Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-21-2012, 07:46 PM   #31
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 667
I don't want to run two systems, so I will probably wait a bit to see what (if anything) Pentax does. I really just want a Pentax FF. I am so over the moon about the 77, I just really want to see that lens on a FF dslr. My ideal set up is both a FF and an aps-c so I can take advantage of all of the features of both systems.

If it becomes clear that FF is never going to happen on Pentax, then I will seriously start to consider Nikon. I believe that even on Nikon I would prefer to have both FF and crop. Unless the d600 has some pretty impressive performance, I would probably go with the d800. I thought about the d700, but if you are going to spend that much you might as well suck it up and get the better d800. Who knows what I would do about lenses, haven't thought about it that much. I really just want a Pentax FF announcement or even a credible rumor so I can stop thinking sout Nikon forever.

07-23-2012, 12:44 PM   #32
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,558
OK , I'm going to fess up... I actually looked at what it would mean to me if an FF at 24 MP came out at around $1400. I'd still want my k5 with the DA*60-250.... but I could have a top rate 24 Mp landscape setup for about $2500 that would be about the same cost as my K-5 and said 60-250. I Might not ever go for the FF long lenses, APS-c is great for that... but for landscape... an FF and a 31 equivalent... why wouldn't I go for that? You really can't argue that anything in APS-c is going to give me the equivalent of an FF with a good 28-31 on it. At least I wouldn't. That focal range just isn't the strength of APS-c.

To my way of thinking Pentax is in a bind. If the D600 comes out at $1400, they can't sell their K-5 successor at more than that.. at least to people like me. But they also are in a real pinch. TO differentiate themselves, they need an FF at more than 24Mp, which will now be defined as the poor man's FF.. and 36 Mp which is the top of the line but probably not the most economical. They are forced into the position of releasing a $2000 FF at 30 Mp. That's really the only spot left open. ANd if Canon gets there first, that's gone.

I sincerely doubt that's the spot their FF unit was aiming for. I'm willing to bet they are now dead in the water before even releasing an FF camera. I think they were so slow, they missed their possible entry point and they no longer have an FF opportunity. My guess is the day the D600 actually arrives is the day Pentax shuts down it's FF division, if there ever was one.
07-23-2012, 03:25 PM   #33
Veteran Member




Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Denver
Photos: Albums
Posts: 570
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
You really can't argue that anything in APS-c is going to give me the equivalent of an FF with a good 28-31 on it. At least I wouldn't. That focal range just isn't the strength of APS-c.
I concur!

QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
My guess is the day the D600 actually arrives is the day Pentax shuts down it's FF division, if there ever was one.
I sure hope not! It'll be interesting, and somewhat telling, to see what price the D7100 and D5200 are released at. Nikon has that important bit to figure out. I suspect they'll be sharing the same sensor as the K-5 replacement. I would imagine that the price point of the D600 will be much closer to $2000 at launch and that the D700 will be out of stock for new bodies by that time. It'd be great if Pentax could release two FF bodies, one "entry level" and one professional grade, possibly with the same sensors as the D600 and D800. If they do eventually have two FF cameras, I wonder which would come first: the lower or higher price point one? Or will they only ever have the FF slot occupied by one camera at a time?
07-23-2012, 04:47 PM   #34
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
Just from a capability standpoint, It seems like the D600 would have a better chance at killing the Canon 5DIII than a Pentax version. Of course that's not going to happen,either.

07-24-2012, 04:57 PM   #35
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,142
I will evaluate the D600, especially if Pentax doesn't introduce FF this year. (Don't expect them to.) If the D600 is D7000-sized with larger prism, I'd be very interested. I still have Nikon film bodies and lenses from the 70s. With the D800 priced as it is, there is going to be a lot of price pressure on APS sensor cameras, so it will be interesting to see what fill in the $2K-2.5K range.
I'd prefer a Pentax FF the size of the K-5, but don't see Pentax competing that way.
07-24-2012, 05:09 PM   #36
Pentaxian
cali92rs's Avatar

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 3,346
For me, FF isn't even Pentax's biggest issue. I would really like top notch AF in a Pentax body. If the K-5's replacement is on the same level AF-wise as Nikon, then I would happily pony up the dough for an APS-C camera.
07-24-2012, 05:34 PM   #37
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Kaunas
Posts: 1,452
QuoteOriginally posted by Reportage Quote
i dont mind getting one to complement pentax system and then a 24-70 with 50mm for lowlight and some portraiture work.

anyone else?
I will buy it. It's going to replace my D700 and serve as backup (for paid photography work) and walkaround camera.



QuoteOriginally posted by Mareket Quote
It's bigger, heavier and more expensive than my K-5 and 16-50 + FA 50, so nah. Plus I'm poor.

That and the fact that it doesn't really do anything I wish my K-5 could do. Flying springs to mind as an example.
What about thrashing your K-5 in image quality?
07-24-2012, 05:37 PM   #38
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
QuoteOriginally posted by Mareket Quote
It's bigger, heavier and more expensive than my K-5 and 16-50 + FA 50,
We'll see. The body certainly will be bigger.

07-24-2012, 06:05 PM   #39
Veteran Member
Chex's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: The 'Stoke, British Columbia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,700
I would have considered it, but I don't need a back up FF body THAT badly, my D800 would rather have new glass than a little brother.
07-25-2012, 03:07 AM   #40
Pentaxian
Mareket's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Chester
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 719
QuoteOriginally posted by Edvinas Quote
What about thrashing your K-5 in image quality?
Yeah it will destroy the K-5 in IQ, but I've never had an issue getting great IQ out of the K-5 so that doesn't seem like a huge deal for me. Plus having better IQ isn't something I wish my K-5 could do.

I'm still excited to see this camera released mind, as it WILL affect the DSLR market in a big way methinks. I'm not so sure it'll be as cheap as people want it to be though.
07-25-2012, 11:13 AM   #41
Veteran Member
sb in ak's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Homer, AK
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 571
i really don't think FF "thrashes" or "destroys" the K-5 in IQ. FF is marginally better in my experience but it really boils down to whether you want the additional coverage, larger VF, and thin DOF, extra cropping ability, or you want to make massive prints. If you want better AF, you don't need to go to FF; there is the 7D or probably even the D7000.

Anyways, I've seen professional grade images taken with much lesser cameras than the K-5.

Additionally, APS-C trumps FF if you want extra reach with lenses.

Last edited by sb in ak; 07-25-2012 at 11:22 AM.
07-25-2012, 12:52 PM   #42
Pentaxian
Mareket's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Chester
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 719
QuoteOriginally posted by sb in ak Quote
i really don't think FF "thrashes" or "destroys" the K-5 in IQ.
Nah, but a recent FF sensor that's a few years ahead in technology will most likely have much better IQ technically than an older APS-C sensor. Whether this is actually noticeable in use is another story.
07-25-2012, 12:54 PM   #43
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
QuoteOriginally posted by sb in ak Quote
i really don't think FF "thrashes" or "destroys" the K-5 in IQ.
18-55mm at ~31mm, ~f4, according to Photozone: 2040 lp/ph
31mm at 31mm, f4, according to Photozone: 2345 lp/ph

2345/2040 = 1.15

The difference between 'one of the best' (admittedly in far more than 'resolution'), available for $1000, and the kit lens, probably the least-good-lens current sold by Pentax, available for $100 or so, is 15%.

FF gives you 50% better linear resolution off the bat, all else the same.



QuoteOriginally posted by sb in ak Quote
Anyways, I've seen professional grade images taken with much lesser cameras than the K-5.
Absolutely. Resolution isn't everything. I'd like to keep decent resolution and use cheaper and smaller lenses, personally, and have the choice to use some more expensive lenses if desired.

QuoteOriginally posted by sb in ak Quote
Additionally, APS-C trumps FF if you want extra reach with lenses.
I post process all of my images that are worth keeping, so this isn't any advantage to me.
07-25-2012, 01:29 PM   #44
Veteran Member
sb in ak's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Homer, AK
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 571
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
18-55mm at ~31mm, ~f4, according to Photozone: 2040 lp/ph
31mm at 31mm, f4, according to Photozone: 2345 lp/ph

2345/2040 = 1.15

The difference between 'one of the best' (admittedly in far more than 'resolution'), available for $1000, and the kit lens, probably the least-good-lens current sold by Pentax, available for $100 or so, is 15%.

FF gives you 50% better linear resolution off the bat, all else the same.





Absolutely. Resolution isn't everything. I'd like to keep decent resolution and use cheaper and smaller lenses, personally, and have the choice to use some more expensive lenses if desired.



I post process all of my images that are worth keeping, so this isn't any advantage to me.
Numbers are one thing, but I have a hard time telling my K-5 and 5DM2 apart in blind tests, at similar equivalent focal lengths, and not pixel peeping. I guess what I am saying here is that in a real life, in the field situation, this is not a "thrashing" in IQ. The K-5 saves my back. Sure, the 5D wins in huge prints, but that is a question of how much you print huge. I have absolutely no worries that if I take my K-5 instead of my 5D that I can get a professional print, unless the situation calls for very narrow DOF or low light shooting.

I fail to see how PP factors into lens reach, unless you are cropping? The extra reach a FF lens gives APS-C is very real and to me, makes that format superior in a lot of ways if you are into bird photography, etc as you get more mm for the buck with camera lenses.

I guess if anything here, I'm arguing for both formats, since they both have their uses. There's a reason some folks shoot with both.

Last edited by sb in ak; 07-25-2012 at 01:45 PM.
07-25-2012, 01:29 PM   #45
Veteran Member
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
QuoteOriginally posted by ElJamoquio Quote
18-55mm at ~31mm, ~f4, according to Photozone: 2040 lp/ph
31mm at 31mm, f4, according to Photozone: 2345 lp/ph

2345/2040 = 1.15

The difference between 'one of the best' (admittedly in far more than 'resolution'), available for $1000, and the kit lens, probably the least-good-lens current sold by Pentax, available for $100 or so, is 15%.

FF gives you 50% better linear resolution off the bat, all else the same.
This sort of speaks to a point I always try to make - folks talk about the vast differences between, say, regular FA or DA lenses and the Limiteds, but the difference between 'regular' lenses and the LImiteds (in IQ) is less than he difference you see changing formats - and yet some of the same folks maintain that there's no significant difference available when changing formats.

In other words, If you claim to see the difference in the 43ltd over the F 50 1.7, or the 31ltd over the DA 35 f/2.4, then you can't claim that FF would hold no value for you - because it would hold more difference than those lenses would on aps-c.

(I'm also still struggling about how to really clearly articulate that point...)

.
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, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Low price rumor FF Nikon D600 LFLee Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 159 10-06-2012 07:35 PM
First leaked "cheap" full frame Nikon D600 images jogiba Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 9 06-14-2012 04:09 PM
After Nikon D600 rumor, Canon entry level FF camera rumor ... LFLee Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 17 05-16-2012 08:41 PM
Nikon responds to Sony A99 with D600 FF camera! JohnBee Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 40 05-07-2012 05:01 AM
Rumor mill: FF Nikon D600 this summer writeb Photographic Industry and Professionals 2 04-26-2012 10:10 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:50 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