Re: I know what it is:was: Holy Crap -- Pentax 10MP body
Fra: Powell Hargrave [EMAIL PROTECTED] After reading the patent file DagT posted, even though I could only get the first page of drawings to download. It seems to me this must be the break through. http://v3.espacenet.com/textdes?DB=EPODOCIDX=US7084915F=0QPN=US7084915 I think the patent states that the Image Pump cancels out the dark current, so no more noisy shadows and eliminates blooming, and perhaps effects over exposure? Powell I think the fairly broad claim 8 gives the best summary on what they are doing. (Press Claims in the menu on top of the espace page) Note that this may be the first of a number of applications. The inventor, Sato Koichi, is also the inventor of a number og Japanese patent applications that has been filed recently with the title Solid State imaging element and Solid state imaging device . Moire reduction without AA filter, improved aperture of light sensing diodes, microlenses covering more than one pixel etc. They are working on something related to the sensora nd it makes lots of interesting reading for those who are also interested in the technology. Use the advanced search option of espacenet and search for Sato Koichi as inventor (he seems tyo be the key inventor) and Pentax as applicant. DagT -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
RE: I know what it is:was: Holy Crap -- Pentax 10MP body
Having no time to audit the Holy Crap thread, to eliminate what Aaron has negatoried and reconsider his ambiguous answers, I'm going to have a stab. Why not? It's fun and after all it was Aaron who opened up Pandora's Box, what does he expect of us inquisitive types who don't work in retail and have insider knowledge? I've no background in electronics to understand what the patent documents say, but I do know that a big gripe about digital capture is that the exposure is recorded lineally, ie the brightest stop gets half the bit depth, the second brightest stop gets the next quarter of all the bit depth, etc. Eventually, the darkest discernible stop only has two or three levels in it. Perhaps Pentax has implemented logarithmic exposure (logE as film is measured) rather than linear exposure. Just a guess, and just for fun ;-) Regards, Anthony Farr -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of DagT Sent: Wednesday, 16 August 2006 7:14 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: I know what it is:was: Holy Crap -- Pentax 10MP body (snip) I think the fairly broad claim 8 gives the best summary on what they are doing. (Press Claims in the menu on top of the espace page) Note that this may be the first of a number of applications. The inventor, Sato Koichi, is also the inventor of a number og Japanese patent applications that has been filed recently with the title Solid State imaging element and Solid state imaging device . Moire reduction without AA filter, improved aperture of light sensing diodes, microlenses covering more than one pixel etc. They are working on something related to the sensora nd it makes lots of interesting reading for those who are also interested in the technology. Use the advanced search option of espacenet and search for Sato Koichi as inventor (he seems tyo be the key inventor) and Pentax as applicant. DagT -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: I know what it is:was: Holy Crap -- Pentax 10MP body
Someone else was very, very close before. -Aaron Hope it was me with the Fuji SR sensor, http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilms3pro/ So Pentax/Samsung have a 10 meg high dynamic range sensor with two pixel sensor sizes. Powell -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: I know what it is:was: Holy Crap -- Pentax 10MP body
A new super-sensor would be great but it does not seem to fulfill the seer's vision of Mid-September ...forehead-slapping amongst the competition in the DSLR world. nor does it fit with ...not a single DSLR out there at any price, including ones using the same sensor, have it. This implies it is an in-production sensor and the improvement could have already been done by someone. Maybe the innovation is in-camera processing to emulate kodachrome or tri-x and possibly eliminate some post processing. My biggest problem with digital is post processing on a monitor, making a print that doesn't look like the monitor and all the education it takes to calibrate and coordinate equipment to produce the original vision. I have quite a few framed prints from MF film. I have nothing on the wall from digital and I've had a D almost since it went on sale. I produce very fine snapshots using my many lens, happy as any amateur shooter could be, but I have not seen the digital image yet that I can get lost in like MF and LF images. - Original Message - From: Powell Hargrave [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 12:34 PM Subject: Re: I know what it is:was: Holy Crap -- Pentax 10MP body Someone else was very, very close before. -Aaron Hope it was me with the Fuji SR sensor, http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilms3pro/ So Pentax/Samsung have a 10 meg high dynamic range sensor with two pixel sensor sizes. Powell -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: I know what it is:was: Holy Crap -- Pentax 10MP body
I don't think any in-camera processing can come close to what can be achieved in conversion and subsequent photoshopping. It just wouldn't have the horsepower. Plus, you'd be at the mercy of the camera's software. No choices. In contrast to your experience, I have gradually replaced most of the 11 x 14 MF shots in my portfolio with 11 x 17 prints from the *ist D. I've also framed quite a few for both home hanging and gallery shows. I don't want post-processing help from the camera. Just a nice, wide, high resolution starting point. Paul -- Original message -- From: Mark Stringer [EMAIL PROTECTED] A new super-sensor would be great but it does not seem to fulfill the seer's vision of Mid-September ...forehead-slapping amongst the competition in the DSLR world. nor does it fit with ...not a single DSLR out there at any price, including ones using the same sensor, have it. This implies it is an in-production sensor and the improvement could have already been done by someone. Maybe the innovation is in-camera processing to emulate kodachrome or tri-x and possibly eliminate some post processing. My biggest problem with digital is post processing on a monitor, making a print that doesn't look like the monitor and all the education it takes to calibrate and coordinate equipment to produce the original vision. I have quite a few framed prints from MF film. I have nothing on the wall from digital and I've had a D almost since it went on sale. I produce very fine snapshots using my many lens, happy as any amateur shooter could be, but I have not seen the digital image yet that I can get lost in like MF and LF images. - Original Message - From: Powell Hargrave [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2006 12:34 PM Subject: Re: I know what it is:was: Holy Crap -- Pentax 10MP body Someone else was very, very close before. -Aaron Hope it was me with the Fuji SR sensor, http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilms3pro/ So Pentax/Samsung have a 10 meg high dynamic range sensor with two pixel sensor sizes. Powell -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: I know what it is:was: Holy Crap -- Pentax 10MP body
Mark Stringer wrote: A new super-sensor would be great but it does not seem to fulfill the seer's vision of Mid-September ...forehead-slapping amongst the competition in the DSLR world. nor does it fit with ...not a single DSLR out there at any price, including ones using the same sensor, have it. This implies it is an in-production sensor and the improvement could have already been done by someone. One of the theoretical advantages of CCD, versus CMOS, sensors is that the output of a CCD is analog, so it's possible to use different/improved A-D converters. In most cases, camera makers economize by using the A-D converter designed my the CCD manufacturer. But not always: Nikon designed their own A-D converter for the D200 (Nikon's D80 and Sony's A100 use the Sony D-A converter made for the chip by Sony). -- Mark Roberts Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com 412-687-2835 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: I know what it is:was: Holy Crap -- Pentax 10MP body
A new super-sensor would be great but it does not seem to fulfill the seer's vision of Mid-September ...forehead-slapping amongst the competition in the DSLR world. nor does it fit with ...not a single DSLR out there at any price, including ones using the same sensor, have it. This implies it is an in-production sensor and the improvement could have already been done by someone. One of the theoretical advantages of CCD, versus CMOS, sensors is that the output of a CCD is analog, so it's possible to use different/improved A-D converters. In most cases, camera makers economize by using the A-D converter designed my the CCD manufacturer. But not always: Nikon designed their own A-D converter for the D200 (Nikon's D80 and Sony's A100 use the Sony D-A converter made for the chip by Sony). I somehow doubt that there is much to gain from improving the A/D, though. Seems to me that the real issue is noise already present in the analogue signal, and also dynamic range limitations also on the analogue side. - Toralf -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: I know what it is:was: Holy Crap -- Pentax 10MP body
Toralf Lund wrote: One of the theoretical advantages of CCD, versus CMOS, sensors is that the output of a CCD is analog, so it's possible to use different/improved A-D converters. In most cases, camera makers economize by using the A-D converter designed my the CCD manufacturer. But not always: Nikon designed their own A-D converter for the D200 (Nikon's D80 and Sony's A100 use the Sony D-A converter made for the chip by Sony). I somehow doubt that there is much to gain from improving the A/D, though. Seems to me that the real issue is noise already present in the analogue signal, and also dynamic range limitations also on the analogue side. I have reason to believe you're mistaken about this :) -- Mark Roberts Photography Multimedia www.robertstech.com 412-687-2835 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: I know what it is:was: Holy Crap -- Pentax 10MP body
On Aug 15, 2006, at 2:27 PM, Mark Stringer wrote: A new super-sensor would be great but it does not seem to fulfill the seer's vision of Mid-September ...forehead-slapping amongst the competition in the DSLR world. nor does it fit with ...not a single DSLR out there at any price, including ones using the same sensor, have it. This implies it is an in-production sensor and the improvement could have already been done by someone. Yes. Maybe the innovation is in-camera processing to emulate kodachrome or tri-x and possibly eliminate some post processing. My biggest problem with digital is post processing on a monitor, making a print that doesn't look like the monitor and all the education it takes to calibrate and coordinate equipment to produce the original vision. No. I have quite a few framed prints from MF film. I have nothing on the wall from digital and I've had a D almost since it went on sale. I produce very fine snapshots using my many lens, happy as any amateur shooter could be, but I have not seen the digital image yet that I can get lost in like MF and LF images. I agree. I have made large prints from the DS2 that I am happy with, but they ain't the same as my big prints from 6x7. -Aaron -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: I know what it is:was: Holy Crap -- Pentax 10MP body
On Aug 15, 2006, at 1:34 PM, Powell Hargrave wrote: Someone else was very, very close before. -Aaron Hope it was me with the Fuji SR sensor, http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/fujifilms3pro/ So Pentax/Samsung have a 10 meg high dynamic range sensor with two pixel sensor sizes. Nope. -Aaron -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: I know what it is:was: Holy Crap -- Pentax 10MP body
On Aug 15, 2006, at 3:53 PM, Toralf Lund wrote: I somehow doubt that there is much to gain from improving the A/D, though. Seems to me that the real issue is noise already present in the analogue signal, and also dynamic range limitations also on the analogue side. Are you certain? -Aaron -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: I know what it is:was: Holy Crap -- Pentax 10MP body
On 16/08/06, Toralf Lund [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I somehow doubt that there is much to gain from improving the A/D, though. Seems to me that the real issue is noise already present in the analogue signal, and also dynamic range limitations also on the analogue side. Absolute subtleties may be recorded with better resolution (ie noise floor which may lead to more effective post processing noise reduction) using an ADC of greater bit depth. However when compared to my experience in precision audio recording technologies I can honestly say that generally the quality of the source material is the absolute overriding quality constraining component in the recording chain. IE a cassette tape transcribed from the best cassette deck will sound no different when replayed from a 44kHz/16bit recording or a 196kHz/24bit recording. In other words if the output range of the sensor is being fully serviced by a 12 bit ADC then adding more resolution will do very very little to improve the final output. And the fact that we are likely to see a sensor of higher pixel density than the 6.1MP APC sensor that we are so used to if theory is to be believed we will only see poorer noise performance. Anyone who has bought the new improved model of a film scanner which ultimately still used the same sensor but ramped the ADC up from 14 to 16 bits per pixel will probably appreciate my position. I'm all for maintaining an open mind but physics being what it is leaves me doubting about the potential for radical improvement under the circumstances. I can't see me selling off my 67 gear just yet. -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: I know what it is:was: Holy Crap -- Pentax 10MP body
On Aug 15, 2006, at 3:53 PM, Toralf Lund wrote: I somehow doubt that there is much to gain from improving the A/D, though. Seems to me that the real issue is noise already present in the analogue signal, and also dynamic range limitations also on the analogue side. Are you certain? -Aaron On Aug 15, 2006, at 4:56 PM, Jostein Øksne wrote: -- the K10D certainly will have a number of very pleasing features. Some of which will hopefully make it stand out from the competition equipped with the same CCD. I'm fairly sure we've seen the same news. It's the big part of the news, right? -Aaron After reading the patent file DagT posted, even though I could only get the first page of drawings to download. It seems to me this must be the break through. http://v3.espacenet.com/textdes?DB=EPODOCIDX=US7084915F=0QPN=US7084915 I think the patent states that the Image Pump cancels out the dark current, so no more noisy shadows and eliminates blooming, and perhaps effects over exposure? Powell -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: I know what it is:was: Holy Crap -- Pentax 10MP body
On Aug 14, 2006, at 12:56 PM, David J Brooks wrote: If Aaron is willing to sell his 67 gear, then i suspect the new camera news he dangles to us, is, a nice wooden handle for the K10d.:-) Nope, I don't own a wooden handle for my 67. Someone else was very, very close before. -Aaron -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
Re: I know what it is:was: Holy Crap -- Pentax 10MP body
On 15/08/06, Aaron Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Aug 14, 2006, at 12:56 PM, David J Brooks wrote: If Aaron is willing to sell his 67 gear, then i suspect the new camera news he dangles to us, is, a nice wooden handle for the K10d.:-) Nope, I don't own a wooden handle for my 67. Someone else was very, very close before. I have a wooden handle for my LX but only aluminium for my *ist D -- Rob Studdert HURSTVILLE AUSTRALIA Tel +61-2-9554-4110 UTC(GMT) +10 Hours [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~distudio//publications/ Pentax user since 1986, PDMLer since 1998 -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
