Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-28-2012, 03:20 PM   #1081
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,688
QuoteOriginally posted by Anvh Quote
From what i read the K7 has a lower "blur" filter (sorry forgot the name but that's the effect) on the sensor.
The K7 therefore has more noise but also has more details.
The DXOMark SNR graph is an equalized playing field. The K20D has slightly better noise performance than the K-7.

01-28-2012, 03:22 PM   #1082
Veteran Member
ihasa's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: West Midlands
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,054
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
By producing an adapter with the screw drive motor built it you gain all the advantages of K-mount support and gives you the advantages of using other lenses. People who don't own a single Pentax lens could pick-up the body and use it with other lens brands.
I agree, but sadly the released specs confirm a camera depth thick enough to use K-lenses without an adapter. It seems an odd decision but perhaps Pentax believe there are enough people in the market for a mirrorless who don't require it to be really small, or perhaps there is some other sort of innovation that will make the camera attractive - uprated video or weather proofing for example...

Or perhaps they're banking on people falling in love with the yellow leather trim...
01-28-2012, 03:22 PM   #1083
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,688
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
It has to do with the shutter, but it also has to do with read out speed. Even with the K7's shutter, the K20 still wouldn't do 5 fps, i am sure.
I agree, the processsing wasn't there, but you said that adding video gave the capability to go beyond 3fps. There were DSLR's with 8 fps before video was added.
01-28-2012, 03:25 PM   #1084
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,688
QuoteOriginally posted by ihasa Quote
I think that's a bit of an odd example. All the Sony sensors perform way better than the Samsung sensors, and also manage to include video with higher definition and higher frame rates. The inclusion of video also helps drive sales, which drives R&D, which raises the bar for IQ...
That's not the point. The point is, the inclusion of video in DLSR's generates more noise, therefore lower performance. If you have identical cameras, same technology except one with video, the camera without video will perform better.

01-28-2012, 03:26 PM   #1085
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,253
QuoteOriginally posted by audiobomber Quote
I agree, the processsing wasn't there, but you said that adding video gave the capability to go beyond 3fps. There were DSLR's with 8 fps before video was added.
Let me rephrase. Video is a side effect of having (a) a CMOS type sensor (b) fast read out speeds and (c) the software in place necessary to encode video. The K20 was just on the edge of being able to do video with its 21 fps burst mode, but not quite there.
01-28-2012, 04:00 PM - 1 Like   #1086
Pentaxian
Clavius's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: De Klundert
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,122
QuoteOriginally posted by audiobomber Quote
That's not the point. The point is, the inclusion of video in DLSR's generates more noise, therefore lower performance. If you have identical cameras, same technology except one with video, the camera without video will perform better.
That is why it's such a shame that the video feature is forced upon us. The K5 has OK video performance, but still the cheap and tiny sony video recorder in on of my lens-slots of my camerabag beforms better. Therefore, only the sony gets used for video, and the K5 for photos. In the back of my head I know the performance of the K5 could have been even better, if that performance wasn't lowered by a videofunction that I don't even use.
01-28-2012, 04:14 PM   #1087
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,236
In my opinion, the output from the K-5 in video mode is pretty good. The K-7 on the other hand has quite a bit more noise when recording under the same conditions. Ive been making a lot of split screen videos where I use both cameras. They are using different lenses though, so that could be partly to blame. I also think the audio when using an external mic is pretty good too.

Do I want more? sure. Can we expect more? sure... just look at the Q. It has more manual control in video and there isn't any reason to expect that the next DSLR won't have even more.
01-28-2012, 04:55 PM   #1088
Forum Member




Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 51
QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
The K5 has OK video performance, but still the cheap and tiny sony video recorder in on of my lens-slots of my camerabag beforms better.
to get the same IQ of an aps-c sensor dslr + budget vintage lens with a camcorder you have to you have to spend three-four times the price of the k-5

a dslr with some accessories (external audio recorder, steadycam, follow focus) is comparable or possibly exceed the IQ of a camcorder that costs 4 times as much, the only reason why the k-5 in particular can't is the fact that you can't select manually the video parameters

01-28-2012, 04:58 PM   #1089
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,236
QuoteOriginally posted by befocus Quote
to get the same IQ of an aps-c sensor dslr + budget vintage lens with a camcorder you have to you have to spend three-four times the price of the k-5

a dslr with some accessories (external audio recorder, steadycam, follow focus) is comparable or possibly exceed the IQ of a camcorder that costs 4 times as much, the only reason why the k-5 in particular can't is the fact that you can't select manually the video parameters
rolling shutter (or rather incremental read out of the sensor) that produces vertical jiggle is a pain too. I don't know anything about camcorders, but I'd assume they would be better in that respect considering it is their intended purpose?
01-28-2012, 05:20 PM   #1090
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,802
QuoteOriginally posted by ihasa Quote
I agree, but sadly the released specs confirm a camera depth thick enough to use K-lenses without an adapter. It seems an odd decision but perhaps Pentax believe there are enough people in the market for a mirrorless who don't require it to be really small, or perhaps there is some other sort of innovation that will make the camera attractive - uprated video or weather proofing for example...

Or perhaps they're banking on people falling in love with the yellow leather trim...
It seems to me Pentax is limiting its appeal to new users by restricting them to only the K-mount. Sony, Samsung, Panasonic, Olympus, & Fuji have all opened the door to attract users from other mounts to come use their mirror-less systems with their existing glass, and that has opened the door for new lens sales. I think it is a big mistake. If you want to attract MORE people you need to appeal to more people. I just don't get it. Why limit yourself to a small user group who already own most of the lenses and wont be buying many more? I don't think Pentax wants to be in the lens business. I think they want Sigma to fill all of the holes for them.
01-28-2012, 05:22 PM   #1091
Veteran Member
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by audiobomber Quote
The point is, the inclusion of video in DLSR's generates more noise, therefore lower performance.
QuoteOriginally posted by Clavius Quote
That is why it's such a shame that the video feature is forced upon us. [...] In the back of my head I know the performance of the K5 could have been even better, if that performance wasn't lowered by a videofunction ...
In the way this is stated the statements are false.

It is true that the K-7 sensor has some additional noise due to doubling the number of read-out channels. But this only applies to this particular implementation and would have been avoidable.

In particular, this argument does *not* apply to sensors where read-out channels are digital rather than analog. E.g., the K20D/K-7 read-out channels are analog where the K-x/K-r/K-5 (Sony) read-out channels are digital.

With the newer Sony sensors, the faster read-out for video does not negatively impact the sensor's noise profile. Actually, it beats almost every still-only sensor out there.

Another topic: Camcorders vs. still image camera video function: Still cameras have the problem that they use a tiny fraction of their pixels only in video. This causes alias artefacts and noise. But I expect this problem to be solved in the foreseeable future: the pixels can be binned and combined right after the on-sensor A/D conversion. Therefore, I assume that camcorders will soon terribly fall behind still cameras in video image quality. However, it is true that this has not happened yet (apart from the shallow DoF special effect).
01-28-2012, 05:43 PM   #1092
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,802
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
In the way this is stated the statements are false.

It is true that the K-7 sensor has some additional noise due to doubling the number of read-out channels. But this only applies to this particular implementation and would have been avoidable.

In particular, this argument does *not* apply to sensors where read-out channels are digital rather than analog. E.g., the K20D/K-7 read-out channels are analog where the K-x/K-r/K-5 (Sony) read-out channels are digital.

With the newer Sony sensors, the faster read-out for video does not negatively impact the sensor's noise profile. Actually, it beats almost every still-only sensor out there.

Another topic: Camcorders vs. still image camera video function: Still cameras have the problem that they use a tiny fraction of their pixels only in video. This causes alias artefacts and noise. But I expect this problem to be solved in the foreseeable future: the pixels can be binned and combined right after the on-sensor A/D conversion. Therefore, I assume that camcorders will soon terribly fall behind still cameras in video image quality. However, it is true that this has not happened yet (apart from the shallow DoF special effect).
Is Sony currently the only sensor manufacturer with on-sensor A/D conversion? I am not aware of any other manufacturer who does this. It is a pretty amazing achievement.
01-28-2012, 06:05 PM   #1093
Veteran Member
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
Is Sony currently the only sensor manufacturer with on-sensor A/D conversion? I am not aware of any other manufacturer who does this. It is a pretty amazing achievement.
I don't know. I don't kow another vendor who was able to do this.

It is amazing indeed. This is an early article (Feb 2007) describing the technoogy when it was still at the prototype stage. It is an interesting read ...

-> http://www.sony.net/Products/SC-HP/cx_news/vol47/pdf/featuring47.pdf

Last edited by falconeye; 01-28-2012 at 06:17 PM.
01-28-2012, 06:38 PM   #1094
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
QuoteOriginally posted by ihasa Quote
I agree, but sadly the released specs confirm a camera depth thick enough to use K-lenses without an adapter. It seems an odd decision but perhaps Pentax believe there are enough people in the market for a mirrorless who don't require it to be really small, or perhaps there is some other sort of innovation that will make the camera attractive - uprated video or weather proofing for example...

Or perhaps they're banking on people falling in love with the yellow leather trim...
You don't think that they could/would design the lenses with the rear of the lens 'quite' recessed into the camera mount?
01-28-2012, 07:00 PM   #1095
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: 11432
Photos: Albums
Posts: 382
I heard that Pentax will announce more pan cake lens.
Photo Rumors

Use same K-5 sensor
500g
NO EVF

I don't know how they will going to make a K-mount mirroless smaller.
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!
camera, k-01, k-01 mirrorless camera, mirrorless, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, rumors
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is the new pentax mirrorless coming out tomorrow? justtakingpics Pentax News and Rumors 12 07-26-2011 06:22 AM
There may not be a 2nd mirrorless camera rustynail925 Pentax News and Rumors 5 06-29-2011 05:36 PM
Mirrorless Camera--Good or Bad? InStitches49 Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 15 11-10-2010 10:15 PM
[RUMOR] Canon's First Mirrorless Camera! jct us101 Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 12 09-14-2010 08:08 PM
New Pentax: K-5, K-r and Mirrorless models coming JohnBee Pentax News and Rumors 32 08-08-2010 01:57 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:01 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