Interesting times with Pentax

I remember how it all started with K10D. Lotta rumors,
unrealistic 
expectations, even though it can shake itself shame it still
doest do 
the laundry. At the end it was good tool that does its job
well and 
helps achieving excellence in photography. Now another
round, 12Mp? FF? 
1.3x 1.25x crop, CMOS? CCD? It is always a photographer who
makes good 
photographs, not the camera, but I'm sure Pentax R&D
guys are listening. 
Good captures to all of you this weekend.

Roman.

-- 
new photos once and again... roman.blakout.net <http://roman.blakout.net
>

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDMLpdml.net
http:/
/pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly
above and follow the directions.

Roman Melihhov wrote:
> I remember how it all started with K10D. Lotta rumors,
unrealistic 
> expectations, even though it can shake itself shame it
still doest do 
> the laundry. At the end it was good tool that does its
job well and 
> helps achieving excellence in photography. Now another
round, 12Mp? FF? 
> 1.3x 1.25x crop, CMOS? CCD? It is always a photographer
who makes good 
> photographs, not the camera, but I'm sure Pentax
R&D guys are listening. 
> Good captures to all of you this weekend.
> 
> Roman.
> 


Good bet?

12MP, 5fps, improved AF system, ~20 RAW buffer, 1-2 stops
better high ISO noise. ISO200-6400 native.  New shutter with
1/8000 and 1/250 sync. 

Possibly with 14bit RAW's and Live View. Hopefully all
stuffed into a K10D body (I like the K10D body)

-Adam


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDMLpdml.net
http:/
/pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly
above and follow the directions.

Adam Maas wrote:
> Roman Melihhov wrote:
>   
>> I remember how it all started with K10D. Lotta
rumors, unrealistic 
>> expectations, [ ... ]
>> Roman.
>>
>>     
>
>
> Good bet?
>
> 12MP, 5fps, improved AF system, ~20 RAW buffer, 1-2
stops better high ISO noise. ISO200-6400 native.  New
shutter with 1/8000 and 1/250 sync. 
>
> Possibly with 14bit RAW's 
Do you think that would be possible?

I know you (or was it someone else?) have been saying the
light 
collecting capability of sensors has been improved lately,
but in order 
to achieve a higher bit count, a better electric charge
storage capacity 
would probably be needed as well. Or at least, some papers I
read on 
this a year or so ago seemed to suggest that 14 bits won't
be possible 
with the current element sizes even with 0 noise.

- Toralf


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDMLpdml.net
http:/
/pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly
above and follow the directions.

> Good bet?
>
> 12MP, 5fps, improved AF system, ~20 RAW buffer, 1-2
stops better  
> high ISO noise. ISO200-6400 native.  New shutter with
1/8000 and  
> 1/250 sync.
>
> Possibly with 14bit RAW's and Live View. Hopefully all
stuffed into  
> a K10D body (I like the K10D body)

Sounds like a good prognostication to me.

Godfrey

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDMLpdml.net
http:/
/pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly
above and follow the directions.

On 19/10/07, Godfrey DiGiorgi, discombobulated, unleashed:

>Sounds like a good prognostication to me.

Sorta like a wet dream.

-- 


Cheers,
  Cotty


___/__
||   (O)   |     People, Places, Pastiche
||=====|    http://www.cottysnaps.com
_____________________________



-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDMLpdml.net
http:/
/pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly
above and follow the directions.

I agree. And it will make a nice camera paired with the K10D
as backup.
Paul
On Oct 19, 2007, at 6:13 PM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:

>> Good bet?
>>
>> 12MP, 5fps, improved AF system, ~20 RAW buffer, 1-2
stops better
>> high ISO noise. ISO200-6400 native.  New shutter
with 1/8000 and
>> 1/250 sync.
>>
>> Possibly with 14bit RAW's and Live View. Hopefully
all stuffed into
>> a K10D body (I like the K10D body)
>
> Sounds like a good prognostication to me.
>
> Godfrey
>
> --  
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> PDMLpdml.net
> http:/
/pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link
directly above  
> and follow the directions.


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDMLpdml.net
http:/
/pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly
above and follow the directions.

Toralf Lund wrote:
> Adam Maas wrote:
>> Roman Melihhov wrote:
>>   
>>> I remember how it all started with K10D. Lotta
rumors, unrealistic 
>>> expectations, [ ... ]
>>> Roman.
>>>
>>>     
>>
>> Good bet?
>>
>> 12MP, 5fps, improved AF system, ~20 RAW buffer, 1-2
stops better high ISO noise. ISO200-6400 native.  New
shutter with 1/8000 and 1/250 sync. 
>>
>> Possibly with 14bit RAW's 
> Do you think that would be possible?
> 
> I know you (or was it someone else?) have been saying
the light 
> collecting capability of sensors has been improved
lately, but in order 
> to achieve a higher bit count, a better electric charge
storage capacity 
> would probably be needed as well. Or at least, some
papers I read on 
> this a year or so ago seemed to suggest that 14 bits
won't be possible 
> with the current element sizes even with 0 noise.
> 
> - Toralf
> 
> 

That was me talking about the improved light collecting
ability of the 
sensor.

Note the 'good bet' I describe is the Sony 12MP CMOS sensor,
which is 
available in 12 or 14bit forms (the D300 is 14 bit, the Sony
A700 is 12 
bit). The only real guess there (if Pentax goes for the Sony
sensor) is 
the new shutter, but I'd expect they'd want a higher-spec
shutter on a 
semi-pro body, the K10D has a relatively low-end shutter.

-Adam

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDMLpdml.net
http:/
/pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly
above and follow the directions.

Cotty wrote:
> On 19/10/07, Godfrey DiGiorgi, discombobulated,
unleashed:
> 
>> Sounds like a good prognostication to me.
> 
> Sorta like a wet dream.
> 

Nah, it's just the A700 sensor's capabilities, with the
possibility of 
some of the D300/40D features arriving (14bit RAW, Live
View).

-Adam

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDMLpdml.net
http:/
/pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly
above and follow the directions.

On Oct 19, 2007, at 3:09 PM, Toralf Lund wrote:

>> Possibly with 14bit RAW's
>
> Do you think that would be possible?
>
> I know you (or was it someone else?) have been saying
the light
> collecting capability of sensors has been improved
lately, but in  
> order
> to achieve a higher bit count, a better electric charge
storage  
> capacity
> would probably be needed as well. Or at least, some
papers I read on
> this a year or so ago seemed to suggest that 14 bits
won't be possible
> with the current element sizes even with 0 noise.

My take on this:

12 bit vs 14 bit RAW files has more to do with quantization
than with  
charge capacity, which translates to DR. They could quantize
the data  
captured by the current sensor to an 8, 11, 12, or 14 bit  
representation. The question is whether or not it is useful
to do so.  
12 bits is 4096 discrete energy levels; 14 bits is 16,384.
Is there  
adequate resolution of energy levels in the sensor to make
expressing  
that energy in a larger quantization meaningful? The
assumption is  
that, given the present sensor, 12 bits is an accurate
representation  
and there is no added value in going to a larger
representation.

The implication is that a new sensor might have sufficient
resolution  
of energy levels to make a 14 bit quantization an advantage.
Improved  
accuracy is the result, exercising more of that 22bit
A->D converter.  
Maybe increased DR as well, if the imager actually does have
 
additional DR.

Godfrey
"I'm no electrical engineer, I play one on the
PDML."

-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDMLpdml.net
http:/
/pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly
above and follow the directions.

Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
> On Oct 19, 2007, at 3:09 PM, Toralf Lund wrote:
>
>   
>>> Possibly with 14bit RAW's
>>>       
>> Do you think that would be possible?
>>
>> I know you (or was it someone else?) have been
saying the light
>> collecting capability of sensors has been improved
lately, but in  
>> order
>> to achieve a higher bit count, a better electric
charge storage  
>> capacity
>> would probably be needed as well. Or at least, some
papers I read on
>> this a year or so ago seemed to suggest that 14
bits won't be possible
>> with the current element sizes even with 0 noise.
>>     
>
> My take on this:
>
> 12 bit vs 14 bit RAW files has more to do with
quantization than with  
> charge capacity, which translates to DR. They could
quantize the data  
> captured by the current sensor to an 8, 11, 12, or 14
bit  
> representation. The question is whether or not it is
useful to do so.  
>   
Exactly!
> 12 bits is 4096 discrete energy levels; 14 bits is
16,384. Is there  
> adequate resolution of energy levels in the sensor to
make expressing  
> that energy in a larger quantization meaningful?
That was essentially the question I was trying to ask.

I was saying that based on some papers I've read in the past
(but don't 
have in front of me, or care to search for right now), the
answer seems 
to be "no" unless *something* has been done to
improve the  sensor's 
capacity for storage of energy levels - or if you like, to
make room for 
some extra electrons/electron holes.

But actually, I didn't really do any maths when I said that.
After doing 
some quick calculations, I think that there would actually
be enough 
levels for 14 bits, or 15 even - but not 16. You have to
consider the 
noise as well, though. The noise will essentially add random
variation 
to the (theoretical) lower bits from the sensor so that it
is not 
possible to extract useful info about the energy levels from
them, and 
including them in the final output gives no extra value. The
number of 
unusable bits depends on the amount of noise, obviously, but
having just 
1 bit to throw away may not seem sufficient.

In other words, a sensor using the "old"
technology would in fact have 
enough levels for 14 bits, but such a setup would leave
virtually no 
room for noise.

Oh, and if you wanted to know, the papers I mentioned
suggested that you 
can simply assume a storage capacity of 1000
electron/electron 
holes/energy levels per square micron of sensor area.
>  The assumption is  
> that, given the present sensor, 12 bits is an accurate
representation  
> and there is no added value in going to a larger
representation.
>   
> The implication is that a new sensor might have
sufficient resolution  
> of energy levels to make a 14 bit quantization an
advantage. Improved  
> accuracy is the result, exercising more of that 22bit
A->D converter.  
> Maybe increased DR as well, if the imager actually does
have  
> additional DR.
>
> Godfrey
> "I'm no electrical engineer, I play one on the
PDML."
>   
- Toralf
  "Me too (I did study at the electrical engineering
department, but 
chose the IT option.)"


-- 
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDMLpdml.net
http:/
/pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly
above and follow the directions.