[Winder]

well the new sensor that should be in Sony's A77 should do 12 fps and that probably is needing a new shutter.

The A77 does not have a mirror to move. I don't think the shutter is as big of an issue as the mirror or having the image processor that can handle all of the image data. Also we don't know if the A77 will run 12 FPS at 12-bit or 14-bit. 24MP/12FPS/14-bit is a awful lot of data.

[RonHendriks1966]

The A77 does not have a mirror to move. I don't think the shutter is as big of an issue as the mirror or having the image processor that can handle all of the image data. Also we don't know if the A77 will run 12 FPS at 12-bit or 14-bit. 24MP/12FPS/14-bit is a awful lot of data.

Well maybe a future just for liveview or so.

We do need faster processing and support for UHS-I to use faster writespeed for al this data.

For sports this would be great. If you want more then just on a lucky occasion that special moment then K-7 with 5 fps and K-5 with 7 fps aren't fast enough.

I have some series where in service for volleybal one shot the ball is in the air and in the next the ball is gone, and you want the shot in between where it is being hit!

[Class A]

My math skills are not good, but it looks like more than 40% more area to capture light?

FF offers 125% more light collecting area over Sony/Pentax APS-C (i.e., 225% of Sony/Pentax APS-C0 or 156% more light collecting area over Canon APS-C (i.e., 256% of Canon APS-C).

Size is only important because it allows you to use larger more efficient photosites which gather more light and have a higher capacity.

The size of the photosites is irrelevant. Four small sensels capture as much dynamic range as one sensel four times the size of one small one.

FF overs a number of advantages, most nicely described by Verglace. One might add "higher dynamic range" and "wider FOV for the same set of lenses" (important for wide-angle fans).

[jsherman999]

I do not think so, so let's see if I get what you are writing

Do DSLR manufacturors have to produce big fast zooms? Yes, because they will generate money for them.

Yes.

Does a consumer have to buy one? No, if he doesn't need it.

Correct.

Do DSLR manufacturors say that you need big fast zooms otherwise your FF will not deliver. Yes, as it makes money for them.

I don't know that I recall a manufacturer ever saying this in any kind of statement or ad - you tend to hear it internet forums, at camera clubs, etc, and it comes from folks who have bought the lenses already. In some cases they upgraded from a variable-aperture consumer zoom and are floored by that the output of that Nikon/Canon f/2.8 zoom (rightfully so,) and just doubt that a Tamron, Sigma or Tokina zoom could bring such optical quality. In some cases they may have had some experience with older primes on film, and prefer the versatility of the zoom, and the look the modern coatings bring.

At it's best, it's simply good-natured enthusiasm; at it's worst, lens snobbery mixed with a good dose of ignorance and/or lack of experience and/or purchase justification.

The manufacturer simply counts on X number of FF buyers buying these zooms, and benefits directly from the myth that you need them to somehow gain access to FF's advantages. In my (and many other's) view, the size and cost of these lenses represent one of FF's main disadvantages, good as they are optically.

Does a consumer have to buy one? No, as slower smaller zooms, or even primes might fit their budget and/or requirements better. And they will get results which will be more than good enough anyway.

Yes, very much so.

I have almost no experience with the Canon lens lineup, but at one point or another I've tried most modern Nikon lenses, and many older ones. The 14-24 2.8 is remarkable, but I felt it was like carrying a heavy, bulbous divining rod around. seemed very awkward to shoot. I really didn't like the thought of accidentally scratching that front element (it was borrowed.) The 70-200 2.8 VRII was very nice, but really is only about a 135mm on the long end for closer-in subjects, costs $2300, and didn't get me better results than the Tamron 70-200 2.8, although it had VR and focused very quickly. I saw nothing fantastic with the 24-70 2.8 - nice lens for sure, didn't beat the Tamron 28-75 optically, and was heavier.

The 16-85 is a fairly sharp, DX VR kit lens, 28-200 variants, 18-105, all the variable-aperture zooms I tried were equally mediocre.

The primes, though - with the exception of the 24 2.8 I tried - very good, very exciting to shoot on FF. The one Nikon zoom I still consider buying is that 14-24 2.8 despite it's drawbacks.



.

---

Last edited by jsherman999; 08-11-2011 at 08:14 PM.

[Bare]

The A77 does not have a mirror to move. I don't think the shutter is as big of an issue as the mirror or having the image processor that can handle all of the image data. Also we don't know if the A77 will run 12 FPS at 12-bit or 14-bit. 24MP/12FPS/14-bit is a awful lot of data.

An big question is will it have an AF with 12fps.

[zxaar]

Yes.



I don't know that I recall a manufacturer ever saying this in any kind of statement or ad -

this is very much correct, NO manufacturer ever says that one should buy zooms or just primes because both of them make them money. I would argue that selling more primes would make them much more money then zooms. The proof of this is in prices of 85mm f1.2 L (canon) , 50mm F1.2 (any manufacturer) etc etc. These are not cheap lenses, they cost almost the same as good quality zooms.

A manufacturer , if he has made some product, he would like to sell everyone of them.

[Macario]

Well maybe a future just for liveview or so.

We do need faster processing and support for UHS-I to use faster writespeed for al this data.

For sports this would be great. If you want more then just on a lucky occasion that special moment then K-7 with 5 fps and K-5 with 7 fps aren't fast enough.

I have some series where in service for volleybal one shot the ball is in the air and in the next the ball is gone, and you want the shot in between where it is being hit!

Unless you really want to sequences, the FPS will be handy, other than that, get to know the sport, and you get the right shot with just one frame (I do it a lot with surf and bodyboarding, and did it alot with skate). Just anticipate wath the surfer is going to do, and press the shutter at the right moment.
But yes, for sequences a higher FPS is handy, but also not always. Because you can still miss the shot, if it happens when your buffer is full and the camera starts shooting slower.

[Kunzite]

The A77 does not have a mirror to move. I don't think the shutter is as big of an issue as the mirror or having the image processor that can handle all of the image data. Also we don't know if the A77 will run 12 FPS at 12-bit or 14-bit. 24MP/12FPS/14-bit is a awful lot of data.

A new shutter could be needed as well; while the release is more than fast enough, winding it up takes longer. Of course, the mirror remains the main issue.
That being said, the only thing related to FPS that I'd like to be added to the K-5 is being able to chose the frame rate in Continuous Low mode. I don't care for more speed.

[RonHendriks1966]

Unless you really want to sequences, the FPS will be handy, other than that, get to know the sport, and you get the right shot with just one frame (I do it a lot with surf and bodyboarding, and did it alot with skate). Just anticipate wath the surfer is going to do, and press the shutter at the right moment.
But yes, for sequences a higher FPS is handy, but also not always. Because you can still miss the shot, if it happens when your buffer is full and the camera starts shooting slower.

Well I do know something about some sports, but it would come in handy to have some technical support on this:


Or to capture this moment:


Having 12 fps would mean taht I would make less pictures on such an event since I'm now taking sometimes many off these series to have that one shot, where the succesrate would be bigger on hi framerate and thus stopping the extra attempts.

[jsherman999]

Nice vertical leap.

[Pentaxeros]

Habeis visto estas dos patentes de Pentax:
Publicada el 2 de Agoto de 2011:
Digital camera
Otra publicada el 28 de Junio de 2011:
Digital camera

Mirar que dibujo de camara se puede ver en la patente:


ademas Pentax ha registrado varias patentes mas:
del 30 de Junio de 2011,
MIRROR DRIVE APPARATUS INCORPORATING A BRAKE MECHANISM OF AN SLR CAMERA

del 20 de Enero de 2011,
APPARATUS FOR DETECTING FOCUS

del 26 de Mayo del 2011:
APPARATUS FOR DETECTING IN-FOCUS STATE - HOYA CORPORATION

del 20 de Enero de 2011 :
FOCUS DETECTION DEVICE - HOYA CORPORATION

del 14 de julio de 2011:
FOCUS DETECTION OPTICAL SYSTEM

del 26 de mayo de 2011
APPARATUS FOR DETECTING IN-FOCUS STATE

del 3 de Mayo de 2011:
Diaphragm driving device of a camera system using an interchangeable lens

Otra del 2 de Agosto de 2011?:
Targeted object pursuit system

Otra del 5 de Julio de 2011:
Diaphragm control apparatus of interchangeable lens camera

14 de Junio de 2011:
Imager with auto focus functionality

30 de Junio de 2011
MIRROR BRAKE MECHANISM OF AN SLR CAMERA

Otra mas:
MIRROR DRIVE APPARATUS INCORPORATING A BRAKE MECHANISM OF AN SLR CAMERA

Sera la nueva FF??

[peasant]

Okay, nothing new here for the old hands but for us learners I've recently acquired an 18mm Zeiss and 18.5 times 1.53 is 28.305.Not that far off the" legendary" 31.Just never realised how wide the 31 is on ff(not owning one).Totally different perspective from on cropped "normal".

[Emacs]

Okay, nothing new here for the old hands but for us learners I've recently acquired an 18mm Zeiss and 18.5 times 1.53 is 28.305.Not that far off the" legendary" 31.Just never realised how wide the 31 is on ff(not owning one).Totally different perspective from on cropped "normal".

Almost the same, but 21mm )
I bought it after I saw how 31Ltd works on LX

[Kunzite]

Pentaxeros, very interesting - thanks for the patents.
But if anyone is hoping Pentax will resurrect the old prototype - it won't happen, and for a good reason. The old MZ-S body, made for a film camera was only good for a "hack" job like on the first DSLRs; now is very much inadequate. What's the chance of Pentax using that instead of a modern, K-5-like body? Zero.
In other words: most likely, the drawing was just made up - they needed a DSLR drawing so they made one, no relation with any real product.

[rawr]

ademas Pentax ha registrado varias patentes mas:

Thanks for those patent links. Very interesting.

Lots of work on autofocus seems to be going on in Pentax, including predictive AF.

Those patents could apply equally to APS-C as to FF though.