Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-29-2017, 09:28 AM   #106
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
QuoteOriginally posted by tregubovav Quote
normhead you mention is still correct when you look photos via HD/4K or even 5K monitor/TV.
But it's still not true when you print photos in ISO A3 () or lager formats.
I see the differences with images made by K10D, K-5 and K-3 with the same lens and similar scenes non only the screen. Good downsizing algorithm can save details contrast and colors which you do loose when you take photo in lower resolution.

IMHO.
We actually have a forum member who printed a D800 image and 16 MP K-01 at A2, and an independent judge didn't prefer one over the other. She could see differences but she couldn't make up her mind which she preferred. There's a difference between, "you can see a difference" and one is better than the other from an artistic sense.

I tend to trust data from people who have done a little blind testing to the myriad of folks who claim they see a difference themselves. After all, if you know which is which, you are already biased.

I'm always amused when I report a test and someone says "There's something wrong with your test?" In my case I actually did a test... we test eh DFA 28-105 at 35mm on a K-5 and 50mm on a K-3 and compared images. Flipping back and forth on a 4k monitor they were identical. We loved both of them. But there was nothing in those images that suggested one was better than the other. The suggestion that you can so better because I use an inferior downsizing algorithm, I find interesting, but I'd like some proof, that the software I am using is in some way inadequate, and that there is something out there that's better.

I find that a lot of the time such assertions are not supported by any real data (test charts, blind tests etc.) , but who knows, maybe you're on to something. Maybe but unlikely.


Last edited by normhead; 09-29-2017 at 09:49 AM.
09-29-2017, 03:31 PM   #107
Junior Member




Join Date: Sep 2017
Photos: Albums
Posts: 41
normhead
I wouldn't like discuss subjective things. I was involved to similar discussions in past when *ist DS2 and then K10D had been released.
I would like to say that increasing sensor's resolution without dynamic range degradation is good for customers. This add flexibility for images' post- processing Not only for subjective things like sharpness, contrast, colors accuracy, as well as for objective things like cropping without reducing overall image resolution for printing to specific formats.

P.S.
Optical resolution for most lens is much higher than sensors resolution for consumer cameras yet.
09-29-2017, 06:55 PM   #108
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 40,442
Of course, but there are costs that go with those advantages. And one of those costs is, most of the time you are carrying baggage you aren't using, and you trade that extra cost and weight for the few times that you need those things. For some it's worth it, for some it isn't. Everything you quotes is not needed in every image including resolution.

For every one of the above "advantages" most of my images don't require them. Every camera is so good these days the common areas of performance are much larger than the differences which are by comparison relatively small.

Honestly, I can take a 16 MP XG-1 stack it up against a K-1 image and show you why I prefer it... for some images and won't prefer it for others.
09-29-2017, 10:11 PM   #109
Junior Member




Join Date: Sep 2017
Photos: Albums
Posts: 41
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Honestly, I can take a 16 MP XG-1 stack it up against a K-1 image and show you why I prefer it... for some images and won't prefer it for others.
Market has a lot of decisions on any tastes. And absolutely most people can make own choice for "tools" (camera(s), lens(es), post-processing software) based on own view of value/complexity of using/price.

If talking to K-1 - this is another story. APC-S cameras doesn't realize full power of most of FF lenses (especially of those which were designed in film era). They help to realize your artistic conception (not only get sharp image with correct exposure).

In fact K-1's sensor has lower resolution in comparing to modern APC-S cameras. But it covers


Last edited by tregubovav; 09-29-2017 at 10:57 PM.
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, camera, cameras, controls, cost, crop, dslr, equivalent, feature, features, ff, full frame, full-frame, home, k-1, k1, lx, nikon, pentax, pentax k-1, people, shooters, size, weight
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
As if I didn't spend enough money on hobbies already... Auzzie-Phoenix General Talk 17 02-12-2017 02:58 AM
Pentax does quite well in noise performance (if we didn't know that already!) JinDesu Pentax DSLR Discussion 7 07-12-2016 04:18 PM
does this bag exist? hadi Pentax Camera and Field Accessories 36 04-25-2016 05:46 AM
AF fine adjustment - did it exist for 35mm film SLR cameras? BigMackCam General Photography 25 04-05-2016 07:54 AM
DA* 16-50 Do the Problems Still Exist in Brand New Copies happy boy Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 23 01-18-2016 07:33 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:17 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