Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-30-2015, 01:33 AM   #106
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,705
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
You are right, as soon as you allow multi-shot techniques, the sky is the limit as far as resolution and image quality are concerned. For more resolution you can stitch, for less noise you can stack, and for more dynamic range you can use HDR or exposure fusion to keep a natural look.
You can also combine the different techniques, in particular if all of this is automated. If you are already on a tripod and the software help, your pano shooting could take a dozen picture of each part to get several exposures + stacking and then combine into a pano.

But I think that the pano strategy alone increase more than sharpness. To me sure it has not all the same benefits as if the pixel were bigger (like more dynamic range) but it make the camera act as it had a bigger sensor, including if you want in term of deph of field, focus transitions and all (this is indeed the brenitzer method: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brenizer_Method used by some wedding photographers to simulate MF rendering with their FF).

So to me, it also decrease noise, exactly like the D800 has similar pixel density and no better pixel than a K5, but when you print the same size the noise is more averaged on a D800 than on a K5. This is exactly what DxO does: it normalize for an A4 (approximately 8x12") 300dpi shoot (or 8MP).

10-30-2015, 01:47 AM   #107
Pentaxian
calsan's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Perth, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,387
Thanks to Ed for your comparison.
So it makes sense to choose the camera you will use, not the camera you will use to win arguments.
10-30-2015, 02:15 AM   #108
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,705
QuoteOriginally posted by calsan Quote
Thanks to Ed for your comparison.
So it makes sense to choose the camera you will use, not the camera you will use to win arguments.
Yeah and ultimately you win arguments and client and so on with photographs, not cameras or even lenses.
10-30-2015, 09:05 AM   #109
Pentaxian
Dan Rentea's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Bucharest
Posts: 634
QuoteOriginally posted by Qwntm Quote
Because I say so? With 30 years of professional experience to back up what I say? But you make up your own mind.


Don't worry, there won't be any more Canon 6D shots to compare to, but I'm making A LOT more BIG K3II pixel shift prints for next year. If it's not up to it, I'll be the first to tell you...


And of course, can you point us to anyone else who has spent the money to make the prints to compare these? It may be a test of one, but it's still s decisive WIN for Pentax K3II and pixel shift. It's not that the 6D print is THAT bad, it's just that the K3II PS print is THAT much better.

As a professional landscape photographer with 30 years of experience I expected a better answer than "Because I say so", especially because K-3 II's pixel shift function works only in certain circumstances. The print quality from Canon 6D is not far behind K-3 II print. And if that day had been a windy day...goodbye pixel shift.

Comparing prints from Pentax K-3 II (with pixel shift activated) with prints from Canon 6D it's like comparing prints from Nikon D810 with pixel shift resolution activated (if D810 had it built in this feature) with prints from Pentax 645Z. Nikon's images will probably be better, but only in specific circumstances.


And let’s not also forget that Canon 6D is a three year older technology, even though it has a full frame sensor.

10-30-2015, 01:35 PM   #110
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,705
QuoteOriginally posted by Dan Rentea Quote
As a professional landscape photographer with 30 years of experience I expected a better answer than "Because I say so", especially because K-3 II's pixel shift function works only in certain circumstances. The print quality from Canon 6D is not far behind K-3 II print. And if that day had been a windy day...goodbye pixel shift.

Comparing prints from Pentax K-3 II (with pixel shift activated) with prints from Canon 6D it's like comparing prints from Nikon D810 with pixel shift resolution activated (if D810 had it built in this feature) with prints from Pentax 645Z. Nikon's images will probably be better, but only in specific circumstances.


And let’s not also forget that Canon 6D is a three year older technology, even though it has a full frame sensor.
I don't get your point, the 6D has less resolution: 20MP vs 24MP. It also has a low pass filter. It's Dxo score is nothing to rave about. Less dynamic range and same color deph as K3. Only high iso handling is better.

So I can agree that you'll get better low light performance at the expense of deph of field, like any FF. I can agree on the added deph of field control and for the in focus - out of focus transitions.

But with all due respect there no reason to expect the 6D to work any better for landscape than the K3. We can say it 3 year old camera vs 2 year old camera, we can say this is not valid for other camera... We can say all we want, sure but this doesn't change the reality. Landscape shooting benefit of dynamic range, it is usually taken at the lowest iso setting, potentially with a tripod. None of the 6D benefit apply here.

Only with the very latest Canon provide more than 24Mp the 5Ds. Nikon had FF with lot resolution for years. But that only the D800 familly. All other Nikon cameras are 24MP or less. Many are even only 16MP or less like D3s, D4s, Nikon Df. So there Sony and again most models even FF are 24MP or less, only the 2 version of the A7R have 36 and 42MP.

Either you have a 5Ds, a D8xx or a A7R, A7R-II and you get more resolution for your lanscape, either you don't and you FF has still many adventages but the better landscapes shoots are not part of it.

It will be much more interresting to ensure you have a good set of high quality lenses than to worry that you have "only" a 24MP K3 instead of an all mighty FF. Ironically, you might go away with a Samyang 16mm and a K3 and get very fine results. You might use the DA15 for some shoots, get so-so border sharpness but get outstanding starbust and flare resistance and that may matter more in the end in some situations.

Last edited by Nicolas06; 01-31-2017 at 02:03 PM.
10-30-2015, 02:15 PM   #111
Pentaxian
cali92rs's Avatar

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 3,346
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote

But with all due respect there no reason to expect the 6D to work any better for landscape than the K3. We can say it 3 year old camera vs 2 year old camera, we can say this is not valid for other camera... We can say all we want, sure but this doesn't change the reality. Landscape shooting benefit of dynamic range, it is usually taken at the lowest iso setting, potentially with a tripod. None of the 6D benefit apply here.
If you are shooting landscape on a tripod (such as required with pixel shift), why couldn't you put the 6D on a tripod and use HDR?
Sure, if you are shooting handheld and are going to take a single exposure, then the K-3ii would be a better tool... but the point of this thread was extolling the virtues of pixel shift.
10-30-2015, 04:14 PM   #112
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,705
QuoteOriginally posted by cali92rs Quote
If you are shooting landscape on a tripod (such as required with pixel shift), why couldn't you put the 6D on a tripod and use HDR?
Sure, if you are shooting handheld and are going to take a single exposure, then the K-3ii would be a better tool... but the point of this thread was extolling the virtues of pixel shift.
Sure you can, I just don't get how it would make the 6D a better camera? The K3-II is getting as good pictures (for landscapes) in all situation and significantly better pictures in "pixel shift" situations. In that last case (still subject, camera on a tripod) with a bit more effort, you can go for other techniques and get even more with both cameras.

That's still doesn't mean that a landscape shooter has a case for getting a 6D.
10-30-2015, 04:40 PM   #113
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,258
QuoteOriginally posted by cali92rs Quote
If you are shooting landscape on a tripod (such as required with pixel shift), why couldn't you put the 6D on a tripod and use HDR?
Sure, if you are shooting handheld and are going to take a single exposure, then the K-3ii would be a better tool... but the point of this thread was extolling the virtues of pixel shift.
From what was posted by Nicolas, the K3 without pixel shift should be a better landscape camera. It has better low iso dynamic range, better resolution and a little better color depth. Few landscapes are shot at iso 800, where the 6D will beat up the K3/K3 II.

The pixel shift is just another tool that can add resolution to a camera that should be better than the 6D for this specific application.

10-30-2015, 07:47 PM   #114
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 27,503
QuoteOriginally posted by Dan Rentea Quote
As a professional landscape photographer with 30 years of experience
The guy in your avatar photo appears to be about 30 years of age and the guy on your homepage (Dan Ren?ea) even a bit younger than that. Oops! Must be a different guy. The guy on that home page says that photography has been and will remain a hobby. Nice work though.

Edit: Dan...biz-engineer pointed out to me that you may have been referring to Ed in regards to the "30 years..." statement. English is a strange language sometimes, even for those of us who grew up speaking and writing it. Please accept my apologies.


Steve

Last edited by stevebrot; 10-31-2015 at 01:35 AM.
10-31-2015, 12:54 AM   #115
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,551
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
The guy in your avatar photo appears to be about 30 years of age and the guy on your homepage (Dan Ren?ea) even a bit younger than that. Oops! Must be a different guy. The guy on that home page says that photography has been and will remain a hobby. Nice work though. Steve
That's what I first thought, but also how to read the sentence in English :-) "As professional landscape photographer with 30 years of experience" might refer to Ed or Dan. I don't know. Given the context, I understood Dan referred to Ed being the 30 years experienced photographer. I think Ed had the merit to purchase prints to compare the K-3 pixel shift with 6D in the same conditions. I like very much the straight from the gut videos of Ed , but I suppose he could have chosen something other than pixel shift, the reason being that pixel shift is, I would say, not photographers friendly, and Ed is usually posting videos where the practical aspects of camera equipment is being discussed. Pixel shift is a development that came out of an engineer without much practical photographic considerations (there I recognize it...please beat me lol ).
10-31-2015, 01:37 AM   #116
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 27,503
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
That's what I first thought, but also how to read the sentence in English :-)
Thanks for setting me straight. I am suitably chastised and edited my comment to suit.


Steve
11-02-2015, 01:44 AM   #117
Pentaxian
Dan Rentea's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Bucharest
Posts: 634
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
The guy in your avatar photo appears to be about 30 years of age and the guy on your homepage (Dan Ren?ea) even a bit younger than that. Oops! Must be a different guy. The guy on that home page says that photography has been and will remain a hobby. Nice work though.

Edit: Dan...biz-engineer pointed out to me that you may have been referring to Ed in regards to the "30 years..." statement. English is a strange language sometimes, even for those of us who grew up speaking and writing it. Please accept my apologies.


Steve
No offence taken (I am 35 years old by the way). Yes, I was talking about Ed post in my first comment (sorry for the misinterpretation, english is my second language).

As I said in the first place, I had K-3 II for 2 month and for me pixel shift was useless, especially for outdoor shooting. There were too much artefacts in the final image, even at the slightest movement of a leaf.

What I wanted to point out is that is not fair to compare a print that was taken with pixel shift function activated on K-3 II with a print from 6D and say that K-3 II is better for landscape. With pixel shift function activated of course K-3 II is better, but let's be fair, pixel shift is a function that is more suitable for product photography than landscape photography, at least in my opinion. If he (Ed) wanted to be fair in that comparison test he should have printed another image from K-3 II, but without pixel shift function activated and I bet you couldn't see the difference.


I own Canon 6D and I had Pentax K-3 II (and before K-3 II I had K-5 II for almost 2 years). From my point of view, 6D is a better camera than K-3 II in day by day use and even better for wedding photographers. I know I'm on Pentax forum, but this is my humble opinion based on using both cameras.


K-3 II is a very good camera, especialy for his price but I think Pentax will need at least a few years to get mature (more new lenses to be avaible, better Af performance, better flash sistem, better service, etc.).

I bought Canon 6D because there were some discounts in local stores. I paid for a new Pentax K-3 II just 813$ and for a new Canon 6D only 1.046$. It was worth the money difference in my opinion.

Last edited by Dan Rentea; 11-02-2015 at 05:49 AM.
11-02-2015, 03:01 AM   #118
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,705
QuoteOriginally posted by Dan Rentea Quote
I own Canon 6D and I had Pentax K-3 II (and before K-3 II I had K-5 II for almost 2 years). From my point of view, 6D is a better camera than K-3 II in day by day use and even better for wedding photographers. I know I'm on Pentax forum, but this is my humble opinion based on using both cameras.
Well honestly if I look at the 6D features and target as entry level FF, the most benefit you get from 6D is the FF aspects: better high iso (at the expense of deph of field), possibility for more dof control and the interresting rendering of longer focal length lenses for the same framing.

Now when it comes to printing landscapes, there is no reason to expect the 6D to perform any better than any 24MP APSC camera.

You say comparing K3 with pixel shift is not fair... Maybe true but this was put in the thread title so you knew what it was about and that it applied only to a few cases. I agree with you the applications are limited sure. But this doesn't mean that the 6D is better without pixel shift. Counting the added resolution of the K3, I wouldn't think the 6D would get any significant edge here.

You maybe want to be more confident in you choice of 6D, but really, if you don't spend you time to print huge landscapes, the 6D can very well be better choice... Like if you don't do weddings a K3 might be more interresting. Why not?
11-02-2015, 03:46 AM   #119
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,258
QuoteOriginally posted by Dan Rentea Quote
No offence taken. Yes, I was talking about Ed post in my first comment (sorry for the misinterpretation, english is my second language).

As I said in the first place, I had K-3 II for 2 month and for me pixel shift was useless, especially for outdoor shooting. There were too much artefacts in the final image, even at the slightest movement of a leaf.

What I wanted to point out is that is not fair to compare a print that was taken with pixel shift function activated on K-3 II with a print from 6D and say that K-3 II is better for landscape. With pixel shift function activated of course K-3 II is better, but let's be fair, pixel shift is a function that is more suitable for product photography than landscape photography, at least in my opinion. If he (Ed) wanted to be fair in that comparison test he should have printed another image from K-3 II, but without pixel shift function activated and I bet you couldn't see the difference.


I own Canon 6D and I had Pentax K-3 II (and before K-3 II I had K-5 II for almost 2 years). From my point of view, 6D is a better camera than K-3 II in day by day use and even better for wedding photographers. I know I'm on Pentax forum, but this is my humble opinion based on using both cameras.


K-3 II is a very good camera, especialy for his price but I think Pentax will need at least a few years to get mature (more new lenses to be avaible, better Af performance, better flash sistem, better service, etc.).

I bought Canon 6D because there were some discounts in local stores. I paid for a new Pentax K-3 II just 813$ and for a new Canon 6D only 1.046$. It was worth the money difference in my opinion.
If Ed had used a straight up photo from the K3 II versus the 6D, it still would likely have been better.

Remember, we are not talking about a dark setting with lenses wide open. This is a photo shot on a still morning on a tripod, stopped down, at low iso. And no, the 6D would not do better that the K3 II in that setting.
11-02-2015, 04:44 AM   #120
Pentaxian
Dan Rentea's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Bucharest
Posts: 634
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
You say comparing K3 with pixel shift is not fair... Maybe true but this was put in the thread title so you knew what it was about and that it applied only to a few cases. I agree with you the applications are limited sure. But this doesn't mean that the 6D is better without pixel shift. Counting the added resolution of the K3, I wouldn't think the 6D would get any significant edge here.

You maybe want to be more confident in you choice of 6D, but really, if you don't spend you time to print huge landscapes, the 6D can very well be better choice... Like if you don't do weddings a K3 might be more interresting. Why not?

I didn't say that 6D would have any significant edge. My words exactly were "...but without pixel shift function activated and I bet you couldn't see the difference."

In the end it all comes down to what suits us. I took a decision to go with Canon based on my judgment and based on the time that I spent with Canon 6D and with Pentax (K-3 II and K-5 II). I'm an amateur photographer so my opinion is based strictly on my judgement and on my eyes when I look at a image.

This gentleman named Ed said in his "movies" from Youtube that Pentax can keep up with any other brands in any aspect, but a few months ago he decided to start shooting weddings again and went to Canon because he has no confidence in Pentax gear in order to do weddings. But he is confident in Pentax gear to shot landscape where all you need is a tripod and a camera with good dynamic range and a lot of megapixels. So, Pentax is or is not up to competition?! Sorry, but this gentleman is not a reliable source of information in my opinion. But is the only one on Youtube with more than 2 "movies" on Pentax gear.

As for me, the words "professional photographer" have another meaning. I will name in this regard Karl Taylor. Is the best example I can give you when I'm thinking at a professional photographer. Starting from his website, his tutorials from Youtube, the investment in his studio, in his image, his attention to details, etc. ... these aspects makes him a professional photographer.

Last edited by Dan Rentea; 11-02-2015 at 05:20 AM.
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!
art, camera, canon, canon 6d, dslr, frame, images, k-3, k3, k3 ii test, k3ii, lens, panorama, pentax, pentax k-3, people, pixel, pixel shift, print, prints, resolution, shift, shift on k3, shot, test, test v canon
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K3II: Pixel Shift First Test DDoram Pentax K-3 168 11-24-2015 10:15 AM
Testing K3 II pixel shift with dcraw tduell Pentax K-3 5 08-31-2015 10:59 PM
K-3 II Pixel shift for Macro? Omestes Pentax K-3 6 06-12-2015 08:13 PM
K3 II pixel-shift samples on IR. I'm impressed jonby Pentax K-3 42 06-02-2015 12:28 AM
K3 or Canon 6d - That is the question zorza Pentax K-3 95 05-08-2015 12:07 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:05 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