Win a Pentax Limited lens and more - enter in our 2023 end of year giveaway!

lytrytyr · 11-17-2013, 04:38 PM

Originally posted by starbase218

imho Tamron's 60/2.0 macro is a great idea. Unfortunately that's not available in Pentax mount.

The Zeiss ZK 50/2 Makro-Planar may be the closest in Pentax mount.
One of the niftiest fifties around.

thibs · 11-18-2013, 12:37 PM

Originally posted by gazonk

I've discovered that my K-5 works better with the SR turned off when I use my DA35 ltd at very close range. I've been wondering if that could be fixed in firmware though: could it be that the SR mechanism doesn't compensate for the longer focal length of he lens at its closest focussing distances?

Seems logical to me. When you're very close, a very small movement will generate very easily an unsharp image.
I don't think (Ricoh, you listen ??) that SR is influenced by focus distance. It should in this case.

It may also just mean to Ricoh came to conclusion that in the case of Macro lenses, in-lens SR is quite more effective.

Fogel70 · 11-18-2013, 01:46 PM

Originally posted by gazonk

I've discovered that my K-5 works better with the SR turned off when I use my DA35 ltd at very close range. I've been wondering if that could be fixed in firmware though: could it be that the SR mechanism doesn't compensate for the longer focal length of he lens at its closest focussing distances?

Pentax would have to implement a 5-axis image stabilization for this, but I doubt they have hardware for more than 3 axis stabilisation in the body.
They would need two extra motion sensors for translational movement vertically and horizontally, which dominates shake pattern when close up.

Boris_Akunin · 11-18-2013, 02:11 PM

Would in-lens SR and in-body SR working together be too much to hope for?

Vylen · 11-18-2013, 02:17 PM

Originally posted by Boris_Akunin

Would in-lens SR and in-body SR working together be too much to hope for?

Yes; that would require them talking to each other - this would probably require additional pins in the mount to communicate the information from the lens.

Boris_Akunin · 11-18-2013, 02:30 PM

Originally posted by Vylen

Yes; that would require them talking to each other - this would probably require additional pins in the mount to communicate the information from the lens.

Well, we're hopng for an uncrippled K-mount anyway, they might as well add pins while they're at it...

Fogel70 · 11-18-2013, 02:34 PM

Originally posted by Boris_Akunin

Would in-lens SR and in-body SR working together be too much to hope for?

If they compensate for different types of shake they can easily work together, FI by letting the IBIS compensate for angular shake and let ILIS compensate for vertical and horizontal shift.

But it would be very difficult to get them to work together in compensating the same axis. Both system must know exactly what the other is doing so they don't overcompensate. One system must be the master, and other (slave) can only compensate what the master can't perfectly compensate for.
In the end you probably win very little over one system taking care of all shake.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Nikon files a patent for a camera with interchangeable sensor	RonakG	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	3	09-30-2013 09:19 AM
New lens ricoh patent for 1/1.7" sensor...	wanderography	Pentax Q	14	11-07-2012 10:42 AM
Ricoh patent: 28mm equiv. lenses - Future of GRD and GXR?	JPT	Pentax News and Rumors	2	07-07-2012 08:04 PM
Canon Patent for sensor based SR!	KungPOW	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	22	02-01-2010 07:03 PM
Canon files for iris ID patent	Duck Dodgers	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	3	02-12-2008 08:20 PM

11-17-2013, 04:38 PM	#16
lytrytyr Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2011 Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,300	Originally posted by starbase218 imho Tamron's 60/2.0 macro is a great idea. Unfortunately that's not available in Pentax mount. The Zeiss ZK 50/2 Makro-Planar may be the closest in Pentax mount. One of the niftiest fifties around.

11-18-2013, 12:37 PM	#17
thibs Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Belgium Photos: Albums Posts: 7,000	Originally posted by gazonk I've discovered that my K-5 works better with the SR turned off when I use my DA35 ltd at very close range. I've been wondering if that could be fixed in firmware though: could it be that the SR mechanism doesn't compensate for the longer focal length of he lens at its closest focussing distances? Seems logical to me. When you're very close, a very small movement will generate very easily an unsharp image. I don't think (Ricoh, you listen ??) that SR is influenced by focus distance. It should in this case. It may also just mean to Ricoh came to conclusion that in the case of Macro lenses, in-lens SR is quite more effective.

11-18-2013, 01:46 PM	#18
Fogel70 Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Photos: Albums Posts: 3,043	Originally posted by gazonk I've discovered that my K-5 works better with the SR turned off when I use my DA35 ltd at very close range. I've been wondering if that could be fixed in firmware though: could it be that the SR mechanism doesn't compensate for the longer focal length of he lens at its closest focussing distances? Pentax would have to implement a 5-axis image stabilization for this, but I doubt they have hardware for more than 3 axis stabilisation in the body. They would need two extra motion sensors for translational movement vertically and horizontally, which dominates shake pattern when close up.

11-18-2013, 02:11 PM	#19
Boris_Akunin Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Bremen, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 674	Would in-lens SR and in-body SR working together be too much to hope for?

11-18-2013, 02:17 PM	#20
Vylen Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Sydney, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,262	Originally posted by Boris_Akunin Would in-lens SR and in-body SR working together be too much to hope for? Yes; that would require them talking to each other - this would probably require additional pins in the mount to communicate the information from the lens.

11-18-2013, 02:30 PM	#21
Boris_Akunin Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Bremen, Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 674	Originally posted by Vylen Yes; that would require them talking to each other - this would probably require additional pins in the mount to communicate the information from the lens. Well, we're hopng for an uncrippled K-mount anyway, they might as well add pins while they're at it...

11-18-2013, 02:34 PM	#22
Fogel70 Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Stockholm, Sweden Photos: Albums Posts: 3,043	Originally posted by Boris_Akunin Would in-lens SR and in-body SR working together be too much to hope for? If they compensate for different types of shake they can easily work together, FI by letting the IBIS compensate for angular shake and let ILIS compensate for vertical and horizontal shift. But it would be very difficult to get them to work together in compensating the same axis. Both system must know exactly what the other is doing so they don't overcompensate. One system must be the master, and other (slave) can only compensate what the master can't perfectly compensate for. In the end you probably win very little over one system taking care of all shake.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

Patent for Macro lenses

Win a Pentax Limited lens and more - enter in our 2023 end of year giveaway!