Full Frame teaser - Spring 2016!

Actually some of them do have more pixels. However it's not all about the number of pixels. The size of the pixels is important too. The Sony 12MP Full Frame sensor has really large pixels in comparison to most other sensors and gives it a great high ISP performance and ergo great Dynamic range. I hope to see this sensor in a Pentax camera one day. Pentax

Johnriley wrote:

I do disagree with your explanation.

You say, a fFF sensor has more pixels, but in real life it doesn't. This seems somewhat confusing.

You also say: " If both cameras, FF and crop sensor, had let's say 20 MP then clearly they both have the same pixel count" it seems that you compare an old FF camera with the latest APS-C.

I am sure, Pentax would not have a FF with 23Mpixels like the K3. It makes no sense technically and commercially. We can assume that the pixel count is higher in proportion to the area increase from APS-C to FF.

This the gives you the same pixel size for each format. So if you crop back the FF image to the APS-C
size, You are exactly in the same position as you where when you had only APS-C. The pixel count after cropping is now the same as your original APS-C. You just magnified part of the image to the APS-C size.

So there is no advantage in an APS-C sensor over full frame. However the FF has the advantage, that you can get a wider image and use it if you want to, but you can also crop it without loosing definition.

Of course for the wide angle user, the advantage is quite obvious.

Regards, Horst

Just as MF Roll film (6x6 etc. ) had an unexplainable one stop greater tonal range on the Grey Scale than 35mm. 24MP FF cameras such as the A7 can produce much better results than 24MP APS-C.

For this reason Pentax need to release TWO cameras.

--

I do admit that it's really the dynamic range, and range of tonalities in the lower half of the spectrum, that interests me more about a FF choice .... The sort of extra quality that would show at any sizes, even on screen. To have more latitude in raising and contrast-boosting shadow areas in my shots would really help.

Any kind of ETTR technique is really pushing things with my K7, so the risk adverse approach is tbe other way, and then rescue if needed. It the FF could offer much more then it would be worthwhile. Even the K7 has plenty enough pixels for all the print output I need, including posters at 100x70cm.

Sounds like a K-5 would be ideal for you Nigel

--

Ahhhhrrrgh ... There ya go again, that damn K5 ! It's still happening, everyone keeps making plans for Nigel

I decided long ago that the K7 was a great camera, extraordinary value for the money I paid, and that I'd really keep it and use it to the max. My upgrade when it comes may be a giant leap across the generations! Anyway, I've had plenty of just and helpful image critique here over the years, but almost nothing, ever, about the K7's IQ

Also, I decided that my next camera will need to have DIFFERENT buttons and switches to the K7, just for the variety

So being able to pull back 6 stops on a K-5 doesn't appeal

http://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3910418

--

Correct.

Cannot find link yet. Nikon has published text and photographs that literally prove the same. Using full-frame mp compared to the same exact apsc mp count. Full-frame wins every time, because it's MORE about sensor size than mp count.

Two more cases in point... Take my Canon EOS 5RD R (50mp full-frame latest Canon model) against a Hasseldlbad 5d (50mp full-frame medium format). Obviously much different sensors, made at much different times (The Hasselblad has a much older sensor), there's also the price difference - the Hasselblad sensor cost over ten thousand plus more than the Canon camera.

Yet the Hasselblad wins every time: except in weight, size, ability to capture sports, etc...

Even some mobile phones have ultra small digital sensors that exceed the mp of most Pentax dslrs. Apple uses one of the best "resolution" sensors in their iPhones and even publishes those results to magazines, but... Outside of limited subject content, one probably will not be wishing to use their mobile phone to capture portraits or weddings

If we look at the great photos taken in medium format then that gives an idea of how much detail (and thus cropping options) can be obtained from a larger sensor with more pixels. However I don't think we will resolve this issue until an enterprising member gets their hands on an FF and tries out their lenses.

New FF

http://photorumors.com/2015/10/22/this-is-the-pentax-full-frame-dslr-camera/

http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/16-pentax-news-rumors/306414-some-crappy-shot...#post3408756

I've got a lousy cold and ache all over. In particular my head aches and all this techno-blurb is making it worse. Its left me worrying whether my crop sensor brain will be able to cope with FF when Pentax eventually release it.
David

Like the look of that multi-function dial on the top-down view, 'logical and ergonomic ease of use' is why I use Pentax and that dial looks like a shining example.

Yes, great idea for the function dial. All of that sort of thing is in our menus and control panel now, but I love the direct approach of switches and levers. I see the Photo/Video switcher is on a lever under the dial, just like the lever ok the K7/K5 for metering modes.... Another great idea.

I wonder if it will be launched at the NEC Photography Show in March? Now that would be a coup! Looking at this I might well be tempted. I watched an old interview with a Pentax exec from last year when he described their core customer base as being well served by a good APS-C range, and efforts till then had concentrated on the launch into the medium format with the 645Z to target the professional wedding market. The success of this strategy means that Pentax will be taken seriously in the top end enthusiast market, especially if their aggressive pricing has the same impact as the 645Z did on Hasselblad. This latest preview ticks all the boxes so loved by reviewers - articulated rear screen, wifi, gps.....