Moving to full frame

The OP's photos are up to scratch though, bearing in mind most people use Flickr for 'general shots' rather than a portfolio of best work. I see an interest in low light and shallow dof, so ff may be a good fit! As far as Peter's comment about not needing ff, perhaps he meant because the op's shots were already pretty good.

Some great points Matty ..


Most notable is

after I pointed out it's not a resolving competition ...

After 4 years of being on this forum I know for a fact that John's view will change completely once Pentax do release a Full Frame camera


I'm beginning to feel the same way. Up until recently I've never been that bothered about FF. The IQ of my shooting mate's Canon 5D hasn't really excited me much at all and I've more than happy with the quality from my Pentax APS-C's, especially the wonderful K-5. So much so I bought two of them.

But since the K-3 hasn't continued the previous incremental increases in High ISO performance from successive models, and disappointingly has shown a decrease in ISO performance no doubt due to cramming an extra 8 million pixels in the same amount of real estate, I'm starting to look at other avenues for s progression of low light performance.

The pictures in this forum showing what FF can offer with Pentax lenses with the Sony A7 are exciting. Nothing to do with resolution, they are only 800px wide. The pictures linked to in Rice high's blog Excellent Pentax Film Glass Revived Finally! are exciting.


Those A7 + Pentax Lens pics are a mouth watering preview of what a Pentax FF camera might be able to provide. Had I the spare funds I probably would do what Matty has just done and buy an A7 now and trade it for a Pentax FF as and when. I'd love to attach my A50/1.2 onto am A7 for example.

I'm looking forward to seeing what a Pentax FF can do now.

This FF no noise is all getting a bit tedious, I'm happy with my K3

I've been playing about with FF lenses on my NEX, getting the full frame AOV by using a Lensturbo adapter. (This also improves low light performance, because it focuses the lens into a smaller imaging circle, increasing the brightness at the sensor).

It's very nice getting that shallow dof 'pop' and also the 'original' field of view these lenses were designed for.

It has to be said though - using mirrorless is not as satisfying and natural to me as picking up my K30, crop sensor notwithstanding! As much as I like tinkering with manual glass, I also like AF, and the ability to use modern zooms.

I might feel differently with the A7 as it has a good EVF, but somehow I find it hard to imagine spending that amount of cash on a camera for manily using with manual lenses, and which doesn't have an OVF.

[quote:3496ace15f="MattyH"]May I ask a quick question to those members who have stated that they have checked the OP's Flickr page and then went onto state they don't need a FF camera,

1, Not only does it come over quite condescending but boardering on being quite rude, I to have checked out their photos and there does seem to be a lot of times they shoot in low light situations where FF as discussed comes into its own

2. The OP did not ask for his portfolio to be examined and then to be told what he should or should not do with his work

Matty

With regard to your above two points I disagree. Marketing seeks to sell us products that we think we need which then becomes a desire, but desire on its own won't improve ones photography.

With the OP asking for guidance in relation to FF, I wanted to provide an opinion. Yes I have used FF both Canon and Nikon but the benefits for me personally just would not warrant the cost of going down the FF route. I looked at his flicker site to get an idea of what he is shooting and where FF would provide a significant improvement. I personally think this shows an interest in trying to help the guy, and in no way was meant to be rude, I was trying to get him to think more about what he has and might gain from FF. in relation to commenting on people's work, we all want comments otherwise we would not post our work or links to it. Constructive criticism can be taken the wrong way, but I personally would rather have it than not receive it.

As for the K3, it's not the best camera in the world, it's a compromise which provides me with what I need at a price point that I can afford. I can use the K3 to its full potential as I understand its good and not so good points. When I need FF or MF I won't need to ask which is the better camera as I will research models and link them to my needs. As the Romans said, "only a fool parts with his money"

There is a lot more to photography than which format or lens you choose but at times we seem to forget this and spend money in the hope that our photography will jump to a higher level. When we then realise our mistakes we agree with test charts, talk about ISO and dynamic range and post our findings and thoughts and at the end of the day that's why we have a forum.

It is getting tedious mille19 and those who want to use a FF camera now are quite free to do so. Why they have done it is not really on topic for this forum and it causes conflict where there need be none.

To finish of and getting back on topic

1. Yes
2. Sony A7, for reasons already pointed out, small, light, fantastic image quality, and cheaper then other brands.
3. No, using the A7 to compliment not replace my Pentax gear and bought from WEX.

As for the D600, don't know as never used one properly only for a couple of minutes in store.

Hope this helps.

Bet you wish it was FF though

Bet you wish it was FF though

Yeh, if I had a FF I'd be able to give up my day job and turn Pro

Of course it's on topic. Many of us are developing interest in FF and would like Pentax to release such a model.


As for "tedious" no one's forced to join the FF debate. Any tedium you experience is you're own doing If you're happy with your K-3 then good for you.

I wish it was 16MP, then it might have improved high ISO

Suggest we go back to some of the comments re D600 - lots of discussion on other forums regarding oil on sensor - why do you think Nikon has introduced the D610?

Controversial Smeggy

After over 7 years on this forum I know for a fact you're just a wind-up merchant Smeggy (and tedious)

I bet Rowmac wish he never asked now