AA filter? FF? who knows? I don't.

Started Sep 16, 2012 | Discussions thread
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
jamesm007
Veteran MemberPosts: 5,450Gear list
Like?
AA filter? FF? who knows? I don't.
Sep 16, 2012

samhain wrote:

Zvonimir Tosic wrote:

viking79 wrote:

I think Full Frame is the way to go for wide angle photography.

Sorry, it's a myth.

APS-C performs better and is more economical for both wide angle & telephoto

Wtf are you smoking? Couldn't be more wrong. FF is much better for wide angle than aps-c, in every way. What it costs to produce a lens is irrelevant to the photo & which is the better tool for the job.
Have you ever even shot wide angle side by side with an aps-c & FF?

And also- you do realize viking79 is probably the most respected & knowledgable member around here, right?

This thread is getting off topic in a hurry...

OK I Know this is poor reading material, but most over look two things with wide angle lens and FF versus APS. So I made my own post as not to go wayyy of track the above thread was in.

APS might not be better for wide angle but its almost superior for ultra wide angle (UWA) lens. If you look at all of the reviews for UWA lens, APS has the advantage in corner sharpness and distortion. Also the UWA lens for APS only cameras are smaller and(!) much less expensive. Nikon has nothing to compare to the Sigma 8-16mm in FF for the money. Nikon does have the 16-35mm f/4, but its price to performance ratio leaves a lot to be desired.

Making a FF UWA equal in performance to the Sigma 8-16mm zoom would be a major project, complex and costly. The lens would be huge as well! Its really the other way around as logic and common sense would dictate. The smaller the sensor the smaller the lens, nothing more to it, unless your talking a zoom of that range and IQ in your cellphone.

Another point is, have you ever seen an UWA lens from Sigma, Canon, Nikon, Sony in a FF or APS size with shake reduction? Nope, can't be done for some reason. For some reason there are not UWA lens for Canon or Nikon or any APS, FF brand with shake reduction, why? I can only assume there is a serious problem that hurts IQ or price or both when trying to put Shake Reduction of any form in an UWA lens.

Now understand, which I see some do not, the benefits of having Shake Reduction in a lens like the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6. If shooting at 10mm with shake reduction in low light you need 1.5X or 1/15 shutter speed for a decently sharp pic. How about shooting at 1/6 and wanting tack sharp pics? Very hard hand holding, but very doable with Shake Reduction. This makes a 10mm f/4 lens the equal of a FF 15mm f/1.4 or faster lens! That's huge.

It took time for 35mm film to become the normal size for film. Digital is 100% different and 35mm should be thrown out the window and we start from scratch to find the right size for digital. It would be very dumb to only look at the very old 35mm standard when working with a digital sensor when deciding on a standard. There are many factor involved.

A pic with my old GX10 (same as Pentax K10D) and Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6. The scene was a indoor car show at Cobo Arena Detroit 2009. I shoot in A mode and park it at f/8 with the Sigma 10-20mm f/4-5.6. I use Pentax then unique auto ISO range selector and set it to iso100-640 (the limit IMO for the K10D for clean shots). Walked around hand holding my shots. The shutter speeds were all over the place but mostly were in the 1/60 range with a few down to 1/5. I did not miss very many shots, less than 1%, mainly user error (not making sure of where the AF was looking at).

APS is the hands down winner in price, size and performance for UWA shooting (and telephoto). I will call this a fact and won't even argue my IMO. Whats yours is yours and I won't be able to change your mind, nor anyone mine. Unless of course you show me a 12mm -16mm FF zoom with the IQ and built in shake reduction under $1000 as the Sigma.

On topic. The D800 with AA filter clearly was not up to the 645D resolution. Now sans AA filter brought it very close (have to pixel peep big time) to the 645D. I used Raw Thereapee and no sharpening... However the 645D pics do have a depth to the color and other subjective qualities that puts it ahead in IQ for real for me. IMO the K5 sans AA filter would make it like a 18mp camera perhaps. But I would want a AA filter. Pixel peep the D800 and D800E and you will see why. Unless a hard core pixel peeper of course who only looks for a spot in the pic thats sharper... yea then you might want a K5IIs and not a K5II.

f/8, 1/6, ISO400, 10mm

 jamesm007's gear list:jamesm007's gear list
Pentax K20D Pentax K-5 Sigma 10-20mm F4-5.6 EX DC HSM Pentax smc DA 55-300mm F4.0-5.8 ED Sigma 17-70mm F2.8-4 DC Macro OS HSM +9 more
Nikon D800 Nikon D800E Pentax 645D Pentax K10D Pentax K-5 Samsung GX-10
If you believe there are incorrect tags, please send us this post using our feedback form.
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Flat view
ForumParentFirstPreviousNextNext unread
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow