Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-07-2014, 03:10 AM   #16
Banned




Join Date: May 2010
Location: Back to my Walkabout Creek
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,541
I guess if they made it a 12 pixel sensor, they could get 4 million ASA.
But decided to pump up megapixels for no reason whatsoever.
Strange ...

---------- Post added 04-07-2014 at 08:16 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by richandfleur Quote
...
I'd love to see Pentax enter this if they have a good partnership with Sony for sensors etc. I would be nice to see Pentax feature for video also, more than just people using legacy Pentax glass on someone elses bodies.
Ricoh Imaging will always play a third fiddle. Unique sensors are reserved for Sony. Canon also makes stuff for themselves only. Samsung too. Others get what they can get; take a number, stay in the queue. Or pay extra to jump ahead in the queue.


Last edited by Uluru; 04-07-2014 at 03:17 AM.
04-07-2014, 03:37 AM   #17
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 18,116
The 400,000 iso is a gimmick. Won't be usable. I imagine that most folks who get this camera will do so for video, as a D4s is probably a better option if you need brilliant auto focus in low light settings.
04-08-2014, 02:57 PM   #18
Marketplace Reseller
vjacesslav's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Košice, Czechoslovakia, Europe Union
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 366
The most important thing about this camera is DR - Dynamic range...
That Could be real goal for next level of photography
04-09-2014, 03:12 PM   #19
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,691
Full Sensor Read-Out is the Real Reason for 12MP

QuoteOriginally posted by Apapukas Quote
More cropping vs. better low light
No.

Reducing the number of pixels does not increase low-light performance. The individual pixel quality becomes better with larger pixels, but the overall image quality stays the same.

They made it 12MP because they are reading out the whole sensor for video. No more line skipping. The larger the amount of MP, the more difficult it is to read out each and every single pixel. However, it so worth it do so in order to avoid the problems of line skipping (in particular moiré).

In APS-C crop mode, this sensor even supports 120fps!

Here's a video sample:


The "Arbroath Smokies" sample is more impressive.

There is a respective behind the scenes video as well.



Last edited by Class A; 04-09-2014 at 03:48 PM.
04-09-2014, 04:05 PM   #20
osv
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: So Cal
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,080
QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
No.

Reducing the number of pixels does not increase low-light performance. The individual pixel quality becomes better with larger pixels, but the overall image quality stays the same.
posting a five year old technology article to support a claim about the latest technology could be sketchy.
04-09-2014, 04:07 PM   #21
Veteran Member
Smeggypants's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 1,536
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
The 400,000 iso is a gimmick. Won't be usable. I imagine that most folks who get this camera will do so for video, as a D4s is probably a better option if you need brilliant auto focus in low light settings.
how do you know waht someone else determines "useable"

And yes in practical terms 400,000 will be noisy but it raises the nar and lower ISOs will be better than cameras with a lower high ISO limit.

You could say the ISO51200 of the K-5 isn't usable by the same logic, but i the Sony si 2 stops better DR than the K-5 then I think it's a great .

---------- Post added 10-04-14 at 00:08 ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Class A Quote
The individual pixel quality becomes better with larger pixels, but the overall image quality stays the same.

Oh dear.

---------- Post added 10-04-14 at 00:13 ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by carrrlangas Quote
I don´t understand why would an enthusiast or Professional use ISO values that are not achieved by hardware. Most Sensors native range goes from ISO100 to ISO1600 (through hardware amplification), after that it´s all software amplified. If shooting RAW, as most enthusiast and professionals, why would I let the camera do the post processing for higher than native ISO values rather than do it in my workflow as the rest of adjustments?
What I get out of the big numbers is that the Dynamic range will be better at high (native) ISO (as in ISO 400 - 800 - 1600)

Why don't you ask them?

Besides hardware amplification OR software amplification it's STILL amplification. It's likely that hardware amplification above a certain gain value is better quality than the equivalent hardware ( analogue ) amplifiviation.

.... as an enthusiast I can answer you question, and the answer is I don't want to have to mess around exposure compensating to do the ISO gain in post processing when doing it in camera is just as good. Why complicate photography when there is no need?

---------- Post added 10-04-14 at 00:14 ----------

What happened there? All my posts merged into one. how strange. I didn't use any multiple quote feature
04-09-2014, 04:17 PM   #22
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 18,116
QuoteOriginally posted by Smeggypants Quote
how do you know waht someone else determines "useable"

And yes in practical terms 400,000 will be noisy but it raises the nar and lower ISOs will be better than cameras with a lower high ISO limit.

You could say the ISO51200 of the K-5 isn't usable by the same logic, but i the Sony si 2 stops better DR than the K-5 then I think it's a great .

---------- Post added 10-04-14 at 00:08 ----------




Oh dear.

---------- Post added 10-04-14 at 00:13 ----------






Why don't you ask them?

Besides hardware amplification OR software amplification it's STILL amplification. It's likely that hardware amplification above a certain gain value is better quality than the equivalent hardware ( analogue ) amplifiviation.

.... as an enthusiast I can answer you question, and the answer is I don't want to have to mess around exposure compensating to do the ISO gain in post processing when doing it in camera is just as good. Why complicate photography when there is no need?
If the Sony is 2 stops better DR than the K5, than that would still make 200,000 iso really crappy and unusable. I don't use over iso 6400 on K5 and I would expect it to be a stop to stop and a half better. Obviously if you aren't printing/viewing very large, you can shoot whatever you want.

FYI -- if you post multiple posts without someone else posting in reply in (I think) a 15 minute window, the forum auto-merges them all together.
04-09-2014, 06:31 PM   #23
Pentaxian
Class A's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 9,691
QuoteOriginally posted by osv Quote
posting a five year old technology article to support a claim about the latest technology could be sketchy.
Physics/Logic does not change.

Not even after five years.

04-09-2014, 09:51 PM   #24
Pentaxian
carrrlangas's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Joensuu (Finland)
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,761
QuoteOriginally posted by Smeggypants Quote
Why don't you ask them?

Besides hardware amplification OR software amplification it's STILL amplification. It's likely that hardware amplification above a certain gain value is better quality than the equivalent hardware ( analogue ) amplifiviation.

.... as an enthusiast I can answer you question, and the answer is I don't want to have to mess around exposure compensating to do the ISO gain in post processing when doing it in camera is just as good. Why complicate photography when there is no need?
Your phrase is confusing. Software amplification won´t be as good as what you can do in your PC/Mac PP. And why would you need to use exposure compensation? Just limit the ISO range.
04-09-2014, 11:54 PM   #25
Veteran Member
JimmyDranox's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Ploiesti, Romania
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,627
Five years ago, a sensor Quantum Efficiency was around or under 50%. Now, sensors with 77% QE are on the market. And progresses are also in signal to noise ratio. And to say that a better pixel performance doesn't mean better picture is something that defies logic IMHO.
04-10-2014, 03:12 AM   #26
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 18,116
QuoteOriginally posted by JimmyDranox Quote
Five years ago, a sensor Quantum Efficiency was around or under 50%. Now, sensors with 77% QE are on the market. And progresses are also in signal to noise ratio. And to say that a better pixel performance doesn't mean better picture is something that defies logic IMHO.
Pixel performance isn't very important -- you have to normalize the results. Obviously if you compare a 12 megapixel full frame to a 36 megapixel full frame sensor, per pixel noise will be higher on the 36 megapixel sensor. But the question is if you print the same size -- 8 by 10 or whatever, do you see a difference. The reality is that you probably won't, although your 12 megapixel sensor will max out relatively quickly on detail.

The one are where having larger pixels should help is in giving larger dynamic range at low iso, as the photon wells should be bigger. But the D600 and D800 are pretty equivalent in dynamic range, even at low iso.
04-10-2014, 04:24 AM   #27
Veteran Member
JimmyDranox's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Ploiesti, Romania
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,627
A little smile, to clear the sky

New Outbreak of Full Frame Fever Spotted | New Camera News
04-10-2014, 04:52 AM   #28
Banned




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Millstone,NJ
Posts: 6,491
Amazing Sony A7s Low Light test videos !

QuoteQuote:
Den Lennie just updated his A7s post by including an amaizng A7s High ISO test (Click here and scroll down to see the video). The screenshot on top shows you the noise at crazy 409,600 ISO. This is really a complete DARK(!) room with no light. And the video you will see that actually up to 102,400 ISO noise is acceptable!
Amazing Sony A7s Low Light test video! | sonyalpharumors
Sony Alpha 7s - Hands on Review by Den Lennie - F-Stop Academy







04-10-2014, 06:00 PM   #29
Pentaxian
richandfleur's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Palmerston North, New Zealand
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,432
wow.

Honestly Sony are making tremendous progress at the moment.
I can only hope that Pentax will get their hands on these sensors for their own use soon.

I want my Pentax DSLR body, to have the smarts of these Sony's!
04-11-2014, 07:24 AM   #30
Banned




Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Millstone,NJ
Posts: 6,491
Sony A7s video at up to 409,600 iso !


The Nikon D4s does not come close to this.
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!
answer, camera, enthusiast, frame a7s, gain, hardware, iso, k-5, pentax, photo industry, photography, post, quality, queue, sensors, software, sony, sony full frame, video
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
From Full-Frame Sony... to Pentax... to Full-Frame Canon Mr_Canuck Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 42 01-21-2014 12:50 AM
FULL FRAME PENTAX....by Sony? Sperdynamite Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 127 11-02-2013 12:08 PM
Sony Mirrorless Full Frame coming Winder Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 9 12-21-2012 11:05 PM
Sony full frame VG900 camcorder hands-on ! jogiba Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 22 09-23-2012 09:42 AM
Full Frame Sony NEX imminent? falconeye Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 46 08-22-2012 01:38 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:05 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.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