|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
07-10-2015, 06:53 AM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
07-09-2015, 08:17 PM
|
| |
Panorama/ stitching software (MS ICE, Hugin, LR6, Autopano) kinda removes the field of view advantage of FF (for non-moving subjects). In many situations (eg architectural interiors), even if you have a rectilinear 14mm FF ultra-wide at hand, it's not going to be enough.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
09-15-2013, 02:54 PM
|
| |
Even better, if the DR is there, you can under-expose quite safely and effectively well under ISO 6400, and bring up the shadows or midtones after the fact (if necessary) with only a modest impact on visible noise.
Obviously the D700 is going to be better than the K-5 maybe in a dim church, but it won't be a slam dunk, especially if you stick a fast 1.4 or 1.8 prime on the K-5 and shoot it well.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
09-15-2013, 09:19 AM
|
| |
Same here. Shot well (especially no motion blur or missed focus) and processed in something like Lightroom (which works very well with K-5 RAW's), I could shoot all night at ISO 6400, with output that might typically look like this:
Guitar duo
Tamron 28-75, 1/100 ƒ/3.2 ISO 6400 55 mm
Guitar and drums
FA 50, 1/100 ƒ/1.6 ISO 6400 50 mm
6400 ISO on the K-5 is not perfect, but it can be perfectly usable.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
09-14-2013, 03:01 PM
|
| |
I was looking at a local retailer's web site yesterday (JBHiFi) who are having a '15% off digital cameras' sale.
While the cheapest I can buy a K-5IIs locally is about $1150 (after CRK's current '10% off' sale), JBHifi had a Canon 6D for $1780 and a Nikon D600 for $1859. Not grey imports either...
Whatever Pentax are planning to do about FF, they better move soon. The price gap between FF and APS-C is narrowing, and it gets harder to see the value proposition in even a fine camera like the K-5 IIs if I can get a great new FF for only about $600 more.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
08-07-2013, 09:11 AM
|
| |
Hey Nesster, Pentax could do a 24MP FF with little effort, I think. Keep your Pentax glass.
I just wonder about what Pentax have planned to make their FF special, in some way, beyond the similarly specced D600 and 6D. What could make it distinctive (aside from the K-mount) over those two competitors...
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
08-05-2013, 07:36 AM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
08-05-2013, 07:08 AM
|
| |
As someone who has recently been spending probably more than 50% of his shooting time at ISO 5000 and ISO 6400 with those cameras, they can indeed deliver decent IQ at those ISO's (supported by good RAW processors). But when I see output from 1Dx's and D600's shot at the same ISO, and even at equivalent apertures and focal lengths, there is often a not-so-minute visible difference.
Only assuming the sensors are the same tech generation - eg modern Sony sensors, not banding, high chroma Canon sensors, and sensors with the same SNR response curves too. Some sensors SNR falls off a cliff at ISO 800, others have their SNR only decay slowly past ISO 1600.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
08-05-2013, 05:18 AM
|
| |
These equivalency discussions sometimes seem rather strange to me. It strikes me as perfectly plausible that a new D600 will deliver cleaner output and better IQ at low-light than a new K-5II, simply based on how electrically sensitive/efficient the bigger (and sometimes newer) sensors may be. Ditto for how a 12MP D700 does better at low-light than a 12MP K-x, or indeed how a CMOS K-5 will do better at low-light than a CCD K200D.
It will be hard to make equivalent a D700 and K-x if the underlying sensor tech doesn't support an equivalency argument.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
08-04-2013, 06:09 PM
|
| |
There's still a marginal technical element of truth to the points made at (1) and (6). Probably overcome anyway in real-life by modern sensor tech. And also progress in image processing software.
Having said all that, shooting very low-light I'd still be pretty confident that a D600 or 6D at 3200 or 6400 ISO would provide cleaner output than a K-5II. Just enough to make a visible difference, perhaps.
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
08-04-2013, 03:56 PM
|
| |
That's a decent list. I'm personally only really interested in advantages (1), (2) and (6).
A major deficiency of this sort of list is, of course, that the priorities are not related to the specific requirements of some shooting roles (sports vs landscape vs street vs weddings vs studio fashion vs macro vs photo journalism etc).
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
05-29-2013, 06:42 PM
|
| |
Sure is. A while ago a [casually shot from the car] K-5 pano I made with that lens was turned into a ~4 metre wide wall poster at a nursing home. It did the job to the satisfaction of the interior designer and the printer.
Mt Lindesay from Summerland Way panorama |
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
05-29-2013, 06:30 PM
|
| |
At f2.8 or f1.8? Where the lens is usually the softest?
This D800E guy I've been admiring recently does a lot of great panoramic landscapes but even though he uses a f2 50mm Zeiss a lot, (with filters) I would be surprised if he ever went down below f4 because he certainly wants DOF and sharpness more than anything else:
Flickr: Craig Holloway's Photostream |
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
05-29-2013, 05:01 PM
|
| |
What sort of shooting do you do?
|
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
05-28-2013, 09:15 PM
|
| |
| |
|
Forum: Pentax Full Frame
05-26-2013, 02:21 PM
|
| |
I agree. APS-C vs FF isn't an either/or equation, even though it is often framed that way in discussions. It would indeed be useful to have access to both formats, while using the same lens mount. If I need low-light and to shoot wide, pull out the Pentax FF body. If I need telephoto and/or simply a lighter kit, pull out the APS-C body. Put both around your neck when covering an important event to cover all your bases, and as a bonus have a backup body.
|
