PMA Australia speaks of a 21MP Pentax!

**Digitalis** · 06-24-2010, 06:34 PM

Originally posted by falconeye

Does it look anything like this: ?

yes, very much so!

Class A · 06-24-2010, 07:30 PM

Originally posted by falconeye

Space filling curves won't do it, I guess. You either print finite versions with a peak in frequency space or you get a uniform surface.

That's why I proposed to overlay several versions of varying iteration depths with different colours. Will only provide discrete frequency responses but more than one.

However, your approach sounds much more advanced and thought out.

I hope you find the time to bring it to its conclusion.

Inspector 17 · 06-25-2010, 07:10 PM

Originally posted by Eigengrau

Actually, I see a pretty significant number of impressive portraits there - C

Worth noting is that there are ~15,000 portrait results with the K10, and ~3,000 with the K7. And, actually, if you look here: Flickr: Camera Finder: Pentax you'll see that there are about 6 million K10 shots, and about 600,000 K7 shots.

Here's what I'm getting at.

There are only 10% as many K7 shots out there as K10 shots, likely due to camera age, but perhaps some other factors.

There are 20% as many K7 portraits as K10 portraits. That means that people are taking disproportionately more portraits with their K7s compared to what they have taken over the history of the K10.

Now, I'm not saying that this proves anything conclusively, but if we try to control for a few of the variables a different picture emerges.

That said, at DxoMark it does look like the K10 performs well against the newer cameras in every category except high ISO.

PS. Remember, there are lies, damn lies, and statistics. This is pretty subjective, so I don't know if it would every be possible to prove anything.

Sure there are some numerical disparities but for the k10D you can go at leat 40 to 50 pages deep and still get portraits better than the first two pages of K7 - there is something there besides just numbers 15000 to 3000 doesnt explain a 60 or 70 to one ratio.

You expressed that you didnt understand what I meant by top quality portraiture - I believe this may hold a key to understanding...

I have collected galleries of portraiture in flickr of portraits I consider top quality. Here are several:

Portraits 2 - a gallery on Flickr

portraits - a gallery on Flickr

Portraits 5 - a gallery on Flickr

Subjective maybe - but I bet that most will agree that these are really really good portraiture.

And before you ask, I have some good work from the past and like another poster indicated in this thread, I dont post photos of family and friends so

and I have only begun posting photos to flickr - I have another 30 years of work from which I will be selecting to post

And again, all comment with all due respect

music_lover · 06-27-2010, 06:19 PM

Originally posted by ogl

APS-C camera from Pentax with 21 MP will be the BIG FAILURE.
21 MP at APS-C could be good if it will be SuperCCD sensor. 10.5+10.5 MP. Like Fuji.

The real resolution will be approx. ~ like 15-16 MP Bayer.

A FAILURE.... with Pentax?

I have never seen Pentax fail at anything or any Camera they have ever put out

Last edited by music_lover; 07-03-2010 at 02:15 PM. Reason: misted word

music_lover · 06-27-2010, 06:38 PM

Originally posted by thibs

Once and for all, there'll be never an APS-H camera.
Lenses are not compatible (yep some are not even for APS-H), it would introduce yet another cropped format, would mean new lense because standard/wides are not anymore and there's no sensor for it.

No, no and no. FF is A LOT more likely (and not likely that much so APS-H is fantasy).

never say never, the inevitable always happens

Eigengrau · 06-27-2010, 09:52 PM

Originally posted by Inspector 17

Sure there are some numerical disparities but for the k10D you can go at leat 40 to 50 pages deep and still get portraits better than the first two pages of K7 - there is something there besides just numbers 15000 to 3000 doesnt explain a 60 or 70 to one ratio.

Subjective maybe - but I bet that most will agree that these are really really good portraiture.

I don't think the ratio is nearly that severe. There are a lot of nice pictures in your selection, but there are one or two that I wouldn't call "top quality" (mostly because of heavy-handed PP).

I still think that it is bound to be an uneven comparison since we're looking at cameras that have dramatically different ages. I wouldn't be surprised if pros, for instance, tend not to use the latest and greatest gear. Since the cost of gear comes right out of profit for a professional (vs coming out of discretionary income for an enthusiast) they have older gear oftentimes, and pick it up after costs have come down. All of these things mean that, once again, we can't be sure that we're getting a clear picture here.

I don't really have anything to prove with this (The K7 and K20 both work well enough for the portraiture I'm doing and it doesn't bother me if other people feel the same) but I just have to object to drawing significant conclusions from pretty anecdotal evidence.

Inspector 17 · 06-27-2010, 10:19 PM

Originally posted by Eigengrau

I don't think the ratio is nearly that severe. There are a lot of nice pictures in your selection, but there are one or two that I wouldn't call "top quality" (mostly because of heavy-handed PP).

I still think that it is bound to be an uneven comparison since we're looking at cameras that have dramatically different ages. I wouldn't be surprised if pros, for instance, tend not to use the latest and greatest gear. Since the cost of gear comes right out of profit for a professional (vs coming out of discretionary income for an enthusiast) they have older gear oftentimes, and pick it up after costs have come down. All of these things mean that, once again, we can't be sure that we're getting a clear picture here.

I don't really have anything to prove with this (The K7 and K20 both work well enough for the portraiture I'm doing and it doesn't bother me if other people feel the same) but I just have to object to drawing significant conclusions from pretty anecdotal evidence.

It is far from "petty anecdotal evidence" and I have observed it since the very first K7 samples. I have worked as a photo analyst and have worked with some renowned photographers. My observation would not be classified as "petty" either. Your inner fanboy seem to be responding.

You should continue doing your best with the camera. For my part I knew from its earliest days it fell short - and it wont be a tool I will be choosing. There hopefully will be a top quality Pentax body on the scene before too long to replace this camera. Of course you have nothing to prove - nor do I. Good luck.

gazonk · 06-27-2010, 11:49 PM

Originally posted by Inspector 17

Portraits 2 - a gallery on Flickr

hmm... interesting, I had a look at that gallery, and to my taste, several of the images had blown/flat skin tones, and those were without exception the ones shot with a D700! Those which had skin tones that I liked were shot with unknown, K20D, D300 or A700. I'm pretty sure it says more about PP than the actual cameras, but still it surprised me.

Inspector 17 · 06-28-2010, 04:19 AM

Originally posted by gazonk

hmm... interesting, I had a look at that gallery, and to my taste, several of the images had blown/flat skin tones, and those were without exception the ones shot with a D700! Those which had skin tones that I liked were shot with unknown, K20D, D300 or A700. I'm pretty sure it says more about PP than the actual cameras, but still it surprised me.

Yes it is interesting, and it probably does show more about PP than body but still there are unmistakable tendencies. Some of these gallery shots I chose because of a certain lens used, or sometimes just the subject

Your favorites K20D, D300, and A700 are also my favorites. The A700 in particular catches my eye - and it just went out of production. The A850/A900 are nice but are hamstrung with a lack of performance at higher ISO. Earlier Canon 30D, 40D and most pre-D300 Nikons have a plastic/flat feel to me regarding skin tones - it is another reason I have stayed with Pentax (since moving from a D30 to my K10D). Great PP can cure many ills...

Like I said, the next series of Pentax bodies will determine a lot for me - I hope they are home runs - and I hope one of the home runs has an amazing FF viewfinder.

and I hope they will hurry and get here!

Eigengrau · 06-28-2010, 08:08 AM

Originally posted by Inspector 17

It is far from "petty anecdotal evidence" and I have observed it since the very first K7 samples. I have worked as a photo analyst and have worked with some renowned photographers. My observation would not be classified as "petty" either. Your inner fanboy seem to be responding.

I never called your evidence or your opinion 'petty'. I actually wrote "pretty anecdotal", which I think is fair. This isn't a rigorous scientific study here, this is a subjective observation.

I'm not really trying to defend the K7 as much as I am the pursuit of objectivity. Grand claims require grand evidence, and a distribution of Flickr pictures isn't convincing to me.

Inspector 17 · 06-28-2010, 08:26 AM

Originally posted by Eigengrau

I never called your evidence or your opinion 'petty'. I actually wrote "pretty anecdotal", which I think is fair. This isn't a rigorous scientific study here, this is a subjective observation.

I'm not really trying to defend the K7 as much as I am the pursuit of objectivity. Grand claims require grand evidence, and a distribution of Flickr pictures isn't convincing to me.

I told you I needed a bigger brighter better viewfinder! My bad - I misread your comment and left out the 'r'

Nonetheless, anecdotal evidence implies someone is giving a story or description of something. This is not anecdotal at all and with thousands of samples there is definitely a numerical confirmation of my "grand claim".. and the ratio is approximately 60 or 70 to one. There is simply a dearth of great portraiture from the K7.

Tha is not to say that an artist could not produce some. It would take a lot of effort to do so however IMO

I wanted a K7 when it first arrived. I hoped it would be the camera I was searching for. It simply wasn't - and I knew it early on from my observations. Still isn't based on IQ despite an amazing leap in overall feature set. That leap is encouraging - now lets see the sensor leap ahead.

People have different evaluations and always will. One mans ceiling is another mans floor...

Heres hoping I am using a magnificent Pentax FF within 6 to 9 months - my Limiteds are crying for it. Good luck with your K7

unixrevolution · 06-28-2010, 08:27 AM

Originally posted by ogl

21 MP at APS-C - is the death of photography. 21 MP at FF is good.

I thought the death of photography was picture phones.

No, wait. The death of photography was color film. Sorry, I keep forgetting.

ogl · 06-28-2010, 08:53 AM

Originally posted by unixrevolution

I thought the death of photography was picture phones.

No, wait. The death of photography was color film. Sorry, I keep forgetting.

Maybe...Maybe....

**Pål Jensen** · 07-04-2010, 09:18 AM

Originally posted by SimonSmyth

this all lies!

There is no 21mp APS-C sensor and there wont be for some time.

Canon have a prototype but the noise issues make it unusable above ISO400 without lots of destructive NR, still another 10months away from even been workable.

What a pity! It would have been very nice to have one....

Class A · 07-05-2010, 06:24 AM

Originally posted by SimonSmyth

There is no 21mp APS-C sensor and there wont be for some time.

So you've got access to all secret developments going on all over the world?

I'm not saying that a 21MP sensor is likely to appear anytime soon, but just wondering how you can make such a sweeping statement with authority.

Originally posted by SimonSmyth

Canon have a prototype but the noise issues make it unusable above ISO400 without lots of destructive NR,...

So where is the difference to the existing Canon sensors?

06-27-2010, 06:38 PM	#260
music_lover Guest	Originally posted by thibs Once and for all, there'll be never an APS-H camera. Lenses are not compatible (yep some are not even for APS-H), it would introduce yet another cropped format, would mean new lense because standard/wides are not anymore and there's no sensor for it. No, no and no. FF is A LOT more likely (and not likely that much so APS-H is fantasy). never say never, the inevitable always happens Last edited by music_lover; 07-03-2010 at 02:14 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Pentax at PMA 2010	techmulla	Pentax News and Rumors	8	04-21-2010 07:02 PM
Pentax Japan finally speaks about the new camera!!!!	vitalsax	Pentax News and Rumors	8	05-08-2009 03:03 PM
Pentax PMA	vievetrick	Pentax News and Rumors	11	03-01-2009 10:11 PM
Hiroshi Onada, GM of imaging systems for Pentax Europe speaks...	digitalphil	Pentax News and Rumors	21	02-02-2008 02:18 PM
No New Pentax DSLR at PMA?	RiceHigh	Pentax DSLR Discussion	52	02-26-2007 05:05 AM

06-24-2010, 06:34 PM	#256
Digitalis Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Melbourne, Victoria Photos: Gallery Posts: 11,694	Originally posted by falconeye Does it look anything like this: ? yes, very much so!

06-24-2010, 07:30 PM	#257
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Originally posted by falconeye Space filling curves won't do it, I guess. You either print finite versions with a peak in frequency space or you get a uniform surface. That's why I proposed to overlay several versions of varying iteration depths with different colours. Will only provide discrete frequency responses but more than one. However, your approach sounds much more advanced and thought out. I hope you find the time to bring it to its conclusion.

06-25-2010, 07:10 PM	#258
Inspector 17 Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Southeastern USA Posts: 75	Originally posted by Eigengrau Actually, I see a pretty significant number of impressive portraits there - C Worth noting is that there are ~15,000 portrait results with the K10, and ~3,000 with the K7. And, actually, if you look here: Flickr: Camera Finder: Pentax you'll see that there are about 6 million K10 shots, and about 600,000 K7 shots. Here's what I'm getting at. There are only 10% as many K7 shots out there as K10 shots, likely due to camera age, but perhaps some other factors. There are 20% as many K7 portraits as K10 portraits. That means that people are taking disproportionately more portraits with their K7s compared to what they have taken over the history of the K10. Now, I'm not saying that this proves anything conclusively, but if we try to control for a few of the variables a different picture emerges. That said, at DxoMark it does look like the K10 performs well against the newer cameras in every category except high ISO. PS. Remember, there are lies, damn lies, and statistics. This is pretty subjective, so I don't know if it would every be possible to prove anything. Sure there are some numerical disparities but for the k10D you can go at leat 40 to 50 pages deep and still get portraits better than the first two pages of K7 - there is something there besides just numbers 15000 to 3000 doesnt explain a 60 or 70 to one ratio. You expressed that you didnt understand what I meant by top quality portraiture - I believe this may hold a key to understanding... I have collected galleries of portraiture in flickr of portraits I consider top quality. Here are several: Portraits 2 - a gallery on Flickr portraits - a gallery on Flickr Portraits 5 - a gallery on Flickr Subjective maybe - but I bet that most will agree that these are really really good portraiture. And before you ask, I have some good work from the past and like another poster indicated in this thread, I dont post photos of family and friends so and I have only begun posting photos to flickr - I have another 30 years of work from which I will be selecting to post And again, all comment with all due respect

06-27-2010, 06:19 PM	#259
music_lover Guest	Originally posted by ogl APS-C camera from Pentax with 21 MP will be the BIG FAILURE. 21 MP at APS-C could be good if it will be SuperCCD sensor. 10.5+10.5 MP. Like Fuji. The real resolution will be approx. ~ like 15-16 MP Bayer. A FAILURE.... with Pentax? I have never seen Pentax fail at anything or any Camera they have ever put out Last edited by music_lover; 07-03-2010 at 02:15 PM. Reason: misted word

06-27-2010, 09:52 PM	#261
Eigengrau Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Colorado Photos: Albums Posts: 250	Originally posted by Inspector 17 Sure there are some numerical disparities but for the k10D you can go at leat 40 to 50 pages deep and still get portraits better than the first two pages of K7 - there is something there besides just numbers 15000 to 3000 doesnt explain a 60 or 70 to one ratio. Subjective maybe - but I bet that most will agree that these are really really good portraiture. I don't think the ratio is nearly that severe. There are a lot of nice pictures in your selection, but there are one or two that I wouldn't call "top quality" (mostly because of heavy-handed PP). I still think that it is bound to be an uneven comparison since we're looking at cameras that have dramatically different ages. I wouldn't be surprised if pros, for instance, tend not to use the latest and greatest gear. Since the cost of gear comes right out of profit for a professional (vs coming out of discretionary income for an enthusiast) they have older gear oftentimes, and pick it up after costs have come down. All of these things mean that, once again, we can't be sure that we're getting a clear picture here. I don't really have anything to prove with this (The K7 and K20 both work well enough for the portraiture I'm doing and it doesn't bother me if other people feel the same) but I just have to object to drawing significant conclusions from pretty anecdotal evidence.

06-27-2010, 10:19 PM	#262
Inspector 17 Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Southeastern USA Posts: 75	Originally posted by Eigengrau I don't think the ratio is nearly that severe. There are a lot of nice pictures in your selection, but there are one or two that I wouldn't call "top quality" (mostly because of heavy-handed PP). I still think that it is bound to be an uneven comparison since we're looking at cameras that have dramatically different ages. I wouldn't be surprised if pros, for instance, tend not to use the latest and greatest gear. Since the cost of gear comes right out of profit for a professional (vs coming out of discretionary income for an enthusiast) they have older gear oftentimes, and pick it up after costs have come down. All of these things mean that, once again, we can't be sure that we're getting a clear picture here. I don't really have anything to prove with this (The K7 and K20 both work well enough for the portraiture I'm doing and it doesn't bother me if other people feel the same) but I just have to object to drawing significant conclusions from pretty anecdotal evidence. It is far from "petty anecdotal evidence" and I have observed it since the very first K7 samples. I have worked as a photo analyst and have worked with some renowned photographers. My observation would not be classified as "petty" either. Your inner fanboy seem to be responding. You should continue doing your best with the camera. For my part I knew from its earliest days it fell short - and it wont be a tool I will be choosing. There hopefully will be a top quality Pentax body on the scene before too long to replace this camera. Of course you have nothing to prove - nor do I. Good luck.

06-27-2010, 11:49 PM	#263
gazonk Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Oslo area, Norway Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,746	Originally posted by Inspector 17 Portraits 2 - a gallery on Flickr hmm... interesting, I had a look at that gallery, and to my taste, several of the images had blown/flat skin tones, and those were without exception the ones shot with a D700! Those which had skin tones that I liked were shot with unknown, K20D, D300 or A700. I'm pretty sure it says more about PP than the actual cameras, but still it surprised me.

06-28-2010, 04:19 AM	#264
Inspector 17 Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Southeastern USA Posts: 75	Originally posted by gazonk hmm... interesting, I had a look at that gallery, and to my taste, several of the images had blown/flat skin tones, and those were without exception the ones shot with a D700! Those which had skin tones that I liked were shot with unknown, K20D, D300 or A700. I'm pretty sure it says more about PP than the actual cameras, but still it surprised me. Yes it is interesting, and it probably does show more about PP than body but still there are unmistakable tendencies. Some of these gallery shots I chose because of a certain lens used, or sometimes just the subject Your favorites K20D, D300, and A700 are also my favorites. The A700 in particular catches my eye - and it just went out of production. The A850/A900 are nice but are hamstrung with a lack of performance at higher ISO. Earlier Canon 30D, 40D and most pre-D300 Nikons have a plastic/flat feel to me regarding skin tones - it is another reason I have stayed with Pentax (since moving from a D30 to my K10D). Great PP can cure many ills... Like I said, the next series of Pentax bodies will determine a lot for me - I hope they are home runs - and I hope one of the home runs has an amazing FF viewfinder. and I hope they will hurry and get here!

06-28-2010, 08:08 AM	#265
Eigengrau Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Colorado Photos: Albums Posts: 250	Originally posted by Inspector 17 It is far from "petty anecdotal evidence" and I have observed it since the very first K7 samples. I have worked as a photo analyst and have worked with some renowned photographers. My observation would not be classified as "petty" either. Your inner fanboy seem to be responding. I never called your evidence or your opinion 'petty'. I actually wrote "pretty anecdotal", which I think is fair. This isn't a rigorous scientific study here, this is a subjective observation. I'm not really trying to defend the K7 as much as I am the pursuit of objectivity. Grand claims require grand evidence, and a distribution of Flickr pictures isn't convincing to me.

06-28-2010, 08:26 AM	#266
Inspector 17 Inactive Account Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Southeastern USA Posts: 75	Originally posted by Eigengrau I never called your evidence or your opinion 'petty'. I actually wrote "pretty anecdotal", which I think is fair. This isn't a rigorous scientific study here, this is a subjective observation. I'm not really trying to defend the K7 as much as I am the pursuit of objectivity. Grand claims require grand evidence, and a distribution of Flickr pictures isn't convincing to me. I told you I needed a bigger brighter better viewfinder! My bad - I misread your comment and left out the 'r' Nonetheless, anecdotal evidence implies someone is giving a story or description of something. This is not anecdotal at all and with thousands of samples there is definitely a numerical confirmation of my "grand claim".. and the ratio is approximately 60 or 70 to one. There is simply a dearth of great portraiture from the K7. Tha is not to say that an artist could not produce some. It would take a lot of effort to do so however IMO I wanted a K7 when it first arrived. I hoped it would be the camera I was searching for. It simply wasn't - and I knew it early on from my observations. Still isn't based on IQ despite an amazing leap in overall feature set. That leap is encouraging - now lets see the sensor leap ahead. People have different evaluations and always will. One mans ceiling is another mans floor... Heres hoping I am using a magnificent Pentax FF within 6 to 9 months - my Limiteds are crying for it. Good luck with your K7

06-28-2010, 08:27 AM	#267
unixrevolution Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Waldorf, MD Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,861	Originally posted by ogl 21 MP at APS-C - is the death of photography. 21 MP at FF is good. I thought the death of photography was picture phones. No, wait. The death of photography was color film. Sorry, I keep forgetting.

06-28-2010, 08:53 AM	#268
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382	Originally posted by unixrevolution I thought the death of photography was picture phones. No, wait. The death of photography was color film. Sorry, I keep forgetting. Maybe...Maybe....

07-04-2010, 09:18 AM	#269
Pål Jensen Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Norway Photos: Albums Posts: 4,371	Originally posted by SimonSmyth this all lies! There is no 21mp APS-C sensor and there wont be for some time. Canon have a prototype but the noise issues make it unusable above ISO400 without lots of destructive NR, still another 10months away from even been workable. What a pity! It would have been very nice to have one....

07-05-2010, 06:24 AM	#270
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Originally posted by SimonSmyth There is no 21mp APS-C sensor and there wont be for some time. So you've got access to all secret developments going on all over the world? I'm not saying that a 21MP sensor is likely to appear anytime soon, but just wondering how you can make such a sweeping statement with authority. Originally posted by SimonSmyth Canon have a prototype but the noise issues make it unusable above ISO400 without lots of destructive NR,... So where is the difference to the existing Canon sensors?