Liked Posts - Search Results - PentaxForums.com

The Latest

Forum

Cameras

Showing results 1 to 21 of 21 Search: Liked Posts

Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 12-21-2021, 03:41 AM

PDCU 5.9.3 available
Posted By jersey

Replies: 42
Views: 5,868

Pentax made new version of PDCU available. 5.9.3 adds new Satobi color profile, support for new astrotracer and allows for better WB adjustements. Plus fixes lots of issues :D

Digital Camera Utility 5 Update for Windows : Software Downloads | RICOH IMAGING

Forum: Photography Articles 06-23-2015, 03:35 PM

The Role of ISO Sensitivity
Posted By dosdan

Replies: 10
Views: 4,229

I believe that the 2 roles of ISO Sensitivity in a digital camera need to be understood. Maximising the Photometric Exposure (the number of photons per unit sensor area captured during the duration of the exposure) leads to the best ratio of wanted Image to unwanted Shot Noise. Changing the ISO does not directly affect the exposure. Instead, it alters the metering point offset in the camera, and the gain applied. However, it is routinely claimed on many web pages and even in some "authoritative" books that ISO directly affects exposure. Indeed, it is often stated that it is part of "The Exposure Triangle". This misconception causes confusion, particularly when you start shooting in raw (PEF/DNG). So, rather than having to later unlearn what we thought ISO Sensitivity does, and then relearn it, as many of us have had to do, I think it's better to understand the role of ISO correctly from the start. The aim of this article is to help the reader develop a "Photonic" or "Exposure-centric" mindset, rather than a "ISO-centric" one.

The variation of gain in the digital imagining chain serves two purposes:

To increase the brightness values when recording the data.

To reduce late-stage noise contributions, usually from the ADC.

The Photometric Exposure is determined solely by the Scene Luminance, f-number (more properly, the T-number which accounts for the light loss in the lens) and the Shutter Speed. These 3 parameters alone determine how many photons are captured per unit area during the exposure period.

The size of the sensor comes into play when considering the Total Light i.e. the total number of photons captured during the exposure period. Since Exposure is a density metric (photons per unit area), multiplying it by the number of "unit areas" in a particular sensor format gives the Total Light value. This also means that, for the same Scene Luminance, using the same camera settings (e.g. 1/100s & f/5.6) results in the sensors in P&S, Micro-4/3, APS-C, FF & MF cameras all receiving the same exposure (the same photonic density), assuming that the lenses have the same light transmission losses, but the bigger sensors will receive greater Total Light (more photons in total), and thus will achieve better Image-to-Shot Noise ratios.

The number of photons captured determines:

The Shot Noise SNR. Light itself is noisy, but the Signal-to-Shot Noise Ratio improves with the sq-root of number of photons, (or from the sensor, photo-electons ("e-")), captured e.g. 10,000e- captured = SNR of 100:1, while 40,000e- = SNR of 200:1. So the larger the exposure, the better the Shot Noise SNR.

More photons captured produces a larger signal from the sensor. For the same mapping of the sensor output signal to the image brightness, more signal means a brighter rendered image.

In LL or action situations, you reach a stage where you no longer want to lower the SS further, or can open the lens aperture (actually the iris) up further to get a "decently" exposed image i.e. one which will produce a bright enough review image in the camera's LCD and from its JPEG engine. So to make the rendered image brighter, you have 2 options:

Shoot in raw, and during PP use the raw developer's "Exposure" control (a misnomer since it doesn't increase the number of photons captured, only the mapping of the brightness values in the captured image data to the rendered output brightness).

Use the camera's ISO control to do the same thing in the camera. This can be done in the analogue domain (applied in discrete ISO steps), amplifying the signal between the sensor and the ADC by the use of an intermediate PGA (Programmable Gain Amplifier) stage. Or it can be done in the digital domain by just multiplying the brightness values stored in the image file.

Regardless of which method is used, for the same exposure level, the rendered image values in an ISO1600 image have 16x times the brightness value compared to the ISO100 version of the same scene. The same applies to the output image produced from the development of an ISO100 raw image, after being digitally boosted 4 stops (16x).

So increasing the ISO compensates for weaker & weaker exposures, which would otherwise be rendered as dimmer & dimmer images. But since the Shot Noise SNR is already "set like a fly in amber" during the exposure capture process, the increasing gain also brings up the shot noise in the image data. It doesn't change the Shot Noise SNR, because you're increasing both the wanted image and the unwanted shot noise by the same amount, but the relatively high amount of shot noise in the weak-exposure image is now brighter, so it is more obvious. This is why weak exposure/high ISO shots look noisier than strong exposure/low ISO shots. As discussed next, increasing the ISO also amplifies the Sensor Read Noise, along with the signal. Normally, the sensor RN is not significant, but with a weak exposure comes a weak image output from the sensor, so the unwanted fixed-level sensor output (sensor RN) is now more obvious too.

The other use of analogue (but not digital) gain is to reduce the contribution of ADC noise to the total read noise (Total RN). The 3 stages in a simplified digital imaging system are:

Sensor -> PGA -> ADC

Each stage contributes noise. Noise components from these 3 stages, if uncorrelated (i.e. random and not harmonically related to each other), are combined in quadrature using RMS (root-mean-square).

The noise contribution from the PGA can be split up into input-stage noise & output-stage noise, with only the input-stage noise being amplified by the PGA. To simplify things further, the PGA input-stage noise can be lumped in with sensor read noise, and the PGA output-stage noise can be included with the ADC noise.

The combined noise from these 3 stages is known as Total RN, which is (simplified):

Total RN = sq-root(Sensor RN^2 + ADC Noise^2).

If the noise is measured using "input-referencing" (as if it was another signal originating from inside the sensor), it can be quoted in units of photoelectrons (e-).
An example: if Sensor RN = 3e- and ADC Noise = 4e-, Total RN = sq-root(9 +16) = 5e-.

It is convenient to reference the various sources of noise in the imaging system back to the input side, as this is the location of the wanted (image photoelectrons) signal, and the SNR can easily be determined.

The fact that some of the noise is amplified by the PGA, and some isn't, complicates matters and means that the Total RN changes with the amount of analogue gain applied. (Analogue gain is typically used for low & mid ISO changes.)

So for example, at ISO200, with 2x relative gain compared to ISO100 applied to the sensor signal, the Total RN, if input-referenced, is:

sq-root(3^2 + (4/2)^2) = 3.32e-

Now both Sensor RN and ADC noise themselves are fixed, but since we're referencing from the input side, the fixed ADC noise appears to drop with increasing ISO. This is the reason the [Total] RN figures shown at www.sensorgen.info, which are input-referenced, drop with increasing ISO. The ADC noise doesn't really change, but you can see that the relative contribution of the ADC Noise to the Total RN decreases with ISO.

If instead we were to look at the noise after the analogue amplification stage, the Sensor RN would appear to rise with ISO e.g. at ISO200:

sq-root((3*2)^2 + 4^2) = 7.2e-

Again, the Sensor RN itself doesn't really change, but you can see that its relative contribution, after amplification, to the Total RN increases with ISO.

The Dynamic Range curve in DxOMark data gives an idea of the contributions from these 2 noise sources when compared against the maximum signal level i.e. the distance between the noise floor compared against the highest possible brightness before either the pixel fills up, or the ADC clips (exceeds a 12-bit or 14-bit number).

Inspect the DR curve below. The FWC (Full-Well Capacity) of the pixel here is 48,000e-.

Look at the Sensor 3e-, ADC 0e- (yellow) curve. While no digital image system can have only Sensor RN and zero ADC noise, if it were to have just 3e- RN from the sensor the max. possible DR ratio, using a max. FWC value of 48,000e-, and the min. value where the noise floor was 3e-, would be 48,000:3 = 16,000:1. Expressing in photographic stops (powers of 2) that's log2(16000) = 14 stops. Notice that the line is straight and falls exactly 1 stop for each doubling of ISO. The reason for this fall is that at the lowest ISO, the system is set up so the max. ADC value is reached close to when the pixel reaches FWC. So, the FWC approx. matches FS DN (the full-scale digital number). Now, neither the FWC nor FS change with the increase in ISO. But when we double the relative gain, i.e. change from ISO100->ISO200, it will no longer be possible for FWC to be reached at FS. Instead, the ADC will clip when the pixel contains only 24,000e-. (Remember that the reason we've upping the ISO is because we're dealing with a weaker exposure, with less photons being captured, and so have "less-well-filled" pixels.) So increasing the ISO means that the digital imaging system's FS is reached with smaller and smaller amounts in the pixel, hence the continual reduction of the max. signal from the sensor, and its ratio compared to the noise floor.

Now look at Sensor 3e-, ADC 10e- (blue curve). Historically ADC noise has been relatively high compared to the sensor RN. This leads to a flattening of the DR curve at low ISO where the ADC noise (not being amplified by the PGA) dominates the Total RN. Most Canon DSLRs still have flattened DR curves, indicating that the noise contribution from the ADC is relatively high.

The Sensor 3e-, ADC 2e- (orange) curve shows a lack of flattening (divergence from flat-line). Most modern DSLRs are tending towards this as ADC noise performance improves.

The red & green curves show the effect of decreasing the Sensor RN with both high & low ADC noise. This increases DR. For example, if it was Sensor 2.5e-, ADC 0e- (not shown on the graph), the DR here would be 48,000:2.5 = 19,200:1 = 14.23 stops. Canon DSLR sensors tend to have better Sensor RN than other brands, so you'll often hear the term "High ISO DR" used with Canons, because at high ISOs the amplified sensor RN is the dominant component in the Total RN.

These figures are for illustration purposes only. Here are some ballpark figures from actual cameras. These were determined by solving the curve-fits of data from Sensorgen - digital camera sensor data, which in turn analyses DxO data. These are older APS-C models, but the situation hasn't changed greatly:

K-5
FWC: 47159e-
Sensor RN: 2.4e-
ADC Noise: 2.7e-

60D
FWC: 24322e-
Sensor RN: 2.4e-
ADC Noise: 13e-

The way analogue gain improves the Total RN is by raising the sensor output above the ADC noise floor. Think of the ADC operational input range as a window, with a relatively noisy ADC having a higher window-sill height. The more ADC noise there is, the more pressing the need to boost the weak-exposure sensor signal first before passing it on to the ADC. However, once the amplified Sensor RN dominates the Total RN, any further gain, either analogue or digital, just increases the Total RN at the same rate as the signal. So there is no further improvement in SNR.

You can see this in the DR curve, when the curve becomes straight-line. This is what DPReview is examining in their ISO Invariance tests. As the ISO is increased, once the DR curve gets close to straight-line, there is no further need to apply analogue gain to improve the Total RN - just using digital gain will suffice to increase the rendered brightness.

The reason for the desirability of knowing from which ISO analogue gain is no longer beneficial, is that DR drops off with increasing ISO, as already explained. By shooting raw at base ISO or close to it, you have more headroom during the capture phase. You can then apply digital gain in PP to bring up the rendered brightness. Now, if there's a prominent highlight, you run the same risk of blowing it when you apply the same amount of boost in PP to get the overall image to the same rendered brightness as if you had shot at high ISO in the first place. But since the highlight is less likely to have been clipped already in the low-ISO capture, you stand a better chance of preserving it, when brightening in PP, by fiddling with the Tone Response Curve (TRC) being applied. So shooting this way gives you more flexibility afterwards in PP and can act as a form of highlight preservation.

Finally, the DxOMark DR measurements shown under the "Screen" tab, not the default "Print" tab, give you the pixel-level DR (i.e. they have not be normalised to account for different sensor sizes and MPixels). This value is a reasonable proxy for the ENOB (Effective Number Of Bits) performance of the digital imaging system.

Examples:

K-5: 13.61 stops
60D: 10.91 stops

Both cameras have 14-bit raw formats which, if the ADCs & sensors were completely noiseless, would result in 14-bit ENOBs. The closeness of the K5's ENOB to the raw format bit-depth means that this is a good candidate for "ISOless" or "ISO-invariant" shooting, and that it reaches straight-line DR performance relatively quickly above base ISO.

Some further reading:

An example of a K-5 ISO100 + 4-stops boost vs the same exposure at ISO1600: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/61-post-processing-articles/234154-invest...-boosting.html

Example of the "soft limit" to Ssat (Sensitivity based on system saturation) caused by the increasing non-linearity as the sensor's FWC is approached and an example of the "hard limit" to Ssat caused by running out of bits:

How to Measure Full Well Capacity (1)
How to Measure Full Well Capacity (2)

Compare the 1st & 2nd graphs in these 2 blogs. The difference is caused by the application of 2x analogue gain. Quoting:
Note: the data shown in Figures 1 and 2 are obtained from the same sensor, with the same light input. The difference between the two measurements is a difference in camera setting, such that the analog gain of the sensor and the reference voltage of the ADC result in an overall camera gain difference of a factor of 2.

ISO Sensitivity and Exposure Index | imatest

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I'll now provide 2 examples of the confusion caused by including ISO Sensitivity in "The Exposure Triangle".

Example 1 - Equivalent Exposures

Shoot the same scene with two different camera settings:

(1) 1/100s, f/4, ISO100

(2) 1/400s, f/4, ISO400

If ISO affected the exposure, then these two settings would produce "equivalent exposures". But they don't. Setting #1 captures 4x the photons captured by #2. Since SNR due to shot noise is the sq-root of the number of photons, #1 will have 2x better Shot Noise SNR than #2. For example, if a pixel exposed using #1 captures 40,000e- (photo-electrons), it has a photonic SNR of 200:1. While in #2, there would be 10,000e- captured, with a SNR of 100:1.

So these two settings don't produce equivalent exposures. Instead they produce equivalently bright images, when rendered.

When you take a shot there are two main steps involved:

The sensor is exposed for a certain duration, using a certain aperture, resulting in the capture of a certain amount of light.

This capture is then rendered to a JPEG for both storage on the memory card and to provide a review image on the back LCD screen. The capture was linear i.e 2x more photons produces a 2x stronger signal. But the eye sees brightness logarithmically. Demosaicing, colour-space conversion, a TRC (including Gamma to map the linear sensor response to log values), bit-reduction/lossy compression are applied to get 14-bit raw data from the sensor down to the 8-bits per primary colour JPEG format.

If you shoot JPEG, these two process occur together. So exposing and rendering are not distinctly separated, either temporally or conceptually. It's just taking "an exposure".

But if you shoot raw, the capture phase occurs in the camera, while the rendering phase is delayed until later when you do the PP. As a raw shooter, I take "Exposure" to specifically refer to the light-capturing process. This is when the intrinsic quality of the image is determined. It's "All about the Light". The rendering of this exposure is for another time. So raw shooters should be mindful of capturing the most photons they can in an exposure, not how bright the image will later turn out to be.

The distinction between the capturing & rendering processes was more obvious in the days of film, where you took an exposure and later developed it. At which time you could apply some darkroom magic to alter the final image's brightness.

Example 2 - ETTR

If you think that ISO affects exposure you can get confused about Exposing to the Right (ETTR). I think everyone is in agreement with maximising the number of photons captured during an exposure. This is the gist of ETTR where a user pushes the histogram as far to the RHS as possible without noticeably blowing highlights. (A certain number of highlights in a capture may end up clipped without being noticeable/objectionable.) But ETTR only makes sense at base ISO. When your exposure is no longer sufficient to "well fill" the pixels, and the histogram peak(s) are a long way from the RHS, you can then increase ISO in the camera to move the histogram, but not the exposure, to the right.

Doing so will:

Increases the rendered brightness of the review image, and JPEG if you shoot in that format.

Up to a certain point, reduces the contribution of the ADC noise to the Total RN.

Moves the AE meter to the right.

Increase the likelihood that some/more of the very brightest image pixels will be clipped.

Again, confusion over this is caused by not understanding the role of ISO in determining the rendering brightness rather than affecting the exposure. It demonstrates the problem caused by adopting an ISO-centric instead of an Exposure-centric mindset.

Dan.

Forum: Pentax Full Frame 03-08-2015, 03:00 AM

Can we have a left handed version?
Posted By rawr

Replies: 54
Views: 5,312

What about catering for left-eye dominant people too (like myself)?

The currently dominant design paradigm for DSLR's assumes right-eye dominance, which causes all manner of ergonomic problems, along the camera back panel in particular.

So even if they built a camera for left-handed users, what about left-eyed users?

What Pentax need to do is build camera design variations for the K-2 FF like so:

(a) - left-eyed, left handed;
(b) - left-eyed, right handed;
(c) - right-eyed, left handed;
(d) - right-eyed, right handed.

:)

I'd buy a K-2b in an instant.

Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II 09-21-2013, 01:46 PM

Post Your K5IIs Pictures Here!
Posted By jbinpg

Replies: 2,879
Views: 492,851

OK, Dave, that does it. I was waffling whether to do the Icefields Parkway this fall. Now I must do it after viewing your wonderful shots. Nothing like the Rockies to inspire photography.

Jack

Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 02-23-2014, 11:02 AM

DSLR without AF.
Posted By TaoMaas

Replies: 54
Views: 4,043

I would buy a DSLR that has no auto focus, as long as it allowed open aperture metering with all my older Pentax lenses. However....I know I'm a dinosaur. Pentax can't cater to such a tiny niche as me and hope to survive when they could just as easily incorporate a different focusing screen and open aperture metering into a current model and sell to both, new and old, buyers.

Forum: Pentax Full Frame 02-09-2014, 11:26 AM

Ok, Lets build a fictional FF K-1s together
Posted By Mazhe

Replies: 168
Views: 14,968

Mirror & Prism like in the LX.

Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 02-04-2014, 06:04 AM

Resurrecting Pentax firmware hacking
Posted By Shodan

Replies: 765
Views: 299,270

Resurrecting Pentax firmware hacking

I better start with an introduction as this is my first post. I own a K30 with a load of old manual lenses. I'm also a full time reverse engineer and I'm very interested in rebooting firmware hacking on the Pentax. However I need help and can't do it alone.

I've gone through all the previous posts on Pentax hacking as well as the useful but old Pentax hacking site. Based on this I've seen that the biggest problems for creating a hacked firmware are:
Need for experienced reverse engineers

Cost of the required tools such as IDA Pro

The FP instruction set

Luckily I can help with some of the above. First with experience. I'm a hardware hacker who previously ported CHDK to my Canon Powershot - I've got some experience in hacking firmware on cameras. Next with tooling, for the people who don't know you need an expensive dissasembler called IDA Pro. I have this and the tool that changes assembly into a higher level language - the decompiler. Finally is the instruction set. I've done a lot of work reverse engineering the chip that's inside the K30 and I believe newer models as well. This I think is a Fujitsu Milbeaut MB91696AM. The great thing about this is that it's based around a Dual core ARM Cortex M4 CPU. This means no horrible FP instruction set! It all ARM and that's what I'm good at.

My progress so far:
Decrypted the firmware

Performed a lot of reverse engineering. Large parts found including memory allocation functions, displaying text on screen etc

Found all the debug processing code

Found the firmware decryption routines

Written custom firmware that allows custom code to be run

Started the PHDK project

Useful links:
PHDK Wiki
Paper describing the work so far - very technical
PHDK source code

What I need (so far):
Service manual for a K30 (or even a similar model). This would be really useful in understanding how all the debug functionality actually works

Datasheet for the MB91696AM or even a very similar ARM based CPU

Someone to tell me the offsets to icons/text images in the binary. This would rapidly increase the amount of functions I can find!

How you can help:
I will need testers. Be warned there is a small chance of bricking the camera...

I need people to help with the disassembly. You'll need a copy of IDA Pro (or maybe notepad - see below).

Anyone know anyone at Pentax / Ricoh. I'm considering dropping their marketing team an email.

Don't request features. At the moment there is only one feature - get custom code running on the device.

Don't request other cameras. I own a K30 and that's what I'm working on.

One of the big things is helping with decompilation of the firmware. It's too big to do alone. Given this I can dump a massive text file with all the functions in C-like code. If anyone has some programming background this might be a good way to help out. Is anyone interested? I still want to play nice with Pentax while i'm requesting their help so I will only PM out the file.

Big issues at present

Icons / text images (fonts)

There are very few strings in the main camera code. All the text is embedded in image data. I suspect that this is as RAW bitmap data directly in the firmware. It would be really useful to get the locations of at least one of these images, then I can find the rest. I'm not quite sure how to find them but The Gimp has an option of opening RAW files and changing the offsets into it. I've had a look but with not much luck.

Give me a few weeks and I hope to be at the point where I can write custom firmware which can then execute a file on the SD card containing additional functionality. I want to perform my code changes inside the debug mode routines, this should mean it's safer as this code is not called by default. At this point some brave soul will need to Flash their camera. Once that works all we will need to do is update the executable on the SD card. Well that's the idea any. Other options are to find a method in the existing debug routines which allow this or alternatively look for an exploit.

Brain dump over.

Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 01-09-2014, 06:29 AM

Manual focus galore! Nikon F, Olympus OM, C/Y, Konica AR mount lenses on Pentax DSLR.
Posted By Gnarelsek

Replies: 56
Views: 19,760

A few people may still remember my winning entry to last year Pentax Forum K-30 giveaway where I shared my “Influential gear” ( PentaxForum Entry ), a self modified K mount ring to accept Nikon F, Olympus OM, Contax/Yashica C/Y and Konica AR* mounts lenses in addition to K mount on my Pentax K-r.
As the response then was encouraging and as promised, I have made it into a commercially available product which I called it Pentax K+ Multi-Mount (PK+MM). There is now no need for users to try DIY now since they can now replace it with this new mount ring instead.
Here is the photo of the PK+MM on my K-r.

The concept behind this possibility is although different camera mounts are different, by re-designing the K mount, I managed to allow the mounting of other mounts as mentioned. No adapter is required and no lens modifications required except for a minor one for C/Y mount. Of course, there are lens mount markings for the different mounts but lens locking is not available. However, the lenses do stay on quite snugly with the leaf spring in the camera body holding on to them. Operation wise is same as using M42 screw mount lenses.

I will share a few photos, especially for those who are interested in adapting lenses.

Nikon 50mm F/1.4 (pre-AI) Nikkor-S Auto on Pentax K-r beside Nikon SLR Nikkormat

Nikon 28-70mm f/3.5-4.5 AF on Pentax K-r beside Nikon SLR N90s

Olympus Zuiko-S 50mm F/1.4 on Pentax K-r beside Olympus OM-1N with Zuiko Auto-MACRO 50mm F/3.5 with Varimagni Finder attached.

Yashica ML 50mm f/2.0 on Pentax K-r beside Contax 167MT and Yashica FX-3

Currently, only the version for non-WR bodies is completed and available. I am still working on the more complicated WR version. And these are made in my home country, Singapore.
If you are interested to know more details, you can visit my website: Adaptist

Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 01-07-2014, 03:36 AM

Pentax/Ricoh: De-cripple the K-mount! PETITION
Posted By froeschle

Replies: 502
Views: 70,054

Unfortunately, the latest Pentax DSLR - the K-3 - also does not feature an aperture coupler.
So, Ricoh/Pentax executives will be asked about this issue at CP+ again.

Forum: Pentax News and Rumors 01-05-2014, 08:52 AM

Interview with Chief Sales & Marketing Officer / Ricoh Imaging Japan
Posted By normhead

Replies: 464
Views: 59,035

It's quite simple, there are those willing to carry heavier glass, heavier systems for one extra stop of DoF, and those that don't think it's worth it. Conflicting opinions apparently. But neither side is going to change because of the values of the others, nor should they. Peace will be obtained, when folks stop pimping their photographic preferences as if there are some "facts" that will alter others perceptions of the issue. Facts have nothing to do with it. it's personal preference. It's all about respecting other people's choices.

The obnoxious pimping of one system focusing on it's advantages and ignoring it's disadvantages is by nature confrontational. And what we have here with a bunch of FF proponents (and 4/3 proponents, and NEX proponents etc. etc. ) is the inability to process the fact that many people here, have experience with both systems, and 8x10 view and medium format, and 110 and 6x6 and practically every other type of camera, who will tell you the difference between FF and APS-c in the grand things is relatively insignificant, as is the difference between 4/3 and APS-c. Like almost every other aspect of photography, you need to skip a step for meaningful difference. But that's just my take.

Some folks have a finer sense of "difference". And there's nothing wrong with that, until they assume that others need their guidance on the issue, are somehow less informed than themselves, and start preaching a doctrine to the crowd.

There is nothing wrong with anyone, who decides to shoot only with a Q, 4/3, APS-c , FF and MF or 4x5 scanning back..or any combination there of. It is quite possible for anyone to know everything there is to know about photography and intelligently choose any one of those options, to all of them, and any combination thereof. It's is not up to other to criticize their choice or point out it's limitations.

Criticizing the limitations of others choices is not a sign of intelligence. Believe it or not, there are a great number of us who completely understand the limitations of APS-c, and still choose to use it 90% of the time. I have 6x6 , 645 and 35mm film cameras at my disposal, and access to a very good scanner. We don't need lectures on the benefits of FF. In front of a class, I'd be happy to give lectures on the benefits of FF, and every other system on the planet. It's important that learning photographers understand and explore the options. So, having some impertinent know it all come on hear and constantly harp on the advantages of one system or the other like they are the be all and end all of knowledge about photography is truly annoying.

There is one point in the development of photographers, when they discover for themselves that system that is best for their style. And they may even start to work with that system almost exclusively. I don't mean to temper anyone's enthusiasm. Finding your system is a wonderful thing. But there's no reason to assume that the system that's right for you is right for everybody. And posting pictures and quoting selected facts that support your choice isn't necessary. They will always be lacking for everyone aware of all the facts. Emphasizing some facts, just means you don't value others.

Until you can take joy in your choice while at the same time respecting the choices of others, your knowledge is incomplete, and emotionally, you're immature and confrontational. Supporting one format, doesn't mean you're smarter than anyone else. it just means you've figured out what's good for you. And personally, I think a lot of the push back against formats that aren't your favourite, is the insecurity you have about the choice you're made. Trying to stamp out the niggling little doubts about the absolute utility of one system or another, by converting others to the system, instead of examining your own work and choices.

As a former teacher, I cannot imagine launching into the kind of one sided diatribe favouring one format or another, you see here all the time. When I see one sided propaganda, I often try to present some balance, but I'm not advocating one system or another.

If you were in my class, you'd use every format available in on appropriate assignments. I've had students do narrow DoF on point and shoots. SO when I see people say you have to have FF for narrow DoF, my second year students would be laughing at you. But deciding what camera was best for an individual is an individual decision.

Listen to the one format blow hards if you choose, but balance what they say with a practical understanding of all relevant formats, practical in the sense of using every system and finding out what you resonate with. Listening to the blow hards pushing one format or another on the forum is next to worthless. That's why they have schools for photography. And that's why so many of us who post a lot of images and can enjoy our photography without reference to format etc. stay out of this type of discussion. (I have some personality flaw that keeps me from being able to do that.) It is just so hard to explain to those with extremely narrow points of view, just what they are missing without eliciting one of these diatribes of outrage.

I think a lot of the time, some of the more belligerent format enthusiasts think I stop posting in a thread, because they are right and i am wrong, more often it's just I've grown tired of the insolence, belligerence and ignorance. I'm getting to be too old for this baloney. But over 1000 students went through my High School photography program, the one I built from scratch, and 4 or 5 of them went on to do post secondary work in photography, and many others found jobs in the industry or in related industries, or use photography as part of their duties in other jobs, so I can't be doing anything too wrong.

Sometimes I think those pushing one system over others are like proselytizers seeking religious converts. I hate Jehova's witnesses and format proponents. They are pretty much the same thing. Just show me pictures, and maybe a few examples of pictures you'd like to learn how to take and tell me how much money you have to spend, , and I'll tell you what you need to take them. Prejudging, and saying one system is better than all the others for everything and everyone is for the mentally challenged, who can't see the big picture. And for them, it doesn't matter what you say, they will never understand the big picture.

And I bet 99% of the site doesn't give a crap about this whole issue. They just like the pictures they take and camera they have and might like to learn to do a little bit more, take advantage of a few features they don't know about, gain a bit of incremental knowledge, using the system they have. Some knob coming on with a bunch of FF propaganda is a total geek. We tolerate them, because, it just might happen, that there might actually be one person on the site from time to time, who actually would be a candidate to use an FF camera as their only camera. I have a number of friends who are like that. So having a few people helping beginners understand what FF has to offer, is not such a bad idea. It would be nice if they weren't so damed obnoxious about it.

When hanging out with other photographers, the goal is to assimilate as much of what they know that you don't. Because believe it or not, no matter how much you've learned, others have gotten into niches where they know different stuff that might help you in what you do. A confrontational attitude doesn't help that, neither does a one sided promotion of a specific format.

Forum: Product Suggestions and Feedback 12-07-2013, 07:35 AM

Sticky: Dear Pentax
Posted By WideOpen

Replies: 1,346
Views: 413,967

Dear Pentax or a sensor manufacturer it may concern,

Stop producing APS-C sensors that are stagnant (or worse) in terms of all-around performance simply to accommodate more pixels. I don't care about having 24 megapixels. In fact, 6 to 10 megapixels would be more enough for just about everything I shoot. That would allow me to make the occasional 10 X 14 print, which I rarely do. Otherwise, I am viewing and reviewing, sharing, etc., the vast majority of my pictures on a monitor, as I suspect 95%+ of shooters are, which means that even 6 to 10 MPs is way too much already! A 32 inch 1080p screen at a few feet away looks pretty darn sharp, and that's just 2 MP.

Why can't a sensor manufacturer make an APS-C sensor proportional to a full-frame offering, such that we can have "full frame" low light capability with an APS-C number of pixels?

In other words, please release a 10 MP "K3-L" that would deliver outstanding all around low light performance. Oh, and please also tinker with the colour settings in your software so that skin tones look good, too. Skin tones look dreadful on Pentax compared to Nikon.

Many thanks in advance.

Forum: Pentax Full Frame 12-19-2013, 11:19 PM

So what's this Pentax FF/LX-D gonna be?
Posted By Pioneer

Replies: 28
Views: 4,614

I absolutely agree with this. I know that I am definitely in the minority here but I see lots of room for Pentax to develop a camera that sits between their dSLR line up and the Q system. I think that the FF end is a money sink for Pentax with very little room for innovation any longer. Prices are dropping like a rock on that end, and even Nikon's latest entry is being soundly criticized for costing too much money.

I personally think the K-01 was a great start, and though discontinued I think there is still a huge amount of mileage in that idea.

Just my own 2 cents.

Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II 11-20-2013, 11:39 PM

What Digital Camera review
Posted By dansamy

Replies: 32
Views: 4,247

Some things just bug the fool out of me. They're, there and their. To, too and two. Alot. That one really sends me into the stratosphere.

Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II 11-19-2013, 01:59 PM

Poll: K-3 reliability poll
Posted By Na Horuk

Replies: 63
Views: 9,444

Keep in mind that forums are always hotbeds of complaints, because users who have problems are more likely to seek out a forum and talk about it. A user who is happily using his camera wont have such a presence online, wont be as vocal. You are polling people who are most likely to have problems, this is not a representative poll made on the population of all K-3 units. I expect this poll will show that "every second camera is defective" or some other such terrible trend - a trend that is not real
Considering this camera just came out, I think it might be too early for polls about reliability. Maybe about overall QC, if you contrast the results to total number of units sold. Of course, that would also not be accurate because not every K-3 owner will see this thread.

Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 11-18-2013, 07:30 AM

Pentax Planning a Consumer version of K-3?
Posted By RonHendriks1966

Replies: 20
Views: 2,610

Well I hope there will be a K-5 III (same 16mp sensor but the electronics from the K-3).

The cheapest offering at the time for a camera with kitlens is the Sony A3000 for 249 euro while the K-30 will set you back 529 euro. That is a very big gap for what we all feel is a different camera, but for those who are looking for an entry level camera to toy around in the family it is a major issue.

Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II 11-19-2013, 09:15 AM

Experiences with the new K-3 Camera (Lots of Photos)
Posted By LaurenOE

Replies: 13
Views: 4,100

Awesome!
I just have one thing to say, and it's about how you attached the camera strap!

The Mysteries of a Pentax Camera Strap

;)

Forum: Pentax K-3 & K-3 II 11-13-2013, 12:00 PM

Three things I do not like...
Posted By philbaum

Replies: 38
Views: 4,965

I'm the photography coordinator for a live theater (plays) for the past 4 years. For dress rehearsals, i've often invited 2 or 3 other photographic friends to shoot with me. This one gal has a D7000 and couldn't restrain herself from shooting constantly, 100% of the time, for the 2 hrs of the dress rehearsal. (so i just stopped inviting her) The constant beeping is enough to drive me nutty and i should be used to it. I've had 3 actors complain about the beeping, AF assist beams and the occasional inadvertent flash. Not only actors but the occasional director or stage manager will complain to me. Which bugs me because with my k5, i have all the beeping turned off, the focus assist light turned off, etc. I've even reset folks Olympus and Nikon cameras to eliminate beeping because some of their owners couldn't do it without a manual.

Some people can't even hear their own cell phones go off in their pockets, so i'm not surprised some folks aren't concerned about their cameras. Just try to be aware that our cameras can be very annoying to those around us. After turning off all the beeping, i found out it wasn't really contributing much if anything to my photography - try it sometime.

Forum: Post-Processing Articles 11-24-2012, 03:21 PM

Pentax Digital Camera Utility - A Mini Guide
Posted By mcgregni

Replies: 60
Views: 47,984

Is this a labor of love or obsession? :lol: You decide! I am aware, both from this forum and the UK one that there are plenty of Pentax shooters who would like to get more out of the software that comes in the box.

I've enjoyed using the program, and now I've really enjoyed writing about how I edit RAW in PDCU4. Its kind of therapeutic, and helps to cement your working principals in your mind I find. I recommend it as a therapy to all! So here is my Mini Guide for all to peruse, and of course comment, dabate, correct and add to. I will gladly update it to take account of any new info offered.

Of course, I should say that this is entirely my own personal experience of the software, and only my own personal opinions. Enjoy.

Pentax Camera Utility (PDCU) , A Mini Guide; some In-Practice thoughts & a workflow solution
Prepared by Pentax shooter N McGregor, November 2012

This mini guide is intended to serve a wide range of purposes. It should be useful to those new to Pentax DSLRs and the RAW format in general, as well as those opening their new camera box and finding the software disc, who may not have any other RAW software ready to go. These people could read Part 1 for some helpful information which should set them up ready to start RAW processing.

Other more experienced photographers may just want some quick tips on getting the most out of the Pentax software, and need to know how to efficiently apply some key image adjustments, in which case they could refer to Part 2, covering workflow and functionality, and take some useful ideas from that. I am not claiming to be able to offer full guidance on every aspect of the program – either because I myself don’t have particular experience at that type of adjustment or because I choose to do something in a different program, in which case I am sure that some background reading and experimentation with the software will prove valuable.

As this is meant to encourage a practical approach, if you are trying out any of the editing techniques for the first time it is a great idea to have a shot open and work on it as you go and see the effect I am describing right in front of you. In any case, I hope this provides a good read and useful aid to anyone interested in Pentax cameras and the software supplied with them.

Contents:
PART 1 - Introduction to Pentax Camera Utility (PDCU) & RAW – Software Purpose & Scope – The RAW Advantage – Output (Development) from RAW to an Image File – Origins & Upgrades – Computer Resources – Camera Setup

Part 2 – Workflow & Functionality – Workspace Layout & Setup – Image Management – Image Information & Navigation Control – Key Processing Steps; building an efficient processing approach to image adjustments - Sharpness and Noise Reduction control during RAW processing - A Suggested PDCU Workflow; Exposure – Blown Highlights – Clipped Shadows – Contrast, Global Saturation, Sharpness – White Balance – Colour Fine Tune - Lens Distortion & Abberation Corrections - Conclusions

PART 1 - Introduction to Pentax Camera Utility (PDCU) & RAW

Software Purpose & Scope
The PCU software is currently included on disc sold with Pentax digital cameras that record images in RAW format. The version at this time of writing is 4.35. It can open the 'PEF' (Pentax proprietary) and 'DNG' (Adobe standardised) RAW file types, in addition to JPEGs shot on the cameras.

Its primary purpose is to act as the 'Raw Converter' or ‘developer’ for these PEF or DNG files - to convert them from a ‘raw’ camera sensor data format into a viewable and editable image format for a wide range of uses. Secondly it provides key global image adjustments such as exposure, white balance, noise reduction etc. All of these controls offer the possibility to alter these shooting settings after the event with no reduction in quality, just as if they had been set on the camera before shooting. This is considered a 'non-destructive' adjustment, a key advantage of any RAW converter software and a primary reason to choose to shoot in RAW.

In addition PCU offers software controls for those image adjustment and custom image parameters that can be set on the camera prior to shooting the images. This includes shadow & highlight adjustments, lens distortion & aberration corrections, custom presets such as Landscape, Natural, Portrait etc, and individual custom fine tuning including saturation, hue, sharpness and some fine contrast control for shadows & highlights.

The RAW Advantage
When considering workflow, and in which order to apply changes, the main thing to bear in mind is that the RAW file image data is not directly being changed (edited) by what you alter in the program, therefore there is no degradation or image quality reduction occurring just because you might be making many different setting changes and then going back and forward over it all again. In fact, all the settings you make are simply recorded as metadata and added to the file at the point that you save the shot into an image format (JPEG or TIFF). The RAW file will remain as it was when copied from the camera, to be archived for safekeeping, or used again if you want to try again and make further changes.

It is worth noting that we cannot actually ‘see’ the RAW image directly - the file is only a computer bits & bytes record of what data was recorded by the camera. It includes a small embedded JPEG file created by the camera’s CPU which is displayed (if set for image preview) on the LCD screen. Some image management programs will also display this small JPEG as a thumbnail to allow the RAW images to be seen within the program, but they will be low resolution and cannot be enlarged for detailed review. It is the conversion or ‘development’ process applied by PDCU that creates a full size / full quality image file to be generated and saved.

Our Pentax DSLRs helpfully record shots in the DNG format as an option. Before I got my Pentax camera I used to shoot RAW on another camera brand, but I always chose to convert the files into DNGs for archive purposes. My thinking is that the DNG will prove a better bet in the longer term as it is more likely to remain supported by more RAW software in the future. The DNG records the same information as the PEF and I am not aware of any particular disadvantage to using it instead of the PEF. So I save myself an extra step in workflow as I no longer have to carry out the convert to DNG process – thank you Pentax!

Output (‘development’) from RAW to an Image file
Once you have finished making changes to a shot in PDCU, you have the option to 'Save As' and choose either JPEG or TIFF, and give a new filename and location for your newly created image file. What to choose ?
The JPEG option would give the same result as if you had set the highest quality JPEG for capture on the camera. This is good if you are satisfied that the image is fully ready for your intended purpose and you don't need to do any further work in another editing program.

A JPEG is an 8 bit image file, and you started with a 14 or 16 bit RAW from the camera, so there is some compression and reduction of redundant image data in the Save to JPEG process, but the file you produce will still have the same dimensions as was shot on the camera and will have plenty of resolution to make all the usual sized prints, so this is a very versatile option.

The TIFF option, which saves a 16bit uncompressed image file, is ideal for continuing editing work in another program. When opening this file in an image editor (Photoshop for example) you can work on it further and then choose to save it again as a 16bit TIFF with no compression. It is important to note though, that this non-compressed saving of a TIFF is not the same as the 'non-destructive' changes that were being applied to the RAW in PDCU. In standard image editing programs (such as Photoshop) whenever a file is saved the edits are written into the image data permanently. You can change them again, but this would involve further image editing and the risk of quality loss, so you need to be more cautious when working on an image file in this type of program than when using a RAW in PCU.

It is worth noting that there are now some combined RAW image converter & photo editing programs that continue a non-destructive sequence of changes to an image right through the whole process, even with edits that are not strictly to inherent RAW data parameters. The two main examples of this type of program are Apple Aperture & Adobe Lightroom. Both achieve this by holding in memory a series of image ‘states’ or ‘versions’ that can be saved out at any point, with a metadata record of each version adjustment settings linked to the RAW file and saved in the program database. But these are the exceptions – PDCU is a traditional RAW converter in the way that it records adjustments to a file and outputs to a new image format.

Origins & Upgrades
PDCU is created by the makers of a Professional grade RAW software program from Japan called Silkypix Developer Studio. Some of its adjustment controls are similar to those seen in the Silkypix program, and therefore you may find that in future you are interested in getting even more control over your RAW images, and so the Silkypix software might offer you a natural upgrade path. You would lose the Pentax specific in-camera settings I mentioned above which have been incorporated into PDCU especially for Pentax users.

In the meantime the PDCU software itself does evolve, and Pentax release updates available as free downloads to existing customers, mainly to incorporate new camera settings or features, but if we’re lucky we might over time get access to more advanced features taken from the full Silkypix program. Check for updates on the Pentax website. To download and install one you will need the disc supplied with your camera in the drive on your computer prior to installing the update.

Computer Resources
PCU4 does seem to me to use rather a lot of computer processing power. My average spec laptop (dual core, 3Gb ram) runs with high CPU cycles and the fan whirrs away fast when running the programme. Either this is due to inefficient use of computer resources or the program is carrying out some hefty image processing computations. I'll let you decide yourselves which of these you prefer to think of it as! But the result is that it is a rather slow program in operation. It is slow to load, with different parts appearing one after the other, and a bit slow to respond to inputs. The preview of the image can also be slow to update after making a change - on my system I’m talking of only a second or two, but it’s not at all instant.

If you set it to access a folder containing many image files it can make a bit of a job out of this as well - in my case I have 900 or so DNGs in my main ‘for edit’ folder and this can take the program between 30 seconds and a minute to sort out and display thumbnails initially - a bit of an annoyance when you just want to crack on, but not intolerable. However once it’s done this it then retains the thumbnails OK and you can scroll rapidly through your images to pick the one to work on. My personal message is ‘bear with it’ - yes, there are faster RAW converters available, but it’s free & the output you can achieve with PCU4 is high quality so it is worth waiting a little for it.

Camera Setup
Now that you’re going to shoot RAW images, what do you need to have set on the camera before taking pictures? The easy way to do this on Pentax DSLRs is from the Control Panel (INFO button). Here you can move around the key camera settings and select your preferences.

Obviously firstly set RAW capture - either PEF or DNG. There is no quality setting option for RAW because the file always records the maximum amount of data from the sensor, so can be considered the highest quality automatically. You also have the option here to record RAW + JPEG, and this might be useful if you want to use a JPEG immediately from the camera, say for printing or uploading to the web, but would also like the option to improve the photo in the future.

The other key settings on the control panel are Shadow / Highlight adjustments & Lens Distortion / Chromatic Aberration Corrections. Having these active on the camera will mean that when the RAW file is opened in PDCU then these settings will already by applied – you can see the effects and make further changes if needed. This could save a bit of time on the computer especially if shooting a lot of similar images. However, bear in mind that this does increase the time it takes to display the shot on the rear LCD screen (or the last shot of a burst) – this is because the camera’s CPU has to process the adjustments before the embedded JPEG is displayed, and this delay of a few seconds could interrupt your shooting if you rely on quickly checking the preview on the LCD. Leaving the adjustments off will give you fairly instantaneous previews. As you can easily activate these adjustments in PDCU, my recommendation is to leave them off on the camera.

Finally, the Custom Image Parameters (accessed with the right hand button on the four-way controller) cannot be deactivated as such – you always have one preset selected at all times. This will affect the preview image displayed on the LCD, so it makes sense to choose a setting that has a helpful effect on the LCD. Personally I set ‘Bright’, which a provides a bright image (unsurprisingly) with average contrast and saturation. If you are using PDCU with only RAW capture then there’s not much point in making detailed Custom Image Parameter settings on the camera, as these can be more easily applied and experimented with on the computer.

Part 2 – Workflow & Functionality

Workspace Layout & Setup

The program is spilt into three ‘panels’, left, centre & right. You can click and grab the dividing lines between panels and move these, therefore changing the relative sizes of each panel within limits. It makes sense to make the left panel narrower than the right, as the right contains the main editing controls in tabs, so you want a good amount of room to move on the right panel. The centre panel will display the image preview so you want this as big as practical, leaving the left panel narrower as it only needs to show a histogram and a folder view of your computer system. The left and right panels are each again divided into top and bottom ‘sub-panels’, which you have to drag up and down over each other as you change tabs.

The program uses a modular concept - every key editing function (like Exposure / Tone or White balance) and image review resource (like a histogram, Image Preview, folder view) comes on its own individual tab. You can specifically choose which of these modular tabs to display for use or not, and this is set under the Window menu. As well here you choose here whether to show the left and right panels at all, and if the centre panel tabs are vertical or horizontal.

There are 3 different ‘views’ you can access, using the three buttons ‘Browser, Laboratory, Custom’ at top left. The idea is that you can configure what components of the program you want to see under each main view, so whatever panel and tab layouts you set after clicking one of these buttons will be retained for future use. In practice I find I only need one main layout design so I only use ’Custom’, but you have the option of the others if its helpful.

My personal preference is as follows - (after clicking the Custom button), under the ‘Window’ menu, choose ‘Display in whole pane’ - this gives the most space to your main preview image and your folder view for choosing images. Then I would add ticks to the following tab options - Image data, Highlight Adjustment, Colour Fine Tune. This adds these important adjustments to your collection of tabs on the right panel. I remove the tick by Favourite as it doesn’t have much purpose in my view.

Now that you can see all the useful tabs it is time to rearrange them more helpfully. Useful tip – right-clicking any tab on the name gives options for repositioning that tab, eg moving it to top right, bottom right, top left, bottom left. An intuitive arrangement is to set the following tabs to ‘top right’ – Exposure/Tone – Highlight Adjustment – Custom Image – White Balance. These four sets of controls will provide the initial key adjustments, having the most immediate impact on your image, and you will be able to click between them quickly with them all together here on the top right.

This leaves the following set to Bottom Right – Colour Fine Tune / Lens Aberration Corrections / Noise Reduction / Map / Image Data / Rotate /Shift

With your histogram open on the bottom left you are now ready to get working on your shots!

Image Management
One of the main things to consider when working with RAW files is that they are not a true ‘image’ file format (ie a ‘raster’ type file). There are many variations and camera-specific metadata items supported by each different one. Computer operating systems may not be able to display the image thumbnail by default, so generally you need specialised software both to develop and adjust the images, and also to view and manage your collection. Because of this most RAW converter software includes components or even specific modules to view, manage, catalogue and otherwise organise your RAW files. Some are more sophisticated than others and it would be fair to say that image organisation is not one of PDCU’s main strengths.

I myself use a standalone Image Management Program which can display and organise any RAW file, and I use this to launch images into other editing programs. So I cannot offer any huge insight into this aspect of PDCU. But there are some essential features that I will mention, and then I’ll list briefly a few useful features that might be helpful.

By default PDCU is set to monitor the contents of one folder on your computer, and it will display the contents of this folder in the centre panel on running. Because of the performance issues I talked about earlier, it is not a good idea to keep changing the folder that is monitored when using PDCU as this will keep taking a long time and get really annoying! So I suggest you get organised on your computer and just put all the RAW files you might want to work on into one folder – call it ‘Pentax for editing’ or ‘DNGs to Process’, something like that. Then set PDCU to monitor this folder – open the options dialogue by clicking the ‘cogwheel’ icon on the toolbar – open the ‘File Management’ tab – click the browse button under ‘Home Folder’ and choose your pre-determined folder. Under ‘Folder at Startup’ select ‘Home Folder’.

At the point of saving your work on a RAW file you will be choosing to ‘Save As’ a JPEG or TIFF, and you’ll also have to nominate a folder to put this output file into. It makes sense to use a different folder for these processed image files, eg ‘New Pentax TIFFs’, or ‘JPEGs 2012’ etc, so on the same ‘Image Management’ tab under ‘Default Destination’ click on Browse and select your nominated folder, then click ‘Always Use this Folder’. Now you won’t have to worry about choosing a folder each time you save a new image – your shiny new JPEGs or TIFFs will be where you specified waiting for you.... yes, they will be shiny!

In the centre panel now there should be two tabs – one with the name of your home folder and the other ‘Preview’. The home folder tab will display all your RAW files as image thumbnails and now you can click on one to select it (a blue border appears around it), and after a few seconds when clicking on the Preview tab you will see you shot much bigger, ready to be worked on. Any adjustments you make will be applied to this one image only.

If you have a number of similar shots and want to apply the same adjustments made to the first one to any more, try this – in the Home Folder tab select the file you have already worked on, then right click on this selected thumbnail – from the context menu that appears choose ‘Copy Parameters’ – now select the RAW file that you want the same settings applied to also, and right click on that one – now choose ‘Paste Parameters’. The second file will now appear in the Preview tab with all your previous settings applied to it automatically, and you hopefully will only need to make a few minor adjustments, saving a lot of time.

A lot of the settings within the Options dialogue are related to various image management functions, but mostly the defaults are OK, and as I’ve said I don’t use the program for organisation. If you choose to do so then some of the additional tabs here are worth exploring. One setting which may have general significance is on the ‘Image Display’ tab – Pixel Interpolation, with three options; Nearest Neighbor, Bilinear & Real Zoom. I wasn’t sure really myself on how these would affect the preview image, so I queried it on the UK forum, and Team Member John Riley kindly suggested that Real Zoom might equate to ‘Bicubic’, which samples diagonally as well as across & up & down, so would presumably be best for photos. So I suggest you try this setting first and compare with the others if you’re unsure – have a look at what happens to your image just after making a major adjustment to see any differing effects as it updates.

Image Information & Navigation
The main reference you have to monitor image exposure & contrast is the histogram tab, by default on the left panel at the bottom. Make sure the panel is wide enough to fully show the right hand edge of the histogram, or you risk missing seeing any blown highlight information.

The Histogram will be your guide to ensuring that you have enough visible detail in the shadows and highlights (the darkest & brightest part of the image), and that there is a well distributed spread of dark tones, midtones and highlights (high contrast), should this be appropriate for any particular image.

On the right panel , the Image Data tab provides a wide range of camera shooting settings captured with the shot, eg Ev compensation, aperture, shutter speed, iso, white balance, flash mode etc. Some lens specific data will only appear with DA equipment.

The Map tab allows you to move around the preview after it has been zoomed in by using the + button on the toolbar – you drag the box around to move the zoomed preview to where you want it. The ‘fullscreen’ button on the toolbar restores the preview to full size.

Key Processing Steps - building an efficient approach to image adjustments
Successful RAW editing rarely takes a purely linear direction. There will always be certain types of adjustments that it makes sense to work on initially and other that follow naturally, but be aware that making one change to a particular setting can often require a matching correction to another – one example would be an exposure increase that caused highlight to blow out, needing a highlight reduction adjustment to bring them back. Another could be a global saturation increase that caused one dominant tone to become too strong, so you might respond by reducing slightly just that one colour area.

For this reason it makes no sense to try and detail any particular sequence of working as correct. Ultimately what you end up with in output is simply what the controls are finally set to at the point you choose to ‘Save As’ – it makes no difference to the output what order you did things in getting to that point. So I will only try to offer a suggested route along the way – you will always find yourself working back and forth through the control tabs finding your way, and the process becomes quicker and more intuitive as you gain experience.

Sharpness & Noise Reduction control during RAW processing
It is generally accepted that sharpening an image is best left to the end of a processing workflow. This is because the ideal level of sharpening is dependant on the particular output purpose – for example, an image that will printed out very big to hang on the wall will benefit from more sharpening than one that is to be used on a website only.

Also, if an image file (eg JPEG or TIFF) is worked on in standard photo editing software, excessive sharpening at the start can lead to quality degradation as additional editing processes are applied.

So the best advice I can give is as follows; in PDCU (like all adjustments) it makes no difference to quality when you set the sharpness control. But, if you are intending on continuing to edit the output image file in another program (eg Photoshop) then keep the sharpening setting to the minimum needed to correct for the inherent softness of the camera sensor (or not with a K5IIs !!)
My suggestion is for portraits and other softer scenes + 1, landscapes, macro and other detailed subjects + 2. Final additional sharpening if needed for the intended output would then be applied in your chosen photo editing program, ideally applied at the end of that working.

If on the other hand you are going to Save a file from PDCU and use it to print from directly, then increase the sharpness settings proportionately. You should check the effect on the preview at a zoomed setting, say 50 – 100%, but for prints up to A4 then add an additional +1 or +2 to the sharpness for the situations mentioned above. For much bigger enlargements you may need settings of +5 or +6.
For web only display (at any size) then more average settings are appropriate, say +2 to +4 depending on the subject matter.

My own preference is to carry out noise reduction later using different software, so I cannot make detailed suggestions about PDCU’s noise reduction features. The principle would be similar as for sharpening; ie if you are outputting JPEGs for immediate use then take control of noise within PDCU using the Noise Reduction tab. You will not be able to apply your enhancements selectively or target specific elements (such as shadows only, or sky only). This is a real limitation here, and one reason why I leave noise reduction to later in my workflow.

If using PDCU as a RAW converter and initial ‘developer’ prior to further work in another program, then there is a case to be made for not reducing noise before exporting the file (to a TIFF say). This is because you will lose some sharpness and detail across the whole image, and then you’ll just end up having to restore this detail later by some means, which may or may not work well. Any noise that is exported out into your new file can easily be dealt with later, and if you can apply noise reduction selectively in another program then you will be able to retain the maximum possible detail in either shadow or highlight areas while still minimising or eliminating visible grain or colour type noise.

A Suggested PDCU Workflow

1) Exposure, Shadows & Highlights – Open the Exposure / Tone tab and check the image in the preview and histogram. Assuming that the exposure was reasonably accurate when shot, it is common for RAW images to need a modest increase in exposure in processing. Assess the histogram and preview and make your adjustment until you feel the main brightness level is good – there are 1/3rd stop increments on the slider. Watch the right hand edge of the histogram to see if the brightness data
(the grey shading) travels up the right edge of the graph – if it does you have what is known as ‘blown highlights’, meaning overbright areas where no detail can be seen. If the shaded gray has travelled up the left-side edge then you have ‘clipped’ shadows, or pure black with no detail. If both edges of the graph are free of brightness data then you have captured the full dynamic range, and you will only be concerned with the overall brightness and contrast you prefer.

2) Blown Highlights – open the Highlights Adjustment Tab, click the apply box. Reduce the over-bright areas by moving the DR Expansion slider right. As you do you will see the brightness data on the histogram move downwards from the right hand edge, and then once it’s at the bottom the shaded areas will contract from the right edge moving left, leaving clear space in its place. As there will now be visible detail in these brightest areas, we have a ‘Dynamic Range Expansion’ – ie visible detail across a wider range of brightness values than before.

You have further controls to use in this tab and these need some consideration. You can control the balance of the content of detail that is restored in these blown highlight areas, a very sophisticated and useful tool. What content might there be ? Well, it depends on what the subject was that had highlight detail blown out. To look natural you might need to restore either pure toneless ‘brightness’ data, or more saturated colour toned data. Some examples might help – say the brightest blown out parts of your picture were on white clouds, or the foaming tops of some crashing waves – for these cases you would want to restore pure white brightness; allowing colour data here might cause a dominant colour tone to become visible (eg blue from the sky to bleed onto the cloud if WB had been set to daylight). To prevent this move the top slider right towards ‘Preserve Brightness’ and watch your highlights until the correct amount of pure bright tone is restored.

Alternatively, you might have had blown highlights reflected from one side of a flower petal, or maybe bright hotspots on a cars paintwork – in these cases move the top slider left towards ‘Preserve Colour’ and watch your highlight areas until you see a natural amount of colour tone restored. After this you can fine tune the colour tone with the second slider, giving emphasis to either the dominant primary colour tone or the underlying hue tone – move between ‘Preserve Saturation and Preserve Hue’ to get a good result.

Following all this it makes sense to work again a bit with the DR Expansion slider back and forth to adjust the overall highlights level, checking the right edge of the histogram to ensure the data stays away from the right edge.

3) Clipped shadows – Back on the Exposure / Tone tab, looking at the left edge of the histogram, and checking the darkest parts of the preview, from the dropdown box ‘Shadow Correction’ choose from low / medium / high. You will see the grey shaded areas at the left edge of the histogram move down the edge and contract to the right as the shadow detail is brightened.

If it is important to be able to see details in all shadows (not always the case in some photos – you have to judge that) and the ‘High’ setting has not pulled all the data up from the left edge, then you can pull the ‘Dodge’ Slider to the right to increase shadow details more aggressively – be aware though that this slider has the effect of increasing brightness to a lesser degree to other areas of the image, so you may have to balance this with a corresponding Highlight Correction adjustment or reduction in Exposure setting. Look carefully at the brightened shadow areas to be aware of any high noise levels that this processing may have caused. It can be removed later, but this will in itself cause blurring to the detail that you have revealed – it is a compromise type of situation, so go for a fair balance.

Following these first 3 steps you have achieved an image with a dynamic range fully within the visible spectrum, and so can safely proceed to controlling the contrast balance and other adjustments.

4) Contrast / Global Saturation / Sharpness
These are grouped together because in PDCU they are controlled through settings in the Custom Image Parameters. Open the Custom Image Settings tab. Firstly decide on the best Preset from the dropdown box at the top – the top choices are Bright / Natural / Portrait / Landscape / Vibrant etc and are the most useful to us here.

From what I can see the additional presets further down (such as Scene – Kids, or Candlelight, would be more useful if shooting JPEGs on the camera and you weren’t going to do more processing. They mainly alter contrast, sharpness, saturation and white balance settings to predetermined defaults, but in my view as we’re working on the computer we might as well take full control manually. By all means try any to see if they work well with your image.

The main presets will change your shot in the following key ways; Bright – exposure boost, average contrast, average saturation, sharpness increase; Natural – lower exposure, average contrast, low saturation, sharpness increase; Portrait – exposure boost, low contrast, low saturation, lower sharpness; Landscape – neutral exposure, contrast increase, high saturation, higher sharpness; Vibrant –exposure increase, average contrast, neutral saturation, higher sharpness.

Once you have set your choice of preset, now place a tick in the box ‘Set Contrast’. The group of sliders below will now become active. It is not only contrast here - we have saturation, hue and sharpness also. Then there is a main brightness control and two contrast controls (the up & down facing triangles). These work like a single contrast slider divided in two – one for the brighter half of the image, one for the darker half – eg in a landscape the brighter half slider (up triangle) would affect the sky and sunlit grass areas. The darker half slider (down triangle) would affect the shadows and poorly lit parts of the scene. These adjustments apply to a wider range of brightness tones, whereas the Highlight Adjust / Shadow Correction controls used before only affect the very outer extreme tones. Watch the histogram as you move them and you will see much bigger chunks of the shaded areas moving back and forward with your inputs.

Now assess the image following the preset change – check the histogram again. Make fine adjustments to improve what the preset has produced – eg, alter saturation, use the Hue slider to correct any dominant poor colour cast, use the higher contrast slider (up triangle) to reduce brightness in the sky, or conversely in a portrait it might be used to increase brightness on the face. Then you might use the lower contrast slider (down arrow) to darken a less lit background in the portrait.

Once you are happy with the overall contrast you might as well set the sharpness now, as it’s here on this same tab, if you already know what the ideal setting would be based on the output, as talked about earlier.

5) White Balance
On the White Balance tab you firstly have a dropdown selector for the standard camera presets. These include As Shot / Daylight / Shade / Cloudy / Fluorescent / Tungsten / Flash. By default PDCU will display ‘As Shot’. If you had set Daylight, for example, on the camera when shooting then in PDCU you will still have ‘As Shot’ selected, in which case the ‘As Shot’ selection will look the same colour-wise as selecting ‘Daylight’. Try out the other presets to see the effect they have on your image.

As is common to many types of photo software, PDCU has some ‘eye dropper’ selectors to click onto the image to choose a ‘grey point’. We have three available here. The idea is that you would find a neutral grey area of your photo (or select 3 slightly different grey areas to get an average) and the program will calculate an appropriate white balance setting that should eliminate any dominant colour cast. Or you might have placed a grey card in the image for this specific purpose. This is a good theory, but in practise it may often prove difficult to identify what is a truly neutral grey tone, and a lot of clicking on different places can result in lots of jumping around between different colour casts on your image.

My own personal approach, in situations where it is critical to set an exact white balance where none of the presets is accurate, is to use a manual setting on the camera when shooting. Check your camera instructions for this technique, but you will be either pointing the camera at a white or grey item to set the WB, or (as I prefer) using an Expodisc which covers the whole lens and neutralises all tones to pure grey. This setting is then stored by the camera as an updated ‘Manual’ WB, effectively your own personal preset now, and this setting will be remembered until you take a new one. So when you open the image in PDCU, you will still see ‘As Shot’ selected, but this time ‘As Shot’ will be your own manual setting.

I see the advantage of this approach to be that as you are preparing the shot you can actually compare the exact colours of things that are in front of you with how they appear on the LCD screen. The manual setting has the option of fine tuning also to exactly match object colours if this is critical.

So the idea is to get as close as you can with one of the presets, and then you have two sliders for further fine tuning – magenta – green / amber – blue. For most outdoor shots the amber – blue will be most significant as you can control the ‘warmth’ of the image directly with this. The magenta – green controls are most commonly associated with correcting artificial lighting casts, but they also have a use outdoors, maybe some magenta to tone down overly green foliage, or for portraits using magenta again to remove a sickly green tone on skin.

The sliders effects are quite subtle, but you have very powerful control in this tab, and good choices here can really make your photo.

6) Colour Fine Tune
Open the Colour Fine Tune tab. This is a good point in the workflow to carry out this colour work, just after setting the global white balance. Some primary tones are likely to have been affected by the white balance adjustments you made, eg red & yellow tones (such as autumnal foliage) will have increased saturation already as a result of any increase in amber you made in white balance. If this is too excessive in the most saturated areas you can tone these down a bit in Colour Fine Tune without pushing the overall colour balance back away from your amber input earlier.

White balance inputs will affect the global underlying tonalities, whilst colour fine tune adjustments will firstly be effective on the most saturated pixels on the chosen colour channel. In PDCU we have this most interesting ‘Colour Wheel’, a segmented circle of primary & secondary colour channels. Each individual colour ‘segment’ has a dot at its centre which you move around in all directions within the one segment. As you move the dot a line extends from the centre point attached to the dot, giving a visual guide to the extent of the position change you have made. Be aware that the actual colour of a segment is only a median (averaged) representation of a somewhat wider range of true tones that the segment controls.

Moving the dot outwards in a straight line toward the edge of the circle increases the saturation of that specific colour, and conversely moving inwards towards the centre of the circle reduces the saturation. The really exciting part here is the flexibility offered by 360 degree movements within each segment. Moving the dot in any other direction (ie towards or away from an adjacent colour segment on the wheel), will have a proportional toning effect towards that ‘next door’ colour. If you are simultaneously moving towards the outer edge or inner edge then you are carrying out multiple colour edit inputs with one movement – ie changing the toning balance gradually from one colour to another and simultaneously increasing or decreasing the saturation of your newly fixed colour.

This is a very different concept to traditional saturation edit controls (such as in Photoshop) where you choose either a ‘Master’ channel for the whole image at once, or select red, green, blue, cyan etc from the a dropdown box and then control only that channels saturation strength. In PDCU you are changing colour balance tonalities and strengths in one movement.

This is the time to experiment a bit and fine tune the saturations and specific colour tones on your image. For example, under sunlight, foliage in a landscape is mostly under the yellow channel. If you increased amber under White Balance to add to the general warmth in the scene, you might wish to bring back some of the pure greens that were apparent in the foliage. So you would take the yellow segment dot and slowly move it across towards the adjacent greener segment, watching your trees and bushes as you go. Once the green starts to come through you could change direction on your movement either outwards (boosting the new green tones) or inwards (lessening the saturation if the green is becoming too strong). This feature provides a very powerful way of defining the specific tones and saturation levels in your image.

7) Lens Distortion & Abberation Corrections
Accessed on the Lens Abberation Correction Tab, these controls include the following types of corrections – vignette, barrel / pincushion distortion, & chromatic aberrations.

Firstly we find the vignette option. This is termed ‘Marginal Luminance Correction’. Presumably someone at Silkypix has got out their Japanese-English dictionary to come up with that. I interpret it as meaning the lighting values (luminance) at the edges (Marginal – ‘at the margins’). This common brightness falloff at the corners of a photo is mostly evident at wide angles (more so on cheaper zooms) and at wider apertures. It is often most discernable with these conditions on the sky section of landscapes (ie top left and top right corners), but would equally affect the bottom corners as well.

You have two sliders, the top one for setting the focal length of the shot, and then the other for a Compensation setting setting. Annoyingly this defaults to 100, giving a ludicrously strong effect immediately, so I always reduce the compensation slider to zero, then tick the apply box. Check the focal length slider is correct and then gradually move the percentage slider to the right to introduce more brightness at each corner. If you want, for creative effect, you can reduce the slider to introduce a specific ‘vignette’ appearance. For wide angle shots you are probably looking at around +8-12, and this increases proportionately as the focal length increases, maybe +30-40 up to 100mm or so. But you be the judge based on the extent of any visible darkening at the corners. The effect is more apparent in deep dark (polarised for example) skies, less so where there is more complex textures such as trees and foliage.

Next are the Distortion Correction sliders, this time a ‘Correction Balance’ and Compensation (strength) option. We also have here an ‘Auto’ box, and alternatively ‘Manual’. The Auto function will only be available for DA or possibly similar functioning lenses from independent brands. If this is available then by all means tick the box – this should produce a result similar to having the correction enabled on the camera. I have used this sometimes, but I have felt that it seemed a bit excessive, and also it crops in too far for my liking, so I mostly click Manual and use the sliders to achieve a reduced effect. I make no claims to much knowledge in this field of complex lens corrections, so I just use the slider to reduce any obvious barrel or pincushion effect. The Correction Balance slider adjusts the weighting given to the correction to either the centre or edges of the image, and the Compensation slider simply controls the amount of the set correction.

What we are mainly concerned with here are any obvious curved lines that should be straight. On modern Pentax lenses this is not generally a huge problem as far as I understand, but it can be significant on cheaper wide-angle zooms and some independent branded primes, or older K mount equipment. My suggestion would be to use this feature here to reduce the most obvious poor effects if you have them, and if you have any really complex or extreme distortions, then study up a bit and try out some other software that offers more sophisticated control specifically in this area.

Finally the Lateral Chromatic Abberation section deals with this type of optical phenomenon, which causes what is known as ‘Colour Fringing’ (often Purple, or ‘PF’). These controls also have the ‘Auto’ and ‘Manual’ option. Again, Auto will act in the same way as having the function active on the camera, and Manual gives you fine control over the red and blue channels. Zoom in on any aberrations (eg. fringing, often purple where extreme contrast lies along thin edges, such as then outlines of trees against a bright sky), and work the sliders to see the effect. Again, if you have a complex situation and multiple aspects of fringing then you might be advised to read up a bit and research on any alternative software that offers more comprehensive control.

Conclusions – (For now)
If you’ve got this far then I am sure you have prepared your photo beautifully (and you deserve a medal!). You have made use of the most important and key RAW image adjustments in Pentax Digital Camera Utility, and hopefully have extracted the very best out of your Pentax digital image. All that remains is to choose from the menu ‘Save As’ and select JPEG or 16bit TIFF from the dropdown. Give the image a name at this point or it will just default to the camera file name, and send it to your chosen computer folder for new images.

The RAW file will remain intact where it was before, with all of your adjustments recorded within the file. If you open it again in PDCU then everything will be set up as you left off and you can make further adjustments if you want, and then ‘save as’ a second version if you choose.

That’s all I’m going to cover for now. If you’re seeing this in a forum thread then please offer all of your own advice, and any corrections or additional points I may have missed – it would be much appreciated and I will gladly join in any debate! I will update in the future to incorporate any such corrections or other info and if the programme itself should change. In the meantime, happy RAW converting!

NIGEL MCGREGOR, LONDON UK, NOVEMBER 2012

Forum: Pentax Full Frame 05-27-2013, 07:04 AM

Why there might NOT be a FF
Posted By Kobayashi.K

Replies: 114
Views: 12,296

The skills of photographers in the film era were amazing. They could manually focus, adjust their aperture and speed and still keep their camera's steady.

Forum: Pentax K-5 & K-5 II 09-26-2012, 09:26 AM

IBIS is the road block to Pentax FF...
Posted By Winder

Replies: 55
Views: 6,175

I would definitely be interested. I prefer 4:3 as it makes better use of the image circle and there is nothing magical about 24x36mm. I want a sensor with as much surface area as possible, but I don't want bigger that what my glass can handle as far as IQ, CA, & vignetting. Of course my wish list would have a monochrome sensor with no AA or color filter.

I guess I am one of the few people who focus and recompose in the VF. People keep saying that edge quality is not as important, and for people who shot everything dead center and crop for composition in post that is true. I compose in the VF and moving a subject off center and with a lens like a 30mm Sigma F/1.4 that often puts them in a soft area of the lens. For people who use outer AF point it means that you will have trouble getting sharp images in the outer areas.

I really do worry about how well the FA lenses will work on a FF sensor. The images I have been able to find (31mm LTD) are on a Canon 5DII and he only posts the ones stopped down to F/5.6 - F/11. I sent the guy a message requesting wide open shots, but he has not responded.

Forum: Pentax DSLR Discussion 09-24-2012, 01:14 PM

Pentax/Ricoh: De-cripple the K-mount! PETITION
Posted By froeschle

Replies: 502
Views: 70,054

274 users already have signed this petition to de-cripple the Pentax K-mount (i.e. to restore the aperture ring coupler).

Excerpt from this interview:

Quote:

Q: Will the Pentax K-mount ever be "de-crippled" (i.e. will the aperture ring coupler be restored?)

Quote:

A: technology ... develops ... less importance for the users ... user merit ... user feelings ... if voices will be increased ... yes ...

One of the very few reasons, why I would consider to buy an APS-DSLR again: A de-crippled PKAF2-mount.
An important feature, which the D7000 offers but the K-5 II(s) still lacks.
Why not invest some cents or even dollars?

Pentaxians, let your voices be heard ;) :) !

Copied from #117:

Quote:

To summarize:

Statements from the interview at Photokina:
Feedback from enthusiast users will not be ignored in the Ricoh system.

A de-crippled K-mount would be realized (i.e. the aperture ring coupler would be restored), if such "user feelings" are expressed and the corresponding "voices will be increased".

Why this petition:
De-crippling the K-mount will lead to an increased and/or more reliable functionality with all lenses possessing an aperture ring.

Such an implementation would be straightforward (present in nearly all Pentax film SLRs) and at low cost (mechanical sensor + software implementation). Considering the price of a current DSLR, the additional charge should be marginal.

Thus, it is an ideal test case to check the promise of Pentax/Ricoh. Do they really care about the wishes of the enthusiast user base? Nikon, in comparison, cared and realized such a feature.

You did suggest some kind of "voting system or counting system" or "a poll". I asked for a counter or an "I'm in" button. This is the response I got from PentaxForums.com Staff:

I like being liked ;) . So, do so, if you wish (-> Pentax/Ricoh: De-cripple the K-mount! PETITION - PentaxForums.com). However, this thread is rather meant to support the idea or the petition (and not me :) ).
Just a reply here also would not be sufficient, as some members post several times and not all members agree with this campaign.
So, as in a typical petition, I have collected only the supporters up to now in the following way:

Supporter number xxx
Corresponding post #xxxx
Member name xxx (followed by a short comment in brackets)

LAST UPDATE: 12/03/2014 13:30 CEST

xxx #xxxx xxx
------------------------------------------
001 #---1 froeschle
002 #like Alfie (+ #--24: Count my vote!)
003 #like tibi
004 #---4 Aegon (old lenses more useful)
005 #---8 Docrwm (would be nice ... improvement)
006 #---9 Lowell Goudge (not just the crippled K mount ... flash system)
007 #like NaHoruk (+ #--13, great little feature)
008 #--14 paulh (cites 9 -> +1 to this)
009 #--17 kcobain1992 (I'm in)
010 #--18 Not a Number (I'm for this)
011 #--22 JoostW (I endorse a petition)
012 #--23 Tanzer (I'm all for it)
013 #--25 kaiserz (Awesome! I would love that on my next DSLR!)
014 #--27 kenyee (doesn't seem like a hard thing to add)
015 #--30 architorture (Please yes!continuing to develop full frame technologies)
016 #--31 geojazz (DE CRIPPLE THE K MOUNT!!!! )
017 #--32 LFLee (I'm in.)
018 #--33 Mattco26 (I'm all for this, #--85: Nikon does it for their "hobbyists" so why not Pentax?)
019 #--34 GabrielFFontes (Of course! De-cripple it, please)
020 #--35 jeffshaddix (+1 de-cripple it!)
021 #--36 wcchamp18 (+2 de-cripple it!)
022 #--37 Carloz (+1 for de-cripple - Nikon cares enough to maintain an uncrippled mount)
023 #--38 foto guy (+1 for de-crippling.)
024 #--41 Designosophy (This would make life with K and M type lenses so much easier. Why did they remove this capability in the first place)
025 #--43 TomTextura (great it would be to use any of the current FA lenses with aperture rings)
026 #--45 Canada_Rockies (Count me in for the de-crippled mount, and even more so for TTL)
027 #--48 Compur (Count me in.)
028 #--49 Grigoris (I'm also in)
029 #--50 DimitryMD (+1 from me)
030 #--51 aurele (Pentax could do the same : uncripple the mount)
031 #like french_mike (+ #--52, +1)
032 #--53 Warpig (I'm in too)
033 #--54 wisent (count me in)
034 #--55 Macario (De-crippeling the K-mount)
035 #--62 ossy59 (Please Pentax, uncripple the K-mount. It´s only a few Cent or Dollars, and will help us (old) Pentaxians a lot. For me the uncrippled K-mount is more interesting than a FF-DSLR!)
036 #--63 mattiag (Please Pentax-Ricoh de-cripple the K-mount! This can be one of the most important new features in the upcoming cameras, more than FF.)
037 #--64 GibbyTheMole (Yep... I'm for de-crippling the mount.)
038 #--65 Mace (I am also pro a de-crippled K-mount.)
039 #--67 Designosophy (Sounds good to me.)
040 #--68 paulusje (And to me.)
041 #--70 drougge (Yes please, uncrippled mount!)
042 #--72 theperception2008 (I would like to have a non-crippled k-mount!)
043 #--76 Echo Eric (There should be no reason why a new top of the line SLR cant preform as my 30 year old K1000 can.)
044 #--78 geofferiah (I will only buy a Pentax FF if it comes with an un-crippled K mount.)
045 #--86 Quicksand (An uncrippled mount would be pretty good)
046 #--95 TaoMaas (I see uncrippling the k-mount as simply a way to make one of Pentax's biggest selling points even better.)
047 #-107 iht (It'd be nice to take pictures with a de-crippled mount)
048 #-115 BigDave (+1 for de-cripling the K mount)
049 #+dfn fibbo
050 #+dfn zackspeed (-> send this list to Mr. Shiro Kondo)
051 #+dfn gianni
052 #like southlander (+ #-119, Yes please, decripple the K mount.)
053 #+dfn TaxPen
054 #like feverbeaver (add me to the list)
055 #like adrianpglover (Add me to the list! Full manual mode only is not sufficient backward compatibility!)
056 #-125 V'cuz (Add me to the De-cripple the K-mount petition.)
057 #-126 riff (Yes a decrippled k mount is something I want badly!)
058 #-127 yyyzzz (Count me in.)
059 #like tromboads (+ #-128, +1 over here too!)
060 #p--9 Fogel70 (I voted for Uncrippled K mount for M and K series lenses)
061 #p-12 baro-nite (I maxed my votes for K-mount continuation and uncrippled K-mount.)
062 #p-39 befocus (Uncrippled K mount)
063 #p-54 Digitalis (a non-crippled KAF-mount)
064 #p110 stanislav (I would actually like non crippled K mount)
065 #like eddie1960 (liked #---1)
066 #like hjb981 (+ #-134, liked #-123, Very good initiative!!!)
067 #Bdfn ergoden (Blesator -> will ich auch ... möchte ... Blendenring verwenden können)
068 #Bdfn wema02
069 #-131 Kreepax (Add my vote)
070 #-133 Yamagi (a de-crippled mount would be wonderful)
071 #Bdfn ice-dragon
072 #Bdfn Al
073 #Bdfn Arnold (I want the aperture simulator back!)
074 #-137 regentag (I would buy a new Body just for that feature)
075 #like vrrattko (liked #---1, decrippled K mount is a lovely idea)
076 #Bdfn Lefty de Vito (Somit bin ich für den Blesator)
077 #Bdfn Juan
078 #Bdfn derstefan
079 #Bdfn klaus123
080 #Bdfn PINSELHUT
081 #Bdfn Normag 1
082 #Bdfn UndKlick
083 #Bdfn cola (Der Blendensimulator und KB Format würden mich zum Kauf einer PENTAX DSLR bringen)
084 #Bdfn bmk
085 #Bdfn Rauti2
086 #-dfn ErnstK (PM: möchte ich deine 'Petition' ... gern unterstützen)
087 #-139 networker
088 #Bdfn Austro-Diesel (Wär schon schön, fände ich nützlicher als 24x36 mm ...)
089 #Bdfn Orangefield
090 #Bdfn bmu
091 #-141 fs999 (need it for my bellows)
092 #-142 agchang (Pentax has proudly marketed the fact of backward lens compatibility with all slr/dslr cameras and should do so fully in all feature aspects)
093 #-144 Spodeworld (+1! Yes! I love this feature on my D7000 ! Add it to Pentax!)
094 #-145 perron
095 #Bdfn wolfi_z (a great improvement on the issue of backward compatibility)
096 #Bdfn boxer-harry
097 #Bdfn einherzfuerknipser
098 #Bdfn Ramashang
099 #Bdfn AES
100 #Bdfn Yogibaer.bln
101 #Bdfn 1a rabenvater
102 #Bdfn Teevogel
103 #Bdfn penlei (ein Traum könnte in Erfüllung gehen)
104 #Bdfn BerndS67
105 #Bdfn paul
106 #-151 carrrlangas (yes please!)
107 #-152 tlong423 (I would love to see Pentax de-cripple the K mount.)
108 #-153 JorgeR (Yes, please)
109 #-156 jt_cph_dk (Yes. I would like a de-crippled Pentax DSLR)
110 #like UliBär (+ #-157, I vote definitely YES!)
111 #Bdfn learza
112 #-163 iDon (I would definitely buy a de-crippled Pentax DSLR)
113 #-167 Pioneer (I would like to have the K-Mount on my dslr to work the way it does on my PZ-1p. That should not be that difficult to do.)
114 #like Nass (liked #---1)
115 #Bdfn HKMKonz
116 #Bdfn Hasenvater
117 #-170 Roob-N-Boots (Count me in.)
118 #-171 Davidw0815 (Open aperture metering with old lenses would be fantastic!)
119 #Bdfn Eisbär
120 #-179 MysteryOnion (De-cripple it!)
121 #-184 bobpur (Just not acceptable that Pentax has not included this on the K5s after all they advertise the compatibility with the older lenses. If Nikon can do it Pentax should.)
122 #-187 Digitalis (you can count me in. Pentax didn't cripple the mount with the 645D)
123 #-188 Jonathan Mac (I'd love a de-crippled K-mount and yes, it's a feature I would be prepared to pay for.)
124 #-190 topace (let me use my aperture rings the way they were meant to be used, please.)
125 #-191 henrx (Positive)
126 #-192 codeblock (+1, count me in.)
127 #-193 pixelsaurus (+1. Seems like a good idea.)
128 #-194 Gerbermiester (+1. Decripple the K-mount!)
129 #-195 _quicksilver_ (+1 De-cripple it -Now!!)
130 #Bdfn Master of Disaster (Also bin ich dabei!)
131 #Bdfn manolo (Als leidenschaftlicher Altgerätenutzer schließe ich mich natürlich an.)
132 #Bdfn pid (Mich auch!)
133 #-197 dlacouture (I'm in)
134 #-198 MiLKMAN (Count me in)
135 #Bdfn henne (Please give me back the freedom to fully use all the Pentax lenses I've been buying since 1980!)
136 #Bdfn waldbaer59
137 #Bdfn tatrei
138 #-202 obscura (if one of your main selling points is great backward lens compatibility, why the hell do you cripple it ?)
139 #-203 Lupine (so count me in as well, for both de-crippling the K-mount and restoring TTL)
140 #-204 Stratman (I'm in too!!)
141 #-206 gabriel_bc (I've long, long wished that Pentax would de-cripple the K mount. I would buy a new Pentax dSLR merely to have this feature.)
142 #-208 bofh (I'd like to have a full featured KAF2 mount)
143 #-210 lguckert79 (i would love to be able to meter and have controle of my apture ring again)
144 #-214 glasbak (Yes, I want a decrippled mount)
145 #-217 zokes83 (+1 Yes I want a De-crippled K-mount with a aperture ring coupler!)
146 #-220 geedee (A De-crippled K-Mount with a aperture ring coupler would be great! Let's hope Pentax reacts as they have announced.)
147 #like Katier (liked #---1)
148 #Bdfn africanarcher
149 #Bdfn Schellnsau
150 #Bdfn Alfix
151 #-233 tcom (+1, please add me on this list)
152 #-Moderator Bramela (+ #-294, the Pentax consumer wishes to be heard on this issue)
153 #Bdfn blaubaersurfen
154 #Bdfn AS
155 #-235 utak (Yes, please count me in: de-cripple.)
156 #Bdfn Thomasz Xatnep (You can count me in. For a full-frame Pentax this would be mandatory)
157 #-236 Transit (Yes please !)
158 #-237 stingray (Count me in, yes the old fashion way.)
159 #-238 Pentaxle (Very much in favor, heal the system.)
160 #-239 grahame (Pentax should have done that much earlier! Or it shouldn't have been crippled at the beginning!)
161 #-241 floriko
162 #-242 p38arover
163 #-245 Bukaj (Shooting with [...] film cameras with non-crippled mounts makes me wish Pentax de-crippled the mount on current DSLRs)
164 #-249 LaurenOE
165 #-250 rockmaster1964
166 #Bdfn reisschuessel
167 #Bdfn Heribert
168 #Bdfn JGS
169 #-253 kadajawi (if they added the feature for the next camera I'd have to buy a new camera... again!)
170 #-255 TedH42 (using the green button is disruptive, especially for hand-held macro shots)
171 #-256 torge (Yes Ricoh, please do it!)
172 #-257 gilsouthwood (where the hell is the aperture ring, I'm all for this)
173 #Bdfn knixhh
174 #-267 retroflex (Yes to de-crippling!)
175 #-270 deus ursus (I'm all for de-crippling)
176 #-271 hopsing
177 #like cali92rs (Yes! + #-272)
178 #like SpartanD63
179 #Bdfn Uliwin
180 #-276 vkaro45 (I vote to de-criple the k-mount)
181 #-277 TomB_tx (Wish they would. If Nikon can keep compatibility, so could Pentax.)
182 #-279 JohnBee (Count me in!)
183 #-284 mrNewt (Please count my vote)
184 #-285 Shell650
185 #like jcdoss (+ #-286,+1!)
186 #-287 matakacha (Count me in.)
187 #-288 Dmitriy (I vote for de-crippled full K-mount (with the stop-down coupler/indicator))
188 #-289 VisualDarkness (I'm in too! Pentax would have the best mechanical DSLR mount!)
189 #-291 Pedrodelta (+1 from me too....)
190 #Bdfn Sirius
191 #-293 strixaluco (Add my voice, please.)
192 #-295 chhayanat (Vote for K-mount)
193 #-296 minahasa (I'm in. My old glass needs more respect.)
194 #-297 kevbirder (I would definitely like an uncrippled mount.)
195 #-298 robdewall7 (+1 for me)
196 #-299 filoxophy (I'm in for a decrippled K-Mount)
197 #like drache (Yes please start being awesome again.)
198 #-301 Mr Manual (What a great idea. Might we one day see a FF de-crippled K-mount.)
199 #-303 mattt (Add my name.)
200 #-304 macTak (I would love to see this as well.)
201 #Bdfn Thomas W. [Heidelberg]
202 #Bdfn Dimitris E. [Athen]
203 #Bdfn Thomas F. [München]
204 #Bdfn Michele S. [München]
205 #Bdfn sixtyeight
206 #-306 PPPPPP42 (I wouldn't even bother with Pentax if not for backwards compatibility so this is kinda a big deal)
207 #-307 GordonD (A Full Frame DSLR needs De-Crippled mount!)
208 #-308 Gray (Yes! The cripped K-mount severely weakens Pentax's claim to K-mount backward compatibility. Now imagine how compelling a FF dSLR with uncrippled KAF2 mount will be to owners of 35mm classic lenses)
209 #Bdfn Macshark
210 #-312 g.a.p
211 #-313 Petor
212 #-314 Saxplayer1004 (sign me up. hopefully it comes out on the next round of bodies... )
213 #-316 Billgscott (Yes please!)
214 #-317 Mazhe (Sign me up. Let the sun shine on K and M series as they deserve)
215 #like tzrenz0 (this will send the backwards compatibility of pentax to new heights)
216 #like tx0h
217 #-318 sphenodont (The legacy lenses are supposed to be a selling point, so why not fully embrace them? )
218 #-319 pentaxdevotee (please d-cripple)
219 #-321 indy (Pentax needs to de-cripple and go beyond.)
220 #-323 Guakala (De-cripple it now!)
221 #like BigJPR (it sounds like common sense to me!!!)
222 #-325 apathey2131978
223 #-328 deaning (Pentax, listen to the people! )
224 #-329 Belgarchi (Pentax, I want to be able to use my aperture rings!)
225 #-330 Pepe Le Pew (Sign me up Scotty )
226 #-332 Nuff
227 #like stens (liked #---1)
228 #-333 Corto-PA (Signed.)
229 #-334 Pontax
230 #-335 iveous (I would LOVE that feature)
231 #-336 OJGoreng (The crippled mount is the only thing about the K5 I really, really don't like.)
232 #-337 kiwi_jono (I'm in - I would love to see a decrippled mount too.)
233 #-338 kristaps
234 #-341 Brisboy (Decripple please)
235 #-342 Boris_Akunin (Thou shalt not sell crippled cameras!)
236 #-343 todd (i'm in!)
237 #Bdfn Tilla
238 #-345 camerons
239 #-347 Atlantis (this would be a small dream come true)
240 #-348 Johnson (Do away with the minor cost saving Crippled-K)
241 #-349 joergens.mi (would be happy to have this)
242 #Bdfn jedie
243 #-352 Nacho_tyr (+1, from chile)
244 #-353 dominique
245 #-354 tim60 (This would help all users who want to do more sophisticated work, with any series of lenses.)
246 #-355 Quinquen (+1 from Chile, South America)
247 #rice RiceHigh (I have requested this for years now)
248 #-357 tzrenz0 (i'd love to see this on the next offering)
249 #-358 rparmar (one of the main reasons i migrated from pentax to mft. It was a continuous frustration.)
250 #-359 krazykat
251 #Bdfn b.petit
252 #-361 Stephen Coe (I have been wanting this for years.)
253 #-363 Heliotrope (this meager addition would increase the absolute value of
254 #Bdfn Haebbie
255 #-366 SyncGuy
256 #like OldPentaxFan
257 #-368 Sangosto (Yes, we can.)
258 #-369 jbinpg
259 #-370 astraeus19 (Pentax really needs to tout the fact that you can use all old lenses, and make that as easy as possible if they want to sell more bodies under current conditions.)
260 #-371 Heisenberg (I bought my K-5 under the pretense that it was compatible with older lenses, and was very dissapointed to see that there was this major limitation.)
261 #-376 Odinz (My old mechanical low-tech camera bodies can do this without a problem, Please.....De-Cripple the K-Mount!! )
262 #-377 Hornet
263 #-378 Old Man
264 #-379 pento57mm (tired of overriding via body settings)
265 #-380 insulinguy
266 #like lectrolink
267 #like Kmounter (What do we want? Un-cripple the K-mount! When do we want it? NOW!)
268 #-385 nater (I [...] considered creating an online petition for this)
269 #-387 LSR (Please sign me up too.)
270 #like ElleGi53
271 #like valarie (Im In, so many great lenses, that are a bitch to use on the new mount!)
272 #-392 bmf
273 #-395 Fluke
274 #-397 raulmercado

(#+dfn: Blesator and Nikon; #Bdfn: Petition #p---: poll)

Please add your positive vote at the end of the thread.

A printed version of this thread was given to the Pentax representatives at CP+.
The journalist of pentaxforums.com also included a brief paragraph about it and explained it verbally.
Unfortunately, they did not want to comment on it.
There was also no chance to chat with them after the interview.
So, communication still seems to be based on "transfer and pray".
Hopefully, they will take our feedback to heart.

Search took 0.00 seconds | Showing results 1 to 21 of 21

Forum Jump

Search Results for Liked Posts

Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!