[biz-engineer]

ISO alone does not create better image quality. Your suggested improvement would risk create blurry photographs of everything except a perfectly still scene.

That's not what I observed. When I enable SR and force a shutter speed 2 or 3 stops slower than what the camera program would decide, I get much better quality images, it's real. I really see better image quality.

---------- Post added 23-11-19 at 14:22 ----------

You are also being disingenuous in changing your example to using a shutter speed of 1/100 when previously you were arguing for 1/10. No one needs SR at 1/100 except with a long lens

I use a shutter speed of 1/100 with my DFA150450 at 450mm and get a sharp image when SR is enabled. I use a shutter speed of 1/10th with my DFA28-105 at 105mm and SR enabled. In both cases , I get better images then with camera default exposure settings.

[Lowell Goudge]

In reading the first post and the last page, the issue to me seems obvious especially with respect to the camera in question, the K1 or more specifically any of Pentax’s flagship products over the years and I have owned quite a few. The PZ-1, *istD, K10, K7, K5, and now a K1 MKII

They are by design not intended to be mode driven, I.e. a different mode and program for every situation, they are simple cameras, which offer excellent build etc.. and to a large extent are for people who understand what they are doing.

If you understand what you are doing and understand how the camera functions you can make it do what you want.

With respect to shake reduction, for example, and the “golden rule” of Shutter speed = 1/FL. Keep in mind this is intended for somewhat normal viewing from the film era, and 8x10 prints. No one looks at small prints any more. It is a tool, and as some have suggested, unless you are shooting only static subjects 1/10 of a second will never be sharp. This includes landscapes where there is even a hint of a breeze.

I prefer to pick the shutter speed and aperture I want and let the isu go where it needs to, because a slightly grainy but otherwise sharp image is preferable to a blurry mess.

Myself and many others on the forum have often stated the biggest obstacle to getting a good shot can be found immediately behind the viewfinder.

Cameras are not, and never will be equipped with a mindread function. The photographer has to, I repeat has to tell the camera what he/she wants.

[pschlute]

and as some have suggested, unless you are shooting only static subjects 1/10 of a second will never be sharp. This includes landscapes where there is even a hint of a breeze

This is the point I have tried to make to the OP, but he appears not to get it. There is also the issue of lens diffraction if the 4 stop slower shutter speed puts the aperture too small.

We all understand the point about using a low ISO where practical, but the idea that it should be forced upon us by changing the way the auto programs work is both ham-fisted and quite frankly nonsense.

[biz-engineer]

the way the auto programs work is both ham-fisted and quite frankly nonsense.

Yeah, I know. If you lower the shutter speed manually it's fine, but if the camera does it automatically for you it's not good. What I don't get is what cameras have shutter speeds slower than 1/100th, that's useless, we should never use shutter speeds below 1/100th, because something could move in the scene. The question that I'm asking myself is why someone would ever enable SR if the shutter speed was fast enough to freeze motion? Does it mean you would only enable SR with a 500mm lens? I used SR at 20mm , shutter speed 1/4th for a water and rocks image and the photo came out with the rocks sharp and the water blurred as I wanted.

---

Last edited by biz-engineer; 11-23-2019 at 09:54 AM.

[csa]

Originally posted by csa And who decides what the "best possible settings" for someone are?

Well, it seems a lot of people spend more money on cameras having larger sensors for a reason: image quality. Who would not want better image quality whenever it is possible? Why would I shoot at 1/1600 ISO1600 when sharpness would be right there at 1/100th and ISO100?

That's true, however my question was, who decides the best possible settings? You, others, or the one taking the photo?

[biz-engineer]

You, others, or the one taking the photo?

I decide based on camera AE mode I select. I have already done it in U2 mode where the camera is set to TAv, with 1/10th shutter speed by default. My only complain is when ISO goes down to ISO100 and blink (over exposure), the camera is not able to correct settings to expose correctly, even if Auto-exp. compensation is enabled. It's easy, every time I know that the picture doesn't contain motion, I want to use the slowest possible shutter speed and lowest possible ISO to get the best image possible. Using TAv works for me, except that I have to manually adjust most of the time because there is nothing in the AE program to do what I want automatically. And as others have said, there is already an ISO speed setting (Slow, Typ, and Fast) so why not extend this to Extra-slow (3 stops), Very-Slow (2 stops), Slow (1 stop), Typ, Fast (1 stop) , Very-Fast (2 stops), (3 stops) Xtra-Fast. I don't understand why people are opposed to improvements.

[pschlute]

except that I have to manually adjust most of the time because there is nothing in the AE program to do what I want automatically.

That should be giving you the clue

---

Last edited by pschlute; 11-23-2019 at 10:49 AM.

[biz-engineer]

That should be giving you the clue

This gives me a clue that the Pentax AE algorithm date back for 20 years ago , and has not evolved with SR technology, and that the elephant is so big in the room that Ricoh didn't even realized that could take advantage of SR for best image quality.

[volley]

This gives me a clue that the Pentax AE algorithm date back for 20 years ago , and has not evolved with SR technology, and that the elephant is so big in the room that Ricoh didn't even realized that could take advantage of SR for best image quality.

I'm glad you've edited the original post ... that claim was probably a little weird. Thanks.

[pschlute]

This gives me a clue that the Pentax AE algorithm date back for 20 years ago

I am getting blue in the face !! The auto exposure algorithms are using three parameters. All are important to getting the best possible image in the majority of cases.

You are fixated on low ISO. You are ignoring subject blur from subject movement and diffraction. Neither of those impacts have changed in the last 150 years !

[photoptimist]

I am getting blue in the face !! The auto exposure algorithms are using three parameters. All are important to getting the best possible image in the majority of cases.

You are fixated on low ISO. You are ignoring subject blur from subject movement and diffraction. Neither of those impacts have changed in the last 150 years !

Biz-engineer is not ignoring diffraction. He's not trying force the camera to always use the slowest-possible shutter speed and a diffraction-causing narrow aperture.

The current K-1 already lets users pick shutter speed limits of 2/F, 1/F, and 0.5/F as suits the users' sensitivity to motion blur and shooting conditions. Those Auto ISO lines would never force a super narrow aperture. The proposed feature would add more choices (e.g., 4/F, 8/F, and 16/F) and allow the user to use one setting for non-SR and another setting for SR. Nobody would be forced to change the default which would be 1/F for both SR and non-SR.

What is the point of SR except to enable reduced camera motion blur with "slower" shutter speeds? The use cases for this feature are absolutely IDENTICAL to all the use cases where photographers set up a tripod to use a slower the 1/F shutter speed.

[csa]

"I decide

I decide based on camera AE mode I select.

That's correct. You decide for your photos, and the rest of us decide what works best for us. If we are happy with the results; there's no right or wrong way to use our cameras.

[pschlute]

Those Auto ISO lines would never force a super narrow aperture

So what aperture would you get with sunny sixteen rule if you used a 4 stop slower shutter speed?

I don't think i have a lens that does f64

My main issue is that i think cameras have become too automated with things like focus bracketing and aperture bracketing. If Pentax make the things discussed in this thread available as an option That will please some people. I just think it is one more setting to remember to turn on/off.

[othar]

This is the point I have tried to make to the OP, but he appears not to get it. There is also the issue of lens diffraction if the 4 stop slower shutter speed puts the aperture too small.

We all understand the point about using a low ISO where practical, but the idea that it should be forced upon us by changing the way the auto programs work is both ham-fisted and quite frankly nonsense.

I don't get your connection to diffraction in this topic. Biz-engineers goal is to bring ISO down by choosing a slower shutter speed; there is no need to change the aperture to do that, in this context.

[pschlute]

I don't get your connection to diffraction in this topic. Biz-engineers goal is to bring ISO down by choosing a slower shutter speed; there is no need to change the aperture to do that, in this context.

Yes his aim is to bring down ISO, and he wants to achieve that by having the auto modes choose a slower shutter speed by up to 4 stops. So imagine pointing your camera at a subject on a sunny day. You are in P mode. The camera would ordinarily select something like 1/400 ISO 200 f8. If you have the auto mode deliberately choose 4 stops slower you will end up with 1/30 ISO 100 and f22. you are now into diffraction territory.