Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-21-2009, 07:06 AM   #1
Inactive Account




Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Rochester, NY
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 119
An argument against FF

All the naysayers are touting Pentax's lack of a FF camera a failure that will lead to its doom. Meanwhile, Thom Hogan, a prominent figure of the Nikon camp is openly stating that FF isn't necessarily all that it's cracked up to be.

Makes for an excellent read and really shows that the K-7 is hitting the mark. As an avid camper and hiker, I know it's at the top of my wishlist while i keep fingers crossed for a k200d replacement. Otherwise, the k-x would make a nice addition too.

09-21-2009, 07:09 AM   #2
and
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,471
Lets not go there.... again Further acts of violence against that horse skeleton would be redundant
09-21-2009, 08:04 AM   #3
Pentaxian




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Perth Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,511
whatever, pentax are making a medium digital.
09-21-2009, 08:08 AM   #4
Senior Member
Henrik Kristensen's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Odense
Photos: Albums
Posts: 153
That diskussion in often heated

I am personally heading away from "Full Frame" myself... and Pentax is my most likely choice right now. (K7)

09-21-2009, 08:13 AM   #5
and
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,471
QuoteOriginally posted by WerTicus Quote
whatever, pentax are making a medium digital.
Yep, Pentax doesnt need to make a $2000-$2500 FF body, they can make a $9000-$10000 645 body instead.

So if you own a Pentax DSLR and want a bigger sensor you used to have to buy a different brand body and then you couldnt use your lenses anymore. But if they release a 645 body then you will be able to upgrade to that and still not use your existing lenses so that is much bet... wait a minute...


I digress
09-21-2009, 09:25 AM   #6
Pentaxian
reeftool's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,010
I am also a hiker/camper and shoot a lot outdoors where I am carrying my camera a good distance. I stood along side of a pro photographer last winter at a freestyle skiing event. She was shooting with a Nikon D700 with the grip. That thing was a monster and I have no desire lug something like that around with me. My K10D with a couple of lenses is as much as I care to carry anymore. I will be much happier to see the IQ of our current cameras improve through sensor technology and not have to be forced into a bigger,heavier camera.
09-21-2009, 09:30 AM   #7
emr
Guest




So, just out of curiosity, what are the real high end digital cameras today (released or announced)? In this context meaning cameras with a bigger than "FF" sensor and assumingly great picture quality.

- 645D
- Leica S2
- Some Hasselblad digital backs?
09-21-2009, 10:53 AM   #8
Pentaxian
Marc Sabatella's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Denver, CO
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,686
Isn't Thom Hogan the guy who has been convinced for years that Pentax was going to go out of business any day now?

09-21-2009, 11:34 AM   #9
Veteran Member
nostatic's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: socal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,576
There are advantages and disadvantages to every sensor size and system. Period. It is up to the user to determine which aspects are most important to them and then buy accordingly.

Or, you can buy something and then just complain on the interwebs about how it should do something differently

And this is a good read: http://www.josephjamesphotography.com/equivalence/
09-21-2009, 05:13 PM   #10
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: CT, USA
Posts: 499
QuoteOriginally posted by and Quote
Yep, Pentax doesnt need to make a $2000-$2500 FF body, they can make a $9000-$10000 645 body instead.

So if you own a Pentax DSLR and want a bigger sensor you used to have to buy a different brand body and then you couldnt use your lenses anymore. But if they release a 645 body then you will be able to upgrade to that and still not use your existing lenses so that is much bet... wait a minute...


I digress


Also amazing how quickly forgotten all of the how-expensive-its going-to-be-due-to-the-sensor-cost arguments are quickly forgotten when the praises of the 645D are being sung. The 645D is *not* a substitute for a FF dSLR from Pentax, and is the wrong product for Pentax to produce in every way that the APS-C Faithful argue that FF is times a factor of ten. When Pentax finally gets around to making a FF dSLR (hopefully before Mr. Hogan's dire predictions become true), I'm sure all of the "arguments against" FF by Pentax shooters will be forgotten.
09-21-2009, 10:43 PM   #11
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 923
I really like the way APS-C trends are going now, continuously pushing the limits of performance. Take a look at the IQ performance of the Canon 7D.
Its a different price point from the K-7, of course, but Pentax isn't going to be far behind....

I'm perfectly happy continuing to buy non-FF compatible DA lenses...
09-21-2009, 10:51 PM   #12
Pentaxian
johnmflores's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Somerville, NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 5,006
My own personal argument against FF? I can't afford it!
09-22-2009, 05:05 AM   #13
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,956
The two prominent reasons given for full frame are better viewfinder and more narrow depth of field. I guess the better viewfinder would be nice, but I struggle a lot more with too narrow depth of field than trying to get my depth of field thinner. I guess I'm just not there from a photographic standpoint.
09-22-2009, 06:52 AM   #14
Veteran Member
Pentaxor's Avatar

Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,513
as the APS-C sensor gets better and better in IQ and performance and other features, the only obvious advantage left for the FF body is the FOV. I didn't consider a much shallower DOF as an advantage as it is more subjective.

I think the APS-C sensor hasn't reached it's limits yet and has more to offer as the technology in hardware and software further inproves.
09-22-2009, 06:58 AM   #15
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Boston, PRofMA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,053
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
The two prominent reasons given for full frame are better viewfinder and more narrow depth of field.
Don't forget low light noise and dynamic range, both made possible because of bigger photosites.
Seems the target users are:
wedding photogs - low light and dynamic range and DOF effects
portrait photogs - DOF effects (200/2 lens....drool :-)
older photogs - better viewfinder
landscape photogs - better dynamic range and better wideangles
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, ff, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A Counter Argument to The End of “Haute Couture? benjikan General Talk 0 07-16-2009 02:40 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:10 PM. | 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