Sorry Sony, your pixel shift doesn't rock

SSGGeezer · 01-18-2018, 03:23 PM

Nice links, his images of the owl were very nice.

leekil · 01-19-2018, 12:20 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by surfar

Yes, i did the same...hes a pain(of a presenter).....BUT his content is excellent.Its worth watching him if you can tolerate his antics!

I think he's kind of funny. Also his style seems more critical of the competition with his laughing and all, compared to if he played it more serious.

**Rondec** · 01-19-2018, 03:46 AM

Personally, I'm not a big fan of video presentations -- even if done well. I could have read the information in this video in a couple of minutes whereas it took 7 minutes to watch it. At the same time, I don't think that pixel shift really moves the needle a whole lot for either Sony or Pentax. It's a nice add on, but it isn't as though, even here on the Forum, many folks are shooting and posting a lot of pixel shift images. I started a pixel shift thread and I think Pinhole Camera, Normhead, myself, and a few others post images there periodically, but that's about it.

The reality is that even though pixel shift works very nicely for Pentax cameras, it does add an extra step, isn't useful in all situations (I mostly use it for landscapes), and the base K-1 images are nice enough and have enough resolution that it isn't really needed a lot of the time.

That said, I use pixel shift quite a bit and if I had the Sony limitations put on it, I would probably use it a lot less.

**Mikesul** · 01-19-2018, 05:17 AM

I returned my A7RIII before I had a chance to test the pixel shift so I have no direct experience but reading the forums it seemed that the flexible spacing between shots may have been to allow the use of flash.

Kerebron · 01-19-2018, 06:11 AM

Now we need a comparison of K-1 with new Hasselblad H6D-400c MS 400Mpix pixel-shift images (almost 2.5 GB each!). Who's gonna win, I wonder? :P

On more serious note, SONY version of pixel-shift looks to me like an unfinished product. Beta or pre-production status. It's good that you don't have to use four cameras to make one photograph. :/

solitudebound · 01-19-2018, 01:13 PM

I don't use pixel shift that much but even in single shot there is more information in Pentax image files to work with. It saves me quite a bit of time if i don't have to guess at what a detail is if i have to clone brush out some defect or artifact a customer asks for.

Pixel shift comes in handy for odd lighting situations and grants more leeway in post. When i was using the Olympus e-m1 mark ii that also has pixel shift there varies differences between long single exposure and pixel shift. I find that pixel shift works better or to be more accurate more noticeable on smaller sensor camera aka smaller than full frame. The pixel shift DOF is more noticeable on the smaller sensor.

Also there are different forms of pixel shift such as.

Aberration/detail correction (Pentax).
Aberration correction & detail addition (Olympus).
Aberration correction & full detail incorporation (Sigma). OMG! BIG files especially with a 45mpx sensor.

What Sony uses is debatable but it doesn't look much different than most pre-pixel shift mutil exposure HDR images people have been doing for years.

**ffking** · 01-19-2018, 01:23 PM

Originally posted by Rondec

Personally, I'm not a big fan of video presentations -- even if done well. I could have read the information in this video in a couple of minutes whereas it took 7 minutes to watch it. At the same time, I don't think that pixel shift really moves the needle a whole lot for either Sony or Pentax. It's a nice add on, but it isn't as though, even here on the Forum, many folks are shooting and posting a lot of pixel shift images. I started a pixel shift thread and I think Pinhole Camera, Normhead, myself, and a few others post images there periodically, but that's about it.

That's all true, but there's loads of stuff on the K-3 I never use - video, jpeg effects etc - pixel shift I use sometimes and has definite value when I do.

normhead · 01-19-2018, 01:50 PM

Originally posted by surfar

Yes, i did the same...hes a pain(of a presenter).....BUT his content is excellent.Its worth watching him if you can tolerate his antics!

I hate that. people who are so good you have to force yourself to listen to their obnoxious selves.

amoringello · 01-19-2018, 03:35 PM

Does anyone use Pentax's pixel-shift with in-camera processing? With its rendering being limited to 8-bit output, I would think; why bother with the effort?
I've only done a few, but always post-processed out of the camera.
I don't see why this guy things processing in-camera is such a benefit. The other comments seem to have some merit, but is in-camera processing really worthy of so much attention? Seems he's grasping at straws to make a point. :-(

surfar · 01-19-2018, 03:50 PM

Probably? His point is with Pentax you get a look at the image after its shot.With the A7r3 you have to identify(once the files are in puta) which 4 images they are, then PP.

amoringello · 01-19-2018, 04:29 PM

Originally posted by surfar

Probably? His point is with Pentax you get a look at the image after its shot.With the A7r3 you have to identify(once the files are in puta) which 4 images they are, then PP.

Yeah, that is a bonus. Heck, I have trouble working with HDR and panos -- and it's a lot more obvious which are part of the set.. :-)
But the in-camera processing to only 8-bit seems more of a short-sighted gimmick on Ricoh's part, especially when TIF is an output option.

**ffking** · 01-20-2018, 01:25 PM

Originally posted by amoringello

But the in-camera processing to only 8-bit seems more of a short-sighted gimmick on Ricoh's part, especially when TIF is an output option.

So how is outputting TIFFs better than outputting DNGs?

**Rondec** · 01-20-2018, 02:39 PM

Originally posted by ffking

So how is outputting TIFFs better than outputting DNGs?

If you could use the camera to generate a 14 bit TIFF file, then you would hopefully have a file that had all of the info stored in it, including the motion correction information that could be opened directly by any image processor, including Lightroom. As it is, your options with Pentax are to save a RAW image, which is openable in Lightroom, but which has lots of artifacts if there is any movement, save a jpeg which of course has limited post processing ability, or save an 8 bit TIFF which is better, but still more limited in your ability to process it.

As it is, when I shoot a pixel shift image, I open it with Raw Therapee, process it there and then import the save 16 bit TIFF file to lightroom for final tweaks. This is the only process that consistently allows for better results than just shooting a single image out of camera without pixel shift.

amoringello · 01-20-2018, 04:01 PM

Originally posted by ffking

So how is outputting TIFFs better than outputting DNGs?

As an 8-bit TIF, there is no advantage.

If it were a 16-bit TIF, there would be no need to find an application to process it properly.
It would also be much smaller, as it would exist as a single image rather than a DNG package of four images.

Of course, I think finding an application to process them now is not so difficult.
So not really a big issue, other than the fact that Ricoh/Pentax pushed the feature into something close to useless at the time of release.

zapp · 01-21-2018, 01:48 AM

Originally posted by LensBeginner

IMHO he has no clue what he's talking about.

A youtube channel needs new material all the time. Blaming Sony for bad pixel shift implemenation is quite desperate.
He discussed sensor noise of K1 vs D850 which was OK, he compared the DFA 70-200 to the new Tamron(?). All reviews are worthwile watching, but remember this is only one source of information.

01-19-2018, 01:13 PM	#21
solitudebound Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2017 Posts: 140	I don't use pixel shift that much but even in single shot there is more information in Pentax image files to work with. It saves me quite a bit of time if i don't have to guess at what a detail is if i have to clone brush out some defect or artifact a customer asks for. Pixel shift comes in handy for odd lighting situations and grants more leeway in post. When i was using the Olympus e-m1 mark ii that also has pixel shift there varies differences between long single exposure and pixel shift. I find that pixel shift works better or to be more accurate more noticeable on smaller sensor camera aka smaller than full frame. The pixel shift DOF is more noticeable on the smaller sensor. Also there are different forms of pixel shift such as. Aberration/detail correction (Pentax). Aberration correction & detail addition (Olympus). Aberration correction & full detail incorporation (Sigma). OMG! BIG files especially with a 45mpx sensor. What Sony uses is debatable but it doesn't look much different than most pre-pixel shift mutil exposure HDR images people have been doing for years. Last edited by solitudebound; 01-19-2018 at 04:15 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K1/Samyang 24mm Tilt/Shift and Pixel Shift	DDoram	Pentax K-1 & K-1 II	6	12-14-2021 06:47 PM
Sony a6000 or Sony a6300 or Sony a6500?	LeDave	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	5	09-27-2018 03:45 AM
Sony does pixel shift in a7R III	Tas	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	37	11-19-2017 01:16 PM
Pixel shift appears in the new Sony A7riii	travelswsage	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	14	10-28-2017 07:18 AM
DCU5 and Pixel Shift	tuggie76	Pentax K-3 & K-3 II	8	12-11-2016 05:46 AM

01-18-2018, 03:23 PM	#16
SSGGeezer Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2017 Location: Indiana, U.S. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,845	Nice links, his images of the owl were very nice.

01-19-2018, 12:20 AM - 1 Like	#17
leekil Pentaxian Join Date: May 2016 Photos: Albums Posts: 2,003	Originally posted by surfar Yes, i did the same...hes a pain(of a presenter).....BUT his content is excellent.Its worth watching him if you can tolerate his antics! I think he's kind of funny. Also his style seems more critical of the competition with his laughing and all, compared to if he played it more serious.

01-19-2018, 03:46 AM	#18
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	Personally, I'm not a big fan of video presentations -- even if done well. I could have read the information in this video in a couple of minutes whereas it took 7 minutes to watch it. At the same time, I don't think that pixel shift really moves the needle a whole lot for either Sony or Pentax. It's a nice add on, but it isn't as though, even here on the Forum, many folks are shooting and posting a lot of pixel shift images. I started a pixel shift thread and I think Pinhole Camera, Normhead, myself, and a few others post images there periodically, but that's about it. The reality is that even though pixel shift works very nicely for Pentax cameras, it does add an extra step, isn't useful in all situations (I mostly use it for landscapes), and the base K-1 images are nice enough and have enough resolution that it isn't really needed a lot of the time. That said, I use pixel shift quite a bit and if I had the Sony limitations put on it, I would probably use it a lot less.

01-19-2018, 05:17 AM	#19
Mikesul Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Phoenix, AZ Posts: 7,594	I returned my A7RIII before I had a chance to test the pixel shift so I have no direct experience but reading the forums it seemed that the flexible spacing between shots may have been to allow the use of flash.

01-19-2018, 06:11 AM	#20
Kerebron Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2016 Photos: Gallery Posts: 322	Now we need a comparison of K-1 with new Hasselblad H6D-400c MS 400Mpix pixel-shift images (almost 2.5 GB each!). Who's gonna win, I wonder? :P On more serious note, SONY version of pixel-shift looks to me like an unfinished product. Beta or pre-production status. It's good that you don't have to use four cameras to make one photograph. :/

01-19-2018, 01:23 PM	#22
ffking Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2015 Location: Old South Wales Posts: 6,038	Originally posted by Rondec Personally, I'm not a big fan of video presentations -- even if done well. I could have read the information in this video in a couple of minutes whereas it took 7 minutes to watch it. At the same time, I don't think that pixel shift really moves the needle a whole lot for either Sony or Pentax. It's a nice add on, but it isn't as though, even here on the Forum, many folks are shooting and posting a lot of pixel shift images. I started a pixel shift thread and I think Pinhole Camera, Normhead, myself, and a few others post images there periodically, but that's about it. That's all true, but there's loads of stuff on the K-3 I never use - video, jpeg effects etc - pixel shift I use sometimes and has definite value when I do.

01-19-2018, 01:50 PM	#23
normhead Pentaxian Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Near Algonquin Park Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 40,451	Originally posted by surfar Yes, i did the same...hes a pain(of a presenter).....BUT his content is excellent.Its worth watching him if you can tolerate his antics! I hate that. people who are so good you have to force yourself to listen to their obnoxious selves.

01-19-2018, 03:35 PM	#24
amoringello Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Virginia, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,562	Does anyone use Pentax's pixel-shift with in-camera processing? With its rendering being limited to 8-bit output, I would think; why bother with the effort? I've only done a few, but always post-processed out of the camera. I don't see why this guy things processing in-camera is such a benefit. The other comments seem to have some merit, but is in-camera processing really worthy of so much attention? Seems he's grasping at straws to make a point. :-(

01-19-2018, 03:50 PM	#25
surfar Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2015 Location: mid nth coast,nsw Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,141	Probably? His point is with Pentax you get a look at the image after its shot.With the A7r3 you have to identify(once the files are in puta) which 4 images they are, then PP.

01-19-2018, 04:29 PM	#26
amoringello Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Virginia, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,562	Originally posted by surfar Probably? His point is with Pentax you get a look at the image after its shot.With the A7r3 you have to identify(once the files are in puta) which 4 images they are, then PP. Yeah, that is a bonus. Heck, I have trouble working with HDR and panos -- and it's a lot more obvious which are part of the set.. :-) But the in-camera processing to only 8-bit seems more of a short-sighted gimmick on Ricoh's part, especially when TIF is an output option.

01-20-2018, 01:25 PM	#27
ffking Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2015 Location: Old South Wales Posts: 6,038	Originally posted by amoringello But the in-camera processing to only 8-bit seems more of a short-sighted gimmick on Ricoh's part, especially when TIF is an output option. So how is outputting TIFFs better than outputting DNGs?

01-20-2018, 02:39 PM	#28
Rondec Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Gladys, Virginia Photos: Gallery Posts: 27,653	Originally posted by ffking So how is outputting TIFFs better than outputting DNGs? If you could use the camera to generate a 14 bit TIFF file, then you would hopefully have a file that had all of the info stored in it, including the motion correction information that could be opened directly by any image processor, including Lightroom. As it is, your options with Pentax are to save a RAW image, which is openable in Lightroom, but which has lots of artifacts if there is any movement, save a jpeg which of course has limited post processing ability, or save an 8 bit TIFF which is better, but still more limited in your ability to process it. As it is, when I shoot a pixel shift image, I open it with Raw Therapee, process it there and then import the save 16 bit TIFF file to lightroom for final tweaks. This is the only process that consistently allows for better results than just shooting a single image out of camera without pixel shift.

01-20-2018, 04:01 PM	#29
amoringello Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Virginia, USA Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,562	Originally posted by ffking So how is outputting TIFFs better than outputting DNGs? As an 8-bit TIF, there is no advantage. If it were a 16-bit TIF, there would be no need to find an application to process it properly. It would also be much smaller, as it would exist as a single image rather than a DNG package of four images. Of course, I think finding an application to process them now is not so difficult. So not really a big issue, other than the fact that Ricoh/Pentax pushed the feature into something close to useless at the time of release.

01-21-2018, 01:48 AM	#30
zapp Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 2,385	Originally posted by LensBeginner IMHO he has no clue what he's talking about. A youtube channel needs new material all the time. Blaming Sony for bad pixel shift implemenation is quite desperate. He discussed sensor noise of K1 vs D850 which was OK, he compared the DFA 70-200 to the new Tamron(?). All reviews are worthwile watching, but remember this is only one source of information.