[Kevin B123]

As the title.
Of course they are not calling it that exactly, the video description below points to just that process.

Youtu.be

Youtu.be

Good for R5 owners, lets hope that Ricoh are getting some royalties form this .

[ramseybuckeye]

What took them so long?

[gatorguy]

As the title.
Of course they are not calling it that exactly, the video description below points to just that process.

https://youtu.be/1BnL9zHB2Lw


Good for R5 owners, lets hope that Ricoh are getting some royalties form this .

Unlike Pentax it's a JPEG only. Canon R5 owners seem to be underwhelmed, not what they were led to expect.

[luftfluss]

Good for R5 owners, lets hope that Ricoh are getting some royalties form this .

It's actually more like the implementation found on cameras by Olympus, who was first to market with the technology

[luftfluss]

Unlike Pentax it's a JPEG only. Canon R5 owners seem to be underwhelmed, not what they were led to expect.

Sounds pretty lame.

[The Squirrel Mafia]

I'd probably be like whatever if I had a R5. I have yet to use the Pixel Shift feature in my K-3II. I've had it for almost 2 years now. Laziness. Hahaha!

[Fogel70]

It's actually more like the implementation found on cameras by Olympus, who was first to market with the technology

Actually Hasselblad had it much earlier than Olympus. At least since 2009 with the H4D model.

[biz-engineer]

After using pixels shift on and off for 7 years, I think of pixel shift as being mostly a marketing gadget, regardless the camera brand.
It's rather funny how people (customers) react. When Pentax implemented pixel shift, reviewers and fan of other brands pointed negatively to it.
When Sony and Fuji added it to their cameras, reviewers presented pixel as the best thing invented since sliced bread, although Sony/Fuji cameras can't show you on the rear display if the capture was messed up or not, and the way Fuji/Sony deal with motion is pretty bad.
Sample pixel shift 400Mp images from R5 show that 300 out of the 400Mpixel are just a waste of memory/storage space, and motion correction is very bad.
Finally, Pentax pixel shift isn't too bad compared to others, because 1) you can see in camera if the capture was screwed by moving subject and 2) the files aren't too big.
The only brand that made it work is Panasonic, motion correction is very good, the camera delivers a flat DNG file that can be loaded in any PP software supporting Panasonic cameras.
But Panasonic disable pixel shift for exposures longer than 1s. (e.g. at dawn or dusk landscapes or cityscapes), which is exactly the situation you may want to use pixel shift if you are shooting landscape.
Sometimes I use pixel shift when the situation is suitable, I appreciate to have it, but situations that benefit from pixel shift don't present themselves very often.

[jcdoss]

Does anyone know whether Lightroom is able to correctly process pixel shift DNG files from Pentax cameras?

[Kevin B123]

Unlike Pentax it's a JPEG only. Canon R5 owners seem to be underwhelmed, not what they were led to expect.

Well that saves on the external software development for the Canon equivalent of DCU5 I suppose. Or could there be some file jiggery-pokery going on?
Who knows, it's editing a lossy JPEG for shadows etc that will be the undoing, saving it again as a new lossy file.
I guess it would work for say birds in flight where you are like making a massive crop anyway and the light is probably good so little editing is needed.

It's actually more like the implementation found on cameras by Olympus, who was first to market with the technology

I didn't know that, it's hard to keep track of all these developments in other marques that I don't follow.

I have yet to use the Pixel Shift feature in my K-3II. I've had it for almost 2 years now. Laziness. Hahaha!

I used it a few times on the K-3ii and the K-1ii, For my uses, both delivered the goods without PS and the files were huge.

Actually Hasselblad had it much earlier than Olympus. At least since 2009 with the H4D model.

Huh, is it the same?, I guess everyone hit the idea around the same time if there are no patents stopping other implementations.

I appreciate to have it, but situations that benefit from pixel shift don't present themselves very often.

I think that's true up to a point. Pentax has motion correction for hand held PS and it's best if there is little movement in the scene, i.e. tree leaves.

Does anyone know whether Lightroom is able to correctly process pixel shift DNG files from Pentax cameras?

I stopped at 6.14 which won't do PS, so I import to DCU5 (came with the camera) that will combine the files into one and export a .TIFF file to LR, job done.

[Fogel70]

Huh, is it the same?, I guess everyone hit the idea around the same time if there are no patents stopping other implementations.

The function is the same bu shifting the sensor on at pixel or sub pixel level.

But the first implementation seems to be from 2003 (the same year Pentax released it's first DSLR) on a digital back from Imacon, (that Hasselblad merged with 2004). So I guess Hasselblad may own the rights and may get licence fees from other companies.

The Ixpress 384C had two shift mode,4 or 16 images, Where the 4 shot mode would be the same as Pentax pixel shift. Where the 16 shot mode may be 4 pixel shift shots that are shifted half a pixel to also increase resolution.
https://www.ephotozine.com/article/imacon-announce-ixpress--c--digital-camera-back-1495

[house]

Pixelshift makes a difference in the Pentax implementation. I use if for suitable situations and the files are great, motion is a non issue as long as the main subject isn't moving.

I would never use pixelshift i a jpeg only implementation and many other brands seem to have messed up the way it's done.

[Rondec]

After using pixels shift on and off for 7 years, I think of pixel shift as being mostly a marketing gadget, regardless the camera brand.
It's rather funny how people (customers) react. When Pentax implemented pixel shift, reviewers and fan of other brands pointed negatively to it.
When Sony and Fuji added it to their cameras, reviewers presented pixel as the best thing invented since sliced bread, although Sony/Fuji cameras can't show you on the rear display if the capture was messed up or not, and the way Fuji/Sony deal with motion is pretty bad.
Sample pixel shift 400Mp images from R5 show that 300 out of the 400Mpixel are just a waste of memory/storage space, and motion correction is very bad.
Finally, Pentax pixel shift isn't too bad compared to others, because 1) you can see in camera if the capture was screwed by moving subject and 2) the files aren't too big.
The only brand that made it work is Panasonic, motion correction is very good, the camera delivers a flat DNG file that can be loaded in any PP software supporting Panasonic cameras.
But Panasonic disable pixel shift for exposures longer than 1s. (e.g. at dawn or dusk landscapes or cityscapes), which is exactly the situation you may want to use pixel shift if you are shooting landscape.
Sometimes I use pixel shift when the situation is suitable, I appreciate to have it, but situations that benefit from pixel shift don't present themselves very often.

The more images that need to be combined in pixel shift, the more likely it is that you are going to have movement that will spoil the capture. I will say that I can usually tell if something is worth using PS for before I even shoot it. A macro shot on a breezy day is worthless. Don't even bother. The same for landscape shots that include much foliage with a breeze.

On the other hand, if you are shooting on a relatively still day, Raw Therapee's motion correction is excellent and makes the benefit real and easy to realize.

Reading about the R5's implementation, it does feel a little rough -- very prone to subject movement and jpeg only (read, no post processing or motion correction). The Usability of the Canon EOS R5?s IBIS High Resolution Option | Fstoppers

(Obligatory Pentax pixel shift image, developed in Raw Therapee using the median setting for water smoothing)

[ramseybuckeye]

Does anyone know whether Lightroom is able to correctly process pixel shift DNG files from Pentax cameras?

Yes it can, I don't know about motion though. I've only played with it once or twice, because there is usually wind moving things or water in my images.

[Wheatfield]

The more images that need to be combined in pixel shift, the more likely it is that you are going to have movement that will spoil the capture.

This is very true. Adding more megapixels to the sensor also increases the likelihood of failure.
Fuji's implementation with the X-T5 allows for either improved colour or increased resolution and uses 20 exposures.
The image is combined as the first stage of post processing using Fuji supplied software.

In practice, I find it almost impossible to achieve sufficient technical perfection for the software to validate the combined image.