Visiting Photokina what I learned.

photoptimist · 10-18-2018, 06:47 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by reh321

On several occasions recently I've been in a forested area where I had to choose between an ISO level that would result in noisy photos and a lower ISO that would control noise well but not give me the shutter speed I needed to 'stop' birds and squirrels. Some equipment is still the limiting agent.

Quite true!

Yet in this case, it may the planet Earth (and distance to it's star) and physics of this universe that are the limiting agent. The number of photons per second per square millimeter on that squirrel may be too low to get a short-duration, low-noise sample. Modern cameras really are reaching the limit of what is possible given the typical ambient light levels of photography.

Samwise.Gamgee · 11-14-2018, 10:03 PM

In contrary, in our case, you can always pay more and get a better sensor which means higher iso performance

biz-engineer · 11-15-2018, 12:03 AM

Photography cameras are usually not designed for night vision and military combat. For night vision and military combat, there are specific equipment more sensitive in low light but not suitable to taking beautiful image in daylight.
Our camera and lenses are designed to deliver good color images of subject revealed under illumination by good quality light source (sun or indirect sun, or flash/strobe with similar spectrum). When photographers reach the limits of their cameras, images are seldom good to see, at least the same image would be a lot better if the lighting conditions would be appropriate to reveal tonalities of the subject, regardless of the camera equipment used. Focusing attention on the limitations of camera equipment is a serious roadblock on the path to getting better images, I saw that issue for myself and many others.

**Rondec** · 11-15-2018, 03:49 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by photoptimist

Quite true!

Yet in this case, it may the planet Earth (and distance to it's star) and physics of this universe that are the limiting agent. The number of photons per second per square millimeter on that squirrel may be too low to get a short-duration, low-noise sample. Modern cameras really are reaching the limit of what is possible given the typical ambient light levels of photography.

The speed of improvement in cameras and sensors has slowed considerably. At this point, if someone wants a big improvement in low light performance, the best they can do is probably buy a camera with a larger sensor and invest in lenses that have wide apertures and are sharp wide open.

On the other question of a new mount, I really don't think that the issue for Pentax is the specifications of the mount. They could use an existing mount or design one of their own. The bigger issues have to do with them creating a lens line up for this new mount. If you tag on to the Sigma/Leica/Panasonic mount, you certainly would have a lot of Sigma lenses available from the beginning, but I don't see how that helps Pentax. Anyway, I don't suppose it matters. I don't think Pentax is ready to go down the mirrorless rabbit hole. By all accounts they are releasing new K mount SLRs next year.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Abstract Visiting Royalty	SSGGeezer	Post Your Photos!	5	09-14-2018 07:10 PM
Nature Many Dragons Who Fly Visiting	SSGGeezer	Post Your Photos!	12	07-03-2018 09:08 AM
Visiting Texas from Iowa?	PineVim	Welcomes and Introductions	8	06-06-2018 12:55 PM
Lens for family visiting: 18-250, 18-135, 17-50?	Bui	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	11	05-24-2018 01:19 AM
Important questions that no one who's visiting Photokina has addressed yet	Christopher M.W.T	Pentax News and Rumors	67	09-28-2010 07:56 AM

10-18-2018, 06:47 PM - 1 Like	#76
photoptimist Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2016 Photos: Albums Posts: 5,127	Originally posted by reh321 On several occasions recently I've been in a forested area where I had to choose between an ISO level that would result in noisy photos and a lower ISO that would control noise well but not give me the shutter speed I needed to 'stop' birds and squirrels. Some equipment is still the limiting agent. Quite true! Yet in this case, it may the planet Earth (and distance to it's star) and physics of this universe that are the limiting agent. The number of photons per second per square millimeter on that squirrel may be too low to get a short-duration, low-noise sample. Modern cameras really are reaching the limit of what is possible given the typical ambient light levels of photography.

11-14-2018, 10:03 PM	#77
Samwise.Gamgee Junior Member Join Date: May 2014 Location: Melbourne Photos: Gallery Posts: 36	In contrary, in our case, you can always pay more and get a better sensor which means higher iso performance

11-15-2018, 12:03 AM	#78
biz-engineer Pentaxian Join Date: Feb 2015 Photos: Gallery Posts: 12,239	Photography cameras are usually not designed for night vision and military combat. For night vision and military combat, there are specific equipment more sensitive in low light but not suitable to taking beautiful image in daylight. Our camera and lenses are designed to deliver good color images of subject revealed under illumination by good quality light source (sun or indirect sun, or flash/strobe with similar spectrum). When photographers reach the limits of their cameras, images are seldom good to see, at least the same image would be a lot better if the lighting conditions would be appropriate to reveal tonalities of the subject, regardless of the camera equipment used. Focusing attention on the limitations of camera equipment is a serious roadblock on the path to getting better images, I saw that issue for myself and many others.

11-15-2018, 03:49 AM - 1 Like	#79
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,663	Originally posted by photoptimist Quite true! Yet in this case, it may the planet Earth (and distance to it's star) and physics of this universe that are the limiting agent. The number of photons per second per square millimeter on that squirrel may be too low to get a short-duration, low-noise sample. Modern cameras really are reaching the limit of what is possible given the typical ambient light levels of photography. The speed of improvement in cameras and sensors has slowed considerably. At this point, if someone wants a big improvement in low light performance, the best they can do is probably buy a camera with a larger sensor and invest in lenses that have wide apertures and are sharp wide open. On the other question of a new mount, I really don't think that the issue for Pentax is the specifications of the mount. They could use an existing mount or design one of their own. The bigger issues have to do with them creating a lens line up for this new mount. If you tag on to the Sigma/Leica/Panasonic mount, you certainly would have a lot of Sigma lenses available from the beginning, but I don't see how that helps Pentax. Anyway, I don't suppose it matters. I don't think Pentax is ready to go down the mirrorless rabbit hole. By all accounts they are releasing new K mount SLRs next year.