[reh321]

Two-fist it, one camera in each hand. The shake reduction should make one-handing these combos no problem.

So, you'd use the camera in your left hand to photograph whatever is behind you?

[BrianR]

So, you'd use the camera in your left hand to photograph whatever is behind you?

Sure! Or if the couple has a spat during the shoot and won't get close to one another, you can aim one at each! You have to be flexible

[clackers]

No, it is you that still do not get dxomark, or understand the difference between exposure and captured images!

What you see above must be the screen score, which compare noise in a fixed number of pixels. The print score will show a much larger difference as it represents the noise difference in whole images.

It does no such thing, Fogel, you've obviously never read how they get the print score.

They virtually make it up.

They simply apply a theoretical adjustment to the screen score based on how many pixels there are above 8Mp, it's really crude, they don't even consider sensor size.

They call this 'normalization'.

[clackers]

If you look at a K5 and K-1 image at 100 percent, they will look exactly the same with regard to noise and dynamic range.

You know that a K-5 image is just a crop of the K-1 image, Vincent, so the noise and dynamic range and what's in focus, all of that, is exactly the same.

But in theory, you can postprocess more.

In downsampling to 8Mp, you can average values from 36Mp instead of 16Mp.

But this is noise reduction by software, an algorithm, the resulting JPG, it's never in the RAW file the camera has captured.

---

Last edited by clackers; 01-25-2019 at 03:32 AM.

[clackers]

I would like to agree. Except when I saw some nice second hand Fuji XT2 for sale for a good price, and I checked the pictures I wasn't convinced. It looks like the K1 and K1II image quality spoiled me and now I can't go back to apsc.

You did a wonderful test when you first got your K-1, BE.

You took one picture with your new toy and another with your K-3, just at focal lengths that gave the same field of view, and they were practically indistinguishable.

Now, it was a 'normal' scene, some packaging with print on it or similar.

You're such a good photographer that I know you don't treat your cameras like a phone, snapping away at a single stationary subject in good light in the middle of the frame, you would choose a scene and a treatment that showed off the advantages of the larger sensor. It's why I'd love to see you shooting with a 645Z.

And you know there are other people who would be better served with just m43 or even a phone because the capabilities of even APS-C are not being reflected in their photography. They'd save money and weight.

[Rondec]

You know that a K-5 image is just a crop of the K-1 image, Vincent, so the noise and dynamic range and what's in focus, all of that, is exactly the same.

But in theory, you can postprocess more.

In downsampling to 8Mp, you can average values from 36Mp instead of 16Mp.

But this is noise reduction by software, an algorithm, it's not in the RAW file the camera has captured.

Of course. But that's the point isn't it. You have to have similar viewing sizes (hopefully printed) for any of this to make sense. What noise there is at a pixel level doesn't matter to me, I just want to know how much it is going to affect the final image that I display. As I said before, I don't how much downsampling really affects the end resulting image, but what I do know is that in the real world it allows for a lot more post processing. As for whether it is in the RAW file, clearly it is, it is just that the 16 megapixel image starts to show noise in the shadows a lot faster than the 36 megapixel full frame one does.

I shoot my K-1 at iso 12K and have decent results. I didn't like to shoot my K5 II over iso 3200 because the noise started to be problematic and the dynamic range just wasn't there. Maybe that's all voodoo and made up stuff, but it feels like a real difference when I am looking at printed images and that's what matters to me.

[biz-engineer]

You did a wonderful test when you first got your K-1, BE.You took one picture with your new toy and another with your K-3, just at focal lengths that gave the same field of view, and they were practically indistinguishable.

That was because my K1 copy suffered of shutter shock which led to having my K3 even given slightly sharper images. At the time I compared the K1 and K3 I wasn't aware of this issue. Since then I've learned to get around the K1 blur issue and recently got a K1 II which is now delivering to notch images. A theory only is valid if we can demonstration with various cases that the theory still applies. The theory that larger sensor isn't better is shown to be flawed by simply comparing a medium format image with the same image taken with a phone, and seeing the evidence that the medium format image is clearly better than the image from the phone.

[Fogel70]

It does no such thing, Fogel, you've obviously never read how they get the print score.

They virtually make it up.

They simply apply a theoretical adjustment to the screen score based on how many pixels there are above 8Mp, it's really crude, they don't even consider sensor size.

They call this 'normalization'.

They call it normalization because it is normalization. Normalization is done so you can compare data easily between different sensor sizes and pixel sizes.
Like the same normalization that happens when you print out different MP images on same sized paper.

Without normalization you get like on the screen score where only cameras with same number of MP can be directly compared.

[zoolander]

About FF/MF mirrorless
- They expressed respect for the competing FF mirrorless systems, saying that they have many good points.
- However, they are more interested in serving their customers than following trends. They will listen to user requirements, not be swayed. (This was difficult to understand, but I think this means they are going to stick to their judgement, rather than caving in to peer pressure)
- They seem positive about Fuji’s entry into the MF market, because they think it will draw more attention to the MF market.

WOW, they will listen to user requirements and not be swayed by users .......Basically they will make cameras THEY want and not their customers want and need. Whereas the big three are largely listening to their customers and producing cameras and lenses based on customer requirements.

If Ricoh Pentax has missed it, we are already well behind in autofocus in dslr's. Mirrorless has just leaped ahead of dslr in af performance with eye auto focus with ridiculous keeper rates (close to 100%) ............

Ricoh Pentax REALLY needs to wake up.

Even if Pentax makes an apsc camera at or close to the D500 af performance, mirrorless is already out of reach with eye auto focus and continuous af.

Pentax is behind by two generations in af against canikon, and canikon mirrorless is two generations behind Sony and one gen behind Fuji af.

HELLO RICOH PENTAX .......MIRRORLESS NOT A TREND OR A FAD ANYMORE, ITS THE MARKET LEADER IN CERTAIN MARKETS!

Here in Australia Pentax has disappeared from most camera stores ..............what about that trend? Even then city stores have even smaller Pentax sections now - they've gone form small to smaller shelf space...........

Mirrorless is killing dslr period, and Pentax is looking likely the first to go on the scrap heap.

Ricoh's comments here at the 100 year anniversary are simply pathetic. I'm no economist, but the market is shifting and surging ahead and Pentax is simply NOT being wise in their business decisions to not jump into mirrorless.

Look they need to go mirrorless apsc in the next two years and make a few generational leaps in af performance.

[ogl]

Ricoh plans to sell Pentax brand and photo division to any other brand next year. They will keep GR and Theta only. The latest info from insiders.

[biz-engineer]

Ricoh plans to sell Pentax brand and photo division to any other brand next year. They will keep GR and Theta only. The latest info from insiders.

First, that is a gross misnomer, because any M&A info is strictly confidential to a very limited number of top executives due to potential impact on equity value, suppliers, customer and employees. So, employees are only informed together with customers and shareholders after a deal is signed. Secondly, if it was true that Pentax is sold, that would be a noticeable achievement of the decade of brand bashing on Pentax and negative rumors by some people who could be proud of themselves. And if Ricoh would sell the Pentax camera business, the GR and Theta will go together with Pentax, simply because the Pentax brand generate more business than the Ricoh brand of cameras. It would make no sense at all to sell Pentax only.

[Kunzite]

Ricoh plans to sell Pentax brand and photo division to any other brand next year. They will keep GR and Theta only. The latest info from insiders.

No, they don't - and if they did, you wouldn't know anyway.
Which means you're lying.

[Larrymc]

WOW, they will listen to user requirements and not be swayed by users .......Basically they will make cameras THEY want and not their customers want and need. Whereas the big three are largely listening to their customers and producing cameras and lenses based on customer requirements.

If Ricoh Pentax has missed it, we are already well behind in autofocus in dslr's. Mirrorless has just leaped ahead of dslr in af performance with eye auto focus with ridiculous keeper rates (close to 100%) ............

Ricoh Pentax REALLY needs to wake up.

Even if Pentax makes an apsc camera at or close to the D500 af performance, mirrorless is already out of reach with eye auto focus and continuous af.

Pentax is behind by two generations in af against canikon, and canikon mirrorless is two generations behind Sony and one gen behind Fuji af.

HELLO RICOH PENTAX .......MIRRORLESS NOT A TREND OR A FAD ANYMORE, ITS THE MARKET LEADER IN CERTAIN MARKETS!

Here in Australia Pentax has disappeared from most camera stores ..............what about that trend? Even then city stores have even smaller Pentax sections now - they've gone form small to smaller shelf space...........

Mirrorless is killing dslr period, and Pentax is looking likely the first to go on the scrap heap.

Ricoh's comments here at the 100 year anniversary are simply pathetic. I'm no economist, but the market is shifting and surging ahead and Pentax is simply NOT being wise in their business decisions to not jump into mirrorless.

Look they need to go mirrorless apsc in the next two years and make a few generational leaps in af performance.

Go back to sleep.......PLEASE.

[biz-engineer]

Which means you're lying.

I avoided the wording. Recently looked at a guide about how to deal with customer complains and the guy writing the article was saying that one of the categories of complainers is the trolls and somehow they are very funny to deal with. I was wondering if Troll could be a new paid do it at home job, I researched for such job opportunities but could never find any job title such as "CTO: Chief Troll Officer" I would assume trolls would be for moderators what computer viruses are for the computer anti-virus software industry: one cannot exist without the other.

[ogl]

No, they don't - and if they did, you wouldn't know anyway.
Which means you're lying.

It was joke and it's easy to understand...But you are too serious and swallow the lure You went to the discussion of my personality.
So predictable....So boring...