[Cerebum]

One of the other forums is getting heated over the merits of an accelerator chip but, despite reading the replies and arguments, I don't know what it does. Anyone care to enlighten me? I have a KP which has one and a k3 which doesn't(?)

[aslyfox]

zero to 60 in X seconds



I would like to know as well

[kypfer]

Some insights here Acceleration Chip (K1mkII, KP and K70) - What's the Difference - PentaxForums.com

[derekkite]

It is a processor. In the KP and K1-II it does image processing. Noise correction and a bunch of other things to the image. It is early in the pipeline, does low level adjustments. It outputs the raw image.

The advantage is noise reductions. The M1 to II difference in workable iso for me was two stops.

[FozzFoster]

I only have a K-S2 and a K-5, I can't wait to have a K-mount with the accelerator chip.
Way better low light performance!
And the K-New is supposedly to have an entirely new reworked chip..

[Cerebum]

OK, now I understand. I totally get the purist view that raw is raw but for those of us who just want a good image I don't really see a down side. I was doing butterfly photography with my K3 today, previously my KP has been my weapon of choice. The images just didn't seem to be as sharp. I knew the K3 didn't have quite the IQ of the KP but I took it anyway. I guess I am going to have to see what styles of photography draw benefit from the accelerator and bear that in mind

[FozzFoster]

sorta think of it as the camera equivilent of the Limited lenses.
Technical optical imperfections are known and accepted in order to produce an image with more character which is more pleasing to the eye than a picture taken with a lens that simply tops metric tests.
The accelerator chip allows cameras to makes more pleasing images, even if under the microscope, in technical situations, you can point to examples of 'imperfection'.

[stevebrot]

Anyone care to enlighten me? I have a KP which has one and a k3 which doesn't(?)

There are a ton of people here that will likely weigh in, the same as they did with the K-1ii. In short, the accelerator does noise reduction on the sensor output as part of low level processing. It accelerates nothing, but since its work is low level, the subtraction/replacement of "noise" data (not pixels) will be present in the RAW (DNG/PEF) files as well as in-camera JPEG/TIFF images. A similar approach by Sony resulted in "star eating" by the camera, not a good thing.

This is where things get sticky. Examples have been shared showing here and other places that claim to show compromised detail with the K-1ii. I have not kept up with it, but do remember that those examples involved significant low-value "pull" from underexposed images. The question remains open in my mind whether the detail was lost in the accelerator or in PP.

If those that have skin in the game check in, I would expect this thread to be quite active with lots of examples. As for the K-new, I would like the feature to be switchable.


Steve

[gatorguy]

There are a ton of people here that will likely weigh in, the same as they did with the K-1ii. In short, the accelerator does noise reduction on the sensor output as part of low level processing. It accelerates nothing, but since its work is low level, the subtraction/replacement of "noise" data (not pixels) will be present in the RAW (DNG/PEF) files as well as in-camera JPEG/TIFF images. A similar approach by Sony resulted in "star eating" by the camera, not a good thing.

This is where things get sticky. Examples have been shared showing here and other places that claim to show compromised detail with the K-1ii. I have not kept up with it, but do remember that those examples involved significant low-value "pull" from underexposed images. The question remains open in my mind whether the detail was lost in the accelerator or in PP.

If those that have skin in the game check in, I would expect this thread to be quite active with lots of examples. As for the K-new, I would like the feature to be switchable.


Steve

Switchable would go a long ways towards answering the question about whether it ever harms an images quality. IMO I don't believe it would but then it becomes a he said she said. Personally I appreciate the processing my K70 does. Images are obviously improved from the Ks2's I previously owned.

[mkgd1]

And I thought it was when a French fry got stuck under the gas pedal

[monochrome]

As for the K-new, I would like the feature to be switchable.


Steve

My simple mind assumes more than noise reduction is offloaded to the Accelerator Unit. I have assumed significant to all image processing occurs there, so switchable is (was) a no go without a new image processing engine.

Oh. Look. They say K-new has a completely new Image Processing engine. I wonder if that means Socionext has been dumped and Prime x is no more. Certainly there have been changes since noise management now starts at 100ISO.



* Knows nothing, just inferrring from statements in the videos.

[stevebrot]

* Knows nothing, just inferrring from statements in the videos.

Welcome to the Society of Good Guessers!

Motto:

What we don't know for sure may certainly be imagined.

Steve

[Kevin B123]

IMO you lose nothing in reasonable light. Here is a first test of mine at ISO 12800. I gave up any concern about ISO when I saw this. I have just exported this to JPEG with no adjustments.

[aslyfox]

I wonder

is it physically located to the right of the brake chip

[luftfluss]

I've had several shots with my K-70 where there was oddness in the rendering of fine detail. They were shot late in the evening at ISO 6400 (RAW), where bits of fox fur and grass were rendered as small smudgy blocks. None of the shots were keepers, anyway, so no harm no foul.