[Winder]

I think there are certain fields of photography where this is a worth while upgrade. Astro-photography is an obvious area. Anywhere you work from a tripod and need high resolution for static subjects. Its a solid evolution of the K-3, but most people who own a K-3 won't see this as a needed upgrade IMO. I think most existing K-3 owners will be waiting for the FF to be released or a true replacement for the K-3.


Sony just reduced the A99 by $400 ($1,600). They might have a big announcement brewing. Ricoh better get it right.

[Blue]

thank you!

K3 now comes in two versions, a flash version, and a GPS version. Take your pick. simple.

Maybe the FF will be offered in two(or more) versions as well?

Very good point!

[bxf]

...
Improved SR and AF are nothing to sneeze at. I miss more shots from the shortcomings of those two than limits of the sensor...

Very good point, and perhaps we need to remind ourselves of such matters when formulating our expectations.

[Zygonyx]

Very good point!

+1, may i vote for this as well !

[Nicolas06]

I don't think you understand what the super resolution is. It's not upscaling an image to get more megapixels (eg upscaling 2k-4k) which blurs the detail you have because you can't add detail that's not there, it's not stitching multiple photos together to get more x and y resolution, which can easily be done in post. This takes a sample of the rgb values at every pixel giving the image more color resolution than standard images, where one pixel only records an r, g, or b value and the processing engine samples the surrounding pixels to make up the missing color information. This is why if you ever look at the images from the Foveon sensor, they have unprecedented detail per pixel where typical sensors tend to look very blurry at the pixel level. This is also why silly marketing people at Sigma advertise their cameras to have thrice their real resolution.

The super resolution you speak of is one possibility. The one Pentax currently implement. Many other algorithms and technical process are called super resolution like taking several time the same picture without shifting to reduce noise or adding some known interferance to the signal to deduce information that would be lost in diffraction otherwise. Just look and see the wikipedia article.

As for movies and TV this is not just interpolating pixels from a single image, this is using the fact that a movie has 24 images per second or more and that most of the time the image are moving either because the camera move or because the subject move. This mean you get several views of the same things and get more details this way.

As for panorama this is yet another technology.

In the end what count is the result. If the goal is to get more resolution, less noise there many approach Pentax implemented one. Many landscape shooters use panorama for giga pixel projects. Hazzeblad and Olympus do not move exactly by one pixel so they can increase MP instead of just reducing color artifacts. Some photographers simply take many time the same image to reduce noise.

[Stavri]

The super resolution you speak of is one possibility. The one Pentax currently implement. Many other algorithms and technical process are called super resolution like taking several time the same picture without shifting to reduce noise or adding some known interferance to the signal to deduce information that would be lost in diffraction otherwise. Just look and see the wikipedia article.

As for movies and TV this is not just interpolating pixels from a single image, this is using the fact that a movie has 24 images per second or more and that most of the time the image are moving either because the camera move or because the subject move. This mean you get several views of the same things and get more details this way.

As for panorama this is yet another technology.

In the end what count is the result. If the goal is to get more resolution, less noise there many approach Pentax implemented one. Many landscape shooters use panorama for giga pixel projects. Hazzeblad and Olympus do not move exactly by one pixel so they can increase MP instead of just reducing color artifacts. Some photographers simply take many time the same image to reduce noise.

I have a feeling Nicolas is not a Twitter user.. (I blame the 117 character cap) I read his posts usually with a bowl of cereal in front of me and a nice cup of coffee.

[jaad75]

Hazzeblad and Olympus do not move exactly by one pixel so they can increase MP instead of just reducing color artifacts.

Hasselblads MS have two modes actually - 4-shot, that does basically the same what Pentax pixel shift does, and 6-shot that pumps the files up to 200MPix (from the 50MPix sensor).

[Stavri]

Hasselblads MS have two modes actually - 4-shot, that does basically the same what Pentax pixel shift does, and 6-shot that pumps the files up to 200MPix (from the 50MPix sensor).

They charge by the megapixel. That would explain its $45,000 price tag

[Nicolas06]

Just because you don't have a use for it, doesn't mean no one else does. I really don't understand this "I don't want it so no one else should want it" attitude.

This is not just that even thought the thread is 5MP enough clearly has some discussion of the necessity of so much resolution.

This is more of what a feature is really giving you. When you add more MP, you get the added resolution all the time if your lenses are good enough and you shutter speed is fast enough. When you switch from 11 big focus points to 27 focus points and also get from 77 to 86K metering you can really change you AF algorithms.

When you embbed the GPS inside the camera you don't change the picture quality, you just make the camera a bit more conveniant for the time you need to geotag or take some kind of astro pictures. This was a choice. Was it better choice than not needing Flu card anymore and incomporating wifi? I'am not sure at all. Wifi is also a conveniance but with everybody having a smart phone today you could leverage to more people than only the one after astro pictures and the phone already provide geo tag.

The AF is said to be a bit better but they don't even really push it in their ads. They mention it, no more. The change is sure to be minor.

The super resolution thing is limited to some case, in particular using a tripod on still subjects. It is not at all the same effect as if the sensor was improved and could provide 36MP will keeping the same DR and noise levels. Even in this last case many would consider this as unecessary.

The SR is a bit improved, I'd say let see. They claim more stop but the actual number of stop claimed was always amphatised anyway. Most reviewers testing the feature on older models tend to say it more 2stop than 3.5. So maybe now it is 2.5 stop you can use 1/50 instead of 1/75 with your 200mm. Ok.

[jaad75]

The AF is said to be a bit better

It is said to be noticeably better.

[Stavri]

It is said to be noticeably better.

* On the new d-FA lenses....

[GeneV]

I think it goes without saying that I just expressed my viewpoint and did not imply that everyone needs to adopt it.

I believe using the built-in flash to contribute to the illumination of the subject almost always results in results that are not consistent with using a DSLR of this category. In other words, the respective (lack of) sophistication of the image can be had with much simpler means.

The use of the built-in flash as a trigger for external flashes is a different matter, but even then you end up with the possibility of seeing its weak output during the main flash and have to arrange your external flashes in a way that they can "see" the on-camera flash.


That's fine, but perhaps you wouldn't use the built-in flash anymore if you tried the alternative of having a dedicated flash controller like the V6 on top of the camera.

It is so much easier to be able to place external flashes any way you want them without caring for line-of-sight, and being able to define different flash power output levels (i.e., lighting ratios) by just turning a dial on an on-camera V6.


You can use the Cactus V6 (or similar systems from Godox or Radiopopper) with radio control for Pentax today.

Flash power level control is manual, but P-TTL does not really support multiple off-camera flashes anyhow, so anyone using more than one off-camera flash has very little to lose and a lot to gain by switching from optical P-TTL to radio-based triggering.

I have used radio controllers with speed lights and studio strobes, and I do so for any work where I am there primarily as the photographer. I've used the Alien Bee version of the remote power control the V6 gives you with a speed light.

However, many times I show up mainly as a guest at a party or family gathering with a DSLR, flash and a lens. Setting the flash to bounce and the on-camera to fill produces excellent results with a minimum of thought and equipment. I get to be a guest as well as producing some pretty professional-looking results. I know I get that possible benefit from the flash. I don't know what I get from a GPS.

[jaad75]

* On the new d-FA lenses....

No, it's going to be faster in the AF-S mode with new lenses and will track better with every lenses, AFAIR...

[Stavri]

No, it's going to be faster in the AF-S mode with new lenses and will track better with every lenses, AFAIR...

You need lenses with fast responsive AF motors to "see" its performance no?

[Nicolas06]

I know I get that possible benefit from the flash. I don't know what I get from a GPS.

Well for starter that's more information for google, facebook or flickr to sell to advertisers. Getting GPS coordinate automatically from exif is a far better way to spy on somebody than trying to do image recognition to try to see if it match a well known location.

Otherwise, it help for identity theft to. That funny because i changed work and we add a presentation on Internet security and they spoke of the need to minimze your presence online... Something that make me think that for my flickr and PentaxForum account I should have more an avartar name than my real name.

But yes for a few cases that can be quite usefull... Where this photo was actually taken? The GPS would give the info. And the astro photo case. This last one is sure the most interresting one but is limited to thoses interrested by this kind of pictures.