Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-09-2012, 07:55 AM   #1
Senior Member
leonsroar's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: California
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 102
K-01 has only 1 LPF

It has been found out that K-01 has only 1 LPF (Low Pass Filter).
Usually LPF consist of 3 layers (2 LPFs and 1 Wave Plate) but they omitted 1 LPF and Wave plate as a result it equips only 1 layer of LPF.

Professional Photographer Tanaka's Blog.
http://thisistanaka.blog66.fc2.com/entry/685/ (source is only in Japanese).

04-09-2012, 08:19 AM   #2
Pentaxian
JinDesu's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New York City
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,624
Does that help in improving sharpness of images from the K-01 sensor in comparison with the k-5?
04-09-2012, 09:42 AM   #3
New Member




Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 1
Yes, it gives sharper results.
04-09-2012, 09:54 AM   #4
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
QuoteOriginally posted by rester Quote
Yes, it gives sharper results.
First significant, for me, reason to consider the K-01.

04-09-2012, 11:29 AM   #5
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,994
Saw something about this on anohter thread here yesterday. Those of us who have a K-5 and a K-01 have been surprised at the improved IQ of the K-01 output vs. the K-5, especially the sharpness.
04-09-2012, 11:39 AM   #6
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
Are those filters useful in the AF process? Why are they present for the K-5 but not for the K-01?
04-09-2012, 12:19 PM   #7
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,994
IIRC the Optical Low Pass filter (or Anti-Aliasing Filter) is present to reduce moire at points of high contrast. The tradeoff is to reduce sharpness, similar to what High ISO noise reduction algorithms do. As to why they remain in the K-5, the design is older than the K-01, which has a new Prime M Imager and other processing inprovements. This change does not affect autofocus.

The K-01 is a better camera for image cration than it gets credit for, given all the other objections .

Wikipedia - Anti-Aliasing Filter
In the case of optical image sampling, as by image sensors in digital cameras, the anti-aliasing filter is also known as an optical lowpass filter or blur filter or AA filter. The mathematics of sampling in two spatial dimensions is similar to the mathematics of time-domain sampling, but the filter implementation technologies are different. The typical implementation in digital cameras is two layers of birefringent material such as lithium niobate, which spreads each optical point into a cluster of four points.[1]
The choice of spot separation for such a filter involves a tradeoff among sharpness, aliasing, and fill factor. In a monochrome or three-CCD or Foveon X3 camera, the fill factor alone, if near 100% effective with microlenses, can provide a significant anti-aliasing effect,[2] while in color filter array (CFA, e.g. Bayer filter) cameras, an additional filter is generally needed to reduce aliasing to an acceptable level.[3][4][5]
04-09-2012, 12:22 PM   #8
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
IIRC the Optical Low Pass filter (or Anti-Aliasing Filter) is present to reduce moire at points of high contrast. The tradeoff is to reduce sharpness, similar to what High ISO noise reduction algorithms do.

Wikipedia - Anti-Aliasing Filter
In the case of optical image sampling, as by image sensors in digital cameras, the anti-aliasing filter is also known as an optical lowpass filter or blur filter or AA filter. The mathematics of sampling in two spatial dimensions is similar to the mathematics of time-domain sampling, but the filter implementation technologies are different. The typical implementation in digital cameras is two layers of birefringent material such as lithium niobate, which spreads each optical point into a cluster of four points.[1]
The choice of spot separation for such a filter involves a tradeoff among sharpness, aliasing, and fill factor. In a monochrome or three-CCD or Foveon X3 camera, the fill factor alone, if near 100% effective with microlenses, can provide a significant anti-aliasing effect,[2] while in color filter array (CFA, e.g. Bayer filter) cameras, an additional filter is generally needed to reduce aliasing to an acceptable level.[3][4][5]
So, because the K-01 relies on contrast to focus it makes it more likely that it will be able to focus without the filter. Hmmm, seems that greater sharpness would be preferable for the K-5 as well. I wonder how it would perform with only the 1 filter?

04-09-2012, 12:28 PM   #9
Pentaxian
JinDesu's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New York City
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,624
QuoteOriginally posted by Docrwm Quote
So, because the K-01 relies on contrast to focus it makes it more likely that it will be able to focus without the filter. Hmmm, seems that greater sharpness would be preferable for the K-5 as well. I wonder how it would perform with only the 1 filter?
Like a 16mp crop of a D800E =p
04-09-2012, 01:26 PM   #10
Veteran Member
Frogfish's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 4,490
QuoteOriginally posted by Docrwm Quote
First significant, for me, reason to consider the K-01.
I thought it worth a gander too ... until seeing all three versions in the flesh today. It may get excellent test results but I would never buy it, my goodness is it fugly and toy-like. On the other hand the Q looks impressive in looks and build.... but just too tiny for my mighty mitts. Please Pentax don't let Newsome near another one of your cameras ... ever !!
04-09-2012, 01:31 PM   #11
Forum Member
AKum8's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Milan
Posts: 89
any comparison between K-5 and K-01 to prove the evidence?
04-09-2012, 01:36 PM   #12
Pentaxian
JinDesu's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New York City
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,624
QuoteOriginally posted by AKum8 Quote
any comparison between K-5 and K-01 to prove the evidence?
Quite a few people have been saying that the K-01 has been producing sharper shots than their k-5. Most were assuming that it was just the Prime-M engine.

You can search around the forum, there are many K-01 owners who are of that opinion.
04-09-2012, 01:55 PM   #13
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,994
QuoteOriginally posted by AKum8 Quote
any comparison between K-5 and K-01 to prove the evidence?
Haven't seen a real head-to-head test yet. So far comparison is all hearsay, but regardless, IMPE the IQ is stunning.
04-09-2012, 02:10 PM   #14
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 19,994
QuoteOriginally posted by Docrwm Quote
So, because the K-01 relies on contrast to focus it makes it more likely that it will be able to focus without the filter. Hmmm, seems that greater sharpness would be preferable for the K-5 as well. I wonder how it would perform with only the 1 filter?
I think I understand, but I probably have it wrong. If so Falk or somebody will fix this.

Not quite; for Live View, yes - maybe, if they use CDAF. PDAF requires separate, dedicated hardware (cross sensors) independent of the image sensor (since it works with the mirror down). Contrast detect works with the mirror up (or mirrorless) and permits Live-View focusing. Therefore unless the K-5 replacement were to use CDAF instead of PDAF the removal of the AA filter(s) from the image sensor should not affect autofocus.

And if they're going to do that, why have a mirror at all.

Phase Detect and Contrast detect are quite siimilar in the method of measurement. The PDAF algorithm, though, can anticipate the direction the focus should move and can even anticipate where focus will be for a moving subject whereas the CDAF algorithm seems to do neither.

Cambridge in Colour resource #1

Cambridge in Colour resource #2
04-09-2012, 02:18 PM   #15
Veteran Member
Docrwm's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Somewhere in the Southern US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,275
QuoteOriginally posted by JinDesu Quote
Quite a few people have been saying that the K-01 has been producing sharper shots than their k-5. Most were assuming that it was just the Prime-M engine.
Until this thread that was my take-away from the posts. The new engine may be a factor but it sounds like it is merely one of at least two significant changes likely to have improved the sharpness.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
k-01, k01, lpf, mirrorless, pentax k-01, plate, wave
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:27 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top