Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-20-2020, 05:11 PM   #1591
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 670
QuoteOriginally posted by Larrymc Quote
Yeah and that's clearly a clear majority of Pentax shooters on Pentax Forums. Why incessantly complain about something that isn't going to be changed by Ricoh/Pentax just deal with it.
Why incessantly reply?

I seriously doubt anyone or even you would take that advice simply because you were in a sizeable minority. I've outlined how much of an oddity it is that this seems to be the only thing you can't disable, and that I've heard no plausible reason for it. All we have is handwaving suggestions that it might be "a little difficult" or some such. One could easily be left feeling that it is merely inconvenient, but so is adding any other feature. And that's what it is - the ability to turn something on and off is a feature. And if one were smart about it, one could market it as such.

12-20-2020, 05:14 PM - 3 Likes   #1592
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: New York
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,168
QuoteOriginally posted by Serkevan Quote
You will lose details at higher ISO regardless of accelerator. If there were no consequences for higher gain, we wouldn't be complaining about noise .
The only comparisons would be to either take a K-1ii and shoot twice:
- at ISO 100 grossly underexposed

- at ISO 3200 or so, properly exposed

Or to take a K-1 and K-1ii, shoot side by side, and see if there's any difference at, for example, ISO 12800 (Studio shot comparison: Digital Photography Review).

IMO any difference is minute and does not detract from the image.
Honestly, I don't see much of any difference. If anything, I see MORE detail from the K-1 II than the K-1. In all honesty, the bickering about the accelerator is all pedantic and seems aimed purely at degrading and bashing the brand for few reasons other than the bash. If someone wants to get "pure RAW" in any camera then they'll have to order a run of sensors direct from Sony and jerry rig it into the camera of their choice. Or just use film and develop it themselves.
12-20-2020, 05:33 PM   #1593
retired sw engineer
Loyal Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 18,378
QuoteOriginally posted by Breakfastographer Quote
Why incessantly reply?

I seriously doubt anyone or even you would take that advice simply because you were in a sizeable minority. I've outlined how much of an oddity it is that this seems to be the only thing you can't disable, and that I've heard no plausible reason for it. All we have is handwaving suggestions that it might be "a little difficult" or some such. One could easily be left feeling that it is merely inconvenient, but so is adding any other feature. And that's what it is - the ability to turn something on and off is a feature. And if one were smart about it, one could market it as such.
The image data passes through the 'accelerator' on its way to the processor, which is different from how other functions are accomplished.
Perhaps 'turning it off' would create noisier images than the sensor does.
In any case, the question has been raised with Pentax, and it has been answered, but people still harp on this issue incessantly.
Canon may create pure 'raw' files.
12-20-2020, 06:01 PM - 1 Like   #1594
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Larrymc's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Mississippi, USA
Posts: 4,138
QuoteOriginally posted by Breakfastographer Quote
Why incessantly reply?

I seriously doubt anyone or even you would take that advice simply because you were in a sizeable minority. I've outlined how much of an oddity it is that this seems to be the only thing you can't disable, and that I've heard no plausible reason for it. All we have is handwaving suggestions that it might be "a little difficult" or some such. One could easily be left feeling that it is merely inconvenient, but so is adding any other feature. And that's what it is - the ability to turn something on and off is a feature. And if one were smart about it, one could market it as such.
The plausible reason is Ricoh/Pentax does not want to disable it, secondly they don't owe you an explanation about anything they do. You can either accept that reality or keep tilting at windmills, its your choice.

Have a nice day!

12-20-2020, 06:34 PM - 1 Like   #1595
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2018
Posts: 670
QuoteOriginally posted by Larrymc Quote
The plausible reason is Ricoh/Pentax does not want to disable it, secondly they don't owe you an explanation about anything they do. You can either accept that reality or keep tilting at windmills, its your choice.
Just like I don't owe anybody a purchase. But I'm willing to engage. Others will just read the DPR review and turn away from the brand.
12-20-2020, 06:53 PM - 2 Likes   #1596
Moderator
Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
MarkJerling's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: Wairarapa, New Zealand
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,237
As this thread has now so thoroughly derailed from it's original purpose, is there any reason to keep it going?
12-20-2020, 07:16 PM   #1597
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
luftfluss's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,104
QuoteOriginally posted by MarkJerling Quote
As this thread has now so thoroughly derailed from it's original purpose, is there any reason to keep it going?
IMO, "Nope".
12-20-2020, 07:18 PM   #1598
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Larrymc's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Mississippi, USA
Posts: 4,138
QuoteOriginally posted by MarkJerling Quote
As this thread has now so thoroughly derailed from it's original purpose, is there any reason to keep it going?
Shut_er down!!

12-20-2020, 07:20 PM - 2 Likes   #1599
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 10,928
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
Perhaps 'turning it off' would create noisier images than the sensor does.
This makes zero sense.

The sensor delivers a digital data stream (ones and zeros). These cannot represent "noisier images" by being left unchanged.

FWIW, observing basic facts is not "brand bashing". I find it disheartening that one has to endure insults like that just for keeping the facts straight.
12-20-2020, 07:39 PM - 1 Like   #1600
retired sw engineer
Loyal Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 18,378
QuoteOriginally posted by MarkJerling Quote
As this thread has now so thoroughly derailed from it's original purpose, is there any reason to keep it going?
No, those opposed to the 'accelerator' will continue to rant - thinking of new arguments - as long as you keep it open,
12-20-2020, 07:41 PM   #1601
retired sw engineer
Loyal Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 18,378
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
This makes zero sense.

The sensor delivers a digital data stream (ones and zeros). These cannot represent "noisier images" by being left unchanged.

FWIW, observing basic facts is not "brand bashing". I find it disheartening that one has to endure insults like that just for keeping the facts straight.
This makes at least as much sense at your rants do.

We do not know what experiments have shown - a digital stream can have incorrect elements added to it just like any other electronic stream can.

You are not "keeping facts straight" - you are making up 'facts' of things that neither of us can be certain of.

Last edited by reh321; 12-20-2020 at 07:47 PM.
12-20-2020, 08:03 PM   #1602
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
MMVIII's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: EU
Posts: 877
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
This makes zero sense.

The sensor delivers a digital data stream (ones and zeros). These cannot represent "noisier images" by being left unchanged.

FWIW, observing basic facts is not "brand bashing". I find it disheartening that one has to endure insults like that just for keeping the facts straight.
This would be sad. I value and respect your contributions and I see the passion you are showing.
Still, the only fact here is that the processing pipeline in the K-1II and KP can not be changed by the user to bypass a hardware component. Why they (Ricoh) do it is speculation and only they could provide a reason for it.. When asked if they might change that, they said this would not easily be done. When talking about cameras to come, they stressed the fact that a similar hardware design will be used and it might even help to achieve what they consider the best RAW image quality the designers and engineers can achieve beginning from ISO 100. If they will make a part of it a user choice remains to be seen. I don't think so. They seem to be confident and convinced that this brings the best quality.

The dpr assessment was flawed and exaggerated. Especially as many have realised who e.g. compared the visual output not only to the K-1 but e.g. to the Z7II or R6. The output of the some year old K-1 sensor is capable to not only keep up with them but even surpass them in some areas. Both processing hardware varants! Isn't that what counts? If in 5 years there would be a theoretical algorithm that could bring even more details into the noisier K-1 RAWs, then the K-1II would still offer more details than the images of one of theblatest Canikons. By the way, such an algorithm might just be possible with the use of neural networks and these would adapt to any form of noise reduction, by doing assumptions how the content should look like
12-20-2020, 08:11 PM   #1603
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 521
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
This makes zero sense.

The sensor delivers a digital data stream (ones and zeros). These cannot represent "noisier images" by being left unchanged.

FWIW, observing basic facts is not "brand bashing". I find it disheartening that one has to endure insults like that just for keeping the facts straight.
Sorry, this is completely incorrect. Noise can be digital.
12-20-2020, 08:41 PM - 2 Likes   #1604
Moderator
Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
MarkJerling's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: Wairarapa, New Zealand
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 15,237
Ladies and gentlemen, it's been fun.
But this is no longer about the new K-3iii, not even tangentially.

threadclosed
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!
approx, aps-c, camera, color, correction, display, film, flagship, frames, image, information, jpeg, k-1, k2, model, name, niche, patent, pentax news, pentax rumors, price, priority, safox, select, steps, touch, usb, video oct
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
July 22nd, 2020 at 7 p.m.: Update on the development of the new APS-C flagship model beholder3 Pentax News and Rumors 14 07-16-2020 03:47 PM
New information about new flagship's selling date Karen the Star Pentax News and Rumors 1650 02-29-2020 01:18 AM
Purchase dilemma - KP or new APS-C flagship? NotMyFatDog Pentax DSLR Discussion 80 12-10-2019 08:00 AM
Upgrade Question - Upcoming ASP-C Flagship or K1 Mk ii ? 5shot Pentax DSLR Discussion 43 08-10-2019 08:40 PM
Who knows the actually information about new aps-c flagship? Karen the Star Pentax DSLR Discussion 48 06-28-2019 11:15 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:36 PM. | 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