[JensE]

I open PS files in Lightroom, and they look identical to non-PS.

I don't know about Lightroom. But you can try in-camera RAW processing ("down" button when viewing a raw file) with pixel shift enabled and disabled, the resulting TIFF or JPEG files look very different.

[on6702]

As a new KP owner I have also been experimenting with the pixel shifting functionality and my experience so far is as follows:
- the improvement is very subtle and not readily seen until one zooms in to a very high level and the role of individual pixels is readily evident.
- its harder to see in some images than others and not always apparent. Very fine details, not masked by motion, lens softness, camera instability need to be present.
- one of the biggest benefits can be improved noise due to the repeated exposures. Even at iso 100, there can be a significant improvement in pixel-level noise especially in shadows.
- when patterns, textures and straight lines approach the level of a few pixels in size the PS functionality can be seen to correct false pixel colours and locations

Here's an example of some crops of an old pottery plate I found in Peru with intricate coloured patterns. Pixel shift on left, normal exposure on the right. Both made with stopped down kit lens from centre of image at iso 100 and jpegs generated in camera.

The noise improvement and correct rendering of fine straight lines in the plate can clearly be seen in the PS image.

To get good results, I've found that careful use with a tripod and remote shutter or self-timer is necessary. I also suspect it works best with sharp lenses at their optimum apertures.

Raw therapee is a great piece of software for processing PS images due to its motion mask and correction features, and the ability to see sub frames or actual bayer filter at the pixel level.

[MJKoski]

Pixel-Shift is best processed with a RAW converter. Just take the shot using RAW and process it later. Adobe Camera RAW produces crisp details with right sharpening settings but cannot fix motion issues. RawTherapee can automatically fix most motion artifacts when using PS-processsing (has to be enabled separately).

[ThorSanchez]

I have tried a number of experiments with pixel shift on my K-3ii, and in a large majority of cases there was little or no discernible difference. I use RawTherapee, zoomed into to 200% or more, and I really couldn't tell which was which. I think a problem is that it helps with noise performance, but requires a tripod. With a tripod there is usually no reason you can't use long enough exposures and base ISO where noise is barely a factor.

The one case where I could clearly see improvements was photographing the moon and pretty heavily cropping.

[eric3929]

OOOOOK, so the files do need to be processed outside the camera! It is not obvious at all. I have installed Digital Camera Utility and processed the image of a banknote (without sharpening). I do see the difference now (albeit still somewhat underwhelming). PS image has less noise (that "sharpness" I was talking about before is indeed just noise).

The utility does not have much in terms of sharpening (I have attached a screenshot of its tools). That leaves one with Rawtherapee I guess?

Hey, i've enjoyed looking through this thread and seeing people's results. I just wanted to give a little shameless plug, it would be awesome if you and the others were wanted to post some of your pixel shift images in a thread I started a while back KP Pixel Shift Images - PentaxForums.com

It's supposed to be a place not just to share PS images, but also to talk about the workflow and what good and/or bad results might look like.

[TonyW]

Without access currently to PS images my view is that while it can be sometimes hard to discern the benefits between images shot under the same conditions on other occassions the difference can be quite marked.

Takiing the DPR comparison for example scrolling around does not reveal a huge difference in most colour areas with little inherent detail but look at the difference to resolving power PS vs Standard in other areas

Top row, left image - Increased resolution overall. Right image look at the moire introduced both chroma and luminosity. Look at the loss of detail due to the interference patterns on the childs dress

Second row, right hand image - All detail lost in the coat of the left hand figure and the banding on the face of the right hand figure.

Viewed in isolation you may not even notice, but best practice shooting with half decent glass at reasonable apertures (this shot at f/5.6 on Pentax K1) should reveal what your system is capable of and there are times when you might just appreciate it

[ThorSanchez]

Without access currently to PS images my view is that while it can be sometimes hard to discern the benefits between images shot under the same conditions on other occassions the difference can be quite marked.

Takiing the DPR comparison for example scrolling around does not reveal a huge difference in most colour areas with little inherent detail but look at the difference to resolving power PS vs Standard in other areas

Top row, left image - Increased resolution overall. Right image look at the moire introduced both chroma and luminosity. Look at the loss of detail due to the interference patterns on the childs dress

Second row, right hand image - All detail lost in the coat of the left hand figure and the banding on the face of the right hand figure.

Viewed in isolation you may not even notice, but best practice shooting with half decent glass at reasonable apertures (this shot at f/5.6 on Pentax K1) should reveal what your system is capable of and there are times when you might just appreciate it

I've looked at the studio comparison tool, and it's clear that pixel shift helps in some parts of the scene. It really improves high ISO shots, but I'm struggling to come up with situations where you're on a tripod with a static scene, but you'd need to use higher ISO.

I mentioned the moon before, where you want a relatively fast shutter speed because it is surprisingly bright but also moving. Doing a little research I've found multiple people who say the moon moves too fast to make pixel shift work. Is that true? I swear I've gotten better results with the moon from pixel shift than without, but I guess I could be fooling myself.

[JensE]

It really improves high ISO shots,

... and darker parts of low ISO shots. More room for tone mapping or 'lifting shadows'. My example above was taken at ISO100, lifted 1EV.

[mikesbike]

You are taking pictures that pixel shift isn't going to have an appreciable effect on and asking to see an appreciable effect.
Pixel shift really comes into it's own with reds, which are especially easy to blow out. Try taking some pictures of red flowers, for example, and see what happens.
It's not a tool for every picture, it's a tool for pictures that fall outside of the normal capture range of the camera doing a single exposure.

I've not been using it, but I agree with this- any advantage will be dependent on what is being shot that will be revealing of its benefits.

As to the examples given here, even with the deficit of f/16 in the first one I can see a bit more fine detail in the PS shot. Then, in the next fabric example given by the OP in post #10, which he might be interpreting as "noise" I can definitely see more detail in the fabric with the PS shot.

[MJKoski]

Pixel-Shift is more than red and best details, it is godlike for B&W channel mixing. There is no better source material than a pixel-shift file for that. Every channel has its own exposure (G twice). Pixel-shift cameras easily bypass dedicated B&W sensors as one gets all the primary color filtered channels at once.

[jgnfld]

Pixel-Shift is more than red and best details, it is godlike for B&W channel mixing. There is no better source material than a pixel-shift file for that. Every channel has its own exposure (G twice). Pixel-shift cameras easily bypass dedicated B&W sensors as one gets all the primary color filtered channels at once.

Hadn't thot of that. Thanks for the tip to try.

[JensE]

Hadn't thot of that. Thanks for the tip to try.

See my example above. The orthochromatic simulation, discarding the red channel, would not have any information on the red sensor sites and would have to be interpolated. With pixel shift, it has both blue and green at all sites to determine the right grey value.

[MJKoski]

So yes, remember to do BW with channel mixing and not just desaturating the image. Nik SilverEfex is a wonderful channel mixer plugin.