Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-16-2016, 03:49 AM   #196
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,432
QuoteOriginally posted by zoolander Quote
Okay so 2160 is 33% more than 1440. So are crop camera images 33% less sharp than full frame cameras?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4BDi3tph4M

Although this might be considered an unfair comparison, because a. the K-3 has no AA filter b. K-3 uses pixel shift c. the Tamron lens Ed uses is not as sharp as a DA* lens. And its not like Ed buys crappy gear.

Back in the day crop had very heavy AA filters, now thery're real light or if any. Then why does it appear that crop is just as sharp as full frame, and in many cases sharper ? I mean, they're not putting on AA filters so blurry that they're taking away 33% sharpness from a FF image.
Crop versus full frame may or may not make a difference in the final print or image, depending on the size of the print, or the monitor it is viewed on. But certainly, it would make sense that if you print a D810 image and a K5 IIs image at 36 inches on the long side, the D810 image will have more detail visible and will appear sharper in comparison. On the other hand, compare 4 by 6 prints and you couldn't see a difference.

The pixel shift is a specific application which cameras with image stabilization can do to add detail and dynamic range to images. It is not usable in many situations due to movement within the image, but when usable, it certainly improves K3 II images to being better than D610/6D images, but still not quite as good as D810 images.

01-16-2016, 05:14 AM   #197
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 362
QuoteOriginally posted by zoolander Quote
Although this might be considered an unfair comparison
It is unfair and naive. Ofc stacking 4 shots with 1.5x crop (372mm˛ x4 = 1488mm˛) vs 1 shot of a ff (864mm˛) sensor should give an advantage to the stacked image (is the conditions are ok with stacking). A pano of 4 aps-c images vs a single FF shot should also.

Pixel shift is just an in camera stacking with the optimisation of countering the effect of the bayer filter to get the best possible result with only 4 shots and without moving the camera.
01-16-2016, 05:27 AM   #198
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,750
QuoteOriginally posted by Glorfindelrb Quote
It is unfair and naive. Ofc stacking 4 shots with 1.5x crop (372mm˛ x4 = 1488mm˛) vs 1 shot of a ff (864mm˛) sensor should give an advantage to the stacked image (is the conditions are ok with stacking). A pano of 4 aps-c images vs a single FF shot should also.

Pixel shift is just an in camera stacking with the optimisation of countering the effect of the bayer filter to get the best possible result with only 4 shots and without moving the camera.
Reading that idea it is also unfair to compare an APSC with a 35mm sensor as they don't share the same surface area. After all a larger sensor is just an in camera optimization that allow to get less noise and less deph of field at same apperture...

For me it is unfair because well, it is quite likely the Pentax FF will have the same feature anyway and it apply to a very restrictive use case: perfectly still scene, subject on a tripod.

To evaluate the interrest of a pixel shift, it would make more sense to compare pixel shift on K3-II and no pixel shift on K3, K3-II or D7200 with 4 pictures stacked in photoshop or something like that.

As if a K3, D7100, D7200 or K3-II achieve similar sharpness as a D600/D610/D750, the response is basically yes, very similar sharpness and better sharpness than FF with less pixels. The high iso avantage is not so present on a landscape because you need to be closed down, and to be even more closed down on an FF than on an APSC. There the dynamic range of course but when you need lot of dynamic range, it is not the small difference between the 2 sensors that will make the difference but more if you decide for an HDR shoot or not where you can add 4-8EV of dynamic range.

D810 is sharper when the lens follow because it has more MP. Maybe we will get a 36MP APSC one day that will do just as well. If it coupled with a few low iso setting (like iso50 or better iso25) then it should perform quite competitively against a D810.

Last edited by Nicolas06; 01-16-2016 at 05:41 AM.
01-20-2016, 01:04 AM   #199
Pentaxian
fs999's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Luxembourg
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,790
Does Sony have paied DXOMark to remove the 645Z test ?
I can't find it ! If you click on OP's link, the highest ranked camera is Sony A7R II...

01-20-2016, 01:05 AM   #200
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Zygonyx's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Ile de France
Posts: 3,101
It hasn't been published yet, you only can find the main results as a comparative sheet in Sony RX1-II test.
01-20-2016, 01:11 AM   #201
Pentaxian
fs999's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Luxembourg
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,790
QuoteOriginally posted by Zygonyx Quote
It hasn't been published yet, you only can find the main results as a comparative sheet in Sony RX1-II test.
No, only in the text above the table :
QuoteQuote:
In terms of rankings, only the Pentax 645Z with its physically larger 43.8 x 32.8mm CMOS sensor (nearly 1.7x the surface area of a full-frame 35mm sensor) is ahead by just over a half-stop in noise levels.
The first camera in the table is Sony A7R II...
01-20-2016, 01:13 AM   #202
Site Supporter
Deimos's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Kingdom of Wonder
Posts: 1,711
They removed it....
01-20-2016, 01:18 AM   #203
Pentaxian
fs999's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Luxembourg
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,790
It would be interesting to know why...

01-20-2016, 02:51 AM   #204
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Surrey
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 179
something tells me that they removed it so the new Phase One could replace it... I think they are clearly confusing their vested interest with a credibility of testing website. And, unfortunately, a lot of people and other review sites take that credibility for granted.
01-20-2016, 03:06 AM   #205
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Zygonyx's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Ile de France
Posts: 3,101
Incredible, yes.
01-20-2016, 03:25 AM   #206
Veteran Member
zoolander's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Gold Coast
Photos: Albums
Posts: 337
QuoteOriginally posted by Glorfindelrb Quote
It is unfair and naive. Ofc stacking 4 shots with 1.5x crop (372mm˛ x4 = 1488mm˛) vs 1 shot of a ff (864mm˛) sensor should give an advantage to the stacked image (is the conditions are ok with stacking). A pano of 4 aps-c images vs a single FF shot should also.

Pixel shift is just an in camera stacking with the optimisation of countering the effect of the bayer filter to get the best possible result with only 4 shots and without moving the camera.
No its not unfair or naive to compare outcomes between sensor sizes, people do this on a regular basis.

The K-3ii came out, and from memory the improvement in sharpness over the K-3 was 12% or 14%. The 6D has fewer pixels at 21pm, so I think its 11% mega pixels.

So from 33% we subtract 11% (for fewer pixels) = 22%

The K-3ii has no AA filter which is an 8% improvement.

Plus 14% for pixel shift = 22%

That Canon Lens Ed was using is better then the Tamron for the K=3ii.

This above is just a rough calculation. So as far as I'm concerned they should be similar in terms of detail, but why does Ed from Photouniverse observe something greater, greater that he got rid of the Canon gear. He also had a Nikon D810 and ditched that too because of sharpness issues with his older lenses.

What I'm saying here is you cannot unequivocally declare full frame sharper. There are unique factors that come into to play. But yeah okay a 24mp FF versus 24mp apsc sensor, the FF will resolve more.

This whole argument is just like cars. What is better, a V8, a V6 or a 4 cylinder turbo. Yeah a V8 has lots of grunt, but the cars usually weigh a lot and chew gasoline and can achieve a high top speed. 6's are good if they're turbo charged, but lose in top speed to V8's. 4 cylinder turbo charged all wheel drive cars built to meet world rally homologation rules, are very quick and light with lots of grip, and also chew gasoline, but lose in top speed compared to V8's. People will say, oh you can't compare 8 cylinder cars to 6's and 4's and turbo charged cars .........

Either way, they'll all go very quick and do what they're designed to do. Everybody has their preference, much like cameras. The K-3ii is turbo charged with pixel shift, I know its not perfect, but its useful.

As far as I understand pixel shift, it is not a stack of 4 images.
01-20-2016, 03:38 AM   #207
Pentaxian
Edgar_in_Indy's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Indiana, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,637
Well, it's now been just over two weeks since "Sophie" from DXoMark told me that the 645Z results "should be published within the next couple of weeks."
01-20-2016, 03:46 AM   #208
Pentaxian
Fogel70's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Stockholm, Sweden
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,748
QuoteOriginally posted by zoolander Quote
Okay so 2160 is 33% more than 1440. So are crop camera images 33% less sharp than full frame cameras?
No, 2160 is 50% more than 1440.
But 1440 is 33% less than 2160.

Last edited by Fogel70; 01-20-2016 at 03:51 AM.
01-20-2016, 06:30 AM   #209
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 362
QuoteOriginally posted by Deimos Quote
They removed it....
Ok, DxO cannot invoke any excuses now. I feel sorry for Zygonyx who got its stuff borrowed for weeks for this comedy.
01-20-2016, 06:56 AM   #210
Pentaxian
Edgar_in_Indy's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Indiana, USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,637
QuoteOriginally posted by Fogel70 Quote
No, 2160 is 50% more than 1440.
But 1440 is 33% less than 2160.
After so much speculation and conjecture in this thread, it's nice to have at least one thing that can be conclusively proved.
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!
645z, apples, base, capacity, claims, d810, design, dr, dxo, dxomark, files, ii, iso, k-3, k-5, k-7, lossless, noise, pentax, pentax 645z scores, pentax news, pentax rumors, pixels, score, scores, sensor, technology, unit
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax 645z in DXOMark 101 points..., is it true? Ventzy Pentax Medium Format 32 01-01-2016 12:08 PM
K-S1 scores on DxOMark 6BQ5 Pentax K-S1 & K-S2 34 11-14-2014 07:52 AM
Red Epic Dragon jumps to top of DxOMark Sensor charts with score of 101 ! jogiba Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 14 03-10-2014 01:50 PM
Arrggh - Nikon V2 scores lower than V1 or RX100 on dxomark Christine Tham Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 36 12-24-2012 04:41 PM
DXOMark scores for the Q posted. . . snostorm Pentax Q 8 12-03-2011 01:47 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:29 AM. | 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