[Glorfindelrb]

Only the two posted before are using the pixel shifting.

[jaad75]

It's written on the Japanese website (but not all websites)

You mean here?
Sample Images?K-3 II | RICOH IMAGING

Edit: Nevermind, I got it. Thanks.

[Rorschach]

I believe that's shot with the DA* 55 f1.4 (not a $200 lens), but I see your point

*cough* I didn't pay very much more than that for my copy Granted, it has SDM issues but I knew it and didn't care.

On topic, those images are really fabulous....I think we may have reached a new definition for the expression 'pixie dust'.

[Mistral75]

What makes you think that this one is pixel-shifted?

Confidence reigns...

- As answered before, it's written on the Japanese website : リアル・レゾリューション・システム ON

- On the French website, the filename is "IMGPxxxx_PixelShiftResolution_ON.JPG"

[boriscleto]

Should I be the one to start the "Pixel Shift is worthless to me so I won't buy a K-3 II" thread?

[monochrome]

Should I be the one to start the "Pixel Shift is worthless to me so I won't buy a K-3 II" thread?

Sure.

OTOH, the K-3 refuseniks should start a thread, "Why I will buy a K-3 II . . . . . " *



*(No Hocir)

[Mistral75]

Quite interesting. With the pixel shifting turned on, still produces a 24 mpix file, similar as K3. i Would have expected a 48 to 96 mpix file but apparently, this is not the case.
(...)

Of course it is not the case: you don't have more than 24 Mpixels; simply, you have 4 luminance data (R x 1 + G x 2 + B x 1) per pixel instead of one (R or G or B, depending on the Bayer filter).

(...)

I also noted that in the sample pictures at that website, there are three specific pictures that show that the camera was handheld, or at least, the pictured subjects were moving or not completely still (as in a landscape). The elephants, the tiger and the girl. Dunno if those three pics were shot using pixel shifting high res, but if that's the case, then we have our answer as to how still means "still subjects with camera on tripod" needed for high res pixel shift.

(...)

Only the two pictures shown above are multi-shots. The remaining fifteen pictures, including those you are pointing out, are standards shots.

[Rondec]

Quite interesting. With the pixel shifting turned on, still produces a 24 mpix file, similar as K3. i Would have expected a 48 to 96 mpix file but aparently, this is not the case.

I also noted that in the sample pictures at that website, there are three specific pictures that show that the camera was handheld, or at least, the pictured subjects were moving or not completely still (as in a landscape). The elephants, the tiger and the girl. Dunno if those three pics were shot using pixel shifting high res, but if that's the case, then we have our answer as to how still means "still subjects with camera on tripod" needed for high res pixel shift.


But anyway, even without this feature, the K3 (K3ii) has damm sharp sensor and with proper quality glass... it becomes "surgical".

I thought that Ricoh had said that they were going to use the sensor shift to improve color accuracy and sharpness without increasing megapixels -- sort of like Foveon images have. Looks good to me so far, although certainly it will be of limited value (stationary objects without wind).

[jaad75]

Anybody knows what type of shutter is used for the pixel shift technique and what's the shortest overall exposure one can get?

[boriscleto]

OTOH, the K-3 refuseniks should start a thread, "Why I will buy a K-3 II . . . . . " *



*(No Hocir)

Another reason not to buy the II

[Kunzite]

Anybody knows what type of shutter is used for the pixel shift technique and what's the shortest overall exposure one can get?

Electronic. No idea.

[jaad75]

Electronic. No idea.

Hmm... It's the IMX193, so the fastest it can go is 8.7 frames per second... I believe 4 frames can be taken at ~1/2 s, then... Did I miss something?
Imagine that with a really fast sensor...

[monochrome]

Hmm... It's the IMX193, so the fastest it can go is 8.7 frames per second... I believe 4 frames can be taken at ~1/2 s, then... Did I miss something?
Imagine that with a really fast sensor...

How fast can IMX193 capture a 'frame' if the mirror stays up and the curtains don't move?

[pete-tarmigan]

What I find truly fascinating is Ricoh/Pentax achieved better IQ by improving quality on the pixel level, not by using brute force like Canon with their useless 50MP sensor. RGB pixel stacking improves efficiency instead bringing more firepower. In other words; lens resolution is not a bottleneck, because we achieve superior resolution and color reproduction by putting the 67% of the light to good use that would have been wasted at the color filter otherwise, so by utilizing the SR mechanics we both increase the resolving power of the sensor and lens. Or should I say not decrease (by having a color filter)?

I wonder if Ricoh acquired Pentax because they believed that marrying Ricoh's technology (e.g., pixel-shifting) with Pentax's could result in cameras that could provide serious competition for the other big camera makers. Was that Ricoh's plan?

[Glorfindelrb]

Hmm... It's the IMX193, so the fastest it can go is 8.7 frames per second... I believe 4 frames can be taken at ~1/2 s, then... Did I miss something?
Imagine that with a really fast sensor...

You probably don't want vibrations from the shutter so I guess it will be slower except if it's the electronic shutter, then ...