Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home

Showing results 1 to 25 of 31 Search: Liked Posts
Forum: Pentax K-1 09-05-2018, 03:50 AM  
K1 Mk ii. Is Pentax marketing as dead as Tony Northrup says?
Posted By noelpolar
Replies: 148
Views: 8,785
Mmmm ...... 8 years retired for me this month..... marketing analysis, business development, endless debates over things, meeting after meeting....egos galore..... etc etc so miss it..... all dead to me now....

Forum: Pentax K-1 09-04-2018, 06:00 AM  
K1 Mk ii. Is Pentax marketing as dead as Tony Northrup says?
Posted By BigMackCam
Replies: 148
Views: 8,785
As is yours, but in the opposite direction. We can agree to differ, though, and hold our individual opinions, surely?

You must believe as you see fit, of course. But it's a pity you can't respect my views and accept my stated business background at face value, as I have yours.

Without citing actual data sources to support your views, that's all they are - your views. If you state them as fact in an open forum, you might reasonably expect to have them challenged (in a respectful manner, of course). And we've both provided the same amount of proof to back up our opinions... i.e. none :o

EDIT: I see you edited your post, but the above is still relevant. I will add, though, I'm no fanboy (a derogatory term, IMHO, but I get the gist). I shoot multiple Pentax and Sony ILCs, with a large number of AF K-mount lenses (including most of the APS-C glass you use, plus a bunch more), some mid-to-pro-level full-frame A-mount lenses, and an obscene amount of vintage manual glass (most of which I choose to shoot with Sony). I won't deny that I really like Pentax gear, but it's far from perfect, and the company frustrates me in some respects. I see different flaws with Sony, both the equipment and the corporation. I'm sure if I shot Nikon , Canon, Fuji, Olympus or Panasoniic I'd be equally balanced and realistic in my views of them. I see obvious flaws in all of those companies' equipment and business models even without owning their gear...

Good luck to you also.
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 08-30-2018, 02:42 PM  
Photo indexer/organizer for Mac
Posted By jatrax
Replies: 21
Views: 570
Nothing wrong with using folders. LR makes a new folder for every date when I import. So all photos are in a folder by the date taken. BUT, you have in LR an excellent tool to go way beyond folders. Using a few simple keywords, and if you want the facial recognition system greatly increases the adapability of your system. And in the long run is the only way to actually find something when the number of images gets big enough.

I used folders named for each shoot for many years but eventually realized that looking at a folder title like "waterfall on hike" was rather useless 10 years later. Took me a lot of time but I have my images in folders by date and all images indexed by keyword going back to 2008.
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 08-24-2018, 01:41 PM  
Lightroom got an update today
Posted By boriscleto
Replies: 6
Views: 559
And there won't be. Lightroom 6 is no longer supported.
Forum: Pentax K-1 06-29-2018, 11:22 PM  
K-1 Motorsport Photography: Tatts Finke Desert Race 2018
Posted By Joshua A
Replies: 8
Views: 788
Last year, I had the pleasure to be part of the media crew for the Tatt's Finke Desert Race. Due to contractual obligations, I was unable to post about my use of Pentax gear at that event, but as I am shooting for myself this year, I am able to share my experiences. So here's a little write up about my opinions and thoughts on using the K-1 as a sports camera.

Of course, the best part of using any Pentax camera, is the intuitive ergonomics of both their bodies and lenses, and in this regard, the combination of the K-1 and the DFA* 70-200mm excel. The only downside to this setup is the 3kg weight of it all, but in my opinion, this doesn't constitute as a massive problem given what I had to bring with me as a pro the previous year (last years setup included three bodies; K-1, K-3ii & K-5, as well as three lenses; Tamron SP 300mm f2.8 AF, DFA* 70-200mm f2.8 & DA* 16-50mm f2.8). Therefore, I feel that in this use case, this combination is perfect.

Aside from the ergonomics, the other unique feature of Pentax camera gear is the weather resistance. In my experience, Pentax camera gear can handle almost all weather conditions, ranging from torrential rain, +40*C Central Australian summers, and sub-zero Central Australian Winters. Unfortunately there are things that Pentax cameras cannot reliably handle, namely total immersion in water, and the spray of salt water. As a third item in this list, Pentax gear cannot beat the bull dust of Central Australia. As you can imagine, the ultra fine sand of Central Australia is incredibly abrasive, and at an event such as this, plenty of it is constantly in contact with your camera. Although my gear held up better than that of many of my peers, and is still functioning perfectly, there is now, after 3 years of exposure, grit in both the focus and zoom rings. Considering the length of time I have used the DFA* 70-200mm, I believe that this isn't detrimental to the lens, but it does detract from you confidence in the weather sealing of Pentax equipment. On the otherhand, all of the other gear continues to work without problem, so this could just be a once off, and a quick run under the tap removes most of the offending dust (PS, do not run water over your camera gear, even if I do)

When it comes to setting up the Pentax K-1 for motorsports, I have found the most success setting the 'Focus Hold' setting to 'High', setting the camera up for 'Back Button Focus', setting the AF-C settings to 'Focus Priority' and making sure the shutter is set to 'Release Priority'. This combination allows me to adequately focus continually on cars and motorbikes with a high success rate, whist also maintaining complete control over the camera by allowing me to override the camera at any time. I also shoot in Hyper-Program mode 'P', or in Manual depending on if there is changing lighting where I am shooting or if the lighting is constant. Another tip, is to set the DFA* 70-200mm f2.8 to AF/M mode, as in this mode, any adjustments to the focus ring immediately cancel AF.
And before anyone start to whinge and tell me Pentax AF is terrible, in 2017 I had to take saleable photos of all 700 motorbike competitors, and 140 car competitors, a challenge that I more than adequately met despite speeds of over 200km/h at certain points of the race.

That said, you do have to work the K-1 harder than most other modern full frame cameras. In my experience working with a newspaper, their D5 has much snappier AF than the K-1. The photographer has to be constantly aware of the advantages and disadvantages of their gear, and personally, my Pentax K-1 ticks the most boxes in my use case. For example, I wouldn't be able to crop as heavily with the D4 as I do with the K-1, and the dynamic range isn't as good at low ISO. All of this wouldn't matter if the K-1 was unable to keep up, but in my experience, with practice, the K-1 makes a suitable sports camera.

Last but not least, the pleasure I get from using my Pentax equipment is worth a lot all on its own. To get a similar feel in your hands from other manufactures, you're looking at spending double the money, and in my eyes, that is just not on (aside from Olympus, but lets not muddle the story hey). In the end, the camera and lens is only as good as the photographer, and even after a few years with the k-1, it still continually exceeds my abilities, which humbles me greatly.

Anyway, thanks for reading, and I hope you managed to at least enjoy your reading and my photos. Maybe you even learnt something. I look forward to some feedback and critique. Thanks in advance. Kindest regards, Josh Abbott.

I leave you with two last samples!

Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 07-02-2018, 06:43 AM  
Did you leave Adobe? Where did you go?
Posted By Wheatfield
Replies: 116
Views: 5,222
That is available to you if you drop your subscription to Lightroom.

This is what they are doing. Stop paying your CC subscription and a few options get turned off but the core program, the parts that do what you want keep working.
You could give them a 1 month payment and be done with it, and you would have the core program for as long as you want. Have you not checked into this at all?

You have obviously never worked as a professional photographer. I have. You are not correct in your assessment.

If you are taking up hobbies you can't afford, then that is something you need to be looking at, but as a hobbyist, all you need to do to justify a purchase is to decide you want it and can afford it. If you can't afford your hobby, take up one that isn't as expensive.

As a working pro, I had to account for every nickel I wanted to spend on equipment, and for the most part I had to work a second job not related to photography to ensure there was food on the table. That is the reality of the majority of pro photographers.
Pro photographers aren't out there buying every new piece of equipment to come along. Most are using several generations old gear, scouring the used market for deals, and praying that their car will start to get them to their next gig.

The "pro" camera market is not driven by pro photographers, it is supported by well heeled amateurs who can afford and are willing to buy thousands of dollars worth of new equipment. Were it not for amateurs and hobbyists, the "pro" equipment market would not exist.
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 06-19-2018, 10:27 AM  
Did you leave Adobe? Where did you go?
Posted By Wheatfield
Replies: 116
Views: 5,222
When something like 90% of the users of your product have stolen it, and nothing seems able to deter this, it's only natural for the company to clamp down. I found myself upgrading pretty frequently when I decided to stop being a pirate and start purchasing Photoshop.
Specifically, I bought every iteration of the CS series of Photoshop and Lightroom, so I suspect that for me the subscription model would be pretty much a wash moneywise.
I do wish when I bought CS6 that i hadn't cheaped out. I should have sprung for the entire suite rather than the vanilla version. There are some features I would like to have that I will need to go to the CC version for if I decide they are a must have.
So far I haven't gone to the CC versions, as the standalones are (mostly) doing what i want.

---------- Post added 06-19-18 at 11:52 AM ----------

Using this logic, It's OK to steal a Ferrari if you can't afford it. Sorry, I'm not buying into that logic, nor am I buying into the strawman that you've set up about 1 pirate = 1 lost sale. It comes down to protection of property rights and not enabling thievery.

If it results in some sales, then they are ahead compared to doing nothing and having more and more people bypass the purchase option when it's just as easy (and far cheaper) to go the pirate route and pay nothing. If they annoy some people, they are probably the people who would have stolen the software anyway. I'm not in the business of appeasing thieves, and I don't believe Adobe, or any other business should be.
Thievery is creeping horse dung. If you set yourself up as a patsy, word gets around pretty quickly, and suddenly every man and his dog are at your door waiting to rip you off, and all of a sudden even the people who would have bought from you are stealing what you have to sell.

I've kicked a few serial abusers of policy out of my store because I am not willing to move from being taken advantage of to being outright stolen from. Are these "customers" unhappy about having their desires for free stuff unfulfilled? Absolutely they are.
Do I care? Not a whit. People who steal from your business are affecting your bottom line no matter how you look at it. Thieves cost the honest people money, as it's the honest ones who are paying for the shrinkage.

In the case of Adobe, the price of Photoshop was based on the cost of development plus a desired profit margin divided by the number of products they projected selling during the life of the product. This is how all businesses set prices.
If all the customers who stole Photoshop had paid for it instead, the price for everyone would have been lower. It really is that simple. Even if the customers who could have afforded it but chose not to because they were able to get it for free, the unit price would have been much lower.

I'm one of those people. I was well able to afford the 4 versions of Photoshop that I was using illegally, but I chose the dishonest route because it was cheaper. Why buy what I can steal, when the theft allows me to buy what I cannot steal with no hardship? I eventually woke up and changed my ways, but not before being part of the problem.

Imagine if you are in the business of selling cars and 90% of the inventory you bring in dissapears off the lot, never to be seen again. That leaves you with 10% of your inventory to make enough to stay in business. Exactly what do you think you are going to have to do to the price of what you have left to make a profit?
It really doesn't matter if the 9 out of 10 cars stolen wouldn't have been purchased anyway, the fact is, they are lost revenue, and in order to stay in business, you need to make that revenue back up. Since all you have is cars, that revenue has to be made up by selling fewer cars at a greatly increased price.

I know, you are going to come back and say a car is far different from a DVD with some software, but the principle is exactly the same. Your business projects a certain amount of sales, and those sales are being eroded seriously by thieves. In order to stay afloat, you have to charge the honest people more for your product.

If you enable theft, then you are going to lose sales. It's really that simple.
Forum: Pentax K-1 05-21-2018, 10:55 AM  
K-1mkII overpowered NR. Firmware update?
Posted By lennyl
Replies: 87
Views: 4,978
I do not believe in all the reviews. I sold K-1 and bought K-1 II.

benefits for K-1 II:
- accurate AF-S (no hunting), better AF-C (only about 5% of inaccurate focused photos)......but only for spot AF point and A-9/SEL-2 mode
- Pixel Shift Resolution to be used handheld without artefacts
- K-1 II ISO 16.000 look like ISO 12.800 on K-1

on the left K-1 II, on the right K-1....the same lens, the same settings (DNG, NR OFF.....export from Adobe Lightroom CC2015 without adjustments)
AF-C SEL-2, ISO 1.250, Tamron AF SP 70-200mm f/2,8 Di LD (IF) Macro

AF-S spot AF, ISO 6.400, Pentax HD PENTAX-D FA 150-450mm f/4.5-5.6 ED DC AW

I would buy K-1 II again if someone asked me.
Forum: Pentax K-1 05-20-2018, 09:09 AM  
K-1II review... Opportunity to get banned on DPR
Posted By Racer X 69
Replies: 428
Views: 22,872
Looks like this discussion has run the course.

Time for everyone to go out and try and squeeze the most from their "inferior" Pentax gear.

Forum: Pentax K-1 05-16-2018, 07:07 AM  
K-1mkII overpowered NR. Firmware update?
Posted By Rondec
Replies: 87
Views: 4,978
I don't care if Pentax makes the iso that the accelerator kicks in optional or not. I think these threads are full of pixel peepers perseverating over very tiny differences that just aren't going to make any difference for 98 percent of images shot at normal viewing/printing sizes. Beyond which, if you are wanting to print maximal sizes, you are going to want to shoot as low iso as possible -- not in the iso 800 plus where the accelerator chip will be kicking in.

Long story short, DP Review has made Much Ado about very little and while you can pick out miniscule differences between the K-1 and k-1 II, the end results are going to be more similar than different.
Forum: Pentax K-1 05-17-2018, 03:12 AM  
K-1II review... Opportunity to get banned on DPR
Posted By Rondec
Replies: 428
Views: 22,872
You are right, if you have a good copy of the 50 macro. But apparently theirs has decentering or something as the right upper quadrant of their test image is really soft throughout. As it currently stands, people are constantly pulling bits out of that part of the image and you can't draw much conclusion from them as a result.

As to the general question, I have yet to see someone take a photo which was "damaged" by the noise reduction offered by the K-1 II. Obviously this is a new camera and so we don't have much in the way of examples, but I see people blowing up pixels and pointing out specks of dust that may be missing at iso 800. But when I shoot at iso 800 it isn't generally with the intention of printing big enough that dust pixels will show up and the bigger issue is whether the overall image is effected and my guess is that it isn't.

I still am waiting on the astro photographers among us to test if this will affect star fields (I don't shoot astro myself), but that is the one application where I think this might have a negative aspect to it.

In general, I have said before and I will say again, the accelerator more than matches the majority of photographers ability to denoise an image without losing detail, with minimal time and effort involved. And that second part is really important as well and not to be glossed over. Even if you can get roughly the same results running your images through DXO Mark's PRIME noise reduction software, that takes time -- quite a bit of time to run each image through. From an efficiency stand point, this is a definite winner with minimal clear loss.

It feels as though you and several others are arguing more on the principle of the thing. RAW files just should be pure with minimal pre-processing done on them. Even if you could show that no detail was lost at all it would just feel wrong to do noise reduction of some kind on the RAW file.

I wouldn't be surprised if Pentax does eventually allow some tweakability to this to allow it to kick in at different isos, but certainly at the upper end of the iso spectrum there is no point to even shooting those unless you have some noise reduction, whether in camera or out of camera.
Forum: Pentax K-1 05-11-2018, 08:42 PM  
K-1 MK2 - Unhappy with results at moderate ISO settings
Posted By Ian Stuart Forsyth
Replies: 560
Views: 27,244
I think it is more important to expose for where you want white to fall within the sensor ability to convert light information into data. If you expose for the shadows you are unknowing placing where you record white within the saturation space you are allowed and clip tonal values in zones 10-8.

You can easily test this by reduce the read noise that is captured in a image, this can be done by selection an exposure at base iso ( where we see the highest level of read noise) and then raising the iso to the point just before the camera uses NR and or stops using gain)
I am using the D800 as that is the only camera that is charged now

You can see that at iso 100 it produces 3.4 electrons and at iso 1600 it produces 2.3 electrons

To test this lets take 2 images that use the same exposure f/2.8 1/6 while changing the iso levels, one at iso 100 and the other at iso 1600 and look at objects that fall in zone 1-3

The top one is iso 100 and the bottom is iso 1600, for the iso 1600 I had to adjust the output brightness to the same level as the iso 100 shot, and because I increase the iso to 1600 I clipped all the data found above middle grey but as you can see that when I decease the read noise there is little effect on the noise we see between the 2 image.

However if I was to lift the shadows to the point that these tone values enter into the middle and highlights as you would in a HDR image then yes we would see some noise variances. Sony sensors produce so little read noise that they are really noiseless until we dig deep into the shadow well below the 10 zones that we can display as a medium, its the shot noise that decides how much noise we see in most of our work until we start doing HDR and compressing the full DR the sensor can capture into that of what we can display our images, shot noise is still greater contributor in a lot of what we shoot.
Forum: Pentax K-1 05-10-2018, 10:16 PM  
K-1II review... Opportunity to get banned on DPR
Posted By Shivaess
Replies: 428
Views: 22,872
What is wrong with you? This is an inflammatory post when I have been nothing but polite. The person I quoted is a well respected technical expert who owns a business analyzing sensor data. He has also been nothing but professional on "the site that shall not be named". I have used the technique outlined because while its not fool proof I'm not about to buy a K-1 to test my K-1ii against to determine if I should swap them out.

Iso invariance -
There now I'm quoting this site. Please have some manners in the future.
Forum: Pentax K-1 05-10-2018, 06:52 PM  
K-1II review... Opportunity to get banned on DPR
Posted By photoptimist
Replies: 428
Views: 22,872
For linear filters (e.g., averaging adjacent pixels together or various convolution-based noise filters), the relationship between noise reduction and detail reduction is a mathematical fact. And if Ricoh is only using simple NR, then people have reason to be concerned about the accelerator.

Nonlinear filters are a differ beast entirely. There's a lot of really clever signal reconstruction methods that use what is known about the statistical properties of noise versus the statistical properties of signals to maximize noise removal while minimizing signal degradation. Maximum likelihood estimators, for example, can look at a set of pixels and slightly correct them to make them less noise-like and more signal-like. And we must admit that the splotchy saturated speckles of chroma noise, for example, are extremely unlike any image. Moreover, even if you take a picture of chroma noise splotches, a properly designed filter would notice that the image is "too splotchy" for just noise and not entirely remove the splotches that are actually in the scene.

It's going to take a lot more that an FFT of the noise to characterize what the chip is doing and whether it affects images in any detrimental way.
Forum: Pentax K-1 05-11-2018, 09:11 AM  
K-1 MK2 - Unhappy with results at moderate ISO settings
Posted By stevebrot
Replies: 560
Views: 27,244
Now you are in Voodoo territory...cue the theramin...

Forum: Pentax K-1 05-09-2018, 08:52 PM  
K-1 MK2 - Unhappy with results at moderate ISO settings
Posted By Ian Stuart Forsyth
Replies: 560
Views: 27,244
It really depends on why and how it becomes significant, even when we are shooting at base iso it really is not that hard to find the tell tail signs of shot noise in a photo.

The biggest hurdle is that for the first 3 stops of the tonal range(zone10-8) in a scene is using 75% of the space a sensor can store as light information( signal).

take this photo

If you take a look at 100% you can see shot noise creeping in easily, on the right the image is take using the cameras meter set on middle grey and the right one stop larger exposure

The reason why is how light information is captured, if we expose to the right and place objects found in a scene to appear as white close to clipping ( zone 10) as not to clip that signal is near saturation and we have captured a lot of information.
Now here lies the problem anything that falls in zone 9 only captures half the signal as zone 10. Here this still is not a big deal as our signal is still rather large and shot noise has very little influence.

Now we go to zone 8 it has only gather a signal that is 1/4 of the signal that zone 10

zone 7 gathers only 1/8 the signal

zone 6 gathers only 1/16 the signal that was captured in zone 10
Now we hit zone 5 middle grey has only captured 1/32 or 3% of the signal that was captured at zone 10 , now we start to see the tell tail signs of shot noise. 94% of the capacity of what the sensor can store is used up in the first 4 stops in tonal range of a scene. Naturally this is where we like to place most of the detail of our image is in zone 5 that only uses less than 3% of the saturation capacity of the sensor.

Dip down to zone 4 where we will place a lot of our darker tones and that is only made up of 1/64 of the light that the sensor can store( less than 1.5%) now shot noise is very easy to find.
Forum: Pentax K-1 05-09-2018, 12:19 PM  
K-1 MK2 - Unhappy with results at moderate ISO settings
Posted By stevebrot
Replies: 560
Views: 27,244
They also could have negotiated K-cup support with Keurig. Just saying...

Forum: Pentax K-1 05-09-2018, 10:28 AM  
K-1 MK2 - Unhappy with results at moderate ISO settings
Posted By Rondec
Replies: 560
Views: 27,244
I took a look through that scene and honestly, there is not enough difference between those. Maybe a hair more detail in the A7r III image, but it is realy hard to say because noise often gives the impression of detail that isn't really there. Clearly there is less noise in the K-1 II image. Also the A7r III seems to have odd color shift where black lines almost have a brownish look to them. Not sure if there is just a bit more moire with the A7r III image or what is going on there.

Regardless, if that's the goal we are all shooting for then the K-1 II is already there. :)
Forum: Pentax K-1 05-08-2018, 01:00 AM  
K-1II review... Opportunity to get banned on DPR
Posted By pid
Replies: 428
Views: 22,872
First I think, the K1II is not expensiver than the K1 was before. The K1II is as good as the K1. The K1II has some kind of improvments. The K1 is still a very good cam with a similar IQ to the K1II. The K1 is now cheaper as the K1II.
Second thought: you can buy both cameras and will be happy. The Upgrade is a little bit to expensive, but a friendly idea from Ricoh for those who will get the newest standard from Ricoh.
Third thought: you buy a camara as it is. No firmwareupdate makes a new camera out of it. Sometimes some little improvements can be made or little features can be added. Most times the camera does not feel like an other camera afterwards.
So if you have a K1 be happy. If you dont have a k1 buy one for a really good price for an FF cam. If you want the little improvements buy the K1II and be also happy. Both are woth every penny and can make a lot of fun and produce very good pictures.
So what is the problem?
Forum: Pentax K-1 05-07-2018, 06:22 PM  
K-1II review... Opportunity to get banned on DPR
Posted By rawr
Replies: 428
Views: 22,872
Probably not. Unless it impacts some other qualities of the image - eg interferes with various colour channels.

I think the level of micro-analysis performed here by tech gurus like Bill Claff and Iliah is important and useful, but in the real-world, the results of any mandatory NR will not be something ordinary folks will ever see.

However in the world of camera journalism and marketing, it's the sort of thing that can certainly make a product look less attractive. Particularly for professionals, who like maximum control over their camera, or users with specialized requirements where mandatory NR may have an impact on their image output.
Forum: Pentax K-1 04-16-2018, 11:31 AM  
Pentax K-1 Mark II Early Reviews?
Posted By savoche
Replies: 204
Views: 18,320
Exactly so. The noise amounts to the square root of the signal. While that means that you actually have more noise with more light, the noise makes up a much smaller fraction of the total (signal+noise) than when there are fewer photons captured. If you capture 100 times more light you will increase the amount of noise only 10 times.

Or to look at it in another way; it's not high ISO that gives you noisy images, it's the lack of light. (But yes, when you increase the ISO you will let in less light to avoid overexposure. So in practical terms high ISO gives more noise.)
Forum: Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 04-25-2018, 08:44 AM  
M42 Embarrassment
Posted By Kozlok
Replies: 32
Views: 1,376
That’s why I always remove the retaining clips.
Forum: Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 04-22-2018, 08:29 AM  
How "pure" can a Raw file be?
Posted By stevebrot
Replies: 22
Views: 1,063
In theory, the RAW data represents voltages for each photo site on the sensor. "Pure" RAW would be these data as captured. "Not-so-pure" would be stuff like using the image processor for removing statistical outliers (probable noise), detection/mitigation of clipped values, and revising voltages to accommodate changes made, all before packaging the data and writing the file.

Forum: Pentax K-1 04-15-2018, 11:45 AM  
Pentax K-1 Mark II Early Reviews?
Posted By photoptimist
Replies: 204
Views: 18,320
There seems to be some confusion because I think we are talking about the same definition of superresolution
Many people use the term pixels interchangeably with sensels and in many cases the distinction isn't important. The distinction can be important if the sensels are smaller than the pixels (a common property of older sensors) or if the output pixels are at a different resolution than the input sensel data.

It's worth noting that the K-1 only has 9 million red sensels, 18 million green sensels, and 9 million blue sensels. If we want 36 million RGB pixels, we either have to interpolate (blurry!) or get more sensel data using superresolution techniques in which the sensels are not coincident at the color level.

All that is required may be different from what is possible.

But Ricoh does target increased spatial resolution that exactly what pixel shift is for. A single shot K-1 image only resolves to 9 million locations in the red channel. Pixel shift collects multiple frames with the sensels offset to be non-coincident to create 36 million pixels of resolution from the 4 frames of 9 million red values each. Ditto blue and ditto green. That's a superresolution process.

Photoacute explicitly says: "The first step is to accurately align individual low-resolution images with sub-pixel precision."

They also say: "Uncertainty in real registration offsets of individual images. Since the precise camera position and orientation in space is not known during super-resolution processing, it has to be estimated from the low resolution scenes themselves, which introduces errors."

This is untrue in the case of Pentax camera which does have data on the camera position and orientation in space through the SR sensors. You may choose to disbelieve what Ricoh have said about the system but it doesn't make much sense for them to lie about such an arcane element of the system.
Forum: Pentax K-1 03-29-2018, 08:17 AM  
Pentax K-1 Mark II Early Reviews?
Posted By JPT
Replies: 204
Views: 18,320
I think you've made the wrong inference from the photos. What is "Pixel Shift" in English, has always been called "Real Resolution" in Japanese. I remember hearing this from the very first presentation of it.

Here is the FAQ for the K-3 II. Look at Question 3.
English: PENTAX K-3 II | FAQ | Support | RICOH IMAGING
Japanese: PENTAX K-3 II|???????FAQ|????&???? | RICOH IMAGING

This page of the K-1 mark 2 product description shows something similar.
English: Pixel Shift Resolution System II | PENTAX K-1 Mark II | RICOH IMAGING
Japanese: (リアル・レゾリューション = "Real Resolution" transliterated) ?????????????????II / PENTAX K-1 Mark II / ??????? / ?? | RICOH IMAGING

I don't have a Pixel Shift capable camera, but my hunch is that if the interface language is changed to Japanese, it will show "Real Resolution".

Of course, none of this says anything about how it works. Actually, it sounds like a trademark issue to me. I personally prefer naming that alludes to the objective rather than the means, so I tend to prefer "Real Resolution".
Search took 0.00 seconds | Showing results 1 to 25 of 31

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:38 AM. | See also:, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]