Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-30-2014, 02:40 PM   #31
Veteran Member
crewl1's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 9,795
As storage space and computer performance get cheaper and faster some future number will become optimal.
I'm sure similar arguments about the k-5 files being too big were made when users were going from their K-7 k-x models.
Personally I prefer the faster process and better AF of the K-3 for sports and the 24mp sensor is great for wildlife cropping.
Shooting the k-5 side by side it seems such a slow performer in comparison.
The images from the k-5 are very nice.
A K-3 with 16mp sensor would be welcome.

09-30-2014, 02:58 PM - 2 Likes   #32
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,787
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
Never found any use for a second card slot.
It's great when I forget to put the first one back in the camera before I go out...
09-30-2014, 02:59 PM   #33
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,557
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
It's great when I forget to put the first one back in the camera before I go out...
That is probably the most silly reason.

I know one photographer who has the grip attached to his K-5 because he keeps a spare card in it.
09-30-2014, 03:05 PM   #34
Pentaxian
ChristianRock's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Marietta, GA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,050
Hey, I'm sold on two cards whenever I can afford it.

On Sunday I took my camera with me as we went to a friend's house and, you guessed it, I had forgotten to put the card back in it.

09-30-2014, 03:07 PM   #35
Forum Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Berlin, Germany
Posts: 62
I don't think prints will come get obsoleted; maybe the focus shifts to more advanced, artistic ones, but only those may have suffered from potential resolution deficiency of past camera offerings... .

To still comment on the initial post: as some others who already contributed, also I was pretty happy with 6MP of my istDL for quite some time until longing for better AF, low-ISO-performance and double exposure, which was why I got first K20 (clear disappointment in terms of low ISO btw) and then K5. I have a 50x75cm print in my home office of a squirrel shot with istDL and a very cheap Sigma 55-200. I had to double the pixels in PS elements to allow for the print size. And still it's good enough in sharpness given the fact that you don't view pictures of that size at close distance. It was a remake of a 60x90cm poster of the same photo that was even better due to the poster-software's enlargement capabilitiy.

16MP imply a clear advantage in terms of cropping leeway. As to the lenses available (incl. the old ones Pentax-users have to recourse to when aiming for fast prime lenses), this sensor resolution seems to coincide with the practical resolution capabilities of many of better ones of them. When shooting w/o tripod, my results often are not pin-sharp (especially at larger distance; not speaking of focus issue here). A tripod sometimes grants better results.

So I would not expect any benefit from 24MP when it comes to factual resolution, left aside the many advantages the K3 carries in it. I am waiting for a full frame model and hope for moderate 24 to low 30-ish MP that is in line with 16MP-sensor pixel density.
09-30-2014, 03:31 PM   #36
Pentaxian
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 23,787
There is a part of me that silently recognizes that 16 mp and 14 EV dynamic range is pretty much the pinnacle of APS_c. Green red and yellow spectrums are already topped out, in terms of being limited in resolution being limited by diffraction. The increases in resolution after 16 MP are confined to blue spectrum detail, at least that's my understanding. They sold me a K-3 based on improvements in AF, two card slots, etc.

QuoteQuote:
Do Sensors ā€œOutresolveā€ Lenses?

You have all the data at hand, but take the green-yellow light and f/8-f/11 aperture values as a reference. It represents a realistic, not too demanding case. Consider a 35mm system with a lens at f/11. At best, the maximum resolution you will get is equivalent to 16 MP, even if your camera has 22 or 25 MP. In the case of an APS-C based system the limit goes to 7 MP, and 4 MP considering a Four Thirds format. Stopping down to f/22 the limit of the effective resolution of the 35mm based system goes to 4 MP!
I think 16MP is probably enough oversample to give you a decent 7 Mp image.
You will still get an increase in resolution because of the blue spectrum, but as some have noted, the reds get really sloppy.

Last edited by normhead; 10-06-2014 at 05:22 AM.
09-30-2014, 03:48 PM   #37
Loyal Site Supporter
dadipentak's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Baltimore, Maryland
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 10,073
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
That is probably the most silly reason.
It is but--for me--it's real.
09-30-2014, 04:13 PM   #38
Pentaxian
MadMathMind's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Houston, TX
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,534
Printed some 16x11 canvas prints from Adorama Pix not long ago. Had some from the K-5 IIs and the K110D. The K-5's are sharper, but if there weren't a side by side comparison, no one would notice. In fact, I doubt anyone but me will notice.

I suspect the difference would be greater on photo paper, as canvas will hide some detail. Still, there's little to complain about 6 high quality MP at this size. Print it slightly smaller as most people do and there's nothing to worry about. 8x10s out of the K110D still look gorgeous.

QuoteOriginally posted by ivanvernon Quote
On my K-7, you can go to the menu and reduce the number of pixels. The options are 14, 10, 6, and 2. Shooting at the lower count levels seems to make no discernab le difference when viewing at normal sizes, although certinly is you are going to print out at 16 X 20 inches, you need the additional resolution.
I think that affects JPEG size only, does it not?

09-30-2014, 06:06 PM   #39
Forum Member




Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Boston
Posts: 68
16MP is a good size - higher MP count produces diminishing returns unless printing huge.

I've just upgraded to the K-3 from a K-7, which I used for five years. Photos were often cropped from 14MP down to 10-12MP. Never had a problem getting quality 13x19 prints from these sizes.
I would have bought the K-3 even if it only had 16MP. Now that I'm using the K-3, I find the extra pixels can help when more aggressive cropping is needed. Even so, I'm still downsampling final JPGs to 16MP.

I've been impressed by the samples I've seen out of the Q-S1 (12MP) and am considering getting one despite being "only" 12MP.
09-30-2014, 06:10 PM   #40
Site Supporter
stevebrot's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Vancouver (USA)
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 26,235
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
When in future we go print less and less and only go online, will we need the extra pixels?
Nope, only our phones and instagram...


Steve

---------- Post added 09-30-14 at 06:12 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
It's great when I forget to put the first one back in the camera before I go out...
My experience as well. I have only done it once, but it was nice to not get skunked.


Steve
09-30-2014, 06:20 PM   #41
Site Supporter
Stavri's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: at a Bean & Leaf
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,636
QuoteOriginally posted by ivanvernon Quote
On my K-7, you can go to the menu and reduce the number of pixels. The options are 14, 10, 6, and 2. Shooting at the lower count levels seems to make no discernab le difference when viewing at normal sizes, although certinly is you are going to print out at 16 X 20 inches, you need the additional resolution.

Hmm....an option to downsize your Raw files in camera from 36-24-16-10mp etc, Great Idea, let's put it on the new Pentax 36mp full frame coupled with the option to switch between FF and APS for DA glass. Awesome....now where's the preorder button?
09-30-2014, 07:20 PM   #42
mee
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,260
If Medium Format was significantly cheaper.. I'd go that route.. larger sensor with a much larger pixel count.. but I do landscapes and macro work mostly so it makes sense there.

Actually, if Ricoh wants to release a 40+ MP APS-C sensored body I'd be all for it.. cropping for days... that is nice.

With this potential FF body next year.. I still suspect it might auto sense current DA lenses and auto crop the sensor..
10-01-2014, 05:39 AM   #43
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,557
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by mee Quote
If Medium Format was significantly cheaper.. I'd go that route.. larger sensor with a much larger pixel count.. but I do landscapes and macro work mostly so it makes sense there.

Actually, if Ricoh wants to release a 40+ MP APS-C sensored body I'd be all for it.. cropping for days... that is nice.

With this potential FF body next year.. I still suspect it might auto sense current DA lenses and auto crop the sensor..
Looking at the 1 inch sensor that is in use in many camera's like Nikon 1 and Panasonic FZ1000 you can even get more. With that pixeldensity you would get 62 megapixel on our aps-c sensor. Would you really be interested?
10-01-2014, 05:47 AM   #44
Site Supporter
p38arover's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Western Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 3,020
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
Well discussed in many threads about FF and aps-c. I sold my K-3 because I didn't need the pixels. Just thinking about buying a second K-01. The question is....is 16 megapixel enough? For now, for the coming years? I wonder how you think or feel about this.
Ron, I've seen your pix and they just ain't good enough. You need a 645Z!
10-01-2014, 06:14 AM   #45
mee
Site Supporter




Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 5,260
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
Looking at the 1 inch sensor that is in use in many camera's like Nikon 1 and Panasonic FZ1000 you can even get more. With that pixeldensity you would get 62 megapixel on our aps-c sensor. Would you really be interested?


I shoot 50-100 MP panoramas.. so if the IQ was still high then YES!

You can always turn down the image size in the features.. I wouldn't have sold the K-3 (if I had one) if I wanted smaller image size for that reason alone.. plus the CPU is faster in the K-3 than in the K-5 models, so reducing image size may increase your burst performance or number of frames in burst..
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!
4k, auto, camera, comparison, computer, course, dslr, filter, head, image, jpg, k-3, k-5, k3, k5, lens, lenses, life, medium, megapixel, people, photography, pictures, post, quality, resolution, steve
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Is the image processor in Pentax K-r is good enough? dmnf Photographic Technique 10 05-15-2013 09:43 AM
Pentax WG-2 Waterproof 16-Megapixel Fl_Gulfer Pentax Price Watch 3 03-10-2013 12:35 PM
is 16-45 mm wide enough? boone Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 15 01-26-2011 12:56 PM
[Auto-ISO] so, is the K5 and Kr brave enough to use max iso? Reportage Pentax K-5 13 10-24-2010 03:30 PM
Is the 16-50mm sharp enough? lbenac Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 03-09-2009 03:04 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:53 PM. | See also: NikonForums.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