[Vormulac]

What what what!? Did I miss it? Where do I get tickets?

Sorry, you're too late, tickets for the next rumour sold out hours ago. You'll have to engage in some feckless speculation until the one after that becomes available. Of course the existance of the rumour after that is, at this point, entirely speculative.

[glanglois]

Right, 2 times more possible integer values. but going from 14/bpc to 16/bpc is an increase by 2/14 or 1/7 or about 14%. That's the increase in the file size. However, my guess is that most scenes wouldn't have this much DR so with compression, the extra bits would add negligible size and value. But on scenes with that much DR, you would see at most a 14% increase in file size.

*I am a computer scientist...

Greg

Greg, I'm not a computer (or any other kind of) scientist. The following may show my ignorance but I'm going to plow ahead anyway.

I wonder .... wouldn't the greatly increased number of possible integer values negatively affect the effectiveness of lossless compression that depends on repeating bit or byte patterns?

Of course I'm assuming the presence of lossless compression owing to a dim recollection of the use of it in digital photography. If it were not in use, all raw image files from a given sensor and system would be of identical size. Instead, it appears that the presence of detail tends to increase file size somewhat, suggesting (to me) that the detail reduces the occurrence of recurring patterns.

[befocus]

they can't just make it menù selectable?
You can choose if you want the raw to be saved in 14 or 16 bits, so in landscapes and high contrast scenes you can switch to 16bit while in situation where is less useful and want smaller files the camera can discard the extra 2bits and save a 14bit raw

[solar1]

1b. Larger microlens for the vaster area available for light capture.

Assuming there is remaining space between each micro lens in order to enlarge each one, what is the possibility that what they are referring to is the light path from the lens? I'm sure that there are other lenses involved besides those in the sensor. Haven't they closed the gaps already?

From IR K5 review: "The SAFOX IX+ AF module's optics have improved transparency, along with better controlled aberration, two changes which translates to noticeably improved performance and accuracy in low light." Perhaps the AF module's lenses are larger? Am I way off track here?

Maybe they've done both?

[Boris_Akunin]

I think Fuji already use sensor based stabilisation don't they?

nope:

Image stabilization: In-lens optical stabilization when available

sauce

[Rupert]

Whatever?....please Lord, don't let it be another K5 ugly duckling that turns into a beautiful princess...after we have torn each other apart upon its introduction. Just let it be a beauty from day one! Let us embrace it, and hug each other in praise of its magnificent features and unblemished performance.
Amen

Regards!

[L33tGreg]

Greg, I'm not a computer (or any other kind of) scientist. The following may show my ignorance but I'm going to plow ahead anyway.

I wonder .... wouldn't the greatly increased number of possible integer values negatively affect the effectiveness of lossless compression that depends on repeating bit or byte patterns?

Of course I'm assuming the presence of lossless compression owing to a dim recollection of the use of it in digital photography. If it were not in use, all raw image files from a given sensor and system would be of identical size. Instead, it appears that the presence of detail tends to increase file size somewhat, suggesting (to me) that the detail reduces the occurrence of recurring patterns.

This would be true for a trivial compression like RLE. However, modern lossless compression algorithms are far more complex. A simple and high level overview of a lossless compression algorithm would be to take an approximation of the data in a lossy-compressed method (jpg) and then encode a residual (delta or difference) between the lossy and lossless versions. The residual should be quite small since the difference between the jpg and raw is quite small and the residual can be compressed using RLE and something like a Huffman codec. Now, I don't know if this method is similar to what Pentax uses for its RAW files, but I do know that this sort of algorithm is used in lossless compressed audio which I'm quite familiar with.

Something to note is that a type specific lossless compression is better than a generic compression. Take a 16M*16bit uncompressed image in TIFF and save it uncompressed and then zip it (general purpose compression). Compare that to a K-5 raw file (specialized compression) and I bet the zip file is quite a bit larger. Knowing something about the data makes the algorithms better.

[Medium FormatPro]

And maybe dual card slots with two buffers? So you could write RAW+JPG on seperate cards without the dreaded write times of Canikon's dual card systems. Oh, and it should offer Mirror lockup shooting rates at higher speeds. Like the Canon 1DX. Enough wishes there?

Most Pentax camera bodies do have the room to have a dual card slot, but also obviously do not have it. And then there's the K-5 probably the best prosumer/semi-professional camera made - also not having it.

Most true professionals actually need the dual card thing. And considering it costs camera companies next to nothing to actually place this item into their cameras.

[eddie1960]

I wouldn't be at all surprised to see a dual slot on the K5 replacement, and if not then when (if) a FF comes it will most certainly have it.

[Clavius]

Most Pentax camera bodies do have the room to have a dual card slot, but also obviously do not have it. And then there's the K-5 probably the best prosumer/semi-professional camera made - also not having it.

Most true professionals actually need the dual card thing. And considering it costs camera companies next to nothing to actually place this item into their cameras.

I've seen people wishing dual card slots before, but I have no idea what the use of it would be. It's not used for the extra storage space, because memory costs nothing nowadays.

[eddie1960]

I've seen people wishing dual card slots before, but I have no idea what the use of it would be. It's not used for the extra storage space, because memory costs nothing nowadays.

pros will use them 2 save 2 copies as a back up for one. you can assign one to video the other to still, if you are shooting a lot of video it is handy. one can be assigned as jpeg the other as raw. there are lots of possibilities. If you shoot a lot of events or sports 2 cards means you aren't likely to miss something while changing cards. lots of reasons. the best from a paid gig standpoint is one is a backup.

[ihasa]

I've seen people wishing dual card slots before, but I have no idea what the use of it would be. It's not used for the extra storage space, because memory costs nothing nowadays.

The extra storage, plus the option to back-up your shots. You could also have RAW going to one card for shots that need PPing later, low quality jpeg going to the other for instant email.

[thibs]

(Voice over speaker system) "The next rumour will begin in ten minutes. All those who have tickets please proceed to the waiting area and try not to trample anyone in the way"

ROTFL

[Parliament]

Right, 2 times more possible integer values. but going from 14/bpc to 16/bpc is an increase by 2/14 or 1/7 or about 14%. That's the increase in the file size. However, my guess is that most scenes wouldn't have this much DR so with compression, the extra bits would add negligible size and value. But on scenes with that much DR, you would see at most a 14% increase in file size.

*I am a computer scientist...

Greg

Hi Greg,

i think the problem would be noise, as it isn't really compressible, unlike actual image information. (unless somebody likes to take photos of random noise, but most image motives look rather well organised) So if you have a raw file of a sensor which isn't really capable of 16 bit, then you would have a nice, compressible image in the top 14bits, while there ends up a huge amount of noise in the bottom 2bits, which would throw off your 2/14 figure for the added file size. (depending on the quotient of compression rate for image information vs. noise)

(since my approach is theoretical as well, it would be interesting to know how much the difference between a 12 and 14 bit raw is, but i'm not sure how to work that out)

Alex

[Clavius]

An extra cardslot in the battery grip, wouldn't that be more logical then?