[northcoastgreg]

Mountain ranges in Two Medicine area of Glacier NP, with the KP + DA 55-300 PLM using pixel shift:

[Des]

K-3 + FA 77 Ltd

[noelcmn]

Addo Elephant National Park

[RobG]

Mountains near Queenstown, New Zealand.




DA55-300PLM @ 300mm.

[noelcmn]

More Addo

[northcoastgreg]

Glacier NP, DA 55-300 PLM, using pixel shift:

[RobG]

Glacier NP, DA 55-300 PLM, using pixel shift:

Fabulous mountain scenery. I don't think I got any decent photos of Glacier NP. Does the pixel-shift improve the dynamic range of the image?

[northcoastgreg]

abulous mountain scenery. I don't think I got any decent photos of Glacier NP. Does the pixel-shift improve the dynamic range of the image?

Yes, pixel shift does improve dynamic-range — not by much, but maybe half to a full stop. But what it really does is improve richness color and the clarity of the image. Without pixel shift, you're going to get some smearing at the pixel level, which will take a little bit away from your sharpness and clarity. With pixel shift on a 24 MP APS-C camera, you can capture the kind of detail you might get on a 24 MP FF camera without PS. And the other thing is that I found for landscape shooting, pixel shift tends to work better when shooting telephoto landscapes because the kind of fine detail that can move and be a problem — light vegetation in the wind, for example — is too far away to cause a problem.

Now as far as getting decent images in Glacier NP, I think it helps to go there either in late spring or late summer. There are more clouds at those times of year and that tends to improve the quality of the light.

Here's another image from Two Medicine area of Glacier NP, also shot with the DA 55-300 PLM, but without pixel shift, which is not used here because the lake is included in the scene, and the waves are introducing motion:

[Piotrek K]

Tamron SP 60-300 (23A)

[RobG]

Yes, pixel shift does improve dynamic-range — not by much, but maybe half to a full stop. But what it really does is improve richness color and the clarity of the image.

Interesting! Unfortunately I have a K3, so I missed out on the feature.

Here's another image from Two Medicine area of Glacier NP, also shot with the DA 55-300 PLM, but without pixel shift, which is not used here because the lake is included in the scene, and the waves are introducing motion:

So the waves would end up blurred with pixel shift?

[Piotrek K]

SMC Pentax -M 100/4 Macro

[northcoastgreg]

So the waves would end up blurred with pixel shift?

Unfortunately, no. You get ugly, moire-like artifacts combined with green and magenta and sometimes even urine-yellow bands of color.

Another pixel shift shot with the DA 55-300 PLM, of Chief Mountain in Montana:

[Scout]

K-3 + FA 77 Ltd

How did you make this ?

[Des]

How did you make this ?

I didn't - Mother Nature did! The 3D magic of the 77, a little processing with DxO and voila! Glad you like it Scout.

Yes, pixel shift does improve dynamic-range — not by much, but maybe half to a full stop. But what it really does is improve richness color and the clarity of the image. Without pixel shift, you're going to get some smearing at the pixel level, which will take a little bit away from your sharpness and clarity. With pixel shift on a 24 MP APS-C camera, you can capture the kind of detail you might get on a 24 MP FF camera without PS. And the other thing is that I found for landscape shooting, pixel shift tends to work better when shooting telephoto landscapes because the kind of fine detail that can move and be a problem — light vegetation in the wind, for example — is too far away to cause a problem.

In my few forays into pixel shift with the KP so far I have certainly seen the difference it makes in capturing detail, but I hadn't realized that pixel shift increased dynamic range at all. A kind of small HDR effect. Thanks for your sharing your experience Greg. Loving your work.

[Piotrek K]

Lake Garda with Pentax-M 100/4 Macro