[awscreo]

Because most of us don't think it's an issue Pentax should be devoting money too. But my point about personal standards was not that I don't have them, in fact I pointed out I do.My point was it's not a universally acknowledged issue and as such, every time you mention it, those of us who disagree are going to make sure it's understood, it's not an issue for everyone, you don't have to pay attention to it if you're happy with your images, it's a niche issue, and there is very little understanding of the parameters under which it might occur.

So every time you say "it's a thing" people are going to point out "not for everyone". We don't want people obsessing about stuff they probably don't care about.
They have enough to care about without adding the irrelevant . And given the 60,000 users, and what? Maybe 10 at most? for whom it's an issue, odds are pretty good it's irrelevant.

We all know that Pentax and every camera maker have to have their engineering departments deal with shutter shock, the issue is do they have to do more in coming models? Some say yes, others say, there are more important things to address, please leave that until everything else is solved.

Oh I understood that not everyone has it years ago. I've not once said that the issue is widespread or that it's affecting everyone and somehow people just don't know and I possess secret knowledge)

What's strange is that mentioning it causes such flare of emotion. Logical thing would be to say "I don't have it and I'm sorry you got it", and that would be it. Short and sweet) yet people time and time again trying to prove to me that it either doesn't exist, or that I'm lying, or that I'm the only one with this issue, or that mentioning issues at all somehow affects anything on the forum or within the brand which is just crazy talk.



---------- Post added 04-23-19 at 11:03 AM ----------

On my K1, with the D-FA28-105, testing shows that if 100% is total blur:
- shutter shock (1) accounts for approx. third of the blur
- approx. another third of the total blur is related to mirror kick (2)

- and another third is related to camera and lens motions (3) at shutter speeds slower or equal to the FL reciprocal.

That's why when using an heavier lenses such as the 15-30, 24-70 or 70-200 the amount of blur from (2) and (3) diminishes, (1) remains the smallest contributor.
When small lenses are used (2) and (3) become more prominent is what people confuse with (1: shutter shock).

It is important to distinguish the 3 causes of pixel blur in order to use camera setup and settings for optimal sharpness.
A photographer who aimed at blowing prints to XXL sizes 24"x36" may have interest to optimize his camera setup for optimal sharpness, or simple use a tripod and enable EFCS.

The Pentax K1 and K1 II offer increasing levels of exposures for optimal sharpness:
- normal mode
- normal mode with remote

- mirror lockup
- mirror lockup with remote

- 2 sec. timer (which include closing the aperture and waiting 2 sec. before exposing the sensor)
- 2 sec. time with remote

- 2 sec. timer with SR
- 2 sec. timer with SR with remote


- 10 sec. timer w/o remote (will close the lens aperture just before the exposure takes place)
- 10 sec. timer with SR w/o remote (will close the lens aperture just before the exposure takes place)

- EFCS in LV mode
- EFCS in LV mode with 2 sec. delay
- EFCS in LV mode with 2 sec. delay and remote
- Pixel shift resolution in normal mode
- Pixel shift resolution in LV mode

- Pixel shift resolution in LV mode with 2 sec. delay
- Pixel shift resolution in LV mode with 2 sec. delay and remote

This is plenty of choice for getting the sharp images when optimal sharpness is a must have.

When I want best sharpness without PS, my favorite choice is: Tripod, wait a bit if the terrain in muddy, camera set EFCS enabled in Live view, 2 sec. timer, IR remote controlled., lens aperture f.5.6 => f11.

I don't know why you post this for me, you know I use ES and a tripod. Issue only arises when I take the camera with me on a trip and shoot hand-held.

---------- Post added 04-23-19 at 11:09 AM ----------

Because most of us don't think it's an issue Pentax should be devoting money too. But my point about personal standards was not that I don't have them, in fact I pointed out I do.My point was it's not a universally acknowledged issue and as such, every time you mention it, those of us who disagree are going to make sure it's understood, it's not an issue for everyone, you don't have to pay attention to it if you're happy with your images, it's a niche issue, and there is very little understanding of the parameters under which it might occur.

So every time you say "it's a thing" people are going to point out "not for everyone". We don't want people obsessing about stuff they probably don't care about.
They have enough to care about without adding the irrelevant . And given the 60,000 users, and what? Maybe 10 at most? for whom it's an issue, odds are pretty good it's irrelevant.

We all know that Pentax and every camera maker have to have their engineering departments deal with shutter shock, the issue is do they have to do more in coming models? Some say yes, others say, there are more important things to address, please leave that until everything else is solved. Anyone posting one opinion is going to trigger people taking the opposite viewpoint. If you brought it up, then it's your issue. Don't complain because others chime in with different opinions. You don't have any right to have an opinion stand un-opposed. It's a forum. People have opinions. They post them. If you can't live with tat, don't come to the forum.

But I can live with it, it's other people complain that I "whine" about my issue and discuss it at all. Im aware how forums work. By your logic you should be addressing some of the other users that reply to me.

[biz-engineer]

I don't know why you post this for me, you know I use ES and a tripod. Issue only arises when I take the camera with me on a trip and shoot hand-held.

Then read the last sentence is your solution: "When I don't have a tripod, there is risk of subject motion or I want to use the OVF and still want the best sharpness, I enable 2 sec. timer, enable PS MC, RAW, shoot hand-held. In post, I disable PS MC => I get 1 frame captured electronically only. Do this."

Note: EFCS can also be used hand held in live view mode. It works well if the camera user keep the camera steady during the exposure.

[awscreo]

Then read the last sentence is your solution: "When I don't have a tripod, there is risk of subject motion or I want to use the OVF and still want the best sharpness, I enable 2 sec. timer, enable PS MC, shoot hand-held. In post, I disable PS MC => I get 1 frame captured electronically only. Do this."

I appreciate the solution you propose, but it's not going to work for me. It does not fit my shooting style for street or travel work.

If simply using the camera as it's intended to be used is not delivering the results that I want, I would rather get another camera that could fill this niche for me, hence me talking about picking up a GRIII for street and travel. It's a fine enough solution for me.



---------- Post added 04-23-19 at 11:30 AM ----------

Then read the last sentence is your solution: "When I don't have a tripod, there is risk of subject motion or I want to use the OVF and still want the best sharpness, I enable 2 sec. timer, enable PS MC, RAW, shoot hand-held. In post, I disable PS MC => I get 1 frame captured electronically only. Do this."

Note: EFCS can also be used hand held in live view mode. It works well if the camera user keep the camera steady during the exposure.

As you pointed out, due to high mp count of the k-1 sensor its hard to get a 100% sharp result hand holding without Ibis at lower shutter speeds. And by lower I mean anything below 1/50 or so. Plus holding I hate holding a dslr that way, just a personal preference. And it eats the battery, heats up the sensor, and with certain light sources introduces banding

[reh321]

Well the above post makes it seem that you know why most people post on this forum.

I assume most people mean what they say. When someone complains about a problem here, I am willing to believe it is important to them. I am retired, so I read a lot here - and sometimes I read older posts to get background on what is said today; sometimes I benefit directly - for example, I was well prepared when my K-30 started exhibiting the truly serious Dark Image Syndrome. I have seen a number of people present a problem, not get a satisfactory solution, say "I give up", and never post anything about anything again here. With the knowledge I have now, and the experience we collectively have had since then, I believe a solution could be provided now to some of those old problems, so I find those situation to be sad, and I don't want that to happen to you.

You have 0 experience with this particular issue, I don't even understand why you're arguing with me on this. You don't own the camera, what are you trying to prove to me right now?

I have little experience with many issues, but I have acquired a lot of knowledge. I am sorry you feel that I am arguing - I am trying to understand why this is such a seemingly important issue to you and whether there is a clear explanation, since so few people seem to be bothered by the same issue. The normally "picky" DPR was very positive about the K-1. Most of the K-1 related complaints I see here are about "detail loss" on the K-1ii; from the example photos, I believe that if shutter shock were an issue for them, it would completely over-whelm the issues they are complaining about. so the shutter shock issue must not be that common. That is why I became involved in the first place - but by now I think more of my comments have been explaining why I think you are important enough to respond to than in responding to your actual issue. But if you get your "fun" that way, then just keep on complaining.


added: From your comments it is obvious that one major difference between us is that I am willing to work around problems. For example, I purchased several aperture-ring equipped lenses {that is an FA 28-105mm lens on my K-30 in my signature photo} so I could continue using it even after it was totally afflicted with Dark Image Syndrome, even though that would restrict me to 'M' mode with green-button metering; in response after response from you, I hear "I don't want to use my K-1 that way" when someone suggests a change in how you do something. I am sure Ricoh will be happy to sell you a GRiii.

---

Last edited by reh321; 04-23-2019 at 08:58 AM.

[biz-engineer]

I appreciate the solution you propose, but it's not going to work for me. It does not fit my shooting style for street or travel work.

That's different, here you reject a solution that works, now it's your personal problem, it's not the problem of Ricoh.

[awscreo]

I assume most people mean what they say. When someone complains about a problem here, I am willing to believe it is important to them. I am retired, so I read a lot here - and sometimes I read older posts to get background on what is said today; sometimes I benefit directly - for example, I was well prepared when my K-30 started exhibiting the truly serious Dark Image Syndrome. I have seen a number of people present a problem, not get a satisfactory solution, say "I give up", and never post anything about anything again here. With the knowledge I have now, and the experience we collectively have had since then, I believe a solution could be provided now to some of those old problems, so I find those situation to be sad, and I don't want that to happen to you.


I have little experience with many issues, but I have acquired a lot of knowledge. I am sorry you feel that I am arguing - I am trying to understand why this is such a seemingly important issue to you and whether there is a clear explanation, since so few people seem to be bothered by the same issue. The normally "picky" DPR was very positive about the K-1. Most of the K-1 related complaints I see here are about "detail loss" on the K-1ii; from the example photos, I believe that if shutter shock were an issue for them, it would completely over-whelm the issues they are complaining about. so the shutter shock issue must not be that common. That is why I became involved in the first place - but by now I think more of my comments have been explaining why I think you are important enough to respond to than in responding to your actual issue. But if you get your "fun" that way, then just keep on complaining.


added: From your comments it is obvious that one major difference between us is that I am willing to work around problems. For example, I purchased several aperture-ring equipped lenses {that is an FA 28-105mm lens on my K-30 in my signature photo} so I could continue using it even after it was totally afflicted with Dark Image Syndrome, even though that would restrict me to 'M' mode with green-button metering; in response after response from you, I hear "I don't want to use my K-1 that way" when someone suggests a change in how you do something. I am sure Ricoh will be happy to sell you a GRiii.

If that was the case, I'd sell the K-1 long time ago and would purchase another system. What part of "I'm making it work for me" screams that I'm not willing to work around the issue? I post plenty of images here, on 500px and on Flickr (when they were free), majority of my images are taken with K-1, meaning that I use it for all of my photography.

The issue was important to me before because I was under the illusion that a $2000 professional grade camera shouldn't have flaws. But I learned to accept the flaws and live with them, or work around them.

The issue was buried under the more recent K-1 II posts, K-1 was released in 2016 after all, there were plenty of posts few years ago about the issue. I suspect majority of people that had the issue either learned to live with it or moved onto another system or camera. Also, I'd imagine some people just don't want to be roasted on coals like I am right now or don't want to participate in this meaningless exchange.

By "fun" I mean that I did not consider this particular thread to be a serious one due to its wishlist nature. I don't take wishlists seriously, they are just that - a list of things you wish to see.
I don't enjoy being roasted by three members at the same time.

[biz-engineer]

I would rather get another camera that could fill this niche for me, hence me talking about picking up a GRIII for street and travel

Have you considered downsizing you K1 images to 22Mp before you look at 100% on them, you would horrified by shutter shock then.

[reh321]

What part of "I'm making it work for me" screams that I'm not willing to work around the issue?

How about words such as

I appreciate the solution you propose, but it's not going to work for me. It does not fit my shooting style for street or travel work.

[awscreo]

That's different, here you reject a solution that works, now it's your personal problem, it's not the problem of Ricoh.

What if the solution was that shutter shock wouldn't not affect your images if you were naked and jumping on one leg while you take the photo?
Would you do it?

There shouldn't be an issue in the first place. Period. If it does exist, how is this my fault? I purchased a product for a lot of money, shutter shock was not part of the marketing campaign, it's not a desired effect.

I see nothing wrong pointing out that there are issues with these expensive products that we buy. No one gives them out for free. If you pay for something you sure as hell can complain about flaws that you find.



---------- Post added 04-23-19 at 12:24 PM ----------

Have you considered downsizing you K1 images to 22Mp before you look at 100% on them, you would horrified by shutter shock then.

You probably mean that I wouldn't be horrified by it because it wouldn't be there. I didn't notice any sharpness issues with GRII, and so far haven't seen anything with GRIII.

---------- Post added 04-23-19 at 12:26 PM ----------

How about words such as

I make it work where it counts and when I need maximum quality out of the images. I'm not willing to change my shooting style when I'm just traveling and want to casually and comfortably take pictures of my surroundings or my loved ones.

[normhead]

Oh I understood that not everyone has it years ago. I've not once said that the issue is widespread or that it's affecting everyone and somehow people just don't know and I possess secret knowledge)

What's strange is that mentioning it causes such flare of emotion. Logical thing would be to say "I don't have it and I'm sorry you got it", and that would be it. Short and sweet) yet people time and time again trying to prove to me that it either doesn't exist, or that I'm lying, or that I'm the only one with this issue, or that mentioning issues at all somehow affects anything on the forum or within the brand which is just crazy talk.

Funny how you class the response to your opinion as "emotional". If you read something you don't think promotes an understanding of an issue instead fo trying to dig deeper, you should just say "I don't have it and I'm sorry you got it". Most of us will try and figure out what's going on.

You didn't say any of that.

I'd be happy with no shutter shock, maybe better af and more focus points in general, the 42mp or 45mp sensor if they have access to it. That's about it I think, I'm personally very happy with my K-1 for tripod shots, when I can use the ES and a tripod to achieve maximum sharpness. Come to think of it, maybe when I get the GRIII I won't ever need to take the K-1 to trips lol, maybe I don't need a new body after all.

Read more at: The Pentax K1 III might be close - Page 7 - PentaxForums.com

And the hyperbole isn't appreciated. And you still haven't addressed the part about it's relevance being a personal decision.

The implication being that's something to be achieved in the coming K-1 III and that there's something wrong with the current K-1s. You have to ask, what do i have to give up, to completely eliminate shutter shock, what does it cost, is it worth the effort?

Given the nature of the shutter shock discussions, we can't even determine you couldn't solve your problem buying another K-1. And the idea of using a GRiii instead of a K-1 is just completely over the top. You just said, "shutter shock is so bad shooting at reduced resolution might be better." Maybe you can give an example of a reduced resolution image that's better than a K-1 image reduced to the same size, because if a GR3 image is good enough, why are you even carrying a K-1?

I have to ask, given the max of maybe 3000 lw/ph with an APS-c senser and 4000 lw/ph with an FF sensor, is your worst shutter shock causing the loss of 1000 lw/ph or 33% of the resolution?
What resolution loss have you measured? Inquiring minds want to know?

And of course the next question will be, have you seen it in a print, and what size will the print have to be print you see it? I don't expect to have to read every thread on the issue. Your post was in this thread, as should be any relevant information.

[reh321]

I make it work where it counts and when I need maximum quality out of the images. I'm not willing to change my shooting style when I'm just traveling and want to casually and comfortably take pictures of my surroundings or my loved ones.

I look for as much quality during travel as I do any other time - in fact some of my best photos are taken then - but my most expensive camera is the KP that I paid $700 for - with the service you're getting from the K-1, I'm not sure why you have it at all.

[awscreo]

You didn't say any of that.


And the hyperbole isn't appreciated. And you still haven't addressed the part about it's relevance being a personal decision.

The implication being that's something to be achieved in the coming K-1 III and that there's something wrong with the current K-1s. You have to ask, what do i have to give up, to completely eliminate shutter shock, what does it cost, is it worth the effort?

Given the nature of the shutter shock discussions, we can't even determine you couldn't solve your problem buying another K-1. And the idea of using a GRiii instead of a K-1 is just completely over the top. You just said, "shutter shock is so bad shooting at reduced resolution might be better." Maybe you can give an example of a reduced resolution image that's better than a K-1 image reduced to the same size, because if a GR3 image is good enough, why are you even carrying a K-1?

I have to ask, given the max of maybe 3000 lw/ph with an APS-c senser and 4000 lw/ph with an FF sensor, is your worst shutter shock causing the loss of 1000 lw/ph or 33% of the resolution?
What resolution loss have you measured? Inquiring minds want to know?

Say what? I was speaking about my personal wish list for K-1 III, and I do wish that the new camera that I will buy will not have the issue (because my current one has it). What's wrong with that sentiment? In my case it's not a hyperbole, it's a fact.

I mentioned GRIII because a) I want to buy it b) it suits better for my style of street and travel photography c) it's way smaller and lighter (I stopped bringing k-1 with me on trips after lugging around a bag full of gear around NYC for a day) d) I won't need to wait for a new K-1 to fix the issue with shutter shock. It's a win overall. Including Pentax, that needs to sell their products to fund R&D for their new ones.

I've printed up to 20x60" for one of the clients, but I used a file that I merged from 3 pixel shift frames. Image looked good. You wouldn't suggest that an image printed that large with shutter shock would look equally as good right?



---------- Post added 04-23-19 at 12:53 PM ----------

I look for as much quality during travel as I do any other time - in fact some of my best photos are taken then - but my most expensive camera is the KP that I paid $700 for - with the service you're getting from the K-1, I'm not sure why you have it at all.

Could you for one second assume that people use their gear in different ways from you?

I use K-1 for landscape work that I love and I value more than my snapshot images that I don't print and mostly shoot for fun when I travel.

[Wheatfield]

It must be because of I don't have 28-105, but really don't know all this fuzz about shuttershock. . . but it must be there root of that issue 28-105.

The K3 was pretty bad for mirror/ shutter induced vibration. The K1 is far, far better. Some of this may be due to the larger sensor requiring less enlargement and the fact the K1 sensor is fairly low resolution. Also, the extra weight of the K1 will have a damping effect.
Shutter shock is something that I have seen in every Pentax camera that has a vertical shutter from the Super Program to the K3. The K1 is the first Pentax I have had that seems not prone to this.
Sometimes I wish they would put a horizontal shutter in a camera. They seemed less problematic in this regard. Unfortunately people want a higher sync speed than is possible with a two curtain horizontal run shutter.

---------- Post added 04-23-19 at 11:02 AM ----------

So please ignore me mentioning the issue. Because I have it, and I have the same rights as you to discuss my issue on this forum.

And I'm not "trashing the system". I keep buying Pentax products and I'm not looking to switch systems. As I already explained, for my main interests it's not a big deal, I shoot on tripod most of the time, with electronic shutter. But just because I can work around it doesn't mean it's not there.

Ah, you must be talking to someone who doesn’t have a problem, and therefore no problem could possibly exist. When I was a teenager, I was blessed with a clear complexion, therefore no one had acne.

[normhead]

What's wrong with that sentiment?

I guess, I should have used for a camera that came with unicorns... what's wrong with that sentiment?
As I said, we aren't sure another K-1 wouldn't solve your problem.

I've printed up to 20x60" for one of the clients, but I used a file that I merged from 3 pixel shift frames. Image looked good. You wouldn't suggest that an image printed that large with shutter shock would look equally as good right?

I've printed up to 20x60" for one of the clients, but I used a file that I merged from 3 pixel shift frames. Image looked good. You wouldn't suggest that an image printed that large with shutter shock would look equally as good right?

I'm suggesting that maybe three merged shutter shocked frames might be as good, I don't know. That's why I asked. You aren't assuming there would be difference without actually having done it are you?

But if you answer the resolution question I asked, I'll be able to make a better guess. IN my experience people can't even tell the difference between images with less than 200 lw/ph difference, at that resolution differences the the distance of the camera from the focal plane and AF accuracy will make more difference than the difference in the images, even pixel peeping. So I would consider a difference of 200 lw/ph irrelevant. Just trying to get a handle on this.

Ah, you must be talking to someone who doesn’t have a problem, and therefore no problem could possibly exist. When I was a teenager, I was blessed with a clear complexion, therefore no one had acne.

And apparently trying to establish the relevance of the problem while acknowledging that the problem has always existed but has never been factor in anyone's behaviour, is the same as denying there is a problem. More like saying, " I know acne can be a problem, but i don't see any serious acne on your face or anywhere else. Why do you think you need medication?" But twist it any way you want if it pleases you. Just don't attribute the hyperbole to anyone else. It gets tiring telling the world that you didn't actually said what they say you said and that their analogy is as inaccurate as their perception of the opinion you posted.

But I have to say 3 pixel shifted images demonstrates a very high degree of perfectionism. I'm guessing this is a standards issue, more than an everyday photographic issue. The man just has standards that go well beyond what most of us find necessary. If he'd qualified that he was talking about 60 inch wide images, that would have ended the discussion right there. Most of us have no clue what you need for 60 inch wide images. Especially those fo us who have 42x30 inch K-3 images. We are clearly operating from a different play book.

I hope awscreo is getting paid for those images. The only folks I know doing that kind of work are getting paid $3000-$5000 an image. But I have to say, I never assume I'm talking to someone with that level of care and expertise. my bad I guess.

[reh321]

Could you for one second assume that people use their gear in different ways from you?

I thought that was implicit in my wording

I use K-1 for landscape work that I love and I value more than my snapshot images that I don't print and mostly shoot for fun when I travel.

You had the answer a day ago

But I like gr and k-1 delivers marvelous files on a tripod, which I use when I do more serious work. Gr would be a perfect travel camera, 36mp files are way too big for casual snap pics anyway.

I'm not sure why you keep arguing {I thought you were exiting with #157 last night}, nor even why this 'issue' {that not even DPR noticed and you found a solution to some time ago} has you using such excitable words.