COME ON PENTAX WHERES YOUR full-frame

Not for a moment denying people's right to spend their money on whatever they like, nor indeed begrudging those with tons more of it than me

But I'm quite interested to hear what specific features those that are desperate for a 35mm sensor are actually wanting.

I do get the idea that with a bigger sensor it's much easier to achieve shallow depth of field with wide angle lenses, and I'd agree it would be nice to be able to do that.

But the other so-called advantages seem a lot less compelling to me - a brighter viewfinder doesn't seem that much of an advantage now that we use AF most of the time. And the high ISO/low noise advantage seems to have been offset somewhat by the latest generation of sensors.

A little arithmetic as illustration for this last point...

A 35mm sensor has area 36x24 = 864 square mm.
An APS-C one has 24x16= 384 square mm.

That's 2.25 times the area, so all other things being equal(number of pixels, inter-pixel gap etc), that's a bit over twice the area per pixel.

So if they stuck to the K-5's 16 MP, without any other advances in sensor technology, you could expect an extra one stop of high ISO performance, maybe a bit more.

However, surely they'd be going to 24 MP at least - which obviously reduces the advantage.

So although shallow DOFs with fast wide angle lenses would be nice, and I can see that if that's genuinely important enough to outweigh all the obvious disadvantages - weight, bulk, cost - then fair dos.

But otherwise I'm not seeing it - what am I missing here?

---

.
Pentax K-5, K10D, DA17-70, DA18-55 MkI, DA55-300, FA50 F1.4, FA28-200, A50 F1.7, A100 F4 Macro, A400 F5.6, Sigma 10-20 EXDC, A400 F5.6 (AF), 50-500 F4.5-6.3 APO DG OS Samsung flash SEF-54PZF(x2)
.

I use a full frame Pentax almost everyday with interchangeable analogue sensors and am more than happy with the results.

K.

---

Kris Lockyear
It is an illusion that photos are made with the camera… they are made with the eye, heart and head. Henri Cartier-Bresson
Lots of film bodies, a couple of digital ones, too many lenses (mainly older glass) and a Horseman LE 5x4.
My website

Film is arguably digital indeed. At the atomic level, the silver halide crystals either are switched on or not by light. 0 or 1, nothing in between. Sounds digital to me.

The sensor, on the other hand, is a purely analogue device that has to be digitised by the A/D converter.

There's something quite ironic about that I'm sure.

---

Best regards, John

K.

---

Kris Lockyear
It is an illusion that photos are made with the camera… they are made with the eye, heart and head. Henri Cartier-Bresson
Lots of film bodies, a couple of digital ones, too many lenses (mainly older glass) and a Horseman LE 5x4.
My website

Chris,

I think it's more a horses for courses kind of deal. There are advantages in specific areas, if one of those appeals to you or is going to enhance your chances of achieving what you are striving for, then it's worth it. If there is little to no advantage then why would you bother, the K5 is clearly capable of delivering superb images.

The AF is a big deal, the DR is a big deal (at base ISO there is not much difference, if any, but once you start getting into those higher ISOs then we quickly reach 1-2 stops advantage), the much lower noise is a huge difference (esp. at higher ISOs giving people the ability to shoot with faster shutter speeds in very dim light) and for some the DoF is a major pull too. Being able to get the DoF from f4 that would take an f1.8 to f2.8 lens on APS-C (and that means being able to achieve that with cheaper lenses - giving this ability to a lot more shooters).

The 100% VF is important to some, and the resolution is important to others (especially if you want a heavy crop - good for birders). So any one of those, or any combination, could seal the deal depending on what you personally need from your photography.

---

http://frogfish.smugmug.com/ Pentax. Pentax DA*300/4, Cosina 55/1.2, Lens Baby Composer Pro & Edge 80, AFA x1.7, Metz 50 af1.
Nikon. D800. D600. Sigma 500/4.5, Nikon 300/2.8 VRII, Sigma 120-300/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 21/2.8, Zeiss Distagon ZF2 35/2.0, Sigma 50/1.4, Nikkor 85/1.8, Nikon TC20EIII, Nikon TC14EII, Kenko x1.4, Sigma 2.0

The link works OK without the full-stop at the end. However, the image quality comparisons start here -
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/pentaxk5/18
- and they are up-to-date: you can compare full-size images from the K-5 directly with those from other cameras, e.g. 5d MkIII, D4 and D800.

I understand the call for FF, but I am one of those who don't see the need for FF - looking at the dpreview comparison images at typical sizes and viewing distances, I just don't think the slight differences are worth the extra cost to a pensioner! However, it might be wise for Pentax-Ricoh to complete the range with a FF sensor camera - as long as it blows away the other makes on cost and quality, just as the K-5 does (at least for still images)!

Philip

If you look at the Queen of Hearts Card on the dpreview page
at 3200ISO the K-5 is way better than anything else

Unfortunately that's nowhere near as thrilling as spending a
load of money!

---

Pentax K-5 and some other stuff

Algi

As stated money is a big issue. Another expense to consider - you might find yourself having to upgrade your computer too so it can process 20-30+ mp RAW files in a reasonable-frustration-free time?

I think the card might be behind the focus plane of the Nikon. Here's another part of the scene at 25600

The whole test (and the majority of 3D tests that you see
on the internet) is absolute nonsense

The DOF at 1:1 pixel level is mm's so anything other than
a flat board is going to be comparing either two points
that are OOF or possibly 1 point in focus and the other
OOF..... also they pick objects that look nice on the
photo, but don't stretch the cameras or lenses.

This indicates the problems of focusing on just a single 2D
target:
http://www.slrgear.com/articles/focus/focus.htm

You have the same problems with the 3D target... no two
cameras will be focused on the same point and I doubt
if they do 10 test shots of each at every aperture

Non-UK banknotes and stamps are quite good for testing
purposes.

I use the Novoflex focusing rail that Imaging Resource
have on the top of their yoke. I normally take about
5 shots moving about 15mm between each and pick the
sharpest.

---

Pentax K-5 and some other stuff

Algi