Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-10-2018, 12:01 AM - 7 Likes   #31
Moderator
Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Sandy Hancock's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,128
2 seconds hand held with the K-1 and DFA15-30



05-10-2018, 12:20 AM - 3 Likes   #32
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,322
QuoteOriginally posted by Hattifnatt Quote
So I was testing the K-1 stabilization vs an Oly user and he posted those images. He claims that they were taken at 2 seconds, without tripod. Is Oly stabilization really that good? I couldn't even come close with the K-1
Low grade physics: SR is all about moving the sensor quickly and precisely. The main enemy here is inertia. This is driven by the mass of the threedimensional object to be moved around.

If you increase dimensions by factor 2 (as in mft versus FF) you increase inertia by factor 8.

So as a rule of thumb, Oly is on par with Pentax if their cameras can stabilize images 8x as long.

I am limited to 1 second handheld exposures on my K-1 (with a Sigma 35mm), so bragging rights for any mft slight improvement would only start at 16 seconds handheld using a 17mm lens.

It is the exact same reasoning why insects can jump higher than mammals and carry more. Their are small and certain challenges grow cubicly with a factor 8 when doubling one dimension. Physics.
05-10-2018, 03:40 AM   #33
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: California
Posts: 619
QuoteOriginally posted by beholder3 Quote

So as a rule of thumb, Oly is on par with Pentax if their cameras can stabilize images 8x as long.

I am limited to 1 second handheld exposures on my K-1 (with a Sigma 35mm), so bragging rights for any mft slight improvement would only start at 16 seconds handheld using a 17mm lens..

Would it though? I mean there is much more involved then crop factor. Just because there is a crop factor of two, doesnt make there be a crop factor everywhere else. The weight of a m43 is not half as heavy, the mechanism is not half the size, and it wouldnt mean that to get the same movement in the location you need to have double the shutter speed or half the shutterspeed. So to say 16 seconds and 17mm well its not realistic....

But in general, i think we can say if the camera can stabilize for the same amount of time with its shutterspeed, with the same person, with each camera having the same field of view only, then id say its on par with each other.





---------- Post added 05-10-18 at 03:40 AM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Sandy Hancock Quote
2 seconds hand held with the K-1 and DFA15-30


Impressive, nice image
05-10-2018, 05:07 AM   #34
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Aug 2011
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,008
QuoteOriginally posted by Sandy Hancock Quote
2 seconds hand held with the K-1 and DFA15-30
Great job! I tried, the best I can do was 1 sec. Holding a camera and looking through a black viewfinder for 2 sec is more than I can handle

05-10-2018, 05:59 AM - 2 Likes   #35
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 33,407
We are talking about a sensor that is 1/4 the size of the K-1 sensor are we not? Why is this even a discussion?

Lets get real, the subject can't move. This is a feature of very limited value. That or Pixel Shift?... I think I'll take Pixel Shift for static subjects.

Last edited by normhead; 05-10-2018 at 09:56 AM.
05-10-2018, 08:36 AM - 1 Like   #36
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,322
QuoteOriginally posted by Fcsnt54 Quote
Would it though?

There can't be any debate about this. It's fact as general truth. Physics.



There is only some wiggle room between 4x and 8x depending on the skills of Sony/Pentax engineers in trying to keep the thickness of the sensor assembly thinner than simply needing to double it as it grows in the other two dimensions. If they are substantially better than the mFT guys then they might have kept it lower and the actual factor might be something like 6x.


But unless someone can prove by physically measuring the thicknesses of Pentax FF and mFT sensor assembly that the Pentax guys are really that good, it is safe to stay at 8x as benchmark.


If Oly can't get at least 8x the exposure times handheld than what we get from a Pentax K-1 (1 second at 35mm FF equiv), they simply are technologically quite behind the curve.


But anyhow, these comparisons are not adding any value. My pictures are not getting better just by knowing that my K-1 is better than all the competition in the SR department.
05-10-2018, 09:35 AM   #37
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: California
Posts: 619
QuoteOriginally posted by beholder3 Quote
There can't be any debate about this. It's fact as general truth. Physics.



There is only some wiggle room between 4x and 8x depending on the skills of Sony/Pentax engineers in trying to keep the thickness of the sensor assembly thinner than simply needing to double it as it grows in the other two dimensions. If they are substantially better than the mFT guys then they might have kept it lower and the actual factor might be something like 6x.


But unless someone can prove by physically measuring the thicknesses of Pentax FF and mFT sensor assembly that the Pentax guys are really that good, it is safe to stay at 8x as benchmark.


If Oly can't get at least 8x the exposure times handheld than what we get from a Pentax K-1 (1 second at 35mm FF equiv), they simply are technologically quite behind the curve.


But anyhow, these comparisons are not adding any value. My pictures are not getting better just by knowing that my K-1 is better than all the competition in the SR department.


We are not talking about exposure, noise, light admittance, depth of field, etc. its about keeping a sensor in a given spot accounting for momentary movements in all axis. The accounting of movement to have a clear, crisp, sharp images. So the notion of 6x, 8x, etc is meaningless. Yes physics does have a hold here. It appears that Pentax has had a massive amount of improvement with their algorythms and shake reduction technology with the release of the new full frame model. Yes the m43 has a little bit of wiggle room do to not having as big of a sensor, thus shaving a little bit of weight off the sensor,but it is just a crop of a larger sensor. Unless someone knows exactly what the weight difference is, or the compensation rates, etc. of the mechanisms/ sensor, the difference between the two are meaningless. What matters is if the photographer is happy with his camera, along with getting the results they desire with said tool.


05-10-2018, 10:06 AM   #38
Pentaxian
eccs19's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Lisle, Ontario
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,504
QuoteOriginally posted by bdery Quote
It's probably much, much more related to technique, lens, camera weight, body of the user, how the person was braced, distance to subject, etc.

2 seconds without ANY help might be possible, but it would require

1-many trials )i.e. it's not an average image, to be sure)
2-luck
3-a wide focal length
4-a user with excellent technique, controlled breathing
5-maybe something against which to lean

The person might have cheated or not, however if that person claims that Oly delivers 2 seconds handheld exposures consistently, regardless of the conditions, then that person is lying. The amount of movement involved in holding still for two seconds prevents any company from making that claim.
Exactly this. 100% agree. If the person getting 2 seconds on the Olympus had a Pentax, he might very well be able to replicate the results.

05-10-2018, 10:18 AM   #39
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 20,542
I will say that I agree a bit with Norm, in that the only time I am doing long enough exposures that this would matter is with shooting waterfalls and there, 1/8 to 1/10 second usually suffices to blur the water. Nightscapes, I suppose could possibly fall into the window between 1/2 second and 2 seconds, but in my experience they generally require enough longer exposure that I couldn't hand hold them even if I was given a couple of second exposure window. The same is true for sunrise and sunset photos. I tend to use tripods for landscapes anyway because things like pixel shift (which I find quite useful) aren't really possible with them and HDR (which I don't use much) matches up better if your camera is stuck in one place.
05-10-2018, 10:23 AM - 1 Like   #40
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 33,407
QuoteOriginally posted by Sandy Hancock Quote
2 seconds hand held with the K-1 and DFA15-30
Awesome, now if only those darn people would stand still. But the books look great.

I did have a friend in school who could hand hold 5 seconds and get a decent image. This is as much about how much the individual shooter can stabilize the camera.

In my case, I'm just not steady at all unless braced. Using a telephoto off tripod I often can't hold still enough to even let the camera's AF work There's absolutely no way, any camera is going to allow me to hold for 2 seconds. OK, so I do have good days with less shake and I do occasionally pull of a long hand held exposure, usually by bracing on something. But it's not dependable. I tend to shy away from processes that are hit or miss.
05-10-2018, 12:50 PM   #41
Pentaxian




Join Date: Oct 2010
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,224
the thing what IS great with Oly, even with E5, I suppose that panny is same. when you half press the shutter, it begings to use SR(what ever is their term for it). you see the effect in VF(because of EVF). so image becomes still. even with longer lens. that to be honest is one of the biggest + from me to these cameras.but it is also needed, because EVF has naturally this little lag. so it eliminates that problem, and makes it the strenght. now, if that thing would not drain the battery, it would be nearly perfect.
05-10-2018, 08:23 PM   #42
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,336
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
In my case, I'm just not steady at all unless braced. Using a telephoto off tripod I often can't hold still enough to even let the camera's AF work There's absolutely no way, any camera is going to allow me to hold for 2 seconds. OK, so I do have good days with less shake and I do occasionally pull of a long hand held exposure, usually by bracing on something. But it's not dependable. I tend to shy away from processes that are hit or miss.


1) Of course you would brace against something to get more stability; unless, of course, you don't have anything to brace on

2) You are assuming that everyone has the same needs/wants as you, and dismissing the feature out of hand for everyone. Other people have more of a need/inclination to use SR than you do.
05-11-2018, 12:21 AM   #43
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
madbrain's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 1,169
I tried with the K-1 II and 28-105mm. I had to turn off the lights for the bookcase, and stopped the lens down to f7.1, otherwise the K-1 would overexpose with 2" shutter speed on FF sensor even at ISO 100.I did not get any sharp images that I could see by zooming on the LCD screen. Same for 1". Even 0.5" seemed to be borderline. I just looked at the images on my 32" 4K monitor, and the 2" images are actually somewhat usable without doing a 1:1 crop. I'm really extremely surprised.
I did try PixelShift as well at 0.5" shutter speed. When zooming in to pixel level, the 0.5" and 1/40 images are nearly indistinguishable. I'm viewing it in Aftershot Pro which doesn't support PS, AFAIK, but still displays an image. It may just be displaying the first frame. If so, I must have gotten very lucky. I did try PS at 1" and 2" but they looked horribly blurred on the LCD so I deleted them.

Keep in mind my resting heartbeat is >100bpm, I had 300mg of caffeine today, and a fair amount of alcohol at dinner time as well. Pretty much the worst case for shooting long exposures handheld.

Now, the true scientific test would be to repeat the test with the SR off.

I have attached samples at 1/40 , 2" and 0.5" (from the PixelShift file, but probably just the first frame). These have been reduced to just a few KB each by PF so can't really pixelpeep. Edit: removed the files because GPS was on and it was showing in EXIF. Will have to reshoot with GPS off . Probably faster than figuring out how to strip it..

Last edited by madbrain; 05-11-2018 at 01:04 AM.
05-11-2018, 02:47 AM   #44
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 20,542
QuoteOriginally posted by Fcsnt54 Quote
Would it though? I mean there is much more involved then crop factor. Just because there is a crop factor of two, doesnt make there be a crop factor everywhere else. The weight of a m43 is not half as heavy, the mechanism is not half the size, and it wouldnt mean that to get the same movement in the location you need to have double the shutter speed or half the shutterspeed. So to say 16 seconds and 17mm well its not realistic....

But in general, i think we can say if the camera can stabilize for the same amount of time with its shutterspeed, with the same person, with each camera having the same field of view only, then id say its on par with each other.





---------- Post added 05-10-18 at 03:40 AM ----------





Impressive, nice image
Well, the sensors are significantly different sizes.

In a sense, it doesn't matter, because if you want to drag your shutter a second or two, you don't care what size the sensor is and maybe the Olympus/Panasonic cameras give you a better chance of doing so. On the other hand, it is pretty impressive to stabilize a full frame sensor to the point that you can hand hold 1/2 to 1 second of time. I guess I still come back to wondering how useful that extra couple of stops between 1/2 second and 2 seconds actually is for most photography.
05-11-2018, 03:17 AM   #45
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
madbrain's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: San Jose, CA
Posts: 1,169
OK, here are test shots from the K-1 II .

All with D FA 28-105mm at 28mm and F7.1 . I used TAv mode.

First one, 1/40, ISO 10,000 .


Second, 0.5s, ISO 500 :


Third, 1s, ISO 250 :


Last, 2s, ISO 160 :


I took the best of 5 shots for 0.5s and 1s .
For 2s, I needed at least 15 shots to get it this sharp. The difference is mostly seen when you pixel peep at 100%. At full screen on my 32" 4K monitor the different is difficult to perceive for the first 3 images. The first image has more noise, and the last one is clearly softer.

These are not from PixelShift. I have not tried disabling the SR.

If you click "view image" on each image, at least in Firefox, then click the magnifying glass, you can pixel peep the entire 36MP resolution.

---------- Post added 05-11-18 at 04:13 AM ----------

And here are the tests with the Panasonic GX85, which has dual IBIS, both from the body and the 12-32mm lens.
All shots were taken at 12mm (24 mm equivalent), and f11 . After shooting, I realized I shouldn't have stopped down the lens that much with this small sensor. The UI on the GX85 is still very unfamiliar to me, and it lacks a "Tav" mode, which the Pentax has.
I was having to switch to A mode to set the aperture with the single dial, then back to M mode to set the shutter speed with the single dial. Now that I think of it, the GX85 has a touch screen, and there was probably a way to set the aperture in M mode by touching the screen. But none that I could find by using the dial. Maybe I'll just have to RTFM. I got the GX85 camera only a few weeks ago, and used it mostly for video on tripod so far, or still photos of my cats during daytime. The stabilizer option had been left at the default all along.

First, ISO 25,600, 1/40s :


The field of view is different from the other 3 on this one because I went back upstairs to reshoot at f11 . My original shot at 1/40s was at f3.5 . I wanted all 4 shots to be at the same aperture.

Second, ISO 1600, 0.5s . This was the best of 5 images :



Third, ISO 800, 1s . This was the best of 5 images :


Fourth, ISO 400, 2s . This was the best of about 15 shots :


What's really surprising on this one is that none of the shots at the lower shutter speeds (0.5s, 1s or 2s) look very good at full screen on my 4K monitor, and they are just awful when pixel peeping.
The 1s image looks the best to me at full screen. I could probably have achieved better results at 0.5s with more tries.

The 1/40s shot is also awful, but not due to the stabilizer - wrong choice of aperture, which forced me to use the highest ISO of 25,600 on the camera.
If I was a review site, I would repeat somewhere between f9 or f7. I would also sober up. Anyway, to me, the stabilizer GX85 is just not helping much. I have not tried disabling it. Just night and day with the much bigger K-1 II at identical shutter speed in terms of blur.
I put it on a scale, and the K-1 II with the original battery, plus battery grip, 6 eneloop pros, 2 SD cards, and the D FA 28-105mm with reversed hood weighs 4.4 lbs.
The GX85 with the 12-32mm lens, battery, SD card, and the lens cap attached with a lens keeper weighs 1.1 lbs, a quarter of the weight.
Either I am much better at handling large cameras than small cameras, or the K-1 II really blows the GX85 out of the water in terms of image stabilization, despite being in-body only vs body + lens.
The first theory certainly makes sense, since I have been shooting Pentax for 10 years, usually with a relatively heavy superzoom.
The GX85 was also a $500 camera with two lenses (12-32 and 45-150), where K-1 II was $2400 with one lens (28-105) and battery grip. Huge difference in price.

Again, with these GX85 shots, you can click "view image" and magnifier in Firefox in order to pixel people to the full 16MP resolution.

All shots from both cameras were in RAW - DNG for the K-1 II, and RW2 for the GX85. They were processed to full-size JPGs in Aftershot. The K-1 II profile is one I created from the official K-1 profile. The GX85 profile is the official one from Corel. I didn't apply any kind of processing, all defaults when generating the JPEGs. As you can see, the 12-32 lens has a pretty bad distortion at 12mm. Aftershot doesn't have any lens profile for either the Pentax D FA 28-105 or Panasonic Lumix G Vario 12-32mm, so there was no lens correction applied either.

I don't have an Olympus to compare with, but I sure hope the stabilizer does better than my GX85.

Last edited by madbrain; 05-11-2018 at 04:20 AM.
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!
17mm, aperture, battery, camera, crop, dslr, factor, full frame, full-frame, half, ii, k-1, k-1 stabilization vs, k1, lens, mode, olympus e-m1 mark, par, pentax k-1, screen, stabilization, stabilization vs olympus, vs, vs olympus e-m1
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K-5 vs MZ-S vs LX vs PZ-1p vs ist*D vs K10D vs K20D vs K-7 vs....... Steelski Pentax K-5 2 06-28-2017 04:59 PM
K1 compared to Oly E-M1 concentrik Pentax Full Frame 8 06-02-2017 10:22 AM
Upgrade to K-70 or Get a Oly E-M10 Mark II? SouthernExposure Pentax K-70 45 03-20-2017 07:37 AM
Olympus OM-D E-M1 for $799! Today only (8-15-16)! The Squirrel Mafia Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 5 08-15-2016 10:18 PM
Lens Stabilization VS Camera Stabilization philbaum Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 17 10-14-2015 12:38 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:46 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