[mrNewt]

It's not gonna work MrNewt

I was just hopping to bring a smile on everyone's face that's all (wasn't meant to offend anyone) .

Anywho... I'm going back to my LBA... eyeballing some lens and my hands are shaking on the buy button.
Peace and love!

[Sliver-Surfer]

lol no offence

[repaap]

Heh... sometimes is like watching a fight between your kids... you love them both and they are both right, but you just want to beat the hell out of them to make them understand.



Just drop it, be a bigger man... you have NOTHING to prove to anyone!
They disagree, who cares? All this frustration is bad for your health. Enjoy and love what you are doing.

I agree on both of quotes.

[osv]

the OP want's a FF I told them good sound advice and the aps-c white knights flew in left and right even though this thread has nothing to do with APS-C
Title is"Sony A7R or Pentax FF"

people who have never shot ff digital need to compensate for their feelings of inadequacy even when it means going completely off-topic.

crop sensor trolling got so bad on the dpr emount forum that the ff people rose up en masse and demanded their own forum.

when the ff pentax hits the streets, it'll be the same thing all over again here.

[Ian Stuart Forsyth]

From Imaging Resources, regarding the Pentax K-3
Resolution
Very high resolution, ~2,700 lines of strong detail from JPEGs, about the same from converted RAW files.

A Canon 5D MkIII at 22.3 Mp produces 2499-2500 lw/ph

A Nikon D600 produces 2700 lw/ph,

A Canon 6D produces 2400 lw/ph

A Nikon D750 produces 2900 lw/ph...

Only one of the 4 mentioned full frames beats the K-3 in resolution.

You do know that to match my K-3 with a 400 mm lens, you have to have a 600mm lens of full frame at 2 to 3 times the cost?
You talk about flexibility, well, it;s only rarely that the flexibility you talk about actually affects IQ.

I haven't got a clue what you're going on about. But you really are a bit out of control here as far as I can tell.

Do you actually understand anything you're writing about, or are you getting all your information from some Full Frame propaganda central?

Well let’s have a look at your quoted sites images and see how they hold up, how they are measuring resolution is by looking at false detail not a very good way to judge IQ and fine resolution

Now bellow are cameras A B C
one is the canon 6d scale to the 24mp, Nikon D750 and the K3


Which camera about gives us just a little more detail B or A
To my eyes A has the clear advantage to the finer detail without false detail as seen below

If I was printing both or view both large as many do when need to crop for the added reach then I would have to say I see less false detail as the green arrow points to what looks more natural.


again which is better A OR C




B or C
C is better right down to extinction

Let’s have another look and see how well all three sensor stack up with regard to off axis detail


A & B are very close but B produces wavy detail that can be noticed right at 16 whereas A is still very clean. To me the camera A wins here
Camera C clearly wins right down to 24 with no hint of wavy lines that’s seen in camera B

Now this post a particular problem to your line of thought because camera A is the 6D scaled to 24mp and it still gives us a more natural finer detail without the wavy lines false detail that camera B the K3 produces ( that is visible even at 16)
And camera C the D750 gives us best of the three.

I see no reason why one could use the D750 and not need to use the equivalent FL (1.5 crop factor) but rather something around (1.2 crop factor ) to achieve the same reach factor so many praise Apsc cameras for.As viewed above ( even using your own reference images) a 20mp FF can match the 24mp APSC very easy and a 24mp camera resolves more detail that can be used when cropping so that if a person was to use an equivalent FL one would have more detail to work with for cropping with the FF camera
If you would like I could post data yet again showing this time that a 24mp FF camera when cropped to 16mp will give a resolution advantage of what a 16mp APSC would give you, thus needing less of a crop factor to match the reach factor apsc has. I would go so far as to say that one could use a zoom lens on a 24mp FF crop it to 16mp and have equal to or slightly more resolution than an 16APSC with a prime can capture . But then that would make you rethink how resolution is captured.
Like I eluded to before one does not need to use the equivalent FL on a FF to achieve the same reach as a cropped camera.

[Nicolas06]

Well let’s have a look at your quoted sites images and see how they hold up, how they are measuring resolution is by looking at false detail not a very good way to judge IQ and fine resolution

On theses kind of very interresting and artistic shoots (that Pentax forum review tend to love), what I tend to see as the biggest differentiator is the lense you put in front of the camera.

[Nicolas06]

I'll say this... so far, every image that was posted in this thread, can be replicated with any of the cameras. End result does NOT tell anything about the gear used.
Hell, some of the images can be easily done using a micro four thirds camera... even a point and shoot one.

Not "some images" for m4/3, all. There f/0.95 lenses on m4/3 . People tend to forget that smaller format also allow for faster lenses without having to make them too huge.

[Nicolas06]

Now this post a particular problem to your line of thought because camera A is the 6D scaled to 24mp and it still gives us a more natural finer detail without the wavy lines false detail that camera B the K3 produces ( that is visible even at 16)
And camera C the D750 gives us best of the three.

If I look at your image without zooming, I see wavy details on Camera A the most at 12 and then on B at 16...

Now If I zoom in to remove the interferences with my screen resolution, the A still has moire has 12 (likely from your rescaling algorithm) and B start to have bit of the issue at 20 and noticable at 24. Camera C has more contrast (but this can be due to default post processing settings) and have heavier moire at 20.

Really That's not convincing as I get opposite results.

[Sliver-Surfer]

OK OP is
Sony A7R or Pentax FF

not Sony A7R or Pentax FF or Aps-c or 4/3 or Cell phone Camera..

[mrNewt]

Not "some images" for m4/3, all. There f/0.95 lenses on m4/3 . People tend to forget that smaller format also allow for faster lenses without having to make them too huge.

Yep ... I just didn't want to ruffle the feathers more than they are.
Is already a big fight (pointless I might add) between FF vs APS-C... let's not bring m4/3 in it... pot is not big enough

[normhead]

I see no reason why one could use the D750 and not need to use the equivalent FL (1.5 crop factor) but rather something around (1.2 crop factor ) to achieve the same reach factor so many praise Apsc cameras for.

Are you going to show us you're right, or are you expecting us to take your word for it? I've never seen such a lot of work put into speculation and supposition. It is impressive, only in that you're really struggling to show make a point and at a causal glance, you aren't even proving your own point.

Do you really think the enjoyment of images of IQ is in anyway related to the kinds of comparison's you're making. How hard do you have to look to see a difference? Can you enjoy an image by looking that hard? I can't maybe you can, I don't know. Your whole post looks like a bunch of nonsense to me. Nitpicking to the nth degree.

Explained more fully here....

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/38-photographic-technique/203024-who-took...hotograph.html

There maybe a correlation between this kind of resolution and IQ, but the vast majority of really good photographs, are good because of composition. As for calling one test chart a false image and another more realistic... so, one set of evidence supports your point and one doesn't. So you dismiss the one that doesn't support your point? Maybe you don't have problem with that, but many of us do. The fact that you can go on and on to the nth degree saying why you think that way, doesn't change the test results. It only explains that you are willing to go to any lengths to persuade of your opinion is right, even though it's hard to discern that from your own data.

If you have images of a test chart, and you have to focus on one little area of the chart to make your point....you've pretty much got nothing in the great scheme of things. These images are pretty much the same. From an artistic standpoint, there is no difference. My advice would be select the camera on other issues. Ergonomics, how much you like working with it, you definitely haven't convinced me, I need a D750 to replace my K-3 for resolution purposes.

If I need more resolution, I'm going D810 or 645z, not D750. with those camera, you can don't have to squint to see a difference.

[audiobomber]

people who have never shot ff digital need to compensate for their feelings of inadequacy even when it means going completely off-topic.

crop sensor trolling got so bad on the dpr emount forum that the ff people rose up en masse and demanded their own forum.

when the ff pentax hits the streets, it'll be the same thing all over again here.

You're twisting the truth to fit your agenda. There were a couple of polls in the DPR NEX Forum asking whether posters wanted to split the forum or not. The grand majority of posters wanted the split. Since most of the posters in the forum were APS-C shooters, clearly your claim that it was the FF shooters who engineered the split is false.

Most posters voted "yes" to split because it was a waste of time opening posts that were not applicable to one's chosen format. Some voted for a split simply because the site was too busy, with posts falling off the lead page in a matter of hours.

I'm calling you on your nonsense about inadequacy too. I know how and why FF is better than APS-C. I also know that it is heavier, bulkier and more expensive, and that's why I'm not interested. APS-C is good enough for me, and has some important advantages.

The discussion about Pentax FF vs A7R should really be about DSLR vs. MILC, and their respective ecosystems. I have both styles (K-3 and a6000), but my main camera is a DSLR because it fits my style better. I can see why some hold the opposite opinion.

[Rondec]

I don't know that there is more to say, is there? Most people probably purchase APS-C purely because it is cheaper, those who move to full frame do so either because they need something specific that it offers or, they just want it. Clearly in order to get a lot of benefit from full frame, you do need a faster equivalent lens. In certain focal lengths that will be pretty easy to obtain, in others, not so much.

As to the initial question of the A7 series versus Pentax full frame, it is very unclear. As Dan says, the only thing we can be sure of is that the A7 series uses and EVF with all of the strengths and weaknesses of that and the Pentax will be an OVF. Some people prefer one to the other and it is probably more important to choose something that you are comfortable with and enjoy using, than anything else.

[osv]

The grand majority of posters wanted the split.

the grand majority of *people who voted* wanted the split.

Since most of the posters in the forum were APS-C shooters

most of the people who *read* the forum might have been aps-c shooters, but that's not relevant to who voted for what, you are just using this opportunity to advance your failed crop agenda.

it's the ff posters who got sick of seeing aps-c garbage, because nobody who owns ff cares about aps-c, it's a step backwards... but people who own aps-c *always* want to compare the formats.

as proven by normhead and nicolas06, who don't own ff but have taken this thread completely off-topic by postwhoring their failed crop vs. ff agenda.

APS-C is good enough for me, and has some important advantages.

totally irrelevant to the thread title, which proves everything that i posted above

The discussion about Pentax FF vs A7R should really be about DSLR vs. MILC.

it should have been, but thanks to people like you, the thread got completely derailed.

[Rondec]

the grand majority of *people who voted* wanted the split.



most of the people who *read* the forum might have been aps-c shooters, but that's not relevant to who voted for what, you are just using this opportunity to advance your failed crop agenda.

it's the ff posters who got sick of seeing aps-c garbage, because nobody who owns ff cares about aps-c, it's a step backwards... but people who own aps-c *always* want to compare the formats.

as proven by normhead and nicolas06, who don't own ff but have taken this thread completely off-topic by postwhoring their failed crop vs. ff agenda.



totally irrelevant to the thread title, which proves everything that i posted above



it should have been, but thanks to people like you, the thread got completely derailed.

I don't know. I plan to get a full frame camera, but I will still on APS-C cameras as back up/to use along side. For many situations, it is not a big deal which format you use.