Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

  

Archive 2015 · More pixel shifting with the Pentax K3-II

  
 
AhamB
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #1 · p.1 #1 · More pixel shifting with the Pentax K3-II


http://www.pentaxforums.com/articles/photo-articles/how-pentax-k-3-ii-pixel-shifting-works.html

The sample images look convincing, perhaps a little better even than what we've seen from Olympus. I'd like to see more manufacturers include this feature (looking at you, Sony).

Edit:
Reading the comments on that article, it seems that the pixel-shifted images aren't written to a single RAW file -- you get 4 separate RAWs or a processed jpeg or tiff, if I understand correctly.



Apr 24, 2015 at 06:03 AM
Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #2 · p.1 #2 · More pixel shifting with the Pentax K3-II


Just to note that this is not an actual hands on test by Pentaxforums (all of the examples are from Ricoh/ Pentax marketing). I'm curious to see what this can actually do - and the important specifics (how long the 4 exposures take, does each exposure require the physical shutter to operate, possibly introducing vibration/ inaccuracy, etc.). Thus far, we do not have these details. So, I think it's early and given that the Olympus method uses the full electronic shutter capability (so no moving mechanical shutter between exposures) to achieve what it does, the Pentax method may or may not be as good.




Apr 24, 2015 at 06:26 AM
galenapass
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #3 · p.1 #3 · More pixel shifting with the Pentax K3-II


They make an interesting conclusion:

"We believe that making improvements on the pixel level rather than indefinitely increasing image pixel count is the future of digital sensor development, since this will help keep file sizes more manageable and reduce the strain on in-camera processors."

My thought is actually the opposite. I believe the future of sensor shifting is to "beef up" processors so that the combination of shots can occur in camera, and quickly (1/4 sec?). After shooting with the EM5II, the high res mode is really nice but as we all know it is limited in its application due to the amount of time the process takes.




Apr 24, 2015 at 09:19 AM
Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #4 · p.1 #4 · More pixel shifting with the Pentax K3-II


galenapass wrote:
They make an interesting conclusion:

"We believe that making improvements on the pixel level rather than indefinitely increasing image pixel count is the future of digital sensor development, since this will help keep file sizes more manageable and reduce the strain on in-camera processors."

My thought is actually the opposite. I believe the future of sensor shifting is to "beef up" processors so that the combination of shots can occur in camera, and quickly (1/4 sec?). After shooting with the EM5II, the high res mode is really nice but as we all know it is limited in its application due to the
...Show more

I see it as a stopgap of sorts until we move on to the next big sensor tech (true full color sensors but without the drawbacks which exist with foveon) that might render some of the sensor shift benefits redundant/ irrelevant.

As as side note, I believe we currently have more than enough processing power (Samsung has shown this with the NX1...and it is also remarkable just how fast/advanced the processor is in the new Galaxy S6 btw). Camera manufacturers are just so damn slow in adopting faster, more advanced processors. This could change quickly though with more competition.




Apr 24, 2015 at 09:45 AM
alundeb
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #5 · p.1 #5 · More pixel shifting with the Pentax K3-II


galenapass wrote:
They make an interesting conclusion:

"We believe that making improvements on the pixel level rather than indefinitely increasing image pixel count is the future of digital sensor development, since this will help keep file sizes more manageable and reduce the strain on in-camera processors."

My thought is actually the opposite. I believe the future of sensor shifting is to "beef up" processors so that the combination of shots can occur in camera, and quickly (1/4 sec?). After shooting with the EM5II, the high res mode is really nice but as we all know it is limited in its application due to the
...Show more

Calling it an interesting conclusion is a euphemism IMO

I am all in for improvements on the pixel level, but a full color sensor does nothing to help reducing processing power for aquiring raw files, and it does not make the raw files smaller either. We will need 3 x 14 bits for each pixel instead of 14 bits per pixel in a raw file.

Since jpg images are compressed, the improved detail at the pixel level will require increased file sizes as well, or in other words, the jpg file size is mostly determined by the actual detail and level of artifacts, and not so much on pixel count. It will be easier to compress larger bayer interpolated jpg images than smaller full color jpg images without artifacts.

Bayer is here to stay for a long time, and increasing pixel count is still what I prefer in order to get more resolution.



Apr 24, 2015 at 01:38 PM
mhespenheide
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #6 · p.1 #6 · More pixel shifting with the Pentax K3-II


alundeb wrote:
Calling it an interesting conclusion is a euphemism IMO

I am all in for improvements on the pixel level, but a full color sensor does nothing to help reducing processing power for acquiring raw files, and it does not make the raw files smaller either. We will need 3 x 14 bits for each pixel instead of 14 bits per pixel in a raw file.

Since jpg images are compressed, the improved detail at the pixel level will require increased file sizes as well, or in other words, the jpg file size is mostly determined by the actual detail and level
...Show more

I'm interested in a true-color non-Bayer sensor because the optics of apertures and CoC mean that we're seeing diminishing returns with higher MP counts. I don't think it's a coincidence that really high-cost lenses are showing up, not just from Zeiss and Leica, but Canon et. al as well. It would seem that switching to a full-color array would let us get more resolution without having to push down in to f/4 or f/2.8 apertures for best results.

Or is there something I'm misunderstanding?



Apr 24, 2015 at 02:56 PM
alundeb
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #7 · p.1 #7 · More pixel shifting with the Pentax K3-II


mhespenheide wrote:
I'm interested in a true-color non-Bayer sensor because the optics of apertures and CoC mean that we're seeing diminishing returns with higher MP counts. I don't think it's a coincidence that really high-cost lenses are showing up, not just from Zeiss and Leica, but Canon et. al as well. It would seem that switching to a full-color array would let us get more resolution without having to push down in to f/4 or f/2.8 apertures for best results.

Or is there something I'm misunderstanding?


The sensor scheme is not directly related to lens issues. If you get diminishing returns from increasing pixel count, you also get diminishing returns from increasing the resolution by using full color sensors.

Using a higher MP sensor will probably still get a higher real resolution than full color sensors from the same number of readouts. This is something we know from Foveon sensors. A 15 MP Foveon sensor with 45 M readouts gives about the same resolution as a 30 MP Bayer sensor with 30M readouts.



Apr 24, 2015 at 03:06 PM
Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #8 · p.1 #8 · More pixel shifting with the Pentax K3-II


mhespenheide wrote:
I'm interested in a true-color non-Bayer sensor because the optics of apertures and CoC mean that we're seeing diminishing returns with higher MP counts. I don't think it's a coincidence that really high-cost lenses are showing up, not just from Zeiss and Leica, but Canon et. al as well. It would seem that switching to a full-color array would let us get more resolution without having to push down in to f/4 or f/2.8 apertures for best results.

Or is there something I'm misunderstanding?


I think it's a good point about the demands that are being placed on the lenses. That said, I think the prices we are seeing are as much a result of fewer cameras and lenses being sold in total to a diminishing market. All of the major players must move way up market where the profit margins per unit are very high but the volume relatively low.




Apr 24, 2015 at 03:18 PM
alundeb
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #9 · p.1 #9 · More pixel shifting with the Pentax K3-II


IMO high resolution sensors don't place a demand on lenses. The system resolution is always equal or higher with the same lens and a higher resolution sensor. Even with a perfect diffraction limited lens, the system resolution continues to increase well into what is called "diffarction limited" pixel density:

https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1351634/7#12898481

Diminishing returns is another matter, but even that is very gradual.



Apr 24, 2015 at 03:28 PM
Tariq Gibran
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.1 #10 · p.1 #10 · More pixel shifting with the Pentax K3-II


alundeb wrote:
IMO high resolution sensors don't place a demand on lenses. The system resolution is always equal or higher with the same lens and a higher resolution sensor. Even with a perfect diffraction limited lens, the system resolution continues to increase well into what is called "diffarction limited" pixel density:

https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1351634/7#12898481

Diminishing returns is another matter, but even that is very gradual.


With the same lens, sure. My point is in using different lenses where one out resolves sensor X and the other is not capable of resolving as much as the sensor is capable of delivering. Thus, if one's goal is to get the absolute most out of the sensor, a higher resolving lens vs a lower resolving lens is necessary. That's what I mean when I think of high density/ high resolution sensors placing more demand on lenses. I think an argument could be made that if one's lenses are at the point where they are out resolved by the sensor, then it makes less sense to move to a higher resolving sensor just for the resolution gain (your lens just becomes a stronger AA filter ). You might not be losing anything compared to using that lens on the lower resolution sensor but then you are not gaining as much as the sensor is capable of delivering.




Apr 24, 2015 at 03:43 PM





FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.