Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-16-2016, 08:53 PM   #1
Site Supporter
Fenwoodian's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,274
Who needs a full frame, not me anymore...

These last few days I finally got around to printing up a bunch of pixel shifted photos I took in Savannah Georgia USA last summer.

They were all shot outdoors, at the historical Bonaventure Cemetery.

There was not much wind that day, and of course I used a sturdy tripod. I mostly used an old manual focus Pentax 20mm lens (forget which one) on my K3ii.

The TIFF files that I converted in Pentax's "Digital Camera Utility 5" from the DNG RAW files were each around 140 - 145MP. I resized them to 240dpi and 17 x 25.5 inches.

Well, the prints' detail was absolutely amazing! The few clumps of Spanish moss that had gently moved in the slight breeze during the exposure were very tiny and if you looked extremely close you could see that they were slightly blurry, but nothing ugly or distracting.

I have already saved up for a Pentax full frame, but not that I've got some more experience printing K3ii pixel shifted images, I'm seriously rethinking whether or not I have a need for the full frame.

01-16-2016, 08:59 PM - 2 Likes   #2
Site Supporter
jatrax's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Oregon
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 10,770
QuoteOriginally posted by Fenwoodian Quote
I'm seriously rethinking whether or not I have a need for the full frame.
But what about a FF with Pixel shift?
01-16-2016, 09:24 PM   #3
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,796
now, let us see you try doing that with a BIF....no? I suppose there is hope for the K-1 yet.
01-16-2016, 09:44 PM   #4
Site Supporter
jimr-pdx's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: 1hr north of PDX
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,551
I have one of those with my Fuji F550 set to DR mode!


01-16-2016, 09:49 PM   #5
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NJ
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,882
QuoteOriginally posted by Fenwoodian Quote
These last few days I finally got around to printing up a bunch of pixel shifted photos I took in Savannah Georgia USA last summer.

They were all shot outdoors, at the historical Bonaventure Cemetery.

There was not much wind that day, and of course I used a sturdy tripod. I mostly used an old manual focus Pentax 20mm lens (forget which one) on my K3ii.

The TIFF files that I converted in Pentax's "Digital Camera Utility 5" from the DNG RAW files were each around 140 - 145MP. I resized them to 240dpi and 17 x 25.5 inches.

Well, the prints' detail was absolutely amazing! The few clumps of Spanish moss that had gently moved in the slight breeze during the exposure were very tiny and if you looked extremely close you could see that they were slightly blurry, but nothing ugly or distracting.

I have already saved up for a Pentax full frame, but not that I've got some more experience printing K3ii pixel shifted images, I'm seriously rethinking whether or not I have a need for the full frame.
At the very least, your satisfaction with Pixel Shift could mean that you wait a while before buying the FF, so any potential issues are resolved before spending your money.
01-16-2016, 10:01 PM   #6
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah
Photos: Albums
Posts: 305
QuoteOriginally posted by Fenwoodian Quote
These last few days I finally got around to printing up a bunch of pixel shifted photos I took in Savannah Georgia USA last summer.

They were all shot outdoors, at the historical Bonaventure Cemetery.

There was not much wind that day, and of course I used a sturdy tripod. I mostly used an old manual focus Pentax 20mm lens (forget which one) on my K3ii.

The TIFF files that I converted in Pentax's "Digital Camera Utility 5" from the DNG RAW files were each around 140 - 145MP. I resized them to 240dpi and 17 x 25.5 inches.

Well, the prints' detail was absolutely amazing! The few clumps of Spanish moss that had gently moved in the slight breeze during the exposure were very tiny and if you looked extremely close you could see that they were slightly blurry, but nothing ugly or distracting.

I have already saved up for a Pentax full frame, but not that I've got some more experience printing K3ii pixel shifted images, I'm seriously rethinking whether or not I have a need for the full frame.
Yes but you are still limited to static scenes with no wind, etc.
01-16-2016, 10:06 PM - 1 Like   #7
Senior Member
JeffB's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Denver, Colorado
Posts: 209
QuoteOriginally posted by Fenwoodian Quote
These last few days I finally got around to printing up a bunch of pixel shifted photos I took in Savannah Georgia USA last summer.

They were all shot outdoors, at the historical Bonaventure Cemetery.

There was not much wind that day, and of course I used a sturdy tripod. I mostly used an old manual focus Pentax 20mm lens (forget which one) on my K3ii.

The TIFF files that I converted in Pentax's "Digital Camera Utility 5" from the DNG RAW files were each around 140 - 145MP. I resized them to 240dpi and 17 x 25.5 inches.

Well, the prints' detail was absolutely amazing! The few clumps of Spanish moss that had gently moved in the slight breeze during the exposure were very tiny and if you looked extremely close you could see that they were slightly blurry, but nothing ugly or distracting.

I have already saved up for a Pentax full frame, but not that I've got some more experience printing K3ii pixel shifted images, I'm seriously rethinking whether or not I have a need for the full frame.
The "full frame" lingo makes me laugh. It's only a "full" 35mm frame. 35mm was always considered "miniature" format alongside medium and large format cameras. The 18x24mm APC format does everything I want.
01-16-2016, 10:09 PM - 1 Like   #8
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NJ
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,882
QuoteOriginally posted by Zephos Quote
Yes but you are still limited to static scenes with no wind, etc.
That's mostly what he shoots - he's a landscape photographer. Pixel Shift is right in his wheelhouse.

01-16-2016, 10:16 PM   #9
Kiwi Pentaxian
NZ_Ross's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Timaru
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,264
QuoteOriginally posted by Fenwoodian Quote
I have already saved up for a Pentax full frame, but not that I've got some more experience printing K3ii pixel shifted images, I'm seriously rethinking whether or not I have a need for the full frame.
Well, time is on your side - now that you have proved the usefulness of the K3II pixel shift, you can sit back and wait when the Pentax FF is released, take time to consider the reviews, look at the images of the early adopters here on PF (and other places) and decide whether the Pentax FF is the camera for you, or alternatively the K3II is sufficient.

If the answer is the K3II then I would suggest that you will have sufficient savings for a couple of very nice lenses

Sounds like a win-win situation to me - there is no poor choice here.
01-17-2016, 01:16 AM   #10
Forum Member
Hoggy's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2012
Posts: 51
QuoteOriginally posted by JeffB Quote
The "full frame" lingo makes me laugh. It's only a "full" 35mm frame. 35mm was always considered "miniature" format alongside medium and large format cameras. The 18x24mm APC format does everything I want.
I've pretty much thought 'full frame' has been over-hyped anyways - even without pixel shift tech.

When you think about it -- just think how arbitrary it was that '35mm' became THE important size for sensors to mimic... How arbitrary it really was for 35mm film to become the dominant size [for those of us without $10,000 deep pockets]. (not knowing the exact history, here)

If/when a Pentax FF materializes, I may or may not be interested in ever getting it.. Maybe down the road - as long as it could still use my current lenses that are digital-only.

Last edited by Hoggy; 01-17-2016 at 04:11 AM.
01-17-2016, 02:15 AM   #11
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,537
QuoteOriginally posted by Fenwoodian Quote
Who needs a full frame, not me anymore...
You don't need a full frame, you don't even need a K-3, K-5 or K-3 are well capable of amazing excellent prints.

Full frame IQ is better, and the same goes for medium format cameras when size, weight, choice of lenses and AF speed are not a problem.
01-17-2016, 07:46 AM   #12
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 885
QuoteOriginally posted by Fenwoodian Quote
These last few days I finally got around to printing up a bunch of pixel shifted photos I took in Savannah Georgia USA last summer.

They were all shot outdoors, at the historical Bonaventure Cemetery.

There was not much wind that day, and of course I used a sturdy tripod. I mostly used an old manual focus Pentax 20mm lens (forget which one) on my K3ii.

The TIFF files that I converted in Pentax's "Digital Camera Utility 5" from the DNG RAW files were each around 140 - 145MP. I resized them to 240dpi and 17 x 25.5 inches.

Well, the prints' detail was absolutely amazing! The few clumps of Spanish moss that had gently moved in the slight breeze during the exposure were very tiny and if you looked extremely close you could see that they were slightly blurry, but nothing ugly or distracting.

I have already saved up for a Pentax full frame, but not that I've got some more experience printing K3ii pixel shifted images, I'm seriously rethinking whether or not I have a need for the full frame.
Yes. For static objects, pixel shifted on k3ii will give you the IQ matching 645 camera. One stop above current 135 format. It should be fine!
01-17-2016, 07:50 AM - 1 Like   #13
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 25,864
So, now image you have a 36x24 with pixel shift and that you don't need a 645z. I wonder if the next 645 will have pixel shift.

Although it is true, you can produce levels of detail that are largely invisible to the eye. Printing at 300 DPI you could certainly do that. People can resolve up to 600 DPI, from 8 inches away, if they look really close. But from a normal viewing distance, most can't tell the difference between 72 DPI and 150 DPI.

If the added detail is in fact a layer of detail that is not easily seen, then there would be no advantage to going to an FF instead of a K-3. I've suspected we reached that point with a K-5, and some experiments have backed that up for up to 24x36 prints.

There's not a lot of difference between, K-3 and K-5 in the actual images they produce. The K-3 tends to shine in AF, burst mode etc. I suspect the FF will be more of the same. More focus points, faster AF, better tracking, not so much in the images but in the ease of getting them.

SO, I agree, you may not feel a 36x24 sensor is necessary for IQ, but a camera is a lot more than final IQ. One of the things I like about Pentax is I can compete in end product with anyone out there, without the expense of their equipment. But, there are serious advantages to other systems as to the ease of getting those images.

Last edited by normhead; 01-17-2016 at 08:00 AM.
01-17-2016, 09:30 AM   #14
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 878
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
SO, I agree, you may not feel a 36x24 sensor is necessary for IQ, but a camera is a lot more than final IQ. One of the things I like about Pentax is I can compete in end product with anyone out there, without the expense of their equipment. But, there are serious advantages to other systems as to the ease of getting those images.
You are so right. I feel the same way.

One of the areas Pentax is seriously handicapped compared to Nikon and Canon or even Sony, is poor third party support in lenses and accessories. With the other systems, say if you do not want to buy the expensive original brand lens, you can go to a third party and buy a similar lens at a substantial discount and still have a product that is of the highest quality. With Pentax we are limited to mostly Pentax offerings. Luckily, what Pentax offers is second to none.
01-18-2016, 06:44 PM - 2 Likes   #15
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Eastern Oregon
Posts: 615
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
So, now image you have a 36x24 with pixel shift and that you don't need a 645z. I wonder if the next 645 will have pixel shift.

Although it is true, you can produce levels of detail that are largely invisible to the eye. Printing at 300 DPI you could certainly do that. People can resolve up to 600 DPI, from 8 inches away, if they look really close. But from a normal viewing distance, most can't tell the difference between 72 DPI and 150 DPI.

If the added detail is in fact a layer of detail that is not easily seen, then there would be no advantage to going to an FF instead of a K-3. I've suspected we reached that point with a K-5, and some experiments have backed that up for up to 24x36 prints.

There's not a lot of difference between, K-3 and K-5 in the actual images they produce. The K-3 tends to shine in AF, burst mode etc. I suspect the FF will be more of the same. More focus points, faster AF, better tracking, not so much in the images but in the ease of getting them.

SO, I agree, you may not feel a 36x24 sensor is necessary for IQ, but a camera is a lot more than final IQ. One of the things I like about Pentax is I can compete in end product with anyone out there, without the expense of their equipment. But, there are serious advantages to other systems as to the ease of getting those images.


Every point you make here is excellent, but maybe not in the way you intended....


The added detail is not easily visible, depending upon your print size. having shot the D810 and 5DIII and 6D, I am 100% APS-c now. There really is no practical advantages of FF for me. (And I print 30x40 inches a lot!)


A camera IS a lot more than final IQ. FF's are BIGGER and HEAVIER and MUCH more expensive. After 8 hours photographing a wedding, or 2 hours hiking with a camera backpack, I want as small and light as I can get that still gives me professionally competitive IQ. That's most APS-c current cameras. Now I want the one with the smallest and lightest lenses: There goes Canon and Nikon out. If I want fast lenses, there goes Pentax. If I want a DSLR with fast small WR zooms, Pentax is a WINNER!!! If I want a set of FAST primes, Fuji wins.


Guess what? I've got a Pentax system with fast zooms and flashes, and a Fuji system with only their fast primes. I shoot each about 50/50 these days. The only thing the Fuji system is really doing is showing me the few small gaps in Pentax's excellent lens range. A 16mm 1.4, 23mm 1.4, and 35mm 1.4 APS-c lens set form Pentax and the Fuji's would be GONE!


Pentax could have carved a real niche for themselves as the ONLY APS-c based Pro DSLR with a full set of small fast APS-c fast primes. They are SOOOOO CLOSE!!! The reason Fuji sales are up is because they have the lens set, not necessarily the cameras pros want to shoot. Love Fuji's lenses, not that big a fan of mirrorless. My preferred system right now is the Pentax with the fast zooms. But when that gets too heavy I am glad to switch out to the Fuji with the small fast primes.


As for Pixel shift, a straight well executed non pixel shift 24 mp image is going to probably deliver everything most people need out of an image. PS is nice to play with, but even without it, the K-3II resolution is spectacular.
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!
aps-c, argument, camera, cameras, dslr, f1.2, f2.0, f2.8, f4, ff, files, frame, fuji, gear, k-3, k3, k3ii, lens, lenses, pentax, pentax k-3, pentax k-3ii, pixel, pixel shift, service, time
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Night Who needs a full moon anyways? ZombieArmy Post Your Photos! 2 09-05-2014 12:40 AM
Full Frame Not Practical in the Long Run? DarCam Pentax Full Frame 579 07-12-2014 11:04 AM
Misc Hungry ? Not me anymore ... daacon Post Your Photos! 2 08-04-2010 05:16 AM
Why not a Full frame with two APC sensors madhurvyas General Talk 23 02-16-2010 11:24 PM
Those who are not remembered anymore.... mulder Post Your Photos! 2 06-17-2007 08:04 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:14 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