[sbh]

I clicked the link, and looking at the other patents, one of them is for SR with tilting the sensor and also moving it "parallel to the optical axis".

I'm not an engineer but this kind of precise controlling seems like quite a challenge. But I would love to see it working well.

Tilt is also useful for product shots, so this could make sense for the next version of the Z even without SR due to the heavy sensor. If tilting the sensor can deliver the same results as tilting the lens, you wouldn't need to invest in such lenses (they are quite expensive).

[Simen1]

This feature could offer lightning fast focusing, although in a limited range. Perfect for manual focusing lenses. You do the coarse focusing, the camera fine tunes it. Tilting will be a niche sideeffect of this feature.

[lytrytyr]

This feature could offer lightning fast focusing, although in a limited range. Perfect for manual focusing lenses. You do the coarse focusing, the camera fine tunes it.

It didn't work that well on the Contax AX:

Contax AX Reviews - PhotographyREVIEW.com

[thibs]

It didn't work that well on the Contax AX:

Contax AX Reviews - PhotographyREVIEW.com

It would (help focussing in Pentax case) also be invisible in optical viewfinder.

[Simen1]

Avast blocked that link because of a Trojan.

I know about the Contax AX, but that is a very different construction. It shares the concept of adjusting focus by adjusting the focal flange to film distance, but thats all. Contax uses a stepper motor that is extremely slow by todays standards. It also uses 35mm film and moved a whole lot of the camera internals, not just the current film frame. Moving the sensor with piezo elements is much faster. The moved mass is also a lot lighter. Modern focus detection is also much faster and more presice then Contax AX. Contax AX hunts a lot and that is a pain when the focusing takes more then a second each way. Also, the Contax solution cant tilt.

[Winder]

Looks like the community is not ready for either tilt or shift.

This feature may help in APS-C cameras with K-mount as full frame lenses cover more than the APS-C sensor area. Otherwise you need new lenses as well - or get a fullframe camera instead of a APS-C with shift feature.

Or you install it on the 645z replacement and you have a phenomenal architectural camera. 645 with pixel shift and tilt/shift built into the body.

[Simen1]

Actually I hoped Pentax would implement automatic composition ajustment that combines 4 shots. One from each of the corner positions. That would emulate a larger sensor.

[moray-eel-bite]

I thought of this coupled to the k1 tilting screen a while ago. Makes sense.

Tilt screen rationale - PentaxForums.com

[lytrytyr]

Avast blocked that link because of a Trojan.

Had you acknowledged the "prior art" of the principle in your proposal, the link would not have been necessary.

[Kunzite]

I can't say I really understand the patent, but it doesn't seems like the sensor has a wide range of tilt.
Perhaps asking for AF or usable sensor movements is too much?

[normhead]

That's a totally awesome idea. in camera tilt shift would finally have an FF or APS-c camera approach what you could do with a 4x5 or 8x10 view camera. Coupled with the Flucard and checking focus on a iPad screen, old school photography would finally have a home.

If you don't understand the potential, that's simply because you didn't train on view cameras. Anyone who learned on view cameras, and then switched to digital is not going to get it.

For those of us who gave up the idea of owning a tilt shift camera because we went digital, this will finally restore the ability to use the skill set we trained with.

[ffking]

The k-1 and modern Pentaxes actually already tilts the sensor to some extent as part of SR does it not? It would seem like they already have the capacity,to a very limited extent, they just need to repurpose it - or am I wrong?

[BrianR]

The k-1 and modern Pentaxes actually already tilts the sensor to some extent as part of SR does it not? It would seem like they already have the capacity,to a very limited extent, they just need to repurpose it - or am I wrong?

Different 'tilt'. As I understand it, all the current movements of of SR keep the sensor in the same plane, up/down, left/right, and 'tilt' aka rotate around the lens axis (edit- I think they refer to this movement as 'Roll"). This is a new 'tilt' that makes the sensor leave its usual focal plane. See Using Tilt-Shift Lenses to Control Depth of Field and the bit about "SCHEIMPFLUG PRINCIPLE & HINGE RULE", though it's a bit different since the sensor and not the lens is doing the tilting.

[Kunzite]

The k-1 and modern Pentaxes actually already tilts the sensor to some extent as part of SR does it not?

No, they do not.

[solitudebound]

Different 'tilt'. As I understand it, all the current movements of of SR keep the sensor in the same plane, up/down, left/right, and 'tilt' aka rotate around the lens axis (edit- I think they refer to this movement as 'Roll"). This is a new 'tilt' that makes the sensor leave its usual focal plane. See Using Tilt-Shift Lenses to Control Depth of Field and the bit about "SCHEIMPFLUG PRINCIPLE & HINGE RULE", though it's a bit different since the sensor and not the lens is doing the tilting.

I think the ref was for Pitch, Yaw, Roll in 5 axis ibis. However the rule to this is to keep the sensor stable in the field, an independent suspension for the sensor as it is. There is the possibility of pro-active adjustments to suspension systems but then it's no longer ib"IS".
Either way the true test would be to see if the tilting sensor would equal the lens type or just make things worse.
Would be interesting to try something with a mirror lens.