[ma318]

SR system before K-7 never supported rotational compensation although it was thought to.
Pentax said it was an interpretation error.

Can you back up your statement with some external links or official documentation?

According to the Pentax document which you can download from the Pentax site, it clearly states the K100D SR system would compensate for three movements: vertically, horizontally and rotationally. No interpretation required. If Pentax think this is in error, would they not pull this document off their website?

AFAIK the K-7 is the only one camera capable of that and btw, a lens with integrated compensation (IS or whatever CAN NOT compensate for rotational movement).

Not true according the this document from the Pentax site. The K100D can do so. Read it to check it. Pentax called it the "FACT SHEET".

http://www.pentaximaging.com/files/scms_docs/SHAKE_REDUCTION_FACT_SHEET.pdf

Here is a writeup on the K10D that states it can compensate for rotational movement like the K100D.

Pentax K10D full review Cameralabs features: anti-shake and anti-dust

Anyway from a pure technical point of view, a SR system that can move vertically and horizontally can in fact account for rotational movement if you design it to do so. The piston in your car that only travels up and down but it can be converted to rotation movement in the wheels. So technically there is really nothing special about this rotational compensation. All IS system can technically compensate for it if the designer wanted to do so. Canon's Lens IS system CAN account for rotational movement. See below.

Canon develops Hybrid image stabilization system: Digital Photography Review
How Slow can you HandHold a Camera

---

Last edited by ma318; 02-11-2010 at 11:42 AM.

[enoeske]

I think there are two interpretations of "rotational" going on here.

1.) Holding the camera out in front of you might cause the camera to "shake". This movement might include going up/down and left/right or a combination of the two. For instance, you could go down while going left, then down while going right, then up and right and finally up and left, thus completing a circle. This could be seen as rotational movement, but in reality, all moves where left/right and up/down.

2.) What happens if you are holding the camera in front of you and twist the camera like a steering wheel of a car. This is another form of "shake" but would not be solved with a simple left/right, up/down reduction system. You need to rotate the sensor the opposite way of the twisting motion, not just move it in a circle.

[ma318]

That I agree. Pentax's new SR system may not be able to account for the 2nd type of rotation, a rotation around the lens axis only. Fortunately for Pentax, I think rotating perfectly along the lens axis only is almost impossible to do hand holding the camera.
Thanks for the clarification.

In any case, because of the free floating SR design used starting with the K100D, all Pentax DSLR up to the K7 can account for the both types of rotation movements.

Another interesting thing to note is that the original Canon IS accounts for rotational movement only but the new hybrid system adds lateral movement compensation.

[ma318]

Having thought it over a bit. I think the new SR system can technically account for rotation along the lens axis as well. All it has to do is shift the sensor so that it is off the lens axis. The rotational movement along the lens axis will then become a circular movement from the point of view of the sensor. Thus the SR system can account for it.

[Photomy]

Some feel it's for the 645.
United States Patent Application: 0100020184

What they really need to patent ASAP before someone else does (it will happen) is a sensor that can rotate 90 degrees in about a second or so for vertical shots without having to rotate the whole camera. No more need for heavy, extra hand grips, L- brackets, or other contraptions for flash. Just press a button. Now that would be something worth paying for.

[PentaxPoke]

What they really need to patent ASAP before someone else does (it will happen) is a sensor that can rotate 90 degrees in about a second or so for vertical shots without having to rotate the whole camera. No more need for heavy, extra hand grips, L- brackets, or other contraptions for flash. Just press a button. Now that would be something worth paying for.

Or just go to a square APS-H sensor. A lot simpler, faster, more reliable, and less expensive.

[ma318]

What they really need to patent ASAP before someone else does (it will happen) is a sensor that can rotate 90 degrees in about a second or so for vertical shots without having to rotate the whole camera. No more need for heavy, extra hand grips, L- brackets, or other contraptions for flash. Just press a button. Now that would be something worth paying for.

But your optical viewfinder is still "wrong". If they use an EVF, then it would be alot easier to change the view of the viewfinder too. But some people seem to hate EVF.

[ma318]

Or just go to a square APS-H sensor. A lot simpler, faster, more reliable, and less expensive.

Maybe that's why large format films are generally more "square". Can't imagine turning one of those around 90degree for a portrait shot.

[Gimbal]

No, I don't think so...

The document below describes the SR system used in the K100D. It has a free floating sensor plate which allows for three directions movement - same as the one used in the K7. This is the older SR design. Hence, it is safe to conclude that all Pentax DSLR from the K100D and up to the K7 are using this "older" SR system. The one used by the K-X is most likely the new one. The new SR design has two movements as the sensor rests on a horizontal and vertical guide bar/actuator - not exactly free floating like the older design.

This is a good example at how good the marketing people usually are at selling you stuff - they tell you the truth but not the whole truth....A SR system that can only move in two directions (vertically and horizontally) can simulate any rotational movement anyway so the new system is not necessary a worse system. In fact, it can offer better sensor stability when the camera is not moving and it can certainly support a heavier/larger sensor.

http://www.pentaximaging.com/files/scms_docs/SHAKE_REDUCTION_FACT_SHEET.pdf

Yes that is a good example of marketing selling us stuff that might not be entirely true. Thanks to the fact sheet it is a widespread understanding that the K100/K10/k20 can do rotational compensation, but they cant. As Thibs wrote Pentax has stated that it indeed was a translation error (from Japanese to English I guess) and thus the myth began. The k-7 is the first camera that actually does rotational SR.

It is mentioned here Pentax K-7 Digital Camera - Full Review - The Imaging Resource!

"(though we've reported that this was a feature of Shake Reduction back to the K100D, Pentax informs us that this was a result of a translation error back in 2006)."


The new SR can not do rotational SR though, at least not as it is described in the patent.

Check out Sonys system http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/technology/technology/theme/alpha_02.html#page03

Looks a bit like the "new" patent, another type of linear motors seems to be the major difference.

[ma318]

Yes that is a good example of marketing selling us stuff that might not be entirely true. Thanks to the fact sheet it is a widespread understanding that the K100/K10/k20 can do rotational compensation, but they cant. As Thibs wrote Pentax has stated that it indeed was a translation error (from Japanese to English I guess) and thus the myth began. The k-7 is the first camera that actually does rotational SR.

It is mentioned here Pentax K-7 Digital Camera - Full Review - The Imaging Resource!

"(though we've reported that this was a feature of Shake Reduction back to the K100D, Pentax informs us that this was a result of a translation error back in 2006)."


The new SR can not do rotational SR though, at least not as it is described in the patent.

Check out Sonys system Sony Global - Technology - SteadyShot INSIDE

Looks a bit like the "new" patent, another type of linear motors seems to be the major difference.

Thanks for the link. I now see why Thibs made his statement above. All I can say is if we could not trust an article from that website (Imaging Resources) or possibly Pentax back in 2006, how are we supposed to trust them now to be giving us the straight goods regarding their SR.

If there is a new marketing idea that would take the cake, I guess it would be this one - claim that the new buyer will get a new feature by claiming this feature that was supposed to be there with the older product were not there after all due to some interpretation error. If this is true, I could see some lawyers reading this smell a class action suit. These kind of marketing materials generally have to go thru many level of company review and approval for correctness before they are released just so that they don't get sued later for product mis-representation. Are we supposed to believe that Pentax marketing and legal department are that incompetent?

In any case, looking at the design of the original SR used in the K100D, there is no technical reason for it not to be able to account for rotational movement unless Pentax did not implement it. Since the document specifically stated that the SR system uses an "angular" sensor to detect movement. My guess is that it is more likely it was compensating for rotational movement only but not for true lateral only movement. So it is actually more believable that they have fixed this in the K7 by adding lateral only movement compensation. Just like Canon did with their hybrid IS lens announced in July 2009. I can see from a marketing stand point back in 2006, if your camera can account for rotational movement, you could kind of claim that it can account for vertical and horizontal movement because a rotation is a combination of vertical and horizontal movement. However it gets into trouble if it is really an vertical only or horizontal only movement.

Like I said above, I don't see any technical reason why the new SR can not account for rotational movement unless the designer choose not to implement it. A rotational movement is just a combination of vertical and horizontal movement.

I agree the Pentax new SR system is more like an incremental improvement over Sony's SR system. Pentax managed to eliminate a couple of guide rails to make its new SR more compact.

[Kunzite]

What they really need to patent ASAP before someone else does (it will happen) is a sensor that can rotate 90 degrees in about a second or so for vertical shots without having to rotate the whole camera. No more need for heavy, extra hand grips, L- brackets, or other contraptions for flash. Just press a button. Now that would be something worth paying for.

Are you a fan of Rube Goldberg?
Such a camera would be much bigger, more complex and the rotating mechanism would not perform better than just twisting your hands (which one could do much faster than in 'press a button and wait about a second or so).

[PentaxPoke]

Maybe that's why large format films are generally more "square". Can't imagine turning one of those around 90degree for a portrait shot.

I agree. I actually like a square format, and would welcome not having to rotate the camera. I fear I am probably in the minority however.

[Gimbal]

Thanks for the link. I now see why Thibs made his statement above. All I can say is if we could not trust an article from that website (Imaging Resources) or possibly Pentax back in 2006, how are we supposed to trust them now to be giving us the straight goods regarding their SR.

If there is a new marketing idea that would take the cake, I guess it would be this one - claim that the new buyer will get a new feature by claiming this feature that was supposed to be there with the older product were not there after all due to some interpretation error. If this is true, I could see some lawyers reading this smell a class action suit. These kind of marketing materials generally have to go thru many level of company review and approval for correctness before they are released just so that they don't get sued later for product mis-representation. Are we supposed to believe that Pentax marketing and legal department are that incompetent?

In any case, looking at the design of the original SR used in the K100D, there is no technical reason for it not to be able to account for rotational movement unless Pentax did not implement it. Since the document specifically stated that the SR system uses an "angular" sensor to detect movement. My guess is that it is more likely it was compensating for rotational movement only but not for true lateral only movement. So it is actually more believable that they have fixed this in the K7 by adding lateral only movement compensation. Just like Canon did with their hybrid IS lens announced in July 2009. I can see from a marketing stand point back in 2006, if your camera can account for rotational movement, you could kind of claim that it can account for vertical and horizontal movement because a rotation is a combination of vertical and horizontal movement. However it gets into trouble if it is really an vertical only or horizontal only movement.

Like I said above, I don't see any technical reason why the new SR can not account for rotational movement unless the designer choose not to implement it. A rotational movement is just a combination of vertical and horizontal movement.

I agree the Pentax new SR system is more like an incremental improvement over Sony's SR system. Pentax managed to eliminate a couple of guide rails to make its new SR more compact.

I questioned the rotational claim from the very beginning. As I’m the curious type, one of the first tings I did with my K10d was looking at the sensor plate (no lens, manual mode and a long shutter time) while wiggling the camera with SR on. The sensor plate moved left, right, up and down, but did not rotate. I figured that MAYBE the rotational movement was so small that it couldn’t be seen by the naked eye. Then someone took a K10d apart and only found two movement sensors, thus rotational SR was out of the question, for that we would need a third sensor. But as far as I know it wasn’t until the release of the K7 that Pentax officially admitted it, in the meanwhile, people where happy with the unique (but fictional) rotational SR.

As for the new SR system, there is no way for it to rotate, the rods will make sure that the horizon stays level.

[ma318]

I questioned the rotational claim from the very beginning. As I’m the curious type, one of the first tings I did with my K10d was looking at the sensor plate (no lens, manual mode and a long shutter time) while wiggling the camera with SR on. The sensor plate moved left, right, up and down, but did not rotate. I figured that MAYBE the rotational movement was so small that it couldn’t be seen by the naked eye. Then someone took a K10d apart and only found two movement sensors, thus rotational SR was out of the question, for that we would need a third sensor. But as far as I know it wasn’t until the release of the K7 that Pentax officially admitted it, in the meanwhile, people where happy with the unique (but fictional) rotational SR.

As for the new SR system, there is no way for it to rotate, the rods will make sure that the horizon stays level.

Thanks for the info. I think we will have to agree to disagree. You believe a sensor moving in two directions, vertical and horizontal, can not account for rotational movement. I believe a rotational movement is just the sum of a vertical and horizontal movement and thus such SR system can technically account for rotational movement. It does not matter in the end because we seem to agree that however the SR works in the K100D/K10D/K20D, it does work.

[enoeske]

Thanks for the info. I think we will have to agree to disagree. You believe a sensor moving in two directions, vertical and horizontal, can not account for rotational movement. I believe a rotational movement is just the sum of a vertical and horizontal movement and thus such SR system can technically account for rotational movement. It does not matter in the end because we seem to agree that however the SR works in the K100D/K10D/K20D, it does work.

see my post earlier, you are talking about a different kind of rotation.