Cross platform equivalency

Started 5 months ago | Discussions thread
Ian Stuart Forsyth
Senior MemberPosts: 1,788Gear list
Like?
Re: Cross platform equivalency
In reply to Keith Z Leonard, 5 months ago

Keith Z Leonard wrote:

If you have read any of the several thousand crop vs 35mm arguments over the years it's all the same stuff applied to MF vs 35mm. I have been pointing out for years that this is the case, that for some reason people have decided that 35mm is the "perfect" balance of price/performance, which really means they can afford 35mm. If money is not an object and there exists something better, well, you see where I'm going with this.

The issue has been that crop and 35mm really have been the sweet spot in terms of selling cameras to people, so they have enjoyed the most focus on tech advancement. With all of the talk about DSLR saturation you might start to see more MF cameras like the Pentax who target working pros who can afford then and are seeking something to differentiate themselves from the mom/dad with a camera crowd.

Anyway, to the crop stuff. 1.27 or so crop factor means that we are comparing a difference pretty close to the difference between 35mm and APS-H. If the sensors are of the same tech generation you will get better images from the 51mp MF sensor, all other things being equal. You will get thinner depth of field from the MF as well, which seems to be a key argument among the anti-crop movement.

One thing I don’t see with pentax is fast glass, the fastest I could find in production is F2.8 so this would be like F2.2 on FF

My question, can a FF 1.4 lens stopped down to F2.2 be as sharp as a 645crop F2.8 shot wide open?

would this not give an edge to FF ?

If the cropped 645z was a true 645 I could see the advantage of the F2.8, but not having anything faster for the cropped 645 really   equals out the playing field in noise and resolution would it not ?

The real question comes down to whether or not you need it. The d800's 36mp is interesting, I personally don't need it for what I want to do. I usually don't need 20mp either, if I'm being honest. All of these arguments about getting the best hardware often makes a pretty insignificant difference to your average photo, it's more about the outlying images that make people go ooo and aaaa.

Summation, the Pentax images SHOULD be better than a Canon 35mm with the same pixel count, due to larger surface area, all things being equal. Does that justify the cost difference that we'll likely see? Hard to say as the Canon camera doesn't exist. Are there other features of the Canon that make it a better fit for your uses?? Again, hard to say.

-- hide signature --

The Camera is only a tool, photography is deciding how to use it.
The hardest part about capturing wildlife is not the photographing portion; it’s getting them to sign a model release

 Ian Stuart Forsyth's gear list:Ian Stuart Forsyth's gear list
Pentax *ist DS Pentax K10D Pentax K20D Pentax K-7 Pentax K-5 +19 more
Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Yes.New
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow