Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-27-2016, 03:33 AM   #196
Junior Member




Join Date: Jun 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 42
QuoteOriginally posted by kenspo Quote
K-1 is way over any other camera from Pentax in High ISO, at least when it comes to real life use of a camera..Which is the way i prefer to use and test my cameras.

So others can pixelpeep, use online testings etc. I couldn't care less
interesting thread

just a note every major film camera manufacturer , RED, ARRI, SONY and blackmagic is build bigger and biggers sensors for their camera,s the new Dragon sensor is 40.96mm x 21.6mm and you can film FF to deliver 8k video

makes you think that if crop sensor deliver the same things a full frame can ....why would they spend millions in research to build these ...and why is the demand so high for these

i mean all film/digital made up of is 24 still images shot in a row in second ..i,m sure some of the same science and maths applied to still and film image :-)

07-27-2016, 10:07 AM   #197
Pentaxian
kh1234567890's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Manchester, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,386
QuoteOriginally posted by gnugent Quote
i mean all film/digital made up of is 24 still images shot in a row in second ..i,m sure some of the same science and maths applied to still and film image :-)
Except that you have to read your '24' images from the sensor, buffer and encode them to video file format and dump this to your storage in real time. Not so simple for 8K UHD where you have some 33 megapixels per frame.
07-27-2016, 10:22 AM   #198
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,621
QuoteOriginally posted by kh1234567890 Quote
Except that you have to read your '24' images from the sensor, buffer and encode them to video file format and dump this to your storage in real time. Not so simple for 8K UHD where you have some 33 megapixels per frame.
This is only a matter of processing power and having enough wiring on the sensor to achieve the bandwidth.

The question is how much you would pay for that, if you are even interrested counting the requirement for storage and there basically no 8K screen available neither.

Last but not least, 8K is more that what the eyes can resolve. People don't complain because cinema are only "4K" and don't even notice outside of video related forums that many movies have even 2K masters, not even 4K.

At some point it become technology for the sake of it. But I am not sure it will be that relevant theses 8K... Enough to see how many people use MP3 at average bit rate (say 256KB/s) and how many people buy music with lossless 192Khz on 8 canals. Counting one can't really ear sounds at more than 20Khz...
07-27-2016, 10:29 AM   #199
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,230
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
This is only a matter of processing power and having enough wiring on the sensor to achieve the bandwidth.
How is that done ?

07-27-2016, 10:47 AM   #200
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,621
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
How is that done ?
Ask RED, they do have 6K and 8K cameras... Weapon 8K model does 60FPS 8K. Weapon 6K model does 100 FPS at 6K.

The sensor size is not bad: 40.96 mm x 21.60 mm, a tiny bit more surface than an FF sensor. The resolution is also 35MP.

RED | WEAPON | 8K/6K Professional Digital Cinema Camera

Last edited by Nicolas06; 07-27-2016 at 10:53 AM.
07-27-2016, 11:26 AM   #201
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,916
QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
How is that done ?
Probably by dividing the sensor into several smaller areas that are read out in parallell.
07-27-2016, 10:25 PM   #202
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,621
QuoteOriginally posted by Gimbal Quote
Probably by dividing the sensor into several smaller areas that are read out in parallell.
Yep. The same is done for memory on graphical card. You put many memory modules and read them in parralel thus increasing the bandwidth.

For example this way on GeForce 1080, you get 320GB/s of bandwidth. While standard memory you'd buy for your computer is at best capable of 20-30GB/s (so a bit less than 10% of what the graphical card does provide).
07-28-2016, 02:12 AM   #203
Pentaxian
kh1234567890's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Manchester, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,386
QuoteOriginally posted by Gimbal Quote
Probably by dividing the sensor into several smaller areas that are read out in parallell.
Most DSLRs use line/column skipping to achieve the required throughput, rather than reading a full frame and rescaling.

07-28-2016, 03:21 AM   #204
Junior Member




Join Date: Jun 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 42
There are lots of reasons you need to shoot at 8k and 6k irrespective of the screen being available to view it

first off as you know when you shoot with any bayer sensor you lose resolution the rule of thumb is

Resolution of a Bayer pattern sensor is 0.7 * .....ish it varies some are higher some are lower

So if you shoot with a Black magic 2.5k film camera the raw image from the sensor is 2400 x 1350 so you divide 2400 * .7 you get 1680 so thats the true resolution of the image after be debayered

higher end cameras like an arri will shoot at 2880x1620 which once the image is debayer will give you true HD and true 2k



ok so now we have 4k as you will note most of the high end camera will have a sensor spec of 4.5 or 4.6 k so when this is debayered it will give true UHD ( which is not actually 4k)

that's fine but the bigger we go with the image, the downsample produces sharper and better picture it also give us the opportunity to reframe and stabilize the image correctly

Pentax brilliantly built in super resolution in the k1 and other k cam,s which is another way of getting more detail in the image ( i won't explain how this works i,m sure you know) ...and as we know it won,t work for movement hence with movie camera we need to get back the detail with a much bigger image capture and downscale

you can definitely see the difference better 4k and 2k in a cinema ...however it needs to be projected correctly and originated in 4k .....eg the new starwars film was finished in 2k and for 4k projection its uprezzed and you can really see how soft that is on a 4k projection

you want to go and see 4k projection of interstellar i know from the guys who did the finish and that's is a full 4k delivery and looks amazing

i have done quite a few 4k cinema jobs myself and i shoot at 6k on Red all the time Red footage is compressed so the storage requirement aren't as bad as you think i shot with 4 reds at 6k while back at 5:1 compress which is the standard unless you're doing effects work we shot 6TB of data over 2 days

in film world we are after bigger sensors for many of the more subtle reasons mentioned , subject separation, light gathering .. the bigger the image the the better for us ,look at something like the revenant some of which was shoot using the arri 65 which is like filming on medium format

also just a note the new rogue one star wars film is also being shot on the arri 65

any way FF is great, medium formats even better i see people going on about how good crops sensors are there great to a point and from a purely commercial aspect they are cheaper to make than a large sensor ...hence they are everywhere

Last edited by gnugent; 07-28-2016 at 08:28 AM.
07-28-2016, 03:06 PM   #205
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,621
QuoteOriginally posted by kh1234567890 Quote
Most DSLRs use line/column skipping to achieve the required throughput, rather than reading a full frame and rescaling.
That's why their video is cheap to have and not as good as equivalent sized cameras.
07-28-2016, 03:13 PM   #206
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,621
@gnugent, you do it because it is available and almost free. It is not the price of the camera that will put a hole in a blockbuster budget.

But even some blockbusters did their master in 2K while obviously a 4K master would have been better because there was a significant cost associated to it. It is not necessarilly the one that didn't do well at the theaters. I'd say there no link at all.

I don't think if you do a blind test that so many people would recognize true good 4K vs true good 2K and that they'll notice the difference between a 4K master taken from 6K instead o 4K camera. I mean most people... The one that pay for it by going to see the movie. There a case of diminushing return.
08-03-2016, 03:14 AM   #207
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 8,507
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
@Clackers

maybe after a few more years of post processing and printing 16MP and 36MP pictures, on day you'll finally notice with your own eyes that the K1 pictures look better ... In the meantime, it isn't really worth to discuss futher the subject.
(Laughs). You would just try to change the subject from noise to something else over which there is no disagreement, @Nicolas, like post processing or resolution.

By the way, I hope it would not be you giving any of us the lessons on PP - you really butchered those RAW files.

And DxO's 'normalization'? Your post 110 showed you did not understand it. I had to explain it to you in Post 115!

Last edited by clackers; 08-03-2016 at 04:19 AM.
08-03-2016, 03:19 AM   #208
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 8,507
QuoteOriginally posted by Gimbal Quote
The K-5 and the K-1 has been expected to perform similar (at pixel level) ever since it became known that they would have a similar pixel size.
Perhaps you should have explained that to Nicolas - have a look at his Post 106, for instance, where he is certain: "Because of how isos are defined, at the same iso setting, because the FF sensor is 2.3 time bigger its capacity has to be at least 2.3 time bigger than the minimal capacity required for the APSC sensor to expose correctly that sensitivity."

And where was your reply when in Post 103 he declared "There a relation between the sensor size and the signal ratio. If you use the same technology in both sensors, the larger sensor will get less noise because the absolute amoung of light received is greater, that is the signal is greater."

QuoteOriginally posted by Gimbal Quote
Software is unavoidable when it comes to digital photo. You will have to use it and it will affect end result.
The topic is not the amount of the user's postprocessing (which we have seen in the examples above can be badly done) but the camera's noise performance, @Gimbal.

Last edited by clackers; 08-03-2016 at 04:18 AM.
08-03-2016, 03:28 AM   #209
Site Supporter
kenspo's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Oslo
Posts: 1,930
FF is superior over any APS-C on ISO, DR and DoF! At least in my experience. The K-1 is so much better then K-3II that its a new world for me now. Difference in my kind of work, is so big, that i would have problems not to accept one of the offers i have from other companies if the K-1 haven't arrived now.

But if you're happy with K-3/K-3II or what ever you have, thats fine..its still produces stunning images
08-03-2016, 03:32 AM   #210
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 8,507
QuoteOriginally posted by kenspo Quote

But if you're happy with K-3/K-3II or what ever you have, thats fine..its still produces stunning images
I have a K-1 *and* a Sony A7, Kenneth.

I put a K-1 snapshot up just this afternoon here ... https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/190-pentax-k-1/314413-post-your-k-1-pictu...ml#post3729599
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!
aperture, aps-c, background, blur, camera, dof, dslr, feet, ff, ff over aps-c, field, focus, frame, full frame, full-frame, k-1, k1, lens, paper, pentax k-1, people, picture, posters, stitching
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FF vs APS-C Field of View revisited Ole Pentax K-1 2 05-07-2016 02:13 PM
Confused about Angle of View of Lenses on FF vs APS-C? Kath Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 10-01-2015 09:55 AM
Does FF vs APS-C affect amount of light? windhorse General Photography 46 03-02-2015 07:07 PM
Quick question regarding field of view - FF vs APS-C glass? Julie Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 12-23-2012 05:33 PM
APS-C does not increase focal length over FF, it decreases field of view. TomTextura Photographic Technique 135 06-09-2012 04:58 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:37 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