Photokina 2010, Pentax and the full frame mystery

Supernaut · 08-31-2010, 09:58 AM

Very interesting!

The best part is that they probably don't smack on the old AF module on a completely new SR tray.

falconeye · 08-31-2010, 10:03 AM

Originally posted by Gimbal

I don't know, but is the benefit worth the effort in this case? If it really is such a huge benefit then maybe the canikon bunch is right and in-lens stabilization is the way to go for Pentax as well. Or maybe we should smack on some motors to the viewfinder while we are at it?

Maybe, the effort is small. Optical stabilization in each and every lens is what I would call effort

Moreover, the invention described by the patent has potential. In continous mode, it could equalize shake more aggressively and over more extended periods of time than possible with a moving sensor or lens. E.g., when following a bird with a tele lens, the AF point could be nailed onto the subject and not loosing the bird while the viewfinder image is shacky as hell to keep the bird framed at all and each image is still made sharp by sensor shift. Of course, would need a panning detection...

But that's me again, thinking beyond the point which is reasonable

After all, it's yet another patent ...

Asahiflex · 08-31-2010, 10:09 AM

Originally posted by falconeye

Maybe, the effort is small. Optical stabilization in each and every lens is what I would call effort

Moreover, the invention described by the patent has potential. In continous mode, it could equalize shake more aggressively and over more extended periods of time than possible with a moving sensor or lens. E.g., when following a bird with a tele lens, the AF point could be nailed onto the subject and not loosing the bird while the viewfinder image is shacky as hell to keep the bird framed at all and each image is still made sharp by sensor shift. Of course, would need a panning detection...

And of course, also a new method to display the AF point(s) in the viewfinder. Maybe that's what the previous viewfinder patents were about

Supernaut · 08-31-2010, 10:14 AM

Originally posted by falconeye

Moreover, the invention described by the patent has potential. In continous mode, it could equalize shake more aggressively and over more extended periods of time than possible with a moving sensor or lens. E.g., when following a bird with a tele lens, the AF point could be nailed onto the subject and not loosing the bird while the viewfinder image is shacky as hell to keep the bird framed at all and each image is still made sharp by sensor shift. Of course, would need a panning detection...

Maybe it is possible not only to compensate for shake but also follow objects that moves within the frame (limited movement though)?

glanglois · 08-31-2010, 11:18 AM

I found that my K-7 seems to focus more surely with the Sigma 18-250 than the Tammy at 250mm 6.3. The Tammy would saw back and forth and fail, even with decent light and contrast. The Sigma does noticeably better. I made the upgrade with that in mind so I may have spent USD $500 to get the placebo effect .....

opiedog · 08-31-2010, 01:37 PM

interesting. the 2nd pdf high-ratio zoom lens (seems this was already posted before?)
looks like the upgrade to the now discontinued 18-250

interesting times

**jpzk** · 09-03-2010, 09:26 AM

Originally posted by falconeye

Maybe, the effort is small. Optical stabilization in each and every lens is what I would call effort

Moreover, the invention described by the patent has potential. In continous mode, it could equalize shake more aggressively and over more extended periods of time than possible with a moving sensor or lens. E.g., when following a bird with a tele lens, the AF point could be nailed onto the subject and not loosing the bird while the viewfinder image is shacky as hell to keep the bird framed at all and each image is still made sharp by sensor shift. Of course, would need a panning detection...

But that's me again, thinking beyond the point which is reasonable

After all, it's yet another patent ...

This post of yours summarizes pretty much what I would like to see happening in the next Pentax "high-end" cameras: reliable, fast, accurate and lock-capable AF, especially when it comes to BIF photos.
Also, and perhaps even more a wanted feature: an AF capable of locking on the moving subject "towards the photographer".

I have missed quite a few "would-have-been-great" birds shots because I just couldn't keep the focus on the oncoming bird(s), either in AF-C and/or AF-S ... I tried manual focusing under such circumstances and the results were actually a bit better.
But, that could well be because of the photographer himself, right?

JP

glanglois · 09-03-2010, 11:11 AM

In my case it's aircraft, AIF. The stabilized Sigma 18-250 does work better than the Tamron at 250mm, perhaps because the image is stabilized on the AF sensor. That was my supposition when I bought the Sigma.

OTOH, the K-7 also does well with the Sigma 100-300 which isn't stabilized.

Perhaps the 18-250 needs additional help owing to the small f/6.3 aperture at 250 but the 100-300 does well without stabilization owing to the larger f/4 aperture.

Perhaps I'm making this all up.

Maybe I should simply buy the K-5 and try everything again.

Yes, that's the ticket.

Buy more stuff.

Much less work than actually learning how to pan properly .....

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Full frame pentax	cem.kumuk	Pentax DSLR Discussion	11	11-12-2010 03:13 PM
I think the Pentax FF will be announced at Photokina 2010	whatever7	Pentax News and Rumors	106	02-04-2010 12:45 AM
Expired Theme Theme: Contest #41, January, 2010 (Frame within a Frame)	Adam	Monthly Photo Contests	11	01-21-2010 12:33 AM
The almost full frame Pentax?	denisv	Photographic Technique	44	01-19-2009 04:01 AM
New Pentax k18D - Full Frame	ebooks4pentax	Pentax DSLR Discussion	17	10-31-2007 05:46 PM

08-31-2010, 09:58 AM	#721
Supernaut Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: West Coast , Sweden Posts: 467	Very interesting! The best part is that they probably don't smack on the old AF module on a completely new SR tray.

08-31-2010, 10:03 AM	#722
falconeye Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Munich, Alps, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,867 Original Poster	Originally posted by Gimbal I don't know, but is the benefit worth the effort in this case? If it really is such a huge benefit then maybe the canikon bunch is right and in-lens stabilization is the way to go for Pentax as well. Or maybe we should smack on some motors to the viewfinder while we are at it? Maybe, the effort is small. Optical stabilization in each and every lens is what I would call effort Moreover, the invention described by the patent has potential. In continous mode, it could equalize shake more aggressively and over more extended periods of time than possible with a moving sensor or lens. E.g., when following a bird with a tele lens, the AF point could be nailed onto the subject and not loosing the bird while the viewfinder image is shacky as hell to keep the bird framed at all and each image is still made sharp by sensor shift. Of course, would need a panning detection... But that's me again, thinking beyond the point which is reasonable After all, it's yet another patent ...

08-31-2010, 10:09 AM	#723
Asahiflex Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Netherlands Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,754	Originally posted by falconeye Maybe, the effort is small. Optical stabilization in each and every lens is what I would call effort Moreover, the invention described by the patent has potential. In continous mode, it could equalize shake more aggressively and over more extended periods of time than possible with a moving sensor or lens. E.g., when following a bird with a tele lens, the AF point could be nailed onto the subject and not loosing the bird while the viewfinder image is shacky as hell to keep the bird framed at all and each image is still made sharp by sensor shift. Of course, would need a panning detection... And of course, also a new method to display the AF point(s) in the viewfinder. Maybe that's what the previous viewfinder patents were about

08-31-2010, 10:14 AM	#724
Supernaut Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: West Coast , Sweden Posts: 467	Originally posted by falconeye Moreover, the invention described by the patent has potential. In continous mode, it could equalize shake more aggressively and over more extended periods of time than possible with a moving sensor or lens. E.g., when following a bird with a tele lens, the AF point could be nailed onto the subject and not loosing the bird while the viewfinder image is shacky as hell to keep the bird framed at all and each image is still made sharp by sensor shift. Of course, would need a panning detection... Maybe it is possible not only to compensate for shake but also follow objects that moves within the frame (limited movement though)?

08-31-2010, 11:18 AM	#725
glanglois Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Madison, Wis., USA Posts: 1,506	I found that my K-7 seems to focus more surely with the Sigma 18-250 than the Tammy at 250mm 6.3. The Tammy would saw back and forth and fail, even with decent light and contrast. The Sigma does noticeably better. I made the upgrade with that in mind so I may have spent USD $500 to get the placebo effect .....

08-31-2010, 01:37 PM	#726
opiedog Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: NC Posts: 787	interesting. the 2nd pdf high-ratio zoom lens (seems this was already posted before?) looks like the upgrade to the now discontinued 18-250 interesting times

09-03-2010, 09:26 AM	#727
jpzk Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Québec Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,777	Originally posted by falconeye Maybe, the effort is small. Optical stabilization in each and every lens is what I would call effort Moreover, the invention described by the patent has potential. In continous mode, it could equalize shake more aggressively and over more extended periods of time than possible with a moving sensor or lens. E.g., when following a bird with a tele lens, the AF point could be nailed onto the subject and not loosing the bird while the viewfinder image is shacky as hell to keep the bird framed at all and each image is still made sharp by sensor shift. Of course, would need a panning detection... But that's me again, thinking beyond the point which is reasonable After all, it's yet another patent ... This post of yours summarizes pretty much what I would like to see happening in the next Pentax "high-end" cameras: reliable, fast, accurate and lock-capable AF, especially when it comes to BIF photos. Also, and perhaps even more a wanted feature: an AF capable of locking on the moving subject "towards the photographer". I have missed quite a few "would-have-been-great" birds shots because I just couldn't keep the focus on the oncoming bird(s), either in AF-C and/or AF-S ... I tried manual focusing under such circumstances and the results were actually a bit better. But, that could well be because of the photographer himself, right? JP

09-03-2010, 11:11 AM	#728
glanglois Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Madison, Wis., USA Posts: 1,506	In my case it's aircraft, AIF. The stabilized Sigma 18-250 does work better than the Tamron at 250mm, perhaps because the image is stabilized on the AF sensor. That was my supposition when I bought the Sigma. OTOH, the K-7 also does well with the Sigma 100-300 which isn't stabilized. Perhaps the 18-250 needs additional help owing to the small f/6.3 aperture at 250 but the 100-300 does well without stabilization owing to the larger f/4 aperture. Perhaps I'm making this all up. Maybe I should simply buy the K-5 and try everything again. Yes, that's the ticket. Buy more stuff. Much less work than actually learning how to pan properly .....

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search