Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-22-2012, 09:38 AM   #46
Inactive Account




Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 59
QuoteOriginally posted by Pål Jensen Quote
Meaningless. APS give you extra reach. If you crop FF to APS you get that extra reach but then you got APS not FF If you want FF you don't get APS reach.
In the film days no one said that smaller format was just a cropped bigger format....
That's just not right. Theres no extra reach, its field of view differences.

If you're concerned about shooting 2 cameras; a FF and an APSC directly next to each other and having same FOV without cropping the FF, then use a wider lens on the APS-c.

THere's no 'extra reach' for the aps-c, thats a misconception.

09-22-2012, 09:39 AM   #47
Inactive Account




Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 59
I dug this up to end confusion, you might wanna check it out

Full-frame v. crop sensors : A comparison
09-22-2012, 09:56 AM - 1 Like   #48
Veteran Member
treebeard's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Windham, NH
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 795
For me it's all about ISO performance and DR. The K-5 does both of those tremendously well. The amount of PP I have to do after shooting at ISO 6400 is very minimal. My only gripe is learning how to use my Metz flash, but that's my issue.
09-22-2012, 11:23 AM   #49
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,149
QuoteOriginally posted by nmrecording Quote
That's just not right. Theres no extra reach, its field of view differences.

That is semantics. Small angle of view is what people mean by reach.

09-22-2012, 11:39 AM   #50
Inactive Account




Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 59
that makes no sense. Thats like saying you can cover your eye with your hand and teleport forward

go look up the definition of reach
09-22-2012, 11:41 AM   #51
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Savannah, GA
Posts: 5,002
QuoteOriginally posted by nmrecording Quote
that makes no sense. Thats like saying you can cover your eye with your hand and teleport forward

go look up the definition of reach
With digital, reach is very much tied to pixel density, as I have been saying -- if I have two sensors the same size and am using the same lens with each, then if one of them has more MPs and all else is equal, then I've got greater reach with the more dense sensor. Do you understand that?
09-22-2012, 01:31 PM   #52
Pentaxian
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,149
QuoteOriginally posted by nmrecording Quote
that makes no sense. Thats like saying you can cover your eye with your hand and teleport forward

go look up the definition of reach

Thats a very nice comparison provided that the brain amplified the image to the same size. Thats what you do when you watch an image or print it. As long as you want your FF camera to maintain an FF camera you get less reach than for smaller formats. Getting the same reach for FF means longer lenses.
09-22-2012, 04:21 PM - 1 Like   #53
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Somewhere, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 453
QuoteOriginally posted by nmrecording Quote
That's just not right. Theres no extra reach, its field of view differences.

If you're concerned about shooting 2 cameras; a FF and an APSC directly next to each other and having same FOV without cropping the FF, then use a wider lens on the APS-c.

THere's no 'extra reach' for the aps-c, thats a misconception.
By that logic, long zooms have no reach. They just offer different fields of view. Isn't that all reach is? Narrowing your field of view?

09-22-2012, 05:23 PM   #54
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
QuoteOriginally posted by Isnwm Quote
WHY DO WE HAVE SUPERIOR CAMERA BODIES W/ HORRIBLE lens selection ?!?! We literally don't have ONE 2.8 lens that covers ANYTHING between 200 & 300. NOT ONE ! Why not ?! So our only choices are 70-200 f/2.8 , then go straight to 300 f/2.8 prime.
Um, failure of a third party lens manufacturer to provide a specific lens that would appeal to maybe 0.1% of the market, and with a couple of very good alternatives as you mention - hardly qualifies as "horrible lens selection", much less screaming about it.

And in any case, it is just as true that Pentax offers lenses the others guys don't - try finding anything like the DA Limiteds for NIkon or Canon, for instance. Different systems offer differ options. Chosoe the one that suits your needs best. Seems simple enough.

QuoteQuote:
How have you life long pentaxians dealt with this for so long ?
99.9% of photographers couldn't care less about an XXX-300/2.8 zoom. The 0.1% who do generally realize this is an extreme speciality item and check to make sure it will be available before choosing a camera system.

Last edited by Marc Sabatella; 09-22-2012 at 05:40 PM.
09-22-2012, 08:53 PM   #55
Senior Member




Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Lewiston, NY
Posts: 104
QuoteOriginally posted by Adam Quote
If Ricoh intends on making the Pentax lineup competitive, they're going to have to get third parties to make more lenses. My hunch is that that's what they're going to do alongside the launch of their future FF/pro bodies.
If the 18-270 is indeed a Pentax badged Tamron:
1. did Tamron not make a Pentax mount version because Pentax requested OR
2. did Pentax go crawling to Tamron to OEM it because Tamron never would.
09-22-2012, 09:55 PM   #56
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Savannah, GA
Posts: 5,002
QuoteOriginally posted by sandilands Quote
If the 18-270 is indeed a Pentax badged Tamron:
1. did Tamron not make a Pentax mount version because Pentax requested OR
2. did Pentax go crawling to Tamron to OEM it because Tamron never would.
The old 18-250 came in both Tamron and Pentax versions, didn't it? I think Tamron has just not been making Pentax mounts on new lenses lately, same as Sigma, Voigtlander, etc
09-22-2012, 10:20 PM   #57
Veteran Member
Venturi's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Tulsa, OK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,639
that's correct. The DA18~250 was a re-badged Tamron design, with SMC coatings and a cosmetically different barrel, IIRC.
09-23-2012, 12:43 AM   #58
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 98
Original Poster
- I'm going to make a heartfelt apology to this thread, and hopefully clear the air, and put this topic to rest. I love my K-5. It's an amazing piece of machinery. I don't even know why I posted this thread , and wish I hadnt. I'm still trying to find my niche as a photographer, and make up my mind on what area I need to focus more on. I am doing more portraits now, and weddings than anything. Shortly before posting this thread, I shot 3 football games and REALLY enjoyed it. So it had me thinking about just hanging up the portrait stuff and doing nothing but sports and long range stuff. So I started investigating fast long range lenses. I almost immediately stumbled across the 120-300 sigma. I was upset it wasn't available for Pentax, but it still didn't warrant me making this thread. After careful consideration, I set up a gameplan for myself and I've acted accordingly. I'm sticking with portrait work and weddings. I did sell off my sigma 70-200 2.8, and bought the 50-135. In a couple weeks I'll get the matching 16-50. Those will be my work horses. If the 50-135 can do some sports, then great. If its too short, then oh well. I picked up the 80-320 f/4.5-5.6 to do some sports stuff in good lighting. I know it's too slow for night games, but that's fine. It was worth $80. I also have the Rokinon 8mm for fun fisheye stuff. So, I've got all my bases covered. If the day comes that I want to get more serious about sports photography, I'll just get the sigma 300. Again, I apologize to everyone who's read this thread. I was ranting over something that didn't even matter. I like this forum A LOT. The last thing I want to do is be known as the bad egg. That's not me. I'm here to learn as much as I can, and socialize with all of you fellow pentaxians. I hope this clears things up. Thanks.
09-23-2012, 02:29 AM   #59
Pentaxian
calsan's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Perth, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,387
No worries!
09-23-2012, 06:01 AM   #60
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
QuoteOriginally posted by vonBaloney Quote
The old 18-250 came in both Tamron and Pentax versions, didn't it? I think Tamron has just not been making Pentax mounts on new lenses lately, same as Sigma, Voigtlander, etc
Yes it did. I own the Tamron version with its 6 year warranty.
Closed Thread

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!
7d, camera, canon, dslr, f/2.8, k-5, lens, lenses, nikon, pentax, photography, sigma
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Hi From a New Pentax Owner craftysnapper Welcomes and Introductions 2 08-18-2011 09:11 PM
New Pentax K-r owner Moller Pentax K-r 10 07-20-2011 11:10 AM
Future Pentax owner civano Welcomes and Introductions 2 02-21-2011 09:20 AM
Hello from a new Pentax owner hugeace007 Welcomes and Introductions 4 12-15-2010 08:44 PM
Potential Pentax Owner Daniel_r Welcomes and Introductions 4 11-24-2010 02:12 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:24 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