---- Tom C <[email protected]> wrote: > Paul, > > Respectfully, if Pentax came out with a 21MP or 24MP digital body in > FF similar to a Canon EOS 5D MKII or Nikon D3x in basic > specifications, are you saying you would not find or suspect it to be > a superior product to their current 14.6MP flagship? And that given > the option to go with what would likely be viewed as their top of the > line in the size factor, that you would choose a lesser model? > > Tom C.
On past evidence, professional photographers will buy and use precisely what their customers tell them to. > > > On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 8:02 PM, paul stenquist <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I have not intention of going FF. With my DA* lenses, the K7 delivers all > > the quality I need. I've been selling some 24 x 30 prints, and the detail > > and sharpness are excellent. I hope Pentax continues to play a lead role in > > APS format. Their lens development strategy indicates that this exactly > > what is planned. > > Paul > > On Feb 22, 2010, at 8:37 PM, Tom C wrote: > > > >> I understand exactly what Boris is saying. If a 35mm sensor is 1.5x > >> that of an APS-C sensor, then given the same pixel density, one can > >> expect a significant increase in resolution using a FF 35mm sensor > >> over an APS-C sensor. Many people already have the 35mm lenses. > >> > >> I don't buy the digital lens superiority over those that were made for > >> 35mm film systems. Maybe there are some benefits here and there, at > >> certain f-stops but I've been getting great results with FF lenses on > >> digital bodies. Yes I know it's with the sweet spot of the lens, and > >> yes I know about chromatic aberration and vignetting with FF, and of > >> course the noise issue with increased pixel count overall. As far as > >> I'm concerned those all are excuses made when when one doesn't have a > >> full FF body to offer to go along with a complement of FF lenses. > >> > >> There's a good reason why other mfrs have a FF body in their lineup. > >> Specifically, Nikon, Canon and Sony do not have a sensor to offer that > >> is > 35mm FF format. So the 35mm FF format allows their user base to > >> realize an increase in resolution over APS-C that is significant and > >> detectable in tests, using their existing lenses and presumed > >> purchases of new FF lenses. Those mfrs have not been unsuccessful with > >> these products. > >> > >> I wager if Pentax came out with a FF 35mm format body, virtually every > >> single person claiming they were perfectly satisfied with APS-C and > >> could afford it, would jump to FF, in much the same manner that many > >> did not need anything greater than a 6MP DSLR before there was > >> anything better offered by Pentax. > >> > >> Tom C. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 6:05 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >>> Nothing wrong with a bigger sensor and more pixels. > >>> > >>> That said, I have no urge to change from what I'm using now. At all. > >>> It's working fine for my photography. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
