Bill_de Loc: US

As it would have if you read it in the Pentax thread that was going on.

It is this type of quibbling that one of the participants routinly uses to take threads off in a different direction, to basically hijack them. Next he would have been talking about all the Pentax cameras he ever owned.

---

Desert Gecko Loc: desert southwest, USA

User ID

This part, right below. It's NOT confusing me. It's just ded wrong.

" ... capability of capturing over 256 million mega pixels. ... "

I prefer my brownies without nuts, thank you.

CO

That's a good point. It's like saying it captures 256 million million pixels.

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

If we compare the Pentax method with the Sony A7Riii, they both do four images. Pentax can process in camera and can do this without a tripod, if you desire. But since it is four images, there is no detail improvement. But there is color refinement. To produce an image with correct colors using a single image, there are a number of interpolation calculations that are performed on the pixels to determine what the real color of each pixel is supposed to be. But these interpolations can be off a bit. The idea behind 4 images is to allow each spot in the image to be captured with a red, a blue and two green pixels on the sensor. This changes the interpolation equations making it a more sure thing that the color is assigned correctly - if the camera is held steady.

In the case of doing this handheld on the Pentax, the user is going to jiggle a bit. Now it may be possible image stabilization holds the sensor steady enough that it doesn't matter. But I am guessing that this is dreaming. Anyway, remember the goal is to improve color accuracy. One of the four images will be used as the main image, and the 3 others will be used to add correction confidence to the color computed for each pixel. I am not privy to the actual algorithms, but keep in mind, correct color is what is being pursued.

Olympus does 8 images. This also provides color correction like Pentax, and the Sony A7Riii. But it also doubles resolution in one axis with the half pixel stepping.

And now the Sony A7Riv uses 16 images. Still provides the color correction. But it doubles the resolution in two axis.

Now, whether hand held pixel shift is as good as tripod assisted pixel shift. I have read on other forums where users have compared hand held to a regular image and found not appreciable difference and have compared tripod held to a regular image and found a significant difference. So perhaps hand held pixel shifting is a marketing gimmick to make more sales. And it looks like using a tripod (with IS turned off) is a better way to do this.

And what about processing in-camera? I suspect that post processing is going to be superior. In-camera is certainly optimized for speed as that want that result as fast as possible. And post processing is certainly not fast as it really does a lot of computing to come up with that result.

It would be interesting to see how many users of pixel shifting actually use the in-camera processing versus doing it in post processing. Of course, not all cameras can do it in-camera.

lev29 Loc: Born and living in MA.

Wow, JimH123! Thank you for writing all this!

So one conclusion I have now reached is that there do exist differences in the implementation of the pixel-shift concept not only among different camera manufacturers but even between models of the same brand.

Unfortunately, I find your discussion in the 5th paragraph a little confusing. Could either you or someone else address whether my generalization is correct, that for the Sony a7 mk IV, the pixel-shift feature does not effectively work if the camera is handheld?

My guess is that no one can answer this question at this time since few, if any members, have actually been able to purchase and audition this camera yet.

Bill_de Loc: US

At this point you have access to all the same information as everyone else. You probably have a better chance of finding an answer by doing a little digging, rather than waiting for someone else to hit upon.

Once the camera is released having the question answered here might work. But you could probably find it yourself before then.

Good luck in your search.

---

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

I think it is reasonable to guess that the Sony A7Riv is not intended to work well with hand held. When doing 16 images, it is critical that the camera remains steady, of the half steps are going to be messed up.

Olympus says that their cameras take 1/4 sec between images, so their time to do 8 is approx. 2 sec plus 8 times the shutter time. Sony does 16, so that time doubles. Holding a camera steady for 4+ sec is beyond the ability of a human to do. And IS is not going to correct for that effort.

My guess is that you will get the 16 images if you try it hand held, but the SW that combines them is not going to produce anything wonderful.

Also, the A7Riv does give you the option to reduce it down to just 4 images, if that is what you want to do.

lev29 Loc: Born and living in MA.

Thank you, JimH123, for elaborating further and extrapolating some. You are much closer in understanding my motive in asking this question than were a couple of other members, as I doubt I would ever purchase such an expensive model but figure that if the use of this pixel-shift concept in a Sony digital camera is essentially limited to use with a tripod only, then it may not be such a necessary feature for me to look for in other new Sony cameras if and when it is time for me to replace one of mine. I appreciate your efforts, JimH, as they do, in fact, spare me from having to do some digging around myself. Like you, I usually reciprocate by having the necessary knowledge in a different area already in hand.

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Just because you're TOO LAZY - to follow the evolution of this thread, Bill - it doesn't mean it doesn't exist!

lev29 Loc: Born and living in MA.

Huh?

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Lev … I think you're a little confused about Pixel-Shift Technology - which debuted in the Pentax K-3 II - and Sensor-Shift technology - which Sony has been using in its IBIS-based FF MILCs. The latter system has very little to do with the Pentax system, which Sony has now adopted.

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Just because you're TOO LAZY - to follow the evolution of this thread, Bill - it doesn't mean it doesn't exist!

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Lev - my apologies if that comment to Bill went up quoting YOUR reply … totally unintentional ..

Perhaps, as I was planning to comment to you, immediately, following ….

Lev - the problem, here - is to do with two developing technologies - Pixel-Shift, and Sensor-Shift …

Sensor-Shift - developed by Sony - allows 5-way IBIS to work successfully, and it doesn't need a tripod.

Pixel-Shift - first debuted on the Pentax K-3 II - has now been adopted by Sony, on their 61MP FF MILC.

"The Pentax K-3 II debuts an innovative feature called the Pixel-Shifting Resolution System, a type of super-resolution technology that increases the effective level of detail in images without requiring a higher sensor resolution."

As we go further into the future - you will find more and more cameras will feature BOTH technologies.

Chris T Loc: from England across the pond to New England

Sensor-shift Image Stabilization As its name implies, Sensor-shift I.S. is an image stabilizer technology that is based on the camera’s image sensor: sensor-shift image stabilization shifts the image sensor inside the camera to compensate for camera shake.