Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-18-2014, 06:01 AM   #106
Pentaxian
Mistral75's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Paris
Posts: 2,930
QuoteOriginally posted by kadajawi Quote
Does SR make sense in a 645D? (...)

(...)
Presumably so since HD Pentax D-FA 645 90 mm f/2.8 ED AW SR incorporates a Shake Reduction mechanism .

03-18-2014, 06:55 AM   #107
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,215
QuoteOriginally posted by kadajawi Quote
Boosting resolution/color fidelity via sensor shift could and should be also done with crop sensor cameras. And I don't need in camera processing. I want them to have features (like sensor shift bracketing) that aren't calculated in camera. I can stitch the files myself, thank you. I think at this point it is fine to assume that a DSLR user will process the photos on a computer anyway.
We do need to remember that many (perhaps most) dSLR buyers actually don't own image processing software. The disconnect is when those consumers buy the highest-capability camera because they think the capability will give them better photographs, then they expect the camera to do everything for them. Manufacturers walk a fine line between adding silly features - bling - to attract nonsense buyers and providing a useful photographic tool for experienced and inexperienced users.

The answer, I think, is for manufacturers to avoid catering to art snobs (by assuming the target customer segment post-processes files) by offering user-contextual menus. Let me turn off the things I don't need or want and by so doing reduce the non-essential processing routines in-camera, freeing processor resources to do the things I want done faster or better, or to do special things.

For instance, in his review of the K10D Michael Reichman lauded the ability to select a single image to process in-camera while shooting RAW instead of RAW+. At the time that was a groundbreaking idea, as was allowing the user to select .DNG RAW instead of .PEF..

Yet Michael Reichman recently wrote about your observation on Luminous Landscape and I have been critical of his writing, not because I think he was wrong but because I think he was condescending. Amateurs have a right to spend money on features they'll never use if that's how they choose to spend their money. Who are we to say what part of buying and owning a camera is satisfying to or motivates another class of camera buyers? Who are we to say who is and isn't a 'real photographer'?
03-18-2014, 08:25 AM   #108
Pentaxian
gazonk's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Oslo area, Norway
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,512
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
We do need to remember that many (perhaps most) dSLR buyers actually don't own image processing software.
Really? I'd like to see numbers for that. For instance, every dSLR buyer with a mac owns image processing software (iPhoto). And PC owners have access to free stuff similar to (while not quite as easy to use as) iPhoto. And those who only have tablets, will probably have more fun editing images on their tablet than on their tiny camera screen.
03-18-2014, 11:38 AM   #109
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,236
QuoteOriginally posted by gazonk Quote
Really? I'd like to see numbers for that. For instance, every dSLR buyer with a mac owns image processing software (iPhoto). And PC owners have access to free stuff similar to (while not quite as easy to use as) iPhoto. And those who only have tablets, will probably have more fun editing images on their tablet than on their tiny camera screen.
I'm convinced Monochrome is right. He said DSLR owner: most Rebel owner IMO have no proper photo editor.

03-18-2014, 11:58 AM   #110
Site Supporter
6BQ5's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Nevada, USA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,087
QuoteOriginally posted by thibs Quote
I'm convinced Monochrome is right. He said DSLR owner: most Rebel owner IMO have no proper photo editor.
I would have to agree with Monochrome too. If I had to guess (and it's all I can do) I would say that a lot of DSLR owners rely on their camera's JPG engine and use something like iPhoto for pre-canned effects and cropping. My mother in law follow this approach with her Canon Rebel. My wife has some friends with DSLRs and they are straight up JPG shooters. A co-worker here bought a Sony NEX-3N when they were being blown out and he asked me about cameras in general. I told him that he has a very nice and very powerful imaging platform, especially if he ever decides to shoot in RAW and do his own post processing. He said that he heard of some people doing that but it's not worth his time. The camera does it all for him.

I think it's easy to look at ourselves and this forum and forget that we are a slim minority of what manufacturers would call power users.
03-18-2014, 12:52 PM   #111
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,714
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
We do need to remember that many (perhaps most) dSLR buyers actually don't own image processing software. The disconnect is when those consumers buy the highest-capability camera because they think the capability will give them better photographs, then they expect the camera to do everything for them. Manufacturers walk a fine line between adding silly features - bling - to attract nonsense buyers and providing a useful photographic tool for experienced and inexperienced users.

I also think that the majority off owners off dslr don't buy any imaging software to work on their images. Still there are free software programs that do give them some controll over their mostly jpg output.

It's just because we (enthousiast users on internet forums about camera's) all buy software, we think everyone does.
03-18-2014, 01:43 PM   #112
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,215
OK I mis-spoke. I'm Windows-centric.

I'll bet though they haven't purchased or downloaded (free) additional, morre powerful post-processing software.
03-18-2014, 03:57 PM   #113
JPT
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Tokyo
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,217
From the point of view of the camera makers, they probably feel that they should be providing a complete solution on their cameras. Telling customers to go out and buy expensive imaging software may seem like a cop out to them.

I have to admit that I shoot the vast majority of my photos in JPEG. I know it doesn't provide optimal image quality and I sometimes regret it afterwards. The thing is, I enjoy photography because it a chance to get out and do something. The last thing I want to do after spending ask week slaving in front of a computer at work is to spend more time staring at a screen tweaking the photos I take. So I keep putting off buying more storage, a more powerful computer, bigger memory cards and the imaging software because I'm not convinced it would make my hobby more rewarding. Am I the only one who feels like this?

So in short, I appreciate any in-camera tools to make my JPEGs look the way I want without recourse to the computer.

03-18-2014, 05:03 PM   #114
Veteran Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 4,893
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
OK I mis-spoke. I'm Windows-centric.

I'll bet though they haven't purchased or downloaded (free) additional, morre powerful post-processing software.
Huh! Looks like Microsoft Photo Editor/Picture Editor has been discontinued. Just as well, better options are available free.

I think the pertinent point isn't that they have software. The more pertinent point in my view is... has an average photo (that is displayed/shared) been through a post-processing program?
03-18-2014, 05:26 PM   #115
mee
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,779
There has to be a line (I'd like to think) where, after being crossed, the majority of camera owners actually do own proper PP software (even if it is PSE).

I'm guessing that line is somewhere in the 1000-1400 dollar DSLR body price range.

I mean, a $500-800 Rebel is one thing.. but a 70D, 6D, or better shooter should probably have PP software... to use the presets they bought off the faaabulous portrait and wedding tips site of course!

That said, if you don't have PP software then you likely do NOT have anything beyond the kit lens too. At which point they are simply treating the DSLR as an expensive P+S and I'd thus argue they don't matter so much anyways for the mid to upper tier bodies design (even if that happens to be what they buy -- their mindset is too limited for full use of the camera)
03-18-2014, 06:36 PM   #116
Banned




Join Date: May 2010
Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,541
This is the problem that bothers camera manufacturers a lot, because none of them is a good software company.

They are forced to invest in camera processing and make it simpler and more powerful too, in order to go forward. It is not about dumbing the camera down, but making it simpler and more immediate to use. Ideally, we should not be using development software at all. Lightroom and Aperture and whatever else are an unnecessary hurdle. Less they are used, the better for all but extremely small niche of art photography.

Manufacturers cannot rely on Apple or Adobe or someone else releasing RAW support at some stage — all vital functions and quality of the output must be controlled by the manufacturer.

Which also rises a question of collaboration; would not be easier for some manufacturers to exchange technologies and patents and make things all the better? I'd personally like to have Fujifilm's JPEG engine inside Pentax camera, and I bet Fujifilm would love to have some unique RI's patents? However, there is very little matter that differentiates some manufacturers today — only almost negligible nuances that keep them afloat and selling under the excuse of 'being different', that I don not see such a collaboration happening anytime soon.
03-18-2014, 08:25 PM   #117
Inactive Account




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: New Orleans
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,053
QuoteOriginally posted by JPT Quote
From the point of view of the camera makers, they probably feel that they should be providing a complete solution on their cameras. Telling customers to go out and buy expensive imaging software may seem like a cop out to them.
They generally do provide some imaging software like Silky Pix from pentax. IIRC, Samsung even bundles LR with some of their ILCs.

But I think most camera owners don't spend a lot of time bothering with PP, personally my cataloging solution was Picasa until recently with GIMP for PP only when I wanted to print something big. In Picasa, if I was going to print something at all, I would only do very limited corrections and cropping and would always revert my image back to the original because it would otherwise create a difficult to manage sprawl of JPEGs ballooning my used disk space.
03-18-2014, 08:59 PM   #118
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 2,646
Hm. Interesting debate. I cringe at the thought of giving someone unprocessed photos. I sometimes might do it, but I don't like it. I even post-process my videos, and I want my camera to give me videos that lend themselves to post-processing. An uncle has set his DSLR to some picture style he liked on the camera screen. What can I say, the videos looked good on camera, but on a monitor? It's underexposed junk, it just doesn't look good, and you can't move it into any other direction.

Keep in mind that at some point DSLRs skip the picture modes and only give you PASM, so they are not beginner friendly anymore. I think that is a sensible approach. I still remember a Sigma DSLR that was not able to output JPEGs. And that was 3 or 4 years before Lightroom was launched (admittedly I think that had more to do with Sigma's image processing being unable to get decent results on its own Nevertheless I liked the approach). We do have exposure bracketing on all DSLRs, and even some smaller cameras, eventhough that mode is rather pointless unless you do post-processing.

If you want to have control over the photos, there's no way around raw and Lightroom.

I whole-heartedly disagree with using less Lightroom. I use a ton of Lightroom and Photoshop for my commercial work, plus PTGui, plus Photomatix, and so on. It is required to get decent photos. You're not supposed to see the work that has gone into them, but the photos themselves do not look good, nor are they meant to look good. They are the source.

Ideally I can write scripts for my camera. Set it on a tripod, and program it (perhaps through a phone or tablet) to take a sequence of photos, with different settings. I want to set 2 focus points that are to be in focus, the closest I need, and the furthest I need. Then I press the shutter once, and after 2 seconds it goes through a procedure. It sets the right aperture and focus point to get everything in focus, if necessary through focus stacking if the aperture has to be too small to get a sharp photo. It moves the sensor to one position in the corner, takes an exposure row, with the focus stacking, then the next position, etc. Right now I have to do all of that by hand, which consumes a lot of time and work. I'd rather set up a photo, press shutter and start reading a book or whatever.

Obviously that isn't for everybody, but giving the option would be nice. After all at least some of these cameras are meant as a professional tool, that are supposed to be used for work. A certain level of complexity is to be expected. No one goes "Oh, AutoCAD is too complex and difficult for John Doe who wants to draw up a simple sketch". There's always the possibility to have a menu item where you can lock/unlock the feature set. Say there's the option to enable beginner modes, and the option to enable the segment that allows you to program the camera. To tether it to a phone (with a Pentax provided SDK that gives you full control. Other programmers can then go crazy giving the camera all sorts of specialized features that improves it for studio use for example).
03-19-2014, 01:39 AM   #119
Pentaxian
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by Uluru Quote
shift sensor just a pixel in each direction to boost on resolution and detail captured, and perhaps just enough to simulate 'film look' of the image and increasing colour and detail fidelity by nullifying the Bayer pattern with the sensor shift. A virtual Foveon ...
Well known idea but wouldn't really work in practice.

Because of sensor readout times, the camera would shake within one sequence of, e.g., 4 pixel shifts. And then you would need a very sturdy tripod to prevent the shutter from shifting the camera by a few microns between shots. Overall, not an interesting option.

Therefore, you are left with traditional superresolution: compute a superresolved image from a burst (aligned in post).

It is doable, I've done it. But the result can't compete with a higher native resolution and while it is doable today, really: how many are doing it really?
03-19-2014, 01:48 AM   #120
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,714
Does someone think that David Beckham with his Lunar does some real photoshopping, or is it just green mode?

http://joytv.gr/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Harper-Beckham-3.jpg
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!
645d, buyers, camera, crop, ff, hand, k-3, lenses, light, lines, market, mf, months, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, players, release, ricoh, sales, sensor, ships, solution, sony, support, system, time, wave
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Imaging Resource's light leak tests odyseuss Pentax DSLR Discussion 6 03-14-2014 10:54 AM
Interview with Chief Sales & Marketing Officer / Ricoh Imaging Japan leonsroar Pentax News and Rumors 464 01-13-2014 01:42 PM
Ricoh email on K-3 points to Imaging Resource review bwDraco Pentax K-3 34 10-23-2013 11:01 AM
Imaging-Resource Pentax/Ricoh interview ogl Pentax News and Rumors 44 09-24-2012 08:32 AM
Imaging Resource Interview with PENTAX US VP Marketing Gareth.Ig Pentax News and Rumors 8 01-28-2012 10:42 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:12 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