Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-27-2011, 09:56 PM   #31
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,354
Original Poster
jsherman999, that was a great post. I agree with a lot of what you said. Call me crazy, but I tend to see aps-c as a detour in the course of photography. 24x36mm has been a standard for many decades, whether people were shooting with rangefinders, slrs, or point and shoot cameras. It seems to me that aps-c was a compromise that was necessary because of the limitations of technology, not an aesthetic choice.

I have confidence that the camera company's engineers will find a way to make ff technology smaller and lighter within the next few years. Just because ff cameras are larger now doesn't mean they will be forever.

In fact, size is another reason why I think some of us would prefer to have a Pentax ff camera; they have always considered it a priority to keep their lenses to smaller dimensions. I would like to avoid carrying and using gigantic lenses.

06-27-2011, 11:06 PM   #32
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midwest
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by kenafein Quote
Where can you get a 5d for 300 bucks? I would jump on that.
When I look at ebay, they all seem to close around $1k or more. *shrug*.
06-27-2011, 11:17 PM   #33
Veteran Member
RXrenesis8's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Orlando, FL (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 523
QuoteOriginally posted by kenafein Quote
Where can you get a 5d for 300 bucks? I would jump on that.
QuoteOriginally posted by yeatzee Quote
agreed
QuoteOriginally posted by jstevewhite Quote
When I look at ebay, they all seem to close around $1k or more. *shrug*.


Here's one for $200, jump all you want: Canon EOS 5D 12.8 MP -With Grip and Extras! | eBay

:P


You are all looking at the 5d MKII's

Last edited by RXrenesis8; 06-27-2011 at 11:33 PM.
06-27-2011, 11:23 PM   #34
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midwest
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by fuent104 Quote
jsherman999, that was a great post. I agree with a lot of what you said. Call me crazy, but I tend to see aps-c as a detour in the course of photography. 24x36mm has been a standard for many decades, whether people were shooting with rangefinders, slrs, or point and shoot cameras. It seems to me that aps-c was a compromise that was necessary because of the limitations of technology, not an aesthetic choice.
Ok, Crazy.

4x5" was a standard, too. So was 2x3". Then 120 roll film. Then small format 35mm. And there were quite a few half-frame 35mm cams, too.

Just like in film, increasing sensor area improves image quality, except that our digital "film" has higher resolution than most color films. The 35mm was the format that was *just good enough*, and that's why it took off like it did. Just like now, there was always larger formats if you needed more image quality, but 35mm out-resolved most of the reproduction media, and so was good enough. In digital, APS-c is going to be the format that is *just good enough*. You can already make much better enlargements from APS/c than you could from equivalent ISO color film. I think you'll see a slow slide to mostly APS-c and MF digital cameras, with CaNikon maintaining a single FF body for people who "just gotta have it", and are willing to pay. It will be like Ford and Chevy funding race cars - they don't make money on the races, but on the people who buy their regular cars because they won a race last year.

Remember that, unlike film, the cost of production of sensors does not go up linearly with the area. It used to go up as the cube of the area; that's probably dropped off, but still is probably more than the square of the area. Until the *average* purchaser of DSLRs begins making prints larger than 16" on the long side (at current pixel densities), the FF will be an artistic choice, not a technical one.

QuoteQuote:
I have confidence that the camera company's engineers will find a way to make ff technology smaller and lighter within the next few years. Just because ff cameras are larger now doesn't mean they will be forever.

In fact, size is another reason why I think some of us would prefer to have a Pentax ff camera; they have always considered it a priority to keep their lenses to smaller dimensions. I would like to avoid carrying and using gigantic lenses.
They could make the *cameras* smaller, but the lenses are what they are. You want FF, you gotta tote the barge. You want a certain FOV, you gotta carry a lens that's 1.5x bigger ( gross approximation; I've seen 200mm lenses smaller than some 135s, but on the whole a 200mm lens is larger than a 135mm one ). Even in the Pentax line, a 200mm is bigger than a 135mm of the same aperture. There's no absolute reason FF cameras have to be so freaking big; it's partially about balancing with the lenses. My T90 is a BEAST compared to my K-5; the F1n with motor drive was as heavy and nearly as large as a 5D. And nobody wants to spend the money on a 5DMkII and have it look just like a 60D.

I suspect that part of the size difference is in the computer power spent on autofocus - you gotta have room for those chips, and probably heat sinks, too.

06-27-2011, 11:30 PM - 1 Like   #35
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midwest
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by RXrenesis8 Quote
Here's one for $200, jump all you want: Canon EOS 5D 12.8 MP -With Grip and Extras! | eBay

:P


You are all looking at the 5d MKII's
If you look at that auction, it's got FOUR DAYS LEFT, and already two bids. It's going to close at a thousand dollars or more. If you search ebay for "Canon 5d body" and check the "completed listings" box, you'll see that they actually sell for ~$1200. I'm looking at a list where a couple closed at less than a thousand, with the lowest price one sold for recently being $933 (except a parts-only that closed for $499); the MkII are in the $2100 range.

Ebay is an auction site; if it doesn't say "buy it now", you probably won't get it for the price you find there. You bid, other folks bid, the price goes up, until time runs out. Just so you know why that price doesn't mean anything, and no, we aren't looking at MkIIs.
06-27-2011, 11:40 PM   #36
Veteran Member
yeatzee's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Temecula
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,675
QuoteOriginally posted by RXrenesis8 Quote
Here's one for $200, jump all you want: Canon EOS 5D 12.8 MP -With Grip and Extras! | eBay

:P


You are all looking at the 5d MKII's
if only you were right.
06-27-2011, 11:55 PM   #37
Pentaxian
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by jstevewhite Quote
...

They could make the *cameras* smaller, but the lenses are what they are. You want FF, you gotta tote the barge. You want a certain FOV, you gotta carry a lens that's 1.5x bigger ( gross approximation; I've seen 200mm lenses smaller than some 135s, but on the whole a 200mm lens is larger than a 135mm one ). Even in the Pentax line, a 200mm is bigger than a 135mm of the same aperture. There's no absolute reason FF cameras have to be so freaking big; it's partially about balancing with the lenses.
.


The FA Limiteds are all FF lenses. They're not exactly honkin' huge, no?

As is just about every 50mm ever made, and most 35mm's, 24mm's, etc. I have a Nikon 180 2.8 that's pretty diminutive for the FL. The Nikon 20 2.8 AF-D is not much bigger than my DA 15ltd.

The really big lenses tend to be the exotic telephotos; 200 f/2 types, the 300 2.8, 400 f/4, etc, and the f/2.8 'pro' zooms. Also, the 85mms are pretty big, except for the Nikon 85 1.8D, which is shorter and about the same weight as the Pentax DA* 55 f/1.4.

A small Pentax FF body matched with the FA Limiteds (to start) would be a unique offering. This is what I continually harp about. There are folks in the Nikon forum shooting the D700 right now who wish it was smaller - but there are no options for them for a small, great, FF body - especially one that can mount lenses of the FA Limited's pedigree.



.
06-28-2011, 12:09 AM   #38
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
QuoteOriginally posted by fuent104 Quote
In the future, I would like to have a camera body that is capable of taking full advantage of the original design of my manual lenses (all of which are m-series).
Problem #1: You want a new camera to use with old lenses. A company wants a customer that will buy both a new camera AND new lenses.

QuoteOriginally posted by fuent104 Quote
I think I can speak on behalf of more than a few of us who would like to see a full-frame camera AND would like it to be a Pentax.
Problem #2: There are just too few such people to form a viable market.

Don't get me wrong. If Pentax will make a digital FF camera, you can count me in for buying a body.

06-28-2011, 12:18 AM   #39
Pentaxian
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by Laurentiu Cristofor Quote
Problem #1: You want a new camera to use with old lenses. A company wants a customer that will buy both a new camera AND new lenses.
Very, very true. Ned B hinted that this was why Pentax wasn't moving to FF yet - not enough new (expensive) FF lenses to accelerate ROI, and the lenses are harder to spin up from scratch than the body.


QuoteQuote:
Problem #2: There are just too few such people to form a viable market.
Not a given. Product uniqueness can expand a market, and there is also some untapped market among existing K-mount shooters now (See quoted comment below. ) The MFD market was something like 500 units per month worldwide when Pentax decided to enter it - with a relatively unique offerring.

QuoteQuote:
Don't get me wrong. If Pentax will make a digital FF camera, you can count me in for buying a body.
06-28-2011, 12:37 AM   #40
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
QuoteOriginally posted by jstevewhite Quote
The 35mm was the format that was *just good enough*, and that's why it took off like it did. Just like now, there was always larger formats if you needed more image quality, but 35mm out-resolved most of the reproduction media, and so was good enough. In digital, APS-c is going to be the format that is *just good enough*.
That is the gist of it.

QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
.
The FA Limiteds are all FF lenses. They're not exactly honkin' huge, no?
I agree. Most of the lenses I use on APS are FF to begin with and I am not bothered by their size. The DA*55 is also larger than any 50 I have. Lens size isn't a very compelling argument against FF, especially since some DA designs are really FF lenses.
06-28-2011, 12:47 AM   #41
Veteran Member
Laurentiu Cristofor's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: WA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,044
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
Not a given. Product uniqueness can expand a market, and there is also some untapped market among existing K-mount shooters now (See quoted comment below. ) The MFD market was something like 500 units per month worldwide when Pentax decided to enter it - with a relatively unique offerring.
Yes, but that monthly 500 is still more than the total number of people I heard voicing requests for FF here on PF. I was just looking at a poll and FF got 261 votes. And the fact that Sony got out of FF isn't promising - they have more capital than Pentax and managed to produce FF models at decent prices. I think the MFD was different because Pentax managed to undercut any other alternative by a big margin - this is not going to happen for FF. Already the K-5 was released at a price that produced some discontent.
06-28-2011, 01:44 AM   #42
Veteran Member
RXrenesis8's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Orlando, FL (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 523
QuoteOriginally posted by jstevewhite Quote
I'm looking at a list where a couple closed at less than a thousand, with the lowest price one sold for recently being $933 (except a parts-only that closed for $499)
Woops! would ya lookit that. I was way off the mark on that one.
06-28-2011, 01:56 AM   #43
Site Supporter
GeneV's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Albuquerque NM
Photos: Albums
Posts: 9,761
QuoteOriginally posted by jsherman999 Quote
FF roll outs have always happened on a more extended schedule than smaller formats, and the world economy + the Japanese tsunami have not helped that schedule much.

Nikon makes money selling FF-capable lenses for their existing base, irregardless of what bodies are currently out. The whole FF market is pretty stable and a money maker for Nikon and Canon - not so sure about Sony. (Sony provides a cautionary tale Pentax would need to heed if they wanted to move into FF.)
Right now, Nikon can afford extended roll-outs and more niche models than Pentax.

Don't get me wrong, I'd love to have a FF body. I wonder, though, if one of the very things that makes Pentax stronger than some of the other smaller players could make FF less profitable for them. The wide availability of Pentax FF capable lenses may keep many of us in the brand now, but may also hinder sales of new FF lenses. For me, they better make money on the body, because I don't need many more FF lenses. I'm still using lots of film because I want to use those lenses in the way they were intended (and the way I became accustomed).

With the 645d, Pentax has a camera that is not all that much larger and heavier than a Nikon D3, but with a larger, higher resolution sensor that is enough off-sized that it can generate new lens sales the way APS-c did. Like APS-c, you get the draw of older lenses, which still fit, but the need to get newer ones to get the full range of capabilities. It may be a better move if they want to sell glass.
06-28-2011, 02:03 AM   #44
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 209
There are rumours of Canon releasing 3 new FF bodies within one years time. One of them has been speculated to be a smaller bodied FF rebel.

I hope that the rumours are wrong, as I donīt like Canonīs ergonomics one bit.
06-28-2011, 03:43 AM   #45
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: WV
Posts: 1,484
You can dislike the "switch to Canikon" argument all you like, but the simple fact of the matter is that Pentax is on record as saying they have no plans to introduce a camera with a 35mm sized sensor. AFAIK, Pentax has given no indication they might change their mind in the future.

DSLRs make up a small percentage of overall camera sales. Cameras with a 35mm sized sensor make up a small percentage of DSLR camera sales. Pentax shooters make up a tiny percentage of DSLR owners. Pentax is too small a company, and the market for 35mm sensor sized cameras is too small a market, for Pentax to compete in effectively. That's just cold, hard, reality.

So if you want a "full frame" Pentax camera buy a film camera.
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, films, image, lenses, passion, pentax, photography, production, slr, switch
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
How do the K5 photos compare to Full Frame camera photos as far as the "look" goes? crossover37 Pentax K-5 166 05-16-2011 07:24 PM
Full frame or improved AF. What do you want in the "K-8"? johnmflores Pentax DSLR Discussion 73 06-04-2010 11:35 AM
Nikon's 1998 vintage "full frame" DSLR pingflood General Talk 5 07-25-2009 05:44 PM
How does the camera "know" where the first frame starts? pbo Pentax Medium Format 9 07-08-2009 08:23 AM
German c't calls K-7 "full frame" falconeye Pentax News and Rumors 3 05-24-2009 11:18 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:48 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