Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-20-2018, 08:47 AM   #91
Moderator
Not a Number's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,676
QuoteOriginally posted by gaweidert Quote
Traditionally, a chip like the accelerator chip in the K1-II is to help number crunching. The idea goes back to 1980 when Intel introduced the 8987 co-processor. It worked on motherboards with the 8086 CPU. It's purpose was to speed up computation of floating point decimal arithmetic. If the accelerator is being used in the same way, then improvements due to it cannot be duplicated by firmware on the K1. For some functions it may simply be calculating the result to more decimal points for greater precision. The stand alone processor on the K1 could do this, but it would take longer to reach the same level of precision therefore the calculation is truncated in the interest of speed.
A more up to date example would be Graphics Processing Units (GPUs) formerly known as Graphics Accelerators. Some graphics functions such as 3D will not work without acceleration. Other function will be much slower. Many non-graphics math functions can also be handed to the GPU for processing freeing up the CPU with faster and more precise results. Most graphics and video players/editors will take advantage of GPUs - some have an option to enable/disable "hardware acceleration".

Photoshop graphics processor (GPU) card FAQ

04-20-2018, 08:56 AM   #92
Pentaxian
photoptimist's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,500
It will be interesting to see if we can learn what kind of accelerator this is.

There are accelerators that are highly programmable. Math coprocessors, DSP (digital signal processing) chips, and GPUs (graphics processing unit) all have the properties of accelerating a broad class of computations (floating point, audio signal processing, graphics, respectively). Such chips can be used in many ways.

And there are accelerators that are extremely specialized and not very programmable at all. For example, there are specialized chips for doing the discrete cosine transform (DCT) that's required for jpeg and mpeg. The only thing they can do is take a block of 8x8 pixels and spit out the DCT coefficients.

It's easy to imagine versions of the accelerator chip of both kinds. More mathematical horsepower (like a DSP or GPU) enables more sophisticated software within the time limits of handling each frame. But an ultra-specialized chip might execute some especially interesting statistical corrections to the image data but have no other functionality than noise reduction that does not affect resolution.
04-20-2018, 09:33 AM - 1 Like   #93
Moderator
Not a Number's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,676
QuoteOriginally posted by photoptimist Quote
It will be interesting to see if we can learn what kind of accelerator this is.

There are accelerators that are highly programmable. Math coprocessors, DSP (digital signal processing) chips, and GPUs (graphics processing unit) all have the properties of accelerating a broad class of computations (floating point, audio signal processing, graphics, respectively). Such chips can be used in many ways.
One of the Japanese blogs that either JPT or OOku had linked (in Google Translate) kept referring to the chip as "the mysterious accelerator unit" and hinted that it is capable of many new features that Ricoh has yet to reveal (or even explore).

QuoteOriginally posted by photoptimist Quote
And there are accelerators that are extremely specialized and not very programmable at all. For example, there are specialized chips for doing the discrete cosine transform (DCT) that's required for jpeg and mpeg. The only thing they can do is take a block of 8x8 pixels and spit out the DCT coefficients.
This may be the case with auto-focus, in which case the possibility of firmware updates of the new AF algorithms is "Not bloody likely" as the old Infocom games used to say when you tried an impossible action.

Last edited by Not a Number; 04-20-2018 at 09:38 AM.
04-20-2018, 09:59 AM   #94
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2016
Location: East Coast
Posts: 2,536
QuoteOriginally posted by Not a Number Quote
This may be the case with auto-focus, in which case the possibility of firmware updates of the new AF algorithms is "Not bloody likely" as the old Infocom games used to say when you tried an impossible action.
I don't think Pentax has made any statements saying the accelerator chip is/is not used as part of the AF improvements. Has anyone seen anything official?

It certainly would make sense that the new chip could give them more horsepower for the calculations. And if not, I can see from a business standpoint of not releasing a firmware update on the older cameras to give an incentive for an upgrade. I can't fault them too much for that. The rewrite of the algorithms has a real cost - they didn't rewrite themselves one night while everyone slept. It is not unreasonable to want to recoup some of that cost.

Am I missing it, or did the OP ever provide a link to an image produced from DCU? Is the OP even still participating on this thread?

04-20-2018, 10:54 AM   #95
Moderator
Not a Number's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,676
Just curious as to what firmware version is on the Mk II at this point.
04-20-2018, 11:37 AM   #96
Junior Member
aikaarska's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Finland
Posts: 44
QuoteOriginally posted by clickclick Quote
Am I missing it, or did the OP ever provide a link to an image produced from DCU? Is the OP even still participating on this thread?
I think he got tired when saw forum reaction ... He is an experienced photographer who knows what he is doing.

---------- Post added 04-20-18 at 11:40 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Not a Number Quote
Just curious as to what firmware version is on the Mk II at this point.
ver. 1.01
04-20-2018, 12:56 PM - 1 Like   #97
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2016
Location: East Coast
Posts: 2,536
QuoteOriginally posted by aikaarska Quote
I think he got tired when saw forum reaction ... He is an experienced photographer who knows what he is doing.
That's unfortunate. The only reason for my query on a copy from DCU is it eliminates so many variables on what other software is doing. Whether true, one would certainly hope that a RAW image processed with DCU would provide as "accurate" an image as possible, whereupon better conclusions may be drawn.

What we really need is several series of shots with both flavors of K-1 side by side, and then repeated with different subjects and lighting. I would expect we'll be seeing something like that in the review that I'm sure Adam must be working on.

My guess is we'll end up with two camps. The "purists" who want as raw a RAW as possible who will argue to do any noise reduction etc. in the software of your choice, where you have control, is superior, and then there will be the "adopters" who will say the chip level noise reduction is better,who has time to do it manually for every shot, and the AF improvement trumps it all anyway, if you shoot any type of moving object. It'll be back to shooting style really dictating which is "better", and that will be the photographer's choice. Good to have choices.
04-20-2018, 02:15 PM - 5 Likes   #98
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North-East of England
Posts: 15,977
QuoteOriginally posted by aikaarska Quote
I think he got tired when saw forum reaction ... He is an experienced photographer who knows what he is doing.
Indeed, that is a shame. Despite having had some robust discussions with him in these forums (and this thread), I like him - and he's clearly a very capable photographer indeed.

I will say, though, when posting on a brand-specific enthusiast site and making bold and provocative claims about poor performance, one ought to provide solid validation of those claims - or expect some pushback. The OP has posted claims and criticism about other Pentax cameras he's used, which - as it turned out - related to out-of-specification useage and his expectations. That caused quite a backlash (understandably), and so there's some history behind the reaction he's received this time.

It could be that he's absolutely right - there may well be a loss of detail as a result of the K-1II's image accelerator. We just need to see more evidence before that claim is made, ideally with identical K-1 and K-1II images taken side-by-side, and processed in a variety of software with zero default edits such as sharpening, noise reduction etc. Until then, it's merely a suspicion.

I genuinely hope the OP comes back and continues to provide information on this - or, if not, to at least continue contributing to the forum. He's valued here, like all our other members


Last edited by BigMackCam; 04-20-2018 at 02:21 PM.
04-20-2018, 02:17 PM   #99
Junior Member
aikaarska's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Finland
Posts: 44
QuoteOriginally posted by clickclick Quote
That's unfortunate. The only reason for my query on a copy from DCU is it eliminates so many variables on what other software is doing. Whether true, one would certainly hope that a RAW image processed with DCU would provide as "accurate" an image as possible, whereupon better conclusions may be drawn..
I don't know if DCU makes any differences here, but OP tried Lightroom and Rawtherapee for these DNG files, and other member of that finnish camera forum (digicamera.net) tried Silkypix 8 (DCU is silkypix powered, btw) and got same kind of NR smearing when ISO800 or higher used... I hope that PEF files would bring some improvement in this regard, but I don't dare to hope too much.

Ari
04-20-2018, 03:02 PM   #100
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2016
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,537
No one else has the m2 yet? Seems like a rather easy test to do, and a lot of people would be genuinely interested in the results, I bet a lot of people are weighing their decisions to upgrade to m2 (doesn't matter which way, new body or upgrade).
04-20-2018, 03:56 PM   #101
retired sw engineer
Loyal Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 18,042
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
Agreed.

I'd like to see the "star eater" comparison baseline... i.e. Camera A recorded *these* stars (A, B, C etc.) whilst camera B (the K-1II) didn't, or only recorded some of them...
Another thread has shown no "star rater" effect
QuoteOriginally posted by SSGGeezer Quote
Looking at the uncropped and stacked images, you can see there is not a "Star Eater" here. Nice images. maybe one day soon it won't be raining, snowing or just cloudy and cold so I can get out in the yard and do some shooting.





btw - have we seen an in-camera created JPEG for this example yet?
04-20-2018, 05:51 PM - 1 Like   #102
retired sw engineer
Loyal Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 18,042
QuoteOriginally posted by aikaarska Quote
I think he got tired when saw forum reaction ... He is an experienced photographer who knows what he is doing.
Then he should have known that his post was essentially a rant by its nature, and rants will be met with equal but opposite language.
In order for this to be information, not just rant, it would have needed
(1) picture taken with K-1, even if noisy ..... dead animal fur sometimes is matted, so I don't know if picture is bad
(2) JPEG from same exposure .................. if this is a problem, does problem come from camera or from PP?
04-20-2018, 06:25 PM   #103
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 38,807
QuoteOriginally posted by Not a Number Quote
One of the Japanese blogs that either JPT or OOku had linked (in Google Translate) kept referring to the chip as "the mysterious accelerator unit" and hinted that it is capable of many new features that Ricoh has yet to reveal (or even explore).
I thought they were hinting that the chip name was a misnomer (i.e. not an accelerator).

IIRC, wasn't there another feature a few years back that was curiously named?


Steve
04-20-2018, 07:03 PM - 1 Like   #104
Otis Memorial Pentaxian
Loyal Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 38,807
QuoteOriginally posted by clickclick Quote
Am I missing it, or did the OP ever provide a link to an image produced from DCU? Is the OP even still participating on this thread?
No, he bugged out, though that is not unusual. He has posted provocative stuff in the past and disappeared when requests were made for RAW or specifics.

QuoteOriginally posted by aikaarska Quote
I think he got tired when saw forum reaction ... He is an experienced photographer who knows what he is doing.
Yes, he does beautiful work and does know how to use his tools to good effect.

Strangely enough, so do most of the respondents to this thread. The OP posted an early report that indicated potential serious problems with a newly released model bolstered by images that may have had tool-induced artifact. I don't believe the original post was intended as a rant, though I do think that he felt he had properly ruled out all causes other than the camera. If the problem did turn out to be an issue with the new version of Lightroom CC Classic, getting the word out would be a huge service to the LR user community and would help quell unsubstantiated rumors that there is a significant problem with the camera. As it is, we now have an unsubstantiated claim waiting for more examples of a similar problem with the K-1II.

At this point, I will express thanks for your willingness to share your images, something that I neglected to do previously. I have spent a fair amount of time with the DNGs and a handful of different RAW converters, but am not able to contribute fully yet.


Steve
04-20-2018, 07:16 PM   #105
Moderator
Not a Number's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 7,676
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
I thought they were hinting that the chip name was a misnomer (i.e. not an accelerator).
Well, you know, today's accelerator unit is tomorrow's co-processor/processing unit, e.g. math accelerator/math co-processor (Intel 8087/80297), graphics accelerator/graphics processing unit
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!
accelerator, camera, claims, crop, dslr, exposure, full frame, full-frame, image, information, iso800, iv, k-1, k-1 mk2, k1, mess, mk2, op, pentax k-1, sensor, settings, software, sony, unit
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Macro Best moderate priced macro lens for newbie HGMerrill Photographic Technique 18 10-20-2014 06:08 PM
Old Moderate Mitt is Back! boriscleto General Talk 3 10-10-2012 02:12 PM
"Moderate" Mitt jeffkrol General Talk 2 10-08-2012 01:59 PM
Excesive noise in moderate light, please help Al_s14 Pentax K-r 4 08-03-2011 03:28 PM
Pentax lens all-in-one with moderate zoom fevbusch Pentax DSLR Discussion 17 01-27-2007 05:13 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:01 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