame sensors, then it's another 3 - 5 years for APS-C to catch up again.
05-15-2011, 10:46 PM   #78
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 209
QuoteOriginally posted by RyanW Quote
+1 This
+2 here

And I would be the first in line to buy one, if it ever happened...

FF in a K-5 sized body.. Come on Pentax, you can do it!!
05-15-2011, 10:53 PM   #79
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Deep Forest
Posts: 630
FF has a larger viewfinder than APS-C.

After APS-C dslr, first time I heard the sound of the FF dslr shutter I said "now THIS, is a real camera!" Not quite the drama of the 6x7 mirror slap, but extremely satisfying...

05-15-2011, 11:38 PM   #80
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midwest
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by MPrince Quote
I don't generally read posts about FF, since Pentax has stated they have no plans to introduce one, but I was wondering if you would be kind enough to provide the name of one person on this forum (along with a link to the thread) who has made the above statement? I'd be interested in seeing the context in which the statement was made. Thanks so much.
I've said that FF digital proponents make the difference between APS-c and FF sound like the difference between 35mm film and medium format film, which is absurd.

In digital it's a little different as "medium format" digitals are mostly "crop sensor" MF. Still, the difference in bare IQ is greater between ff and mf than between aps-c and ff, although not like the film days.
05-15-2011, 11:39 PM   #81
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midwest
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by rhodopsin Quote
FF has a larger viewfinder than APS-C.

After APS-C dslr, first time I heard the sound of the FF dslr shutter I said "now THIS, is a real camera!" Not quite the drama of the 6x7 mirror slap, but extremely satisfying...
Oh, I love the quiet shutter in the K-5.

That said, the one thing that I really miss about 135 is the viewfinder. That's one thing about FF that I'll grant with no argument whatsoever.
05-16-2011, 08:36 AM   #82
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
That's only an advantage if you actually want smaller DoF, if you want more, it's a disadvantage.
No, as I already explained, FF gives you the *choice* of more or less DOF - you can get more by stopping down, less by shooting wide open. That is, FF can take every picture that APS-C can, *plus* the shallower DOF pictures that APS-C cannot.

That's why understanding theory comes in handy - so you don't end up believing something that is actually the opposite of the truth.

However, the price one pays for this is needing fairly large and expensive lenses at the telephoto end to do so.
05-16-2011, 09:03 AM   #83
Pentaxian
Lowell Goudge's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,399
there is a good article in a UK magazine this month about the difference between full frame and ASP-C, aimed at landscape use, but covering the whole debate in general.

to sum it up, with respect to DOF and perspective,

Perspective is completely independant of format, and lens, such that for any lens providing the image is enlarged and corpped to the same size, perspective remains unchanged, it is only that to frame one specific subject to the same height, using shorter lenses necessitates moving closer. Perspective is only an issue of the ratio of subject distances to the camera.

For DOF, again, regardless of format, any two subjects taken from the same distance and enlarged to the same size with the same focal length will have the same DOF. again the issue is that to frame a subject on different format requires moving the camera, or changing focal length resulting in the perceived change in DOF with format.

05-16-2011, 09:06 AM   #84
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midwest
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
No, as I already explained, FF gives you the *choice* of more or less DOF - you can get more by stopping down, less by shooting wide open. That is, FF can take every picture that APS-C can, *plus* the shallower DOF pictures that APS-C cannot.

That's why understanding theory comes in handy - so you don't end up believing something that is actually the opposite of the truth.

However, the price one pays for this is needing fairly large and expensive lenses at the telephoto end to do so.
To get more DOF on the FF, you've got to change distance, fl, or aperture, changes which you don't allow the APS-C to make on the other end.

The second claim, about telephotos, is more complex. If you increase the pixel pitch of the FF to match the APS-c, you lose the large-sensor-site advantage that some FF enjoy, and your statement is true as you can crop to the same size and still get the same MP out. If you don't, the APS-c will always produce more detail, as you can use the same lens on the APS-c that you can use on the FF. This is a factor in long telephoto, and very important in macro work.
05-16-2011, 09:10 AM   #85
Pentaxian
JohnBee's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: front of computer
Posts: 4,620
QuoteOriginally posted by Marc Sabatella Quote
However, the price one pays for this is needing fairly large and expensive lenses at the telephoto end to do so.
BINGO!

I priced a FF kit based off a D700 last year at or around 13K without ever touching 300mm!
And so I settled on a K-5 kit (equivalent) for less than 3K

Granted I needed new glass with the FF system, but all in all, were talking two crop bodies for the price of a single FF with matching low light performance(close enough anyways).

TBH. the idea of shooting FF is a very appealing one. However, the cost of ownership remains an exclusive.
My only hope(I fear) is that mirrorless FF technology will change all that and bring the FF close to home in terms of costs.
05-16-2011, 09:41 AM   #86
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midwest
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by JohnBee Quote
My only hope(I fear) is that mirrorless FF technology will change all that and bring the FF close to home in terms of costs.
But that would wipe out the main reason I'd consider a FF - the viewfinder! (spent some time this weekend looking through the old T90. sigh)
05-16-2011, 09:46 AM   #87
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,511
So go buy a d3x or d3s already, the only two full frame camera's that are actually better than a K-5.
05-16-2011, 10:54 AM   #88
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by WerTicus Quote
So go buy a d3x or d3s already, the only two full frame camera's that are actually better than a K-5.
D700 is also better.

(couldn't resist)

.
05-16-2011, 11:04 AM   #89
Pentaxian
JohnBee's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: front of computer
Posts: 4,620
QuoteOriginally posted by WerTicus Quote
So go buy a d3x or d3s already, the only two full frame camera's that are actually better than a K-5.
  • The D3S is a beast! - high ISO and FPS are where this models strengths lie, making it a true sports favorite.
  • The D3x on the other hand is a resolution machine. Microcontrast and pixel definition are not an issue which make it perfectly suited for shoots both in and outside the studio.
  • The D700 on the other hand is simply to close to justify over a K-5 imo. I've always considered it to be the entry level or entry-point FF option.

Now if only someone had the guts to design a D3X body with D3S speed at the cost of a D700 we'd be all set!
05-16-2011, 11:16 AM   #90
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midwest
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by JohnBee Quote
  • The D3S is a beast! - high ISO and FPS are where this models strengths lie, making it a true sports favorite.
  • The D3x on the other hand is a resolution machine. Microcontrast and pixel definition are not an issue which make it perfectly suited for shoots both in and outside the studio.
  • The D700 on the other hand is simply to close to justify over a K-5 imo. I've always considered it to be the entry level or entry-point FF option.

Now if only someone had the guts to design a D3X body with D3S speed at the cost of a D700 we'd be all set!
By then the next one up the ladder will be that much "better".
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, ff, people, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Buying locally, when you can. The advantage. Ed n Georgia General Talk 2 10-26-2010 07:55 AM
Advantage of mixed system yusuf Pentax DSLR Discussion 10 10-05-2010 07:07 AM
One EVIL/MILC/etc advantage Eruditass Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 21 06-07-2010 05:14 AM
OK...admit it, who stayed up until Midnight to peek for Pentax Goodies... brecklundin Photographic Technique 16 12-29-2009 08:23 PM
PopPhoto admit using K10D AF speed data in K20D review Peter Fang Pentax News and Rumors 31 02-24-2008 04:48 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:46 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