Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-28-2014, 08:52 PM - 1 Like   #16
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,783
QuoteOriginally posted by Kartynas Quote
I have seen that there are bridge cameras with a constant f2.8, but reviews say f2.8 on a bridge is not like a SLR lens at f2.8. I really like bokeh. Can anyone enlighten me?
This video can enlighten you:

Equivalence example, RX10 vs. APS-C; you multiply the crop factor by the actual focal and aperture of the lens. (If you don't know the crop factor, divide the equivalent focal length by the actual focal length. For the RX10: 24mm/8.8mm = 2.7 crop factor. Then you multiply the aperture by the crop factor) :
  1. A Sony RX10 lens is 8.8-73.3mm, f/2.8, which is 24-200mm f/7.6 full-frame equivalent.
  2. A Pentax DSLR with 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 works out to 27mm-203mm f/5.3-8.4 full-frame equivalent
HTH

05-29-2014, 04:59 AM   #17
Banned




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Millstone,NJ
Posts: 6,491
QuoteOriginally posted by audiobomber Quote
This video can enlighten you: Crop Factor with ISO & Aperture: How Sony, Olympus, Panasonic, Canon, Nikon & Fuji Cheat You - YouTube

Equivalence example, RX10 vs. APS-C; you multiply the crop factor by the actual focal and aperture of the lens. (If you don't know the crop factor, divide the equivalent focal length by the actual focal length. For the RX10: 24mm/8.8mm = 2.7 crop factor. Then you multiply the aperture by the crop factor) :
  1. A Sony RX10 lens is 8.8-73.3mm, f/2.8, which is 24-200mm f/7.6 full-frame equivalent.
  2. A Pentax DSLR with 18-135mm f/3.5-5.6 works out to 27mm-203mm f/5.3-8.4 full-frame equivalent
HTH
My full frame Sony VG900 with 24-200mm F3.5-5.6 Tokina works out to 24-200mm F3.5-5.6 full-frame eqivalent.
05-29-2014, 07:12 AM   #18
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,783
QuoteOriginally posted by jogiba Quote
My full frame Sony VG900 with 24-200mm F3.5-5.6 Tokina works out to 24-200mm F3.5-5.6 full-frame eqivalent.
I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. The OP is trying to understand bridge cam specs, which are deliberately fashioned by marketers to confuse people. That is mainly what the Tony Northrup video is about.
05-29-2014, 08:04 AM   #19
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Missoula, MT
Photos: Albums
Posts: 130
I have an Panasonic FZ-20, it's about 10 years old now, but it has a 12x constant f/2.8. It's capable of decent pictures, better stepped down a bit, and the higher ISO is terrible in comparison to newer sensors, but there are tradeoffs for convenience. I can't remember how the bokeh was, as I usually didn't shoot wide open with it, and it does have OIS, which is nice, especially at the long end.

Newer cameras with better sensors are no doubt better by now though.

05-29-2014, 08:25 AM   #20
Banned




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Millstone,NJ
Posts: 6,491
QuoteOriginally posted by audiobomber Quote
I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. The OP is trying to understand bridge cam specs, which are deliberately fashioned by marketers to confuse people. That is mainly what the Tony Northrup video is about.
Showing that a full frame with slow F3.5-5.6 24-200mm zoom is much faster than cameras with much faster 24-200mm FF eqiv. f2.8 zooms and smaller (1") sensor.
05-29-2014, 09:43 AM   #21
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 385
QuoteOriginally posted by Kartynas Quote
I have been a DSLR user since the Pentax *istD. Right now, I have a Pentax K5-iis & lenses that I adore. The problem is I don't want to bring it with me on a foreign trip. A few years ago I got a Panasonic bridge camera that was pretty decent for the images I was going to capture, but it focused very slowly. I waited too long to send it back and gave it away (anonymously, their family's camera was stolen, the dad had just been diagnosed with cancer). I got a Sony bridge camera and liked it better. Now I have seen that there are bridge cameras with a constant f2.8, but reviews say f2.8 on a bridge is not like a SLR lens at f2.8. I really like bokeh. Can anyone enlighten me?

Thanks,
Denise
I used to have a Panasonic Fz-200 which has constant F2.8. The depth of field even at 2.8 is much larger for this type of camera compared to a DSLR so you won't see much bokeh. The pictures are also noisier compared to a DSLR. But for travel it's a great camera. Reasonably small and great picture quality in good light.
05-29-2014, 02:17 PM   #22
Veteran Member
Clicker's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,241
I mainly used a Panasonic Lumix LX7...with a 24-90 2-2.8 (35mm equivalent)...it's great for travelling only accessory i have to attach is an EVF in extremely bright sunlight otherwise P&S is great value for travel in my case. It doesn't cost much now as the announcement of an LX8 is coming.

The Caribbean isn't like a war zone and people in general are quite friendly so using your Pentax gear shouldn't be a problem besides your insurance should cover it if needed.
I was going to suggest the new Sony RX100 III but i saw your comment as to cost of the RX 10.
05-30-2014, 08:30 AM   #23
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
pbancr's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Essex, Connecticut
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,130
You might also consider the olympus Stylus 1. Constant 2.8 aperture with 10.7x zoom in an easy to carry travel camera.

06-01-2014, 11:59 PM   #24
Veteran Member




Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 438



This was taken with my fujifilm sl1000 don't know about f2.8 but is a great holiday camera with reach. I will be taking mine with my pentax when I go overseas probably would be happy to just take it alone might also mention my dad has the Canon sx50 also an awesome bridging camera. Think it would give you what you require but quality will be nothing like your DSLR. They are great if you don't know better but can't compare chalk and cheese.

http://flic.kr/p/nRPz9c
06-08-2014, 12:13 PM   #25
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Durban, South Africa
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,051
IMHO if you want the same quality (excluding extreme high ISO) as your K5 then the Sony RX100 or RX10 is the only camera to go for.

When I travel I still take my DSLR with two lenses e.g. 35 1.8 - for when I want to play with shallow DOF shots and my 70-300 VR when I want extra reach.

The Sony RX100 will handle 90% of your travel shots with amazing IQ to such an extent that your K5 will be relegated only to specialist jobs.

Whether you can stomach the price is a choice you have to make.
06-08-2014, 01:39 PM   #26
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 573
QuoteOriginally posted by audiobomber Quote
I'm not sure what point you are trying to make. The OP is trying to understand bridge cam specs, which are deliberately fashioned by marketers to confuse people. That is mainly what the Tony Northrup video is about.
He is certainly technically correct as it relates to DOF, but 2.8 lets in light at the same rate whether it's on a bridge cam or a large format view cam. So your exposure triangle follows the what the marketers are touting, your DOF does not. ISO 100, F2.8, 1/500 sec all give the same exposure irregardless of the format.

And then there is the fact that some people, as crazy as it sounds, don't like to take 10+ kg of photo gear on a trip with them as it rather ruins the fun.

This person now primarily shoots with a Leica V-Lux 4 aka Panasonic FZ200
Barbara & Stu's Excellent Vacations

This guy doesn't like to carry much either
https://www.flickr.com/photos/peteshep/with/9490548930

It's a convenience vs quality trade off. One has to determine where they are on the continuum. A Panasonic FZ200, Sony RX100, Canon SL1 with 18-135, and a Nikon D800 with the trio of 2.8 zooms. All are chosen by travel photographers and are all competent cameras for travel. Personally, you could not pay me to haul a D800 and the trio on a trip, but then I know some of you would refuse to go if you couldn't take it. I could go with a DF and 50mm. It's individual preference.

---------- Post added 06-08-14 at 15:21 ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by jogiba Quote
Showing that a full frame with slow F3.5-5.6 24-200mm zoom is much faster than cameras with much faster 24-200mm FF eqiv. f2.8 zooms and smaller (1") sensor.
Much faster in what way? The smaller censored camera shot at 2.8 will be able to maintain a faster shutter speed at any ISO than the full frame will. A 2.8 is a 2.8 is a 2.8, if by speed we mean rate of light falling on the sensor. Whether that sensor is the size your thumb or your hand does not matter, lens size will account for that. One just has a bigger bucket to fill to make a particular exposure.

Northrup ought to be complaining that the full frame marketers aren't telling us the whole story after all a 24 - 200 2.8 on full frame would be 180 - 1504 f/21.1 on 8x10

Last edited by RyanW; 06-08-2014 at 02:29 PM.
06-08-2014, 05:24 PM   #27
Loyal Site Supporter
Otis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis FanOtis Fan
Loyal Site Supporter
Rupert's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,126
I'm looking for the Fuji X30 to be announced soon, maybe this month. It rumors to have a fast 2.0 like the X20/X10 but with a larger sensor like the SonyRX100. If so, it should be a killer camera.....if it keeps the same X20 superb metal body and excellent OVF. Nothing wrong with the X20,but a larger sensor would sure up the performance in low light and give better resolution.

Regards!
06-08-2014, 08:37 PM   #28
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,783
QuoteOriginally posted by RyanW Quote
He is certainly technically correct as it relates to DOF, but 2.8 lets in light at the same rate whether it's on a bridge cam or a large format view cam. So your exposure triangle follows the what the marketers are touting, your DOF does not. ISO 100, F2.8, 1/500 sec all give the same exposure irregardless of the format.
If you use the same ISO, aperture and shutter speed, the photo shot with a small sensor will not be the same as one shot with a larger sensor. Exposure will be the same, but noise levels and depth of field will be different.

Forget about ISO, it is an artificial construct, readily manipulated manufacturers. When you take a photo, you want to maintain sufficient shutter speed to avoid hand shake and subject motion. You want to control DOF (whether deep or shallow), and you want low noise. You can compare the suitability of various sensor size cameras by applying the crop factor. Take two photos while standing in the same location, using the following parameters:
  1. Full Frame sensor, 1/100s shutter speed, 100mm lens, f5.6 aperture, ISO 3200
  2. M4/3 sensor (2x crop), 1/100s, 50mm lens, f2.8 aperture, ISO 800
The above two images will have the same DOF, angle of view, perspective and signal to noise ratio. The cameras will make equivalent photos, as long as the lens performance is up to it, and the sensors are of similar technology (e.g. current Sony sensors).
06-08-2014, 09:58 PM   #29
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 573
Audiobomber, neither of us are wrong. Let's assume we're talking film and ISO is honest. (some digital cameras are spot on on ISO and some are not - lets use film to rule that out) For the sake of argument ISO = ISO.

The example about wanting to maintain shutter speed and dof - well sometimes. I would say for many maintaining shutter speed is more important than maintaining dof because unless you are shooting with shallow dof for artistic purpose and I'll agree there are times you will do that. Otherwise, when dof is not maintained, it gets greater not shallower and that's better for landscape, group photos and a whole bunch of other photography.

The equivalence argument seems to think that I always want the same DOF, I personally don't. I'll trade it for a faster shutter speed most of the time.

I have a hard drive full of full frame images. Almost none are below f5.6. 4/3 would be nicer for me in a lot of ways, but the reason I don't actually trade it is tonality. Bigger sensors are less harsh when it comes to tonality than smaller ones. For me it's not about dynamic range, noise cleanliness in the stratospheric iso levels, none of that. I find m4/3 sensors output harsh looking. If it was like full frame I would own m4/3 in a heartbeat because I want the DOF at faster shutter speeds.

There are others with a hard drive full of full frame images all below aperture f2.8. They are the ones that like looking at the equation your way. Both sides are correct, but it just seems rare to hear the side I've presented.
06-08-2014, 10:21 PM   #30
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
Didn't read the posts. I'm sure some people have already covered it, and some others have got it wrong!

Dr. Camera: F/it.doesnt.matter

At the same DOF the camera will have (roughly) the same noise as other sized sensors.

If you're willing to accept (or desire) shallower DOF, a larger sensor size will have less noise.

This chart below was created for APS-C vs FF but the same would hold true for other formats. Just multiply F/number by crop factor, focal length by crop factor, and ISO by crop factor^2, and the image/noise/dof will all be the same. Note that, at the same DOF, the noise is the same regardless of format. The problem in practice is that smaller format lenses usually don't have very large apertures.

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!
beach, blocks, bridge, bridge camera, cam, camera, cameras, d800, exposure, f2.8, frame, fz200, instagram, k5-iis, kit, lenses, night, pentax, people, plenty, quality, sensor, sigma, sling, sony, thanks, trio
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Anyone using a Camera Backpack with a Tamron Adaptall 300mm F2.8 68wSteve Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 13 12-02-2012 05:15 PM
DA-Ltds: A few questions to answer please... rashdown_online Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 43 05-08-2012 06:41 PM
Does anyone have experience with a MF Sigma 16mm F2.8 Fisheye? Bactman Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 02-09-2009 10:53 PM
anyone with or willing to create a JPG account. séamuis Photographic Technique 4 07-26-2008 05:29 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:05 AM. | 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