Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-03-2021, 09:41 AM   #106
Moderator
Not a Number's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 10,510
QuoteOriginally posted by davidsladek Quote
Not sure if this was discussed, but the Accelerator unit doesn't only handle noise reduction but also the colour fidelity and maybe other variables too (dynamic range...). so for it to kick in at 100 it may not be bad news depending on what it is programmed to do at this sensitivity...
I've mentioned that many times. Sources are interviews with Ricoh, the Website Special Pages on the K-1/ii and mainly an interview in one of the Japanese camera eMagazines (you'll have to search for the links probably posted by JPT). Ricoh says the Accelerator can give better blues, was tweaked for each and every ISO setting and affects the images in ways that can't be easily measured numerically.

03-03-2021, 09:47 AM   #107
Pentaxian
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,128
QuoteOriginally posted by davidsladek Quote
Not sure if this was discussed, but the Accelerator unit doesn't only handle noise reduction but also the colour fidelity and maybe other variables too (dynamic range...). so for it to kick in at 100 it may not be bad news depending on what it is programmed to do at this sensitivity...
The astronomer site saw a strange magenta tint to images taken at ISO 100 by the K-1ii - when the 'accelerator' is inactive - hopefully that isn't present in the K-3iii.

Last edited by reh321; 03-03-2021 at 10:48 AM.
03-03-2021, 09:55 AM   #108
Pentaxian
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,128
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
It could be a plus for Pentax, assuming the flaming from DP Review over the accelerator's application to RAW images isn't too great.
and DPR doesn't transmit their biases to others.
After the astronomer site published their article, they apparently heard directly from DPR.
They modified their article until they examined the DPR claims - then largely returned to their original conclusions.
03-03-2021, 10:46 PM   #109
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 11,250
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Yes, I read the patent. It's an example of information not available when post-processing your images.
There are tons of examples and techniques for when post-processing cannot achieve the same as in-camera processing.

It matters, though, whether they are applicable.

In the case of the K-1 II, your referenced technique is not applicable. You could point to tons more of those, they are all irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
A warning against over-simplifying a very complex problem.
The capabilities of the Sony sensor in the K-1 II are known. They are published in a datasheet.
We know what it can and cannot do. There is no "oversimplification" if one just references hardware capabilities.

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
We know next to nothing about what the Image Accelerator Unit does.
We know quite a lot, in particular through what we know about the Sony sensor and what the latter does not allow.
At the time the K-1 II was released, a lot of comparisons with the K-1 were made and everybody seemed to agree that post-processing can equalise the differences between the two. Some still regard it as a big plus that the K-1 II performs the improvements for them, but I don't recall any dispute over the fact that the K-1 II accomplishes anything that could not be achieved with the K-1 plus post-processing.

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Let's not make convenient assumptions under the cover of an unrelated principle.
What "unrelated principle"? What "assumptions"?

Do you realise that you made an "assumption" (that the "accelerator unit" does something more than image processing) and referenced an unrelated principle (the Ricoh patent about real-time noise substraction)?


QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
You're saying it's all software and can be done better in post? Prove it.
Again, I think it has been proven way back when the K-1 II was released already.

If you know about two RAW images, one from the K-1 II and one from the K-1, which you think represent a case where the K-1 image cannot be made to look as good, please point me to the pair and I'll have a go.

Furthermore, you are attempting a reversal of burden of proof.
Anyone who wishes to claim that the "accelerator unit" does something special beyond post-processing needs to provide evidence to be taken seriously. For all I care, you can claim whatever you want about the "accelerator unit" but if you attack my findings by evoking all sorts of magical things the "accelerator unit" could do, you better provide evidence for why a regular "image processing" explanation (which was given by Ricoh themselves(!) in the K-3 III interview) is not good enough.

QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
This thread is about the K-3 III, by the way. So... can we get back to being amazed at the results?
The relevance of this discussion to the thread are the claims that have been made about the "accelerator unit" in the K-3 III.
Remember that I merely made one post observing some facts around the topic of comparing APS-C (K-3 III) images to FF images (K-1 II) and after that my responses to you were only made in defence to accusations.

Regarding:
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
To avoid a thread closure (I feel we're very near that point), I will only respond to this specific thing then stop.
If you feel that certain topics are endangering the thread then please don't bring them up in the first place. It is strange to first accuse somebody about spreading "prejudice" and when that somebody then asks for clarification how such an allegation could be justified, respond by stating that a no-response is best to avoid having the thread closed.

03-04-2021, 01:01 AM - 7 Likes   #110
Forum Member




Join Date: Feb 2019
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 85
If one doesn't like the accelerator unit in the new K3 III they don't have to buy it.

For me it's a non-issue if it's similar to the KP's. I for one made my own assessment when I bought the KP. I'd rather have the accelerator unit with its processing applied to the images than live with a camera I had to post-process my images for a similar result.

Each to there own but no need to devalue views of people who have no issue with having the accelerator unit. Their view is worth no less than a person who has the opposite opinion.

I repeat, if it's such a negative issue don't buy the camera.
03-04-2021, 01:51 AM - 5 Likes   #111
Pentaxian
redpit's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Greece
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,857
QuoteOriginally posted by Batman_ Quote
I repeat, if it's such a negative issue don't buy the camera.
He/she will find it very difficult to find a contemporary camera that doesn't "process" the RAW data... Searching for older generations' used cameras will be their only choice.

Meanwhile I'm sure that I will enjoy my new K-3iii and trust the developers know better and have passed through all these very elementary thoughts/objections we express here (as non experts of any kind) and wouldn't compromise the IQ for a gimmick feauture...

When Pentax officially states they believe this is the APS-C camera with the best IQ in its category I have no reason to doubt given my experience with K-1 and K-5IIs
03-04-2021, 08:45 AM - 1 Like   #112
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
luftfluss's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,595
QuoteOriginally posted by Batman_ Quote
If one doesn't like the accelerator unit in the new K3 III they don't have to buy it.
If folks had taken the same attitude with the KP - if they hadn't raised a fuss over the fact that it wasn't a true K-3 II successor - then we might not have this K-3 III at all.

Consumer complaints, especially when made constructively (and I'm not saying all complaints about the Accelerator are) give important feedback to the company.

Disappointing so many people seem to be fans of this kind of "cancel culture".

03-04-2021, 08:58 AM - 1 Like   #113
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 15,132
QuoteOriginally posted by luftfluss Quote
If folks had taken the same attitude with the KP - if they hadn't raised a fuss over the fact that it wasn't a true K-3 II successor - then we might not have this K-3 III at all.

Consumer complaints, especially when made constructively (and I'm not saying all complaints about the Accelerator are) give important feedback to the company.

Disappointing so many people seem to be fans of this kind of "cancel culture".
No, I really do not think that was the case. According to Ricoh Imaging, the KP was a separate product... and the camera itself clearly wasn't a K-3 II successor.

Positive feedback might be more important. You wouldn't want to work in an environment where the only feedback you're getting is negative... why would that be fine for Pentax?
Besides, most criticism is not reasonable, often it's just emotion speaking.
03-04-2021, 09:22 AM - 5 Likes   #114
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 15,903
QuoteOriginally posted by luftfluss Quote
If folks had taken the same attitude with the KP - if they hadn't raised a fuss over the fact that it wasn't a true K-3 II successor - then we might not have this K-3 III at all.
Probably not, but you are comparing apples to bananas.
QuoteQuote:
Consumer complaints, especially when made constructively (and I'm not saying all complaints about the Accelerator are) give important feedback to the company.
In the case of the accelerator unit, I have yet to read a single valid complaint. Every complaint seems to be centered around some sort of theoretical discussion by people who have no real world experience with files from the cameras that have it.
Were I Ricoh reading about the complaints surrounding the accelerator, I would be thinking that most of the complainers are either drunk or high on glue.
QuoteQuote:
Disappointing so many people seem to be fans of this kind of "cancel culture".
Oh please, that is ridiculous. I actually have much stronger words than that, but I'm not looking for a thread ban or worse.

The carping on this subject has become nothing more than a whiny drone. Repeating the same lies and stupidity a thousand times doesn't add validity to the lies and stupidity, it just reflects really badly on the people doing the whining. Asking people to grow up and stop acting like babies is not "cancel culture".

Using the term "cancel culture" is nothing more than a very lazy shortcut used by people who want to shut down conversation that they don't have the intellectual ammunition to keep up with.
03-04-2021, 09:27 AM - 1 Like   #115
Pentaxian
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,128
QuoteOriginally posted by luftfluss Quote
If folks had taken the same attitude with the KP - if they hadn't raised a fuss over the fact that it wasn't a true K-3 II successor - then we might not have this K-3 III at all.
People largely ignored the K-70 and KP .... except to praise the resulting images.

Only when did the K-1ii came out did really people look how those cameras worked.
When they did realize that even ‘raw’ images are affected, there were many many more complaints than there were here about the “flippy” LCD.
DPR complained and complained.
People asked Ricoh and Pentax representatives about it.
Their response was to use it more.
We do not know how Pentax makes decisions, but I guess that they do not depend on advice from New Zealand or the USA.
Apparently Japanese consumers don’t see any reason to sit for hours at a computer doing what the camera could do at least as well.
Apparently Japanese consumers have fun using the output of the ‘accelerator’ - I know that this American does.
03-04-2021, 09:33 AM - 1 Like   #116
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
luftfluss's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,595
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
No, I really do not think that was the case. According to Ricoh Imaging, the KP was a separate product... and the camera itself clearly wasn't a K-3 II successor.

Positive feedback might be more important. You wouldn't want to work in an environment where the only feedback you're getting is negative... why would that be fine for Pentax?
Besides, most criticism is not reasonable, often it's just emotion speaking.
As I recall, when the KP was announced there was at least one statement from someone affiliated with Ricoh that the KP was the "successor" to the K-3 II. Of course, there is a great deal of semantics involved with the term "successor", and it simply could have been "yes, the KP comes after the K-3 II". It was some time later that Ricoh stated that there would be a true successor - a direct replacement - for the K-3 II, and it was being "researched". I remember this pretty clearly, as I was concerned that should my K-3 II need replacing one day, I had nowhere to go at that time in the Pentax lineup. Hence my complete delight with what I've read about the new K-3 III.

I completely agree with you that positive feedback is important. Feedback, in general, is important, and should be encouraged. The if you don't like it, don't buy it mentality doesn't help Pentax in the long run.

BTW, my previous post is meant to be neither pro- nor anti- Accelerator. It is what it is, and frankly all the discussion about it should be in a singular thread rather than scattered around the forum.
03-04-2021, 09:38 AM - 1 Like   #117
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 15,132
QuoteOriginally posted by luftfluss Quote
As I recall, when the KP was announced there was at least one statement from someone affiliated with Ricoh that the KP was the "successor" to the K-3 II. Of course, there is a great deal of semantics involved with the term "successor", and it simply could have been "yes, the KP comes after the K-3 II". It was some time later that Ricoh stated that there would be a true successor - a direct replacement - for the K-3 II, and it was being "researched". I remember this pretty clearly, as I was concerned that should my K-3 II need replacing one day, I had nowhere to go at that time in the Pentax lineup. Hence my complete delight with what I've read about the new K-3 III.

I completely agree with you that positive feedback is important. Feedback, in general, is important, and should be encouraged. The if you don't like it, don't buy it mentality doesn't help Pentax in the long run.

BTW, my previous post is meant to be neither pro- nor anti- Accelerator. It is what it is, and frankly all the discussion about it should be in a singular thread rather than scattered around the forum.
The General Sales Manager for Ricoh Imaging Europe, yes. But when Mr. Takashi Arai said otherwise...
Besides Mr. Arai being directly involved in the actual product planning, what he said made more sense than "we decided to make a K-3 II successor but we cut down a SD slot, the buffer, frame rate and pretty much everything that makes it a K-3 II successor".
03-04-2021, 10:08 AM - 1 Like   #118
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2014
Location: Baltimore
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,383
Second and final warning: Reduce the heat of the rhetoric or the thread gets shut down---which would be a shame, because within the sniping there's some good exchange of information and disagreements.

I don't understand this. Please, do not give offense, do not take offense.
03-04-2021, 10:11 AM - 1 Like   #119
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 898
This probably has been asked already, but can we expect PentaxForums interview with Ricoh? It didn't happen last year, how about this year?
03-04-2021, 10:12 AM - 2 Likes   #120
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Pål Jensen's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Norway
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,371
QuoteOriginally posted by luftfluss Quote
As I recall, when the KP was announced there was at least one statement from someone affiliated with Ricoh that the KP was the "successor" to the K-3 II..
No. It was sales people. The KP was what they had to sell at the absence of the K-3. That doesn't make it a K-3 successor. It is a different class of camera, and if the KP was intended as a K-3 successor it obviously been called the K-3III and the K-3III called the K-3IV.
Reply

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!
af, camera, color, fuji, ii, iii, image, iso, k-1, k-3, lenses, mechanics, mirror, night, ovf, pentax news, pentax rumors, performance, photos, plm, san, sensor, sensors, stars, system, video, wakashiro
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
2021 CP+ going online only mlt Pentax News and Rumors 258 03-26-2021 01:02 AM
K-3 III "online touch and try" CP+ event open for registration. I'll attend. kwb Pentax News and Rumors 47 02-28-2021 02:50 PM
CP+2021 special site online OoKU Pentax News and Rumors 15 02-27-2021 04:44 AM
New: Product Stories of New APS-C “K-3 Mark III” Vol.8 (Wakashiro) davidsladek Pentax News and Rumors 3 01-15-2021 05:27 AM
Lens roadmap: Tanaka-san spills the beans Mistral75 Pentax News and Rumors 360 04-02-2019 07:14 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:08 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