Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-12-2019, 11:16 AM - 1 Like   #661
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,241
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
What do you mean by "headroom"?? I have already shown that the "Photons to Photos" data already shows a great deal of Dynamic Range present in KP-created 'raw' files.
What I mean is that compared to JPEG it does give me much more to work with, highlights ect.

10-12-2019, 11:23 AM   #662
Pentaxian
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,130
QuoteOriginally posted by repaap Quote
What I mean is that compared to JPEG it does give me much more to work with, highlights ect.
and 'raw' file from the KP does have that - the "Photons to Photo" data that I displayed shows that.
10-12-2019, 11:26 AM   #663
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,241
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
and 'raw' file from the KP does have that - the "Photons to Photo" data that I displayed shows that.
Alright. That is okay.
10-12-2019, 11:28 AM   #664
Pentaxian
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,130
QuoteOriginally posted by house Quote
Exactly! That's the decision Pentax made. No need to misrepresent this choice as one not having any consequences on raw malleability at all.
The 'raw' file from a KP is just as "malleable" as ever. The "consequences" are in the form of slightly different detail. You can judge if that is adequate for you; I am not attempting to represent anything.

10-12-2019, 11:48 AM - 2 Likes   #665
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by house Quote

There's a rather heavy burden of proof for anyone suggesting that the camera can do better than the best desktop software. Failure to understand where the burden of proof lies means you are unfamiliar with the topic.
Oh please, give it a rest. There's absolutely no sense in that post.
I assume the two work together, the camera does its job, PP software does it job. There's absolutely no evidence desktop software can do both jobs.
10-12-2019, 12:05 PM   #666
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 11,250
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
There isn't? What makes you so sure?
Engineering knowledge.

What if you asked a plumber to install a water tap that can provide any kind of water temperature and volume based on the the setting of a single lever and they replied to you that this is impossible. What if they said you can only have two taps, one for cold and one for hot and you'll have to mix the water in the sink? Would you believe the plumber?

What if you said: "No, I really want a single tap with a single lever and I know it can be done".
How do you respond when the plumber asks you "What makes you so sure?"?

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Even if a new version of the accelerator would have a pass-through mode, the processing afterwards (done by the PRIME) is different with, and without the accelerator.
How do you know that?

How do you know that neutralising the "accelerator" unit wouldn't give one K-1 images from a K-1 II without further work?

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
(despite the "blackbox" misconception about the sensor)
Please explain why you think it is a "misconception".

Since you are implying that I don't know what I'm talking about, please educate me and point me to material that demonstrates that there is a "blackbox misconception".

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
This would have to be duplicated, and both versions qualified - fine tuning of the image performance (despite the "blackbox" misconception about the sensor) being a significant effort. I see no reason for that.
You are most welcome to not see a reason for that.

That's a 100% fine.

The only problem we are having is that you are trying to force your view on those who see a reason and belittle them by insinuating they act from a "fear of loss".
10-12-2019, 12:47 PM   #667
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Mikesul's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Posts: 7,585
When will it end?!

10-12-2019, 12:52 PM   #668
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: New York
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,206
QuoteOriginally posted by Mikesul Quote
When will it end?!
When the giveaway ends.
10-12-2019, 12:57 PM   #669
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Melbourne Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,356
QuoteOriginally posted by Mikesul Quote
When will it end?!
QuoteOriginally posted by MikeyBugs95 Quote
When the giveaway ends.
Not even then I'm afraid.
10-12-2019, 01:03 PM - 2 Likes   #670
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
luftfluss's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,595
QuoteOriginally posted by Mikesul Quote
When will it end?!
It won't end even when the Moderator requests that it ends.

QuoteOriginally posted by Not a Number Quote
As fascinating as the discussion has been on the accelerator unit it has been discussed and debated ad nauseam in other threads. Nothing really new has been added and the discussion is going in circles. The relevance of the accelerator chip in regards to a new APS-C body is if the new body will feature the chip, what improvements have been made and whether it can be disabled or not. These have also been debated and discussed at length in this thread.

Let's steer the discussion back on topic.
10-12-2019, 01:12 PM - 1 Like   #671
Pentaxian
Pentikonian's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Arizona
Posts: 778
Back on topic, I'm eagerly awaiting more news on what Pentax has cooked up with regards to the K-new AF system.
10-12-2019, 01:56 PM - 1 Like   #672
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 15,132
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
Engineering knowledge.
No offense, but you have zero "engineering knowledge" about the accelerator.

QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
What if you asked a plumber to install a water tap that can provide any kind of water temperature and volume based on the the setting of a single lever and they replied to you that this is impossible. What if they said you can only have two taps, one for cold and one for hot and you'll have to mix the water in the sink? Would you believe the plumber?

What if you said: "No, I really want a single tap with a single lever and I know it can be done".
How do you respond when the plumber asks you "What makes you so sure?"?
"Proof by analogy is fraud" - Bjarne Stroustrup
I'm not a plumber. I'm a software engineer, and we're discussing a computing problem. I do not have to discuss water taps, and my argument about the accelerator is actually that it could be done, but it's more than an on-off switch..

QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
How do you know that?

How do you know that neutralising the "accelerator" unit wouldn't give one K-1 images from a K-1 II without further work?
Because the software isn't designed to work without the accelerator. You'd need to include the K-1's processing and calibration, as well.

QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
Please explain why you think it is a "misconception".
I already did it a few days ago.

QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
You are most welcome to not see a reason for that.

That's a 100% fine.

The only problem we are having is that you are trying to force your view on those who see a reason and belittle them by insinuating they act from a "fear of loss".
There is no zero cost task.
Even removing features have a cost, often not insignificant. Making sure the camera's processing chain can work in two modes? That's bound to have a cost. Am I the bad guy for saying the obvious truth? Is the pointy haired manager the good guy?

I'm not insinuating, I'm not judging, I'm not blaming; I recognize a situation.

I don't think I want to get raffle entries this way. Should we stop, or at least start discussing - preferably on a dedicated topic?
10-12-2019, 02:08 PM - 3 Likes   #673
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Melbourne Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,356
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Should we stop, or at least start discussing - preferably on a dedicated topic?
Yes please!
10-12-2019, 02:38 PM   #674
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 11,250
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
No offense, but you have zero "engineering knowledge" about the accelerator.
No offence taken.

I'm not offended by irrelevant statements.

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
"Proof by analogy is fraud" - Bjarne Stroustrup
It wasn't a "proof".

You asked a question ("What makes you so sure?") that appeared to require an elaborate answer.
Someone who didn't need that kind of analogy wouldn't have asked the question.

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
my argument about the accelerator is actually that it could be done, but it's more than an on-off switch..
If you always thought "that it could be done", why did you then wrote earlier
"So we'd be talking about two full processing pipelines, and the camera should be able to switch from one to another."?
This "two full processing pipelines" concept makes no sense whatsoever.

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Because the software isn't designed to work without the accelerator.
You just repeated what you said earlier.
I asked you how you know that the normal processing depends on the "accelerator" unit and you answer with the above statement.
That's how you don't make progress in a discussion.

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
I already did it a few days ago.
Please point me to the post.

If you are talking about the one where you enumerate external influences on a sensor then you did not "reveal a misconception". Nothing in that post is incompatible with a "blackbox" sensor design. As a software engineer you should know that "black box" does not mean there is a unit that is impervious to outside influences. It just means that you don't know what is inside and, in particular for this context, that you cannot influence what happens inside. The nature of a modern Sony chip makes all theories about some "special sauce" in-camera processing moot.

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
I'm not insinuating, I'm not judging, I'm not blaming; I recognize a situation.
You are making statements about the psychology of others by stating
"The fear of a loss is the most powerful driver."
and
"Except for making you panic that OMG, you must be losing something! It's the end of the world!"
How is that "recognizing a situation" when you don't know the people you are talking about?
How is that not plain insinuation?

Last edited by Class A; 10-12-2019 at 03:18 PM.
10-12-2019, 02:41 PM   #675
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 11,250
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Should we stop, or at least start discussing
I'm more than happy to stop any time as long as you don't attack what I say.

I appreciate that the back and forth between us may not be pleasant for some but I will not accept attacks on what I wrote, such as that I'm operating with "misconceptions" or from a place of "fear".

No one should be asked to accept such attacks without response.

We can stop it right here. I'd welcome it.
Closed Thread

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!
40mm, af, apsc, auto, camera, canon, f/2.8, focus, g2, increase, information, k-1, laser, lens, lenses, limiteds, lot, motor, nikon, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, post, price, shift, tamron, tech, wire
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Need information how to get focus pulse / distance information from camera sliawatimena Welcomes and Introductions 12 01-09-2019 07:31 AM
rumor new vintage FF and apsc mirrorless OoKU Pentax News and Rumors 621 10-25-2016 10:23 AM
Any new rumours on a new APSC? Cambo Photographic Industry and Professionals 4 04-29-2016 09:46 AM
New APSC Pentax by early 2016, using Sony A7000 sensor? falconeye Pentax News and Rumors 857 03-24-2016 08:45 PM
New APSC/FF sensor news beginning to take shape... JohnBee Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands 4 07-06-2011 04:11 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:49 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