Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-11-2016, 12:28 AM   #1456
Loyal Site Supporter
redpit's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Athens
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 674
You can just ignore the PS option those of you who don't need it. It's not that single shots are lacking something in the K-1, on the contrary. You can also don't ever use the lights that help you with night outdoor photography and use a head lamp. But this doesn't mean that these are useless or meaningless functions to anybody.

I found that I used the PS more than I could imagine and is a wonderful feature. It's just another ace in the sleeve of Pentax K-1. If you use it well you get the benefit of it and the results are awesome. I find it super useful for landscape photography and it turns "cheap" to acquire old manual lenses to super useful-high resolution tools that are difficult to tell the difference to contemporary expensive lenses on single shot captures.



05-11-2016, 12:32 AM - 1 Like   #1457
Site Supporter
Cynog Ap Brychan's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Gloucester
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,091
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
Those who are interested in images don't care wich device is used.
Again, you're generalising too much. I certainly care very much about image quality, and while I have both DSLR and mirrorless systems, I much, much prefer the OVFs of my Pentaxes and Nikons. While some photographers might not care which camera they use as long as they get good images, part of the equation is enjoying the tools one uses, especially as an amateur. I will only use mirrorless for my "serious" photography (if an amateur can indeed be serious in the sense that a professional might be), when DSLRs are dead and gone, which isn't going to happen in my lifetime.
05-11-2016, 03:01 AM   #1458
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,544
I think whether or not you use pixel shift depends very much on the style of photo you shoot. I use it almost not at all when taking photos of my kids and quite a bit when I am shooting landscapes, when I am on a tripod. It definitely does improve color depth, dynamic range and sharpness and with the implementation on the K-1 artifacts are kept to a minimum.

But all of this misses the point. It is silly to argue about whether someone needs an f1.4 lens that is sharp wide open, or medium format resolution, or a small improvement in bokeh that you might see with a top end lens. There is a constant tension between good enough and better (and my personal budget) and whenever I can make my photos incrementally better without spending a bunch of money, I am in favor of that -- even if it takes a little extra time in post processing.

As others have said, if pixel shift isn't important to you, then that's fine. Don't use it. The K-1 is still an awesome camera with or without it.
05-11-2016, 03:02 AM   #1459
Senior Member
gorme's Avatar

Join Date: May 2014
Location: Galway - Ireland
Posts: 212
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
"Everybody" is relative. The camera market is shrinking every year. We are in a case of diminishing returns.

A 8MP is enough for most use because you can't basically see the whole picture and at the same time resolve smaller details than what a 8MP shot with you eyes. Even at cinema, for picture of 15meters wide, this is 4K, no more than 8MP. Many modern movies have 2K master for special effects. I don't see people complaining.

Added resolution serve for cropping, because we don't have real pixels but photosites (pixel shift try to solve that) and because (back in time) we had low pass filters. A standard 36MP is already very comfortable and I would expect that somebody that shoot on a tripod a still subject (pixel shift case) would select a low iso setting and avoid heavy crop anyway.

Imagine on the opposite the impact of 2EV dynamic range and noise level for widlife, wedding, action/sports, even for the average joe that want to shoot indoor or in low light for the birday of its son? So yes that would be huge. And even that I think would not be enough to drive the whole market up. This would only ampower the smaller cameras as due to diminishing return, the difference would be much more visible on smaller sensors, than on big expensive ones.
Typical example where small pictures are an advantage is photojournalism. Given the competition to sell pictures on big events, if you can process and send a good quality 8MPx four times faster than your competitor, you are more likely to sell it to newspapers and online news editions. Anyway for the online news, pictures are downsized to 400*600 or so

PS is an option, no one is forced to use it. I am sure that it will be usefull for some people doing Macro/Product photography and it is a nice option for Pentax users...

05-11-2016, 03:22 AM - 2 Likes   #1460
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,544
There is just a real tendency for folks to get upset over features that photographers don't personally use. I seem to hear the most flack about video. But I have also heard aggravation at pixel shift, astro tracer, live view, and GPS. I'm just not sure why having those features on a camera would bother a person (even if they don't use them), if someone else can find a use for them...
05-11-2016, 03:46 AM   #1461
Site Supporter
Cynog Ap Brychan's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Gloucester
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,091
QuoteOriginally posted by gorme Quote
A 8MP is enough for most use because you can't basically see the whole picture and at the same time resolve smaller details than what a 8MP shot with you eyes.
I's not always about seeing the whole picture, but discerning the detailed elements within the picture. Anyway, only the central part of the retina can resolve small detail, so if one is far enough back to see the whole of a picture, painting, landscape, whatever, you're not seeing the peripheries in any sort of resolution. That's why our eyes move about when we're looking at something. I'm personally happy with 36 Mpx, and would take more if I can get them. I love seeing pictures within pictures.
05-11-2016, 05:16 AM   #1462
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Parallax's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Dakota
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,507
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
They produce images at the same level of quality. Those who are interested in images don't care wich device is used.
And what does that have to do with the work flow of processing shifted images?
You said the work flow for processing PS images was too complex to be used professionally, then tried to substantiate it by pointing out what a great lens the Sony is.
Some apples taste better than others, but what does that have to do with the work flow of pruducing a pie?
05-11-2016, 05:48 AM   #1463
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 5,684
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
Man there 2 ways to look at it. Either what you did before 2008 was not that great. And not because of you as a photographer but because really the gear was too basic. Bad dynamic range, low resolution. Well what you provided in the end was not satisfying. Maybe it was the best of theses time, but not satisfying.
We had a recession and building came to a stop. I basically got out of shooting that type of work. We didn't have the software correction options like we do today or the HDR. That was almost 10 years ago.

QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
Your client, while knowing they got the best available at that time clearly saw the flaws of your work and other photographers and basically, if you were to shoot again with the same gear, in today market the result would look so ancient, so low quality that nobody ever would want to pay for that.
Not even close.

05-11-2016, 05:51 AM   #1464
Loyal Site Supporter
redpit's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Athens
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 674
I unsubscribe, another thread that fulfilled its mission and with some help from "usual suspects" was driven to a meaningless debate. Thanks God Pentax keeps going strong and keeps disappointing the "usual suspects"...
05-11-2016, 07:04 AM   #1465
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,705
QuoteOriginally posted by Parallax Quote
And what does that have to do with the work flow of processing shifted images?
You said the work flow for processing PS images was too complex to be used professionally, then tried to substantiate it by pointing out what a great lens the Sony is.
Some apples taste better than others, but what does that have to do with the work flow of pruducing a pie?
It takes time and time is money when you have to pay for that time. If you want more sharpness then you could look for sharper lenses that fit a certain camera and situation.

QuoteOriginally posted by Cynog Ap Brychan Quote
Again, you're generalising too much. I certainly care very much about image quality, and while I have both DSLR and mirrorless systems, I much, much prefer the OVFs of my Pentaxes and Nikons. While some photographers might not care which camera they use as long as they get good images, part of the equation is enjoying the tools one uses, especially as an amateur. I will only use mirrorless for my "serious" photography (if an amateur can indeed be serious in the sense that a professional might be), when DSLRs are dead and gone, which isn't going to happen in my lifetime.
You missed my point. You are interested in making images and the tool you use for it. For those who only are interested in an image they don't care wich camera or technic is used.

QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
"Everybody" is relative. The camera market is shrinking every year. We are in a case of diminishing returns.

A 8MP is enough for most use because you can't basically see the whole picture and at the same time resolve smaller details than what a 8MP shot with you eyes. Even at cinema, for picture of 15meters wide, this is 4K, no more than 8MP. Many modern movies have 2K master for special effects. I don't see people complaining.
The camera business isn't offering anything new that is needed to do a Job. If you bought a D3 in 2008 then you are still great to go with only 12 mp.

I've seen The Revenant in 4K movie theatre and that is scary detailed. Never was thinking of needing more pixels on the bear.
05-11-2016, 07:22 AM   #1466
Site Supporter
Cynog Ap Brychan's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Gloucester
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,091
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
You missed my point. You are interested in making images and the tool you use for it. For those who only are interested in an image they don't care wich camera or technic is used.
I didn't miss your point, Ron: I said you were generalising, and you were. Now you have introduced the word "only" into your argument, which makes a difference. That said, I don't know any photographers who are not interested in the tools they use to produce their images, but I know a few who could produce great images with whatever they had to hand. Did you mean people like this?
05-11-2016, 07:33 AM   #1467
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,705
QuoteOriginally posted by Cynog Ap Brychan Quote
I didn't miss your point, Ron: I said you were generalising, and you were. Now you have introduced the word "only" into your argument, which makes a difference. That said, I don't know any photographers who are not interested in the tools they use to produce their images, but I know a few who could produce great images with whatever they had to hand. Did you mean people like this?
People who don't make the images, but use them. Either for please or professionally.
05-11-2016, 07:45 AM   #1468
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Parallax's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Dakota
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 15,507
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
If you want more sharpness then you could look for sharper lenses that fit a certain camera and situation.
Well, that's true, but the pixel shift allows for better resolution with any lens, not just oh-God expensive ones, and at no cost.
With that in mind, the choice is x quality for Y dollars with pixel shift, or x quality for y dollars times 3 (or 4, or...) with more expensive equipment.
Do you seriously think that the ability to get the increased resolution (and less noise) and save hundreds or thousands of dollars on equipment won't appeal to professional photographers?
BTW, better glass on the D810 is still going to be noisier than the Pentax glass on the K-1 with PS.
05-11-2016, 07:56 AM   #1469
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,705
QuoteOriginally posted by Parallax Quote
Well, that's true, but the pixel shift allows for better resolution with any lens, not just oh-God expensive ones, and at no cost.
With that in mind, the choice is x quality for Y dollars with pixel shift, or x quality for y dollars times 3 (or 4, or...) with more expensive equipment.
Do you seriously think that the ability to get the increased resolution (and less noise) and save hundreds or thousands of dollars on equipment won't appeal to professional photographers?
BTW, better glass on the D810 is still going to be noisier than the Pentax glass on the K-1 with PS.
It only appeals to pro photographers if their customers would demand better IQ then currently provided. I don't see that yet happening. It is about what push is going on in photography. We have lots of years where the amount of pixels is the thing to look at. Now it looks like that dynamic range messures in iso-invariance is very important. And somehow Canon, being the week party in both races is the company that sells the most.
05-11-2016, 08:05 AM - 1 Like   #1470
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,221
QuoteOriginally posted by redpit Quote
I unsubscribe, another thread that fulfilled its mission and with some help from "usual suspects" was driven to a meaningless debate. Thanks God Pentax keeps going strong and keeps disappointing the "usual suspects"...
Those 2 suspects (yep, I add the 2) are ignored for long time for me. It would help though if, at last, " appropriate" mod action was taken (Parallax, please help us lol). It's really is tiring in the end.

There's "I can have an opinion" and there's "I'm always right " or simple free bashing. This should end IMHO. It is just too easy to justify trollness with "I can have my opinion". Just my 2 cents.
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!
auto, base, camera, company, compression, d810, design, dr, electrons, fa, hardware, iso, k-1, k-3, lenses, pentax, pentax body, pentax k-1, pentax news, pentax rumors, photos, pre-order, risk, sensor, specifications, timelapse, trip, vs
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax K-3 II Officially Announced Adam Pentax News and Rumors 1015 07-03-2015 10:55 PM
Pentax K-S2 Officially Announced Adam Pentax K-S1 & K-S2 12 05-23-2015 06:49 AM
Pentax K-30 Officially Announced! Adam Pentax News and Rumors 245 09-12-2012 08:32 PM
Pentax K-5 Officially Announced Adam Pentax News and Rumors 533 03-06-2012 05:45 AM
K-5 Firmware 1.02 Officially Announced Ole Pentax K-5 50 01-20-2011 10:05 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:35 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