Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-26-2018, 04:26 PM - 1 Like   #16
On Hiatus. Back Later.
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Flyover Country
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 24,447
QuoteOriginally posted by Oakland Rob Quote
I think Fenwoodian's point was about pixel shift resolution and motion correction in the original K-1. And if I recall correctly in that camera's hype they were only ever talking about motion correctin in PSR images taken on a tripod, not something as shaky as hand held. So it's not made up; the quote he does supply from Pentax is clearly referring to MC on PSR. The K-1ii's handheld stuff is, as you note, different.

But those of us who've done stacking manually or semi-auto in post processing software know that deghosting and other problems can limit its effectiveness, even when we can do some manual motion correction. Expecting an automatic process in the camera to always nail it is optimistic. Although I have been surprised at times; my E-M5ii focus stacks pretty well in camera, although larger movement or light changes can befuddle it (wish we had that in Pentaxes).
Fenwoodian specifically said he did not believe Pentax’s claim on hand held Pixel Shift. He used their claim about K-1 PixelShift as justification to disbelieve them this time.

I pointed out they made no such claim this time; it is not Pixel Shift; and their expert Tester states on Pentax’s own K-1II website works only 75% of the time.

I don’t understand your argument with me. Fenwoodian is a nice guy, but his expectations aren’t correct. He’s mistaken about the technology process, the name of the technology, the Pentax claim of what it does, and the efficacy of Real Resolution (through no fault of his own, I suppose).


Last edited by monochrome; 03-26-2018 at 04:34 PM.
03-26-2018, 04:34 PM   #17
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Apr 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 711
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
Fenwoodian specifically said he did not believe Pentax’s claim on hand held Pixel Shift. He used their claim about K- PixelShift as justification to disbelieve them this time. I pointed out they made no such claim this time; it is not Pixel Shift; and their Tester states it works 75% of the time.

I don’t understand your argument with me. Fenwoodian is mistaken about the technology, the name, the Pentax claim and the efficacy of Real Resolution (through no fault of his own, I suppose).
I don't have an argument with you. I just read Fenwoodian's comments somewhat differently. Sorry. I do agree with you that maybe it's due to the somewhat different claims Pentax is making about hand-held this time around. Having already used pixel shift on both Pentax and Olympus I don't expect in-camera or automatic post processing to do miracles (or even well) with motion, any more than I expect 1/250 to always stop motion. But that's me.
03-27-2018, 02:01 PM - 1 Like   #18
New Member




Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 7
Pentax Klub (French) start testing the K-1 Mark II

Pentax Klub (French) start testing the K-1 Mark II

Link:
K-1 mark II, premières impressions

Cheers
03-27-2018, 02:31 PM - 1 Like   #19
New Member




Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 23
Another early (p)review:

Pentax K-1 Mark II: primeras muestras


Last edited by Królik; 03-28-2018 at 01:14 AM.
03-27-2018, 02:45 PM - 1 Like   #20
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
RobA_Oz's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,331
QuoteOriginally posted by Duvel999 Quote
Pentax Klub (French) start testing the K-1 Mark II

Link:
K-1 mark II, premières impressions

Cheers
The high-ISO performance is looking promising. I’ve always been reluctant, even with the K-1, to push ISO beyond 3200, but the inclusion of the Accelerator Chip may allow me to revise that upward, which would be handy for indoor low-light fast-shutter work.
03-28-2018, 01:10 AM   #21
Pentaxian
Andrea K's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Rome, Italy
Posts: 450
no comparison....
03-28-2018, 01:25 AM   #22
Forum Member




Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Australia
Photos: Albums
Posts: 54
QuoteOriginally posted by Królik Quote
Another early (p)review:

Pentax K-1 Mark II: primeras muestras
Interesting comment re the PEF Files giving best colours.
03-28-2018, 03:39 AM   #23
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: London
Posts: 559
Rather unnecessary to have made the RAW formats incompatible with some software which was presumably OK with the K1. Lightroom can open the DNG but which Lightroom version? Many LR users have dropped the Adobe money machine and are staying with the last non-rental version (CS6 usually).

03-28-2018, 05:00 AM - 1 Like   #24
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 11,621
It's the other way around, the software is unnecessarily "incompatible" with new cameras.
03-28-2018, 06:58 AM   #25
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: London
Posts: 559
I don't agree; there is absolutely no need to change the formats, and force camera owners to shell out hundreds on new software. Technologically there is no advantage in any new format, for stills and to a large degree for video (in the consumer and prosumer sphere).
03-28-2018, 07:54 AM - 2 Likes   #26
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 11,621
They're not "changing formats". They're updating the camera ID.
The problem appears when a software application would try to match the camera ID against an internal list.
03-28-2018, 08:12 AM   #27
Pentaxiste
Loyal Site Supporter
DimC's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: Paris
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 804
QuoteOriginally posted by Duvel999 Quote
Pentax Klub (French) start testing the K-1 Mark II

Link:
K-1 mark II, premières impressions

Cheers


First impressions from PentaxKlub is a nice AF improvement in both AFS and AF-C...
Sounds good as people from this site are people I trust in their judgment.
03-28-2018, 08:25 AM   #28
Pentaxian
photoptimist's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,373
QuoteOriginally posted by peterh337 Quote
I don't agree; there is absolutely no need to change the formats, and force camera owners to shell out hundreds on new software. Technologically there is no advantage in any new format, for stills and to a large degree for video (in the consumer and prosumer sphere).
But there is a reason to change formats. The RAWs from hand-held pixel shift cannot be processed in the same way that RAWs from K-1 pixel shift were. It's also possible that the accelerator chip affects the optimal demosaicing parameters of every RAW produced by the K-1ii.

The most effective way handle differences between camera models is for the camera to store a model number in EXIF and for the application to read that number and use it to look up the correct parameters or alternative blocks of software needed to handle that camera's files. But that implies that each new camera requires some kind of update of the application.

That said, I'm sure there's a hack by which one could duplicate the applications settings for the K-1 to cover the K-1ii model number. Yet this hack may not give good results with K-1ii RAW files if the accelerator chip has affected them and it will certainly barf on any Hand Held Pixel Shift Resolution files.
03-28-2018, 08:40 AM   #29
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 10,056
QuoteOriginally posted by peterh337 Quote
Rather unnecessary to have made the RAW formats incompatible with some software which was presumably OK with the K1.
It should be possible to tweak the EXIF data in the K-1 II files so that they are accepted by any software that accepts K-1 files.

While I see your point, it also seems appropriate to write the correct camera info data into the K-1 II files, instead of "lying" just so that the files are indistinguishable from K-1 files. Arguably, at certain settings, K-1 II files may require different development settings compared to K-1 files and you can only adequately handle that by having the two types of files be distinguishable.

I agree with Kunzite; software companies make a point about "inviting" customers to upgrade their software, even though typically it would be very possible to not reject files based on camera info data, that are otherwise 100% compatible.
03-28-2018, 08:45 AM   #30
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: London
Posts: 559
"The problem appears when a software application would try to match the camera ID against an internal list."

OK; interesting. That method will 100% guarantee a loss of compatibility with every new camera, however, so I am sure most apps don't do it. For example I run ACDSEE PRO 7 (which might be 10 years old?) and it opens K1's DNGs fine. My Lightroom is 3.6 on one winXP laptop (5-10 year old version but nothing newer runs on winXP) and that opens K1 DNGs too. My main (PC) LR is 6.5 and that is "old" now, by what Adobe would like to rent you.

I looked at the Sony A7 (when it came out a while ago) and refused to buy it largely because my video software, which cost me a good few hundred quid (Vegas Pro, currently v14), could not read the format and I would have to convert it. Life is too short, unless you are fully invested in the one gadget (as e.g. a pro photographer might be).

"and it will certainly barf on any Hand Held Pixel Shift Resolution files."

I thought this method of res enhancement worked by taking a few images while moving the sensor around fractions of a pixel and then merging them vertically. If you take say 10 images, you make each 10% opaque and merge them. The resulting resolution improvement is sqrt(10) i.e. about 3x so a 50MB DNG ought to become a 150MB DNG. This is a fairly standard method (synthetic aperture radar does this, for example) but I thought it was the camera which combined the images into one flattened image, not the postprocessing software on a PC.
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!
camera, dslr, full frame, full-frame, ii, k-1, k-1 mark ii, k1, mark, pentax k-1, pentax k-1 mark, photographers, pictures, pixels, pp, psr, results, reviews, sensor, shift, spectra, term, utility, weeks
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Pentax K-1 Mark II DSLR camera detailed specifications leaked Craig66 Pentax News and Rumors 389 02-19-2018 10:34 AM
Pentax K3 ii vs Canon 5D mark ii mogge Welcomes and Introductions 49 03-27-2016 02:39 AM
Lens Reviews - Camera used not listed on 3rd party lens reviews? ak_kiwi Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 3 02-15-2014 01:34 PM
Reviews really missed the mark on Kr AWB in tungsten light LRB21 Pentax K-r 3 09-06-2011 03:12 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:38 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