Thanks, Darren! I really missed these edifying discussions on FF vs APS-C ;-)
Cheers, --M. Darren Addy <[email protected]> wrote: >Welcome back, Miserere! > > >On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 4:02 PM, Miserere <[email protected]> wrote: >> I'm glad to see that after a long absence you guys are still debating >Pentax FF. It's like I never left! >> >> Sign me up for not buying the definitely for sure (really this time >it is) up-coming FF. I'll continue to slum it with my APS-C equipment >:-) >> >> Cheers, >> >> --M. >> >> >> Paul Stenquist <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>On Nov 19, 2013, at 10:10 AM, Darren Addy <[email protected]> >>>wrote: >>> >>>> Saw this thread on dpreview: >>>http://www.dpreview.com/forums/post/52547225 >>>> >>>> The guy has 3 year's experience with the K-5. His verdict is "There >>>is >>>> more visible noise at high ISO starting ISO 640. K-5 shots looked >>>> cleaner. But, man, cropping ability and details of K-3 on top of >>>> faster and more reliable AF, including now working well enough >AF.C, >>>> are simply amazing. Also metering is much more accurate, handling >>>> highlights very well." >>>> >>>> Some good images of Birds In Flight (BIF) as examples. >>>> >>>> I believe that this illustrates why Pentax could very easily come >out >>>> with a Full Frame DSLR that has the SAME MP as the K-3 and it would >>>> still be a winner: Larger sensor sites would mean less noise (and >>>> probably better high ISO performance) and so the FF image quality >>>> would top the K-3 (for presumably more money). However, if Pentax >>>> takes what they learned from making the K-3 (in terms of AF >>>> performance, exposure system, high frame rate, and switchable AA) >and >>>> it would be a serious Home Run. >>>> >>>> This is the main reason that I think that K-5 and K-5ii owners >could >>>> pretty easily wait for the FF in 2014, rather than hopping on the >K-3 >>>> now. Think of it as putting $1299 towards your eventual full frame >>>> body. >>>> >>> >>>But there's no guarantee that there will be a full frame body. In >fact, >>>based on the lens roadmap, it seems unlikely. That's the fly in the >>>ointment. >>> >>>Paul >>> >>> >>>> -- >>>> I don't have a problem with idiots. >>>> I have a problem with the fact that they have an internet >connection. >>>> >>>> -- >>>> 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. >> >> >> -- >> 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. -- 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.
