Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-09-2012, 02:32 PM   #91
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,799
QuoteOriginally posted by LamyTax Quote
Sure, but what do you do if you're already at 1/8000 and absolutely don't want to stop down anymore and don't want to use an ND?
You shoot and deal with it in post processing. More efficient sensors will have better high light recovery and better DR. Same thing that you do when you are at max ISO and can't open up the aperture any more or slow down the shutter speed. You shoot and deal with it in post. LR and other post programs have come a long way.

Ultimately a sensor only has 1 "ISO" setting, so all we are talking about is improving the efficiency of the sensor (and support architecture) to get better IQ across a wider range.

08-09-2012, 02:45 PM   #92
Pentaxian
builttospill's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Utah, Idaho
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,675
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
You shoot and deal with it in post processing.
Not exactly. Even if software development has come a long way there's no replacement for slowing the shutter speed to get smooth, flowing water in a stream or waterfall. Additional ISO steps would really help here.
08-09-2012, 05:47 PM   #93
Veteran Member
RXrenesis8's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Orlando, FL (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 523
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
More efficient sensors will have better high light recovery and better DR.
A full well is a full well mate. I think the most tech has been able to accomplish in that case is to control the overflow (blooming)
08-09-2012, 06:36 PM   #94
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Louisville, Kentucky
Posts: 443
Doesn't someone, I believe is Samsung, has a patent to count how many times the "well" is filled.

Dave

08-09-2012, 06:54 PM   #95
Pentaxian




Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Madison, Wis., USA
Posts: 1,510
QuoteOriginally posted by DaveBlack Quote
Doesn't someone, I believe is Samsung, has a patent to count how many times the "well" is filled.

Dave
I'm having trouble picturing (sorry) what this means. Is there a little elf at each sensel emptying the electron bucket as it fills and counting the number of times on an abacus?

I suppose the well can be emptied and a counter incremented. Sounds like a pile of work at a very high speed compared to building a deeper well but my knowledge of circuit design generally ranges from zero all the way to nil, depending on the day ....
08-09-2012, 08:08 PM   #96
Pentaxian
philbaum's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Port Townsend, Washington State, USA
Posts: 3,659
QuoteOriginally posted by builttospill Quote
Not exactly. Even if software development has come a long way there's no replacement for slowing the shutter speed to get smooth, flowing water in a stream or waterfall. Additional ISO steps would really help here.
Using the multiple images option (up to 9 exposures) of Pentax can do a pretty good job of smoothing the water.
08-09-2012, 08:38 PM   #97
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Manila
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,190
QuoteOriginally posted by LamyTax Quote
Sure, but what do you do if you're already at 1/8000 and absolutely don't want to stop down anymore and don't want to use an ND?
You can reduce flash power, I think...
Not using NDs- I can see the point of that. Even though NDs and CPLs are the most useful filters nowadays (as some color filters can be done in PP anyway), they're sometimes just additional cost too. But I would rarely see anyone go 1/8000s unless opting to stop bullets or hummingbird's wings in midair...
08-09-2012, 08:51 PM - 1 Like   #98
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,799
QuoteOriginally posted by builttospill Quote
Not exactly. Even if software development has come a long way there's no replacement for slowing the shutter speed to get smooth, flowing water in a stream or waterfall. Additional ISO steps would really help here.
If it saves the world from having to see one more slow shutter waterfall picture, then it is worth it.

08-09-2012, 10:15 PM   #99
Pentaxian
builttospill's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Utah, Idaho
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,675
QuoteOriginally posted by philbaum Quote
Using the multiple images option (up to 9 exposures) of Pentax can do a pretty good job of smoothing the water.
Yes, but my comment was in response to discussion of the advancement of PP software, not in-camera tricks.

QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
If it saves the world from having to see one more slow shutter waterfall picture, then it is worth it.
That's funny. I'm glad I didn't post an example then.
08-10-2012, 01:51 AM   #100
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 376
QuoteOriginally posted by Alizarine Quote
You can reduce flash power, I think...
Like I said, you often can't in studio settings.
08-10-2012, 02:50 AM   #101
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Manila
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,190
QuoteOriginally posted by LamyTax Quote
Like I said, you often can't in studio settings.
Hmm, that may be true when it's already way into the shoot, when everything else is working already e.g. models, and all the crew. As far as I know (and experienced) studio shoots, you already have a certain peg on the lighting you want to have in the shoot and then change angles mostly with only little changes in aperture and speed if just to adjust for depth of field and focal length.

Prior to the shoot proper, the photographer already sets white balance, color temperature and lighting control. Also, working in a studio with many powerful lights usually requires the services of an assistant, as the photographer will be busy shooting...

..but that's as far as experience has taught me. Anyone is free to correct me on whatever statement I pointed out wrongly~
08-10-2012, 03:01 AM   #102
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 376
QuoteOriginally posted by Alizarine Quote
Hmm, that may be true when it's already way into the shoot, when everything else is working already e.g. models, and all the crew. As far as I know (and experienced) studio shoots, you already have a certain peg on the lighting you want to have in the shoot and then change angles mostly with only little changes in aperture and speed if just to adjust for depth of field and focal length.

Prior to the shoot proper, the photographer already sets white balance, color temperature and lighting control. Also, working in a studio with many powerful lights usually requires the services of an assistant, as the photographer will be busy shooting...

..but that's as far as experience has taught me. Anyone is free to correct me on whatever statement I pointed out wrongly~
The problem is with many studio lighting equipment, you can't reduce power that much. Which is why some photographers go strobist for that .
Aside of reducing ISO to the lowest possible setting, you can only use ND-filters or stop down. ND-filters are no fun in dark studios for obvious reasons.
No, really, low in-camera ISO settings wouldn't be that bad .
08-10-2012, 03:45 AM   #103
Veteran Member




Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Manila
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,190
^hmm, that does indeed happen, though I never gone through that much before... at times we just reduce the number of lights or replace the lights with something weaker altogether. Unless of course the studio you're in doesn't have weaker lights.... or flashes... which is (for me) an easier workaround than waiting for a camera body that can support it.
08-10-2012, 06:21 AM   #104
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Blue Ridge Escarpment, North Carolina, US
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,367
QuoteOriginally posted by Winder Quote
If it saves the world from having to see one more slow shutter waterfall picture, then it is worth it.
Thanks for an eloquent and necessary rebuttal.
08-10-2012, 02:35 PM   #105
Veteran Member




Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Huntsville, Alabama
Posts: 422
What I would really like in a K-5 replacement would be:

Higher usable ISO
Lower ISO
Higher flash sync speed - not sure why we are still stuck at 1/180... need to move to electronic shutter.
The higher the MP, the better.

Of course I am still on a K10D... the K-01 interests me because it doesn't have a mirror.. more room to be able to mod more lenses to work than with the mirrored cameras.

The successor to the K-5 should be mirror less as well.. but also have a high quality digital view finder.

I would also like unlimited frame shooting at a decent speed. This shouldn't really be an issue with how fast SDHC cards have gotten. And if that is an issue, why not just adopt an addon that would fit like a battery grip that would accept an SSD... or even better yet, have an SSD attachement with a nice 4-8GB RAM buffer.. drool.
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!
k5, model, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, replacement, sensor
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Will there be a K-R replacement soon? redogman67 Pentax DSLR Discussion 15 09-25-2011 09:39 AM
K5 replacement warranty ivoire Pentax K-5 3 08-22-2011 12:15 PM
Replacement K-5. Mike.P Pentax K-5 36 04-03-2011 11:18 AM
Replacement for the K5 in the Spring? benjikan Pentax K-5 28 02-01-2011 08:31 AM
K-7 replacement/out of production? Vantage-Point Pentax DSLR Discussion 15 12-28-2010 08:01 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:44 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