Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-06-2011, 10:15 AM   #301
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Northern California
Posts: 475
Nikon

QuoteOriginally posted by dlacouture Quote
AWB is out of the equation, as it is computed afterwards from the image taken...
A manually selected WB could be used, but I doubt it...
Here's a blurb on Nikon's color metering:

Nikon Imaging | Nikon D Technology THE POWER TO CHANGE YOUR PHOTOGRAPHY

The color metering system clearly is designed to set exposure, WB, and according to Nikon, improve AF, which makes perfect sense.

Before all the boo-birds start, yes I am aware of the AF iconsistencies with the new D7000.

The Samsung wavelength grating device might have advantages over simply using a color metering chip, but I am not sure what those would be. I suspect that it is simply a work-around for patents related to color metering that sets AWB and helps with AF tuning.

It also seems to me that just setting an average offset based upon manually chosen WB would be good enough in many cases. After all, fast action situations that move from tungsten to daylight are probably a tiny percentage of the shooting scenarios most will encounter.

Even an offset based upon a WB reading taken off of a WB reference like the WhiBal card would be fine. It could be stored as a user setting and called up quickly.

Methinks the designers (users too) are often just too enamored of the "do everything for me" camera to include simple manual fixes that could well work for almost everyone.

Ray

03-06-2011, 10:34 AM   #302
Veteran Member
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Ray Pulley Quote
Samsung, applied for 2009, issued 2010:

WAVELENGTH DETECTING APPARATUS AND FOCUS DETECTING APPARATUS HAVING THE SAME

I suspect that this is a bit closer to what is in the K5 than the older Hoya patent.
Ray,

thanks for the link but I beg to disagree.

The layout seems to be the standard for metering stuff. Pentax, in their patent, describes a way around an earlier 2003 Canon patent (US 7595475 B2). IMHO, Pentax does it the Canon way. The Canon patent even describes a 7x9 metering sensor with 21 embedded colorimetric sensors while, I believe, Pentax uses 7x11 metering sensors with 11 embedded colorimetric sensors. They patented another way to do it (separating both sensors) in order to avoid Canon claims but I think they didn't use it in the SAFOX+ system. Heck, they may just use their own patent to lower any license fee to Canon

In their patent, Pentax honors the necessity to measure color at every AF point. The Samsung device may or may not be able to do this: It could create a rainbow image of the scene which may be good enough to determine AF point color. Therefore the Samsung patent may be a way around the Canon patent which remains the most obvious way to do it. But the K-5 lacks the diffractor plate which is at the heart of the Samsung patent (I only see an IR cut filter which is normally used to replicate the AF module IR cut filter's behaviour). So no, I think Pentax does it the Canon way rather than the Samsung way (and does it matter, really?).

As a side note. I notice the Canon patent uses much simpler graphics. The work spent into preparing those patent documents probably is overblown.

Last edited by falconeye; 03-06-2011 at 10:52 AM.
03-06-2011, 01:44 PM   #303
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Northern California
Posts: 475
Oly Appears to Have Been First

QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
Ray,

thanks for the link but I beg to disagree.

The layout seems to be the standard for metering stuff. Pentax, in their patent, describes a way around an earlier 2003 Canon patent (US 7595475 B2). IMHO, Pentax does it the Canon way. The Canon patent even describes a 7x9 metering sensor with 21 embedded colorimetric sensors while, I believe, Pentax uses 7x11 metering sensors with 11 embedded colorimetric sensors. They patented another way to do it (separating both sensors) in order to avoid Canon claims but I think they didn't use it in the SAFOX+ system. Heck, they may just use their own patent to lower any license fee to Canon

In their patent, Pentax honors the necessity to measure color at every AF point. The Samsung device may or may not be able to do this: It could create a rainbow image of the scene which may be good enough to determine AF point color. Therefore the Samsung patent may be a way around the Canon patent which remains the most obvious way to do it. But the K-5 lacks the diffractor plate which is at the heart of the Samsung patent (I only see an IR cut filter which is normally used to replicate the AF module IR cut filter's behaviour). So no, I think Pentax does it the Canon way rather than the Samsung way (and does it matter, really?).

As a side note. I notice the Canon patent uses much simpler graphics. The work spent into preparing those patent documents probably is overblown.
Thanks for the comments.

Camera and autofocus apparatus

It looks like Oly pre-dates the Canon and Pentax work with a color sensor feeding back color temp infor to the AF system to correct the wavelength focus error issue.

Maybe they are all working around (and catching up to) Oly in this area? Either way, the issue is the same and the solution of applying a correction basd upon sensing color temp seems also to be consistent, so there really should be no reason this design concept cannot be made to work properly by Pentax.

One wonders why the long delay on a K5 fix given that?

I look forward to comparing a K-7 that is on its way to me to my K20 and the K5.

Edited to add: None of this matters, including all of the testing. The design is what it is, and Pentax will agree that there is a problem and fix it or not no matter what theories we dream up or discuss. The only thing that matters is sales revenue numbers. If Pentax perceives that the K5 revenue is being hurt enough by this, then they might address it. I am fast running out of faith on that point, however.

Ray

Last edited by Ray Pulley; 03-06-2011 at 01:55 PM.
03-06-2011, 04:29 PM   #304
Veteran Member
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
Original Poster
Lumolabs study upgraded to version 1.1

Hi friends,

I upgraded the paper (as linked in the OP) to version 1.1. I did so to take all the new insight into account, esp. with respect of the inner workings of the colorimetric sensor.

You'll hopefully find some new and interesting stuff in the upgrade.

Enjoy,
Falk


Here are the links (from th OP) again for easier reference:

03-07-2011, 06:04 AM   #305
Banned




Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 242
Your study has already a celebrity, its own.
You'll find it in <link to RH removed>.
Enjoy Pentax's "qualities".

Last edited by Parallax; 03-07-2011 at 10:21 AM.
03-07-2011, 06:56 AM   #306
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Pittsburgh, Pa, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 529
Thanks for version 1.1. I gave it a read and there is lots of good info there.

I'm beginning to wonder if Pentax is going to fix this issue or just let it go as is. That also makes me wonder if the follow up camera will be any better. I never before had any doubts about my decision to invest in Pentax cameras and lenses, but I'm now having serious doubts as to the wisdom of my actions.
03-08-2011, 08:56 AM   #307
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,256
K-5 FF Issue - Good News: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review
03-08-2011, 10:13 AM   #308
Banned




Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 242
I also had that 2 days ago call and the person promised to send me a solution to be received next day (so yesterday) as a priviliged PENTAX user.
One day later than promised I received a package from PENTAX with a brand new MAGLITE with a hot shoe connection ! Soo happy with it .



Lol, they began to bribe the customers.

03-09-2011, 07:57 AM   #309
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Budapest
Posts: 821
Interesting study, but I still don't understand how can my first and second K-5 be significantly different: first produced significant front focus that was obvious even on downsized pictures, under the same conditions with same subjects and same lenses the second K-5 doesn't produce noticeable front focus (at least I can't see it even at 100% pixel-peeping).
I'm not sure I want to install the new firmware when it comes out, I'm afraid it may screw my cam
03-09-2011, 10:45 AM   #310
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,803
QuoteOriginally posted by simico Quote
Interesting study, but I still don't understand how can my first and second K-5 be significantly different: first produced significant front focus that was obvious even on downsized pictures, under the same conditions with same subjects and same lenses the second K-5 doesn't produce noticeable front focus (at least I can't see it even at 100% pixel-peeping).
I'm not sure I want to install the new firmware when it comes out, I'm afraid it may screw my cam
The fact that the problem is not consistent across all K-5 cameras, and some are worse than others makes me wonder if it is a firmware issue. It sounds like some cameras might have a bad color meter.

Can the color meters used for AF be calibrated? Maybe the firmware will simply recalibrate the color meter for improved accuracy.

Until it is actually fixed........ who knows. This is why I am never a first adapter. I use to say wait until the 2nd or 3rd firmware release to decide on buying a camera, but now I am leaning towards the 4th or 5th.
03-09-2011, 11:09 AM   #311
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midwest
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,407
Just received my K-5 yesterday, and it exhibits the exact behavior described in this report. Even the 255um variance agrees with my experience, as the shorter the focal length the greater the focus error; my FA 50mm 1.4 focuses well in my office, while my 18-50 Sigma 2.8 does well at 50, but is off by several feet at 18mm. My 10-20 Sigma is off by a repeatable, RIDICULOUS amount; @ 10mm it FF by ~10 feet - focussed on the window, the markings on the barrel say it's focussed at between 1 and three feet (and images support that assertion). It's consistent and repeatable. In addition, it doesn't seem to affect Live View (as others have also stated).

I've already ordered a Katzeye screen for it; I dont' often use autofocus in low light levels with my K20D, either. *shrug*. It would be nice if the AF would work at those light levels, but I've never had a camera that did, so I'm supposing I won't miss it.

I would be really angry if the camera wasn't so stunning in every other way. Instead, I'm a bit put off and hoping they'll have a software fix for it.
03-09-2011, 11:13 AM   #312
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Pittsburgh, Pa, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 529
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
This is why I am never a first adapter. I use to say wait until the 2nd or 3rd firmware release to decide on buying a camera, but now I am leaning towards the 4th or 5th.
I bought the DL when it first hit the market. No problems and 1 FW update to accommodate SDHC. I bought the K100D Super the first week it was available. Zero FW updates and zero problems. I bought the K-5 in December and exchanged twice and finally giving up in February and returning for a refund.

I guess that makes me 2 for 3 as an early adopter.
03-09-2011, 11:28 AM   #313
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Midwest
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,407
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
The fact that the problem is not consistent across all K-5 cameras, and some are worse than others makes me wonder if it is a firmware issue. It sounds like some cameras might have a bad color meter.
You just inspired me to ask for a replacement. If it doesn't affect all K-5s, then by definition, mine is defective. If it's *all* K-5s, then I'd still buy it - I own several manual focus lenses that I use frequently anyway, so I'm no stranger to doing it, but if some work properly, I want one
03-09-2011, 04:27 PM   #314
Veteran Member
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by simico Quote
Interesting study, but I still don't understand how can my first and second K-5 be significantly different: first produced significant front focus that was obvious even on downsized pictures, under the same conditions with same subjects and same lenses the second K-5 doesn't produce noticeable front focus (at least I can't see it even at 100% pixel-peeping).
I'm not sure I want to install the new firmware when it comes out, I'm afraid it may screw my cam
The message about the forthcoming firmware fix relates back to Pentax Europe which the Greece distributor called (if info at DPR is correct). Let's see...

On sample variation: Within (my) standard theory (as laid out in v1.1 of the study), there is a simple mechanism which can cause the variation: How fast the colorimetric sensor signal decreases with fading luminosity. I then would expect the threshold to vary, not the focus shift as such. Also note that it isn't easy to repeat the experiment: Same EV level is only a small part in the overall equation.
03-09-2011, 06:28 PM   #315
Senior Member
mrjamesabels's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: NEW JERSEY USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 198
The new K5 1.03 Firmware is available in pentax japan. Still waiting for the K-r firmware update.
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!
copy, ev, focus, front, issue, k-5, light, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, plane, study
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Any tips for low light focus with K-5 designinme_1976 Pentax K-5 5 11-21-2010 08:38 PM
focus hunting in low light sorin Pentax DSLR Discussion 12 07-17-2010 02:20 PM
Low Light auto focus JohnKSA Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 6 03-10-2010 04:19 AM
Pentax Low Light Focus indy1984 Pentax DSLR Discussion 15 02-17-2010 09:42 AM
EV low light focus question tarsus Photographic Technique 3 06-26-2008 08:22 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:42 AM. | 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