Hand Held High Res - What a game changer!!

[Ab Latchin]

it used to be that pixel peeping was frowned upon in this forum.

But since Hi Res mode the need to demonstrate resolution has become more acceptable

Peter

Wow, another completely irrelevant post.

Thanks for sharing.

I was merely reflecting on how “the game has changed”, which is exactly the subject of your post. But as usual you only want to read responses that agree with you and will attack anybody who posts anything contrary.

Peter

Peter,

Why don't you start an OP about this instead of wasting it here where I am trying to explore the effects and usefulness of a new feature?

My point is completely relevant. No need to open any new posts as I can use your “game changer” statement about Hi Res for whatever purpose I want so long as I stick to the Forum Rules.

Perhaps you could at least acknowledge the fact that pixel peeping has become the norm when sample posts showing hi res output from MFT cameras is concerned. And maybe just maybe acknowledge that it is ironic that hi res is now being described by many as an advanced feature with a lot of potential when just a few years ago it was popular here in this forum to say that the high resolution sensors being used by Canon, Nikon and Sony in some of their high end bodies was unnecessary in the real world.

I think you missed my post here:

"But this is where it gets interesting, I don't always want high res for the full resolution, I often just want the IQ gains, which due to the stacking are very real and very convenient."

Then I show the clean, detailed 20mp file. I am not hugely interested in high resolution for the resolution. What I like is the more analogue feel it gives with great tonality.

You just went straight for the pixel peeping and missed a good part of my point.

Peter

So are you suggesting which parts of your post I’m allowed to comment on ?

I could also have commented on the irony that IQ gains have become so ‘game changing’ for MFT when so many were adamant that the IQ was more than good enough.

You can comment all you like. But posting pure sarcasm will not get a friendly response will it?

You ignore my point and again come up with a pointless reply. The general pop pooing of every Olympus feature starts the same way "well it doesn't work for x" and that has been the these with this one again.

Nothing special about being narrow minded and inflexible.

Peter

 

[Ab Latchin]

It's nice it exists, but I wonder if it'll make it into any other cameras, like....an E-M5III? Or, do you need dual processors for it?

One can hope

I don't know if the processing or the Ibis or both are critical.

 

[Ab Latchin]

The Hand held high res is INCREDIBLE!!!! From my last post on high res where I discussed how the total light equation means much improved tonality, noise, detail etc from an 8 image stack, this hand held high res combines 16 images, and it shows.

Wondering whether the HH-HR images actually are handheld. Isn't the framing of the images almost too perfect?

I asked myself the same question. I also looked at mathieu's landscape and I have asked him for the original 20mp file to make a straight forward comparison ( I haven't heard back yet).

Next week I am going to Henry's launch event where I will test a few things and share them here.

 

[Ab Latchin]

Wow this really became one toxic thread!

I am getting tired of the incessant snarky comments by about 4 people here polluting threads with nonsense.

So I am making my feelings known in my replies.

 

[Ab Latchin]

Yes, High res does make a better quality image.

better than what? better than other M43 cameras without HiRes?

Can the Hires photo from the M1X beat the 50 MP photos from a Canon 5Ds, or the Nikon Z7, ? At $3000 and 1 kg, this M1X needs to clearly beat those other cameras' photos in order to change any game. And of course, the M1X already lost, if there is any motion in the picture.

Do you need to ask everyone this question on every thread? At first I thought you were serious, note I just think you are trolling and possibly have a condition of some sort.

However, I forget to use it all the time.

High Res my way is multi shot multi row panorama hand held.

 

[TN Args]

Yes, High res does make a better quality image.

better than what? better than other M43 cameras without HiRes?

There are IQ advantages over any single-frame Bayer sensor image.

Can the Hires photo from the M1X beat the 50 MP photos from a Canon 5Ds,

Yes, no aliasing

or the Nikon Z7, ?

Yes, same

At $3000 and 1 kg, this M1X needs to clearly beat those other cameras' photos in order to change any game.

Done, see above. Easy.

And of course, the M1X already lost, if there is any motion in the picture.

I'll fix that naive exaggeration for you: "lost, in the moving areas of the picture, if there is excessive motion and neither you nor the camera does the basic PP needed to fix it."

Anyone who denies that hand-held PSHR is a game changer of sorts, simply doesn't understand photo technology. It is a kind of holy grail. The challenge is not its potential, the challenge is implementation. I don't expect the first couple of camera models to sport HHPSHR will have the ultimate implementation, that is an unfair ask. But the first cameras to implement it deserve to be celebrated. I'm really surprised (only kidding, of course I'm not surprised) by the retro-minded denialism of your cohort.

But it is a game-changer. That is not in doubt.

 

[Messier Object]

it used to be that pixel peeping was frowned upon in this forum.

But since Hi Res mode the need to demonstrate resolution has become more acceptable

Peter

Wow, another completely irrelevant post.

Thanks for sharing.

I was merely reflecting on how “the game has changed”, which is exactly the subject of your post. But as usual you only want to read responses that agree with you and will attack anybody who posts anything contrary.

Peter

Peter,

Why don't you start an OP about this instead of wasting it here where I am trying to explore the effects and usefulness of a new feature?

My point is completely relevant. No need to open any new posts as I can use your “game changer” statement about Hi Res for whatever purpose I want so long as I stick to the Forum Rules.

Perhaps you could at least acknowledge the fact that pixel peeping has become the norm when sample posts showing hi res output from MFT cameras is concerned. And maybe just maybe acknowledge that it is ironic that hi res is now being described by many as an advanced feature with a lot of potential when just a few years ago it was popular here in this forum to say that the high resolution sensors being used by Canon, Nikon and Sony in some of their high end bodies was unnecessary in the real world.

I think you missed my post here:

"But this is where it gets interesting, I don't always want high res for the full resolution, I often just want the IQ gains, which due to the stacking are very real and very convenient."

Then I show the clean, detailed 20mp file. I am not hugely interested in high resolution for the resolution. What I like is the more analogue feel it gives with great tonality.

You just went straight for the pixel peeping and missed a good part of my point.

Peter

So are you suggesting which parts of your post I’m allowed to comment on ?

I could also have commented on the irony that IQ gains have become so ‘game changing’ for MFT when so many were adamant that the IQ was more than good enough.

You can comment all you like. But posting pure sarcasm will not get a friendly response will it?

what I posted was a direct statement of how I saw it. There was no sarcasm.

You ignore my point and again come up with a pointless reply.

no you are ignoring my point re the irony, and throwing in deflective responses because you don’t want to even entertain my point of view.

The general pop pooing of every Olympus feature starts the same way "well it doesn't work for x" and that has been the these with this one again.

Nothing special about being narrow minded and inflexible.

ah, Ab gets personal when somebody posts anything contrary to his view. Now that’s unusual (there, that was sarcasm btw).

peter

Peter

 

[TN Args]

it used to be that pixel peeping was frowned upon in this forum.

But since Hi Res mode the need to demonstrate resolution has become more acceptable

Peter

Wow, another completely irrelevant post.

Thanks for sharing.

I was merely reflecting on how “the game has changed”, which is exactly the subject of your post. But as usual you only want to read responses that agree with you and will attack anybody who posts anything contrary.

Peter

Peter,

Why don't you start an OP about this instead of wasting it here where I am trying to explore the effects and usefulness of a new feature?

My point is completely relevant. No need to open any new posts as I can use your “game changer” statement about Hi Res for whatever purpose I want so long as I stick to the Forum Rules.

Perhaps you could at least acknowledge the fact that pixel peeping has become the norm when sample posts showing hi res output from MFT cameras is concerned. And maybe just maybe acknowledge that it is ironic that hi res is now being described by many as an advanced feature with a lot of potential when just a few years ago it was popular here in this forum to say that the high resolution sensors being used by Canon, Nikon and Sony in some of their high end bodies was unnecessary in the real world.

I think you missed my post here:

"But this is where it gets interesting, I don't always want high res for the full resolution, I often just want the IQ gains, which due to the stacking are very real and very convenient."

Then I show the clean, detailed 20mp file. I am not hugely interested in high resolution for the resolution. What I like is the more analogue feel it gives with great tonality.

You just went straight for the pixel peeping and missed a good part of my point.

Peter

So are you suggesting which parts of your post I’m allowed to comment on ?

I could also have commented on the irony that IQ gains have become so ‘game changing’ for MFT when so many were adamant that the IQ was more than good enough.

You can comment all you like. But posting pure sarcasm will not get a friendly response will it?

what I posted was a direct statement of how I saw it. There was no sarcasm.

There was. Apparently unintentional, but it's there.

You ignore my point and again come up with a pointless reply.

no you are ignoring my point re the irony, and throwing in deflective responses because you don’t want to even entertain my point of view.

But your points of view are so entertaining! ;-) <= that funny little thing is a sarcasm alert, in case you need to be shown

The general pop pooing of every Olympus feature starts the same way "well it doesn't work for x" and that has been the these with this one again.

Nothing special about being narrow minded and inflexible.

ah, Ab gets personal when somebody posts anything contrary to his view. Now that’s unusual (there, that was sarcasm btw).

One thing I don't like is bait-and-switch tactics like yours, here. You have been dangling your anti-m43 bait in numerous threads for a while now, and the minute you get an emotional response, you call it and switch to playing victim.

Seen it.

Calling it.

Stop it.

 

[Dennis]

it used to be that pixel peeping was frowned upon in this forum.

But since Hi Res mode the need to demonstrate resolution has become more acceptable

And the value of total light is now being accepted

- Dennis
--
Gallery at http://kingofthebeasts.smugmug.com

 

[TN Args]

it used to be that pixel peeping was frowned upon in this forum.

But since Hi Res mode the need to demonstrate resolution has become more acceptable

And the value of total light is now being accepted

Ah, I see you saw the sarcasm and added your own: well-spotted.

 

[Raist3d]

Yes, High res does make a better quality image.

better than what? better than other M43 cameras without HiRes?

There are IQ advantages over any single-frame Bayer sensor image.

Can the Hires photo from the M1X beat the 50 MP photos from a Canon 5Ds,

Yes, no aliasing

or the Nikon Z7, ?

Yes, same

At $3000 and 1 kg, this M1X needs to clearly beat those other cameras' photos in order to change any game.

Done, see above. Easy.

Except that it's only under very specific situations. No light changes, no movement, no DR challenges. But yes, in some situations it can.

And of course, the M1X already lost, if there is any motion in the picture.

I'll fix that naive exaggeration for you: "lost, in the moving areas of the picture, if there is excessive motion and neither you nor the camera does the basic PP needed to fix it."

It doesn't require to be excessive. Check out the dpreview high res shots with someone just walking. Of course, at 1/60 by 8 or 16 frames, you will have movement to merge or process.

Anyone who denies that hand-held PSHR is a game changer of sorts, simply doesn't understand photo technology. It is a kind of holy grail. The challenge is not its potential, the challenge is implementation.

The game changer there would have been the Sigma Foveon. Doesn't require this to de-bayerise. But speaking of understanding photo technology, apparently there is a lack of understanding of the scope of where super high res can be used.

I don't expect the first couple of camera models to sport HHPSHR will have the ultimate implementation, that is an unfair ask. But the first cameras to implement it deserve to be celebrated. I'm really surprised (only kidding, of course I'm not surprised) by the retro-minded denialism of your cohort.

But it is a game-changer. That is not in doubt.

Looks like not everyone share your opinion. This camera aimed at sports, action and wildlife super high res doesn't help you with sports, a lot of the wild life. Landscape yes as long as it's not moving.

 

[Raist3d]

Please quote me saying high iso doesn't matter that much.

I'll wait.

Oh you can wait all you want. I brought up the advantages of a bigger sensor for sports with high iso, DR and you threw that away in some of our arguments. We don't need an exact quote to know the conclusion here.

No, I am not going to search post by post now to re-call that conversation because I know it happened. I encourage anyone to see the exchanges if they are so inclined.

However, I also remember - more ironically and pertinent to the point - how 20 megapixels is enough for pro work, where cameras with 24, 26, 36, 45 MP apparently aren't as important, but now the super resolution is a game changer.

I mean, don't get me wrong, I think it's an extra nice feature and a refinement- for sure- over what Olympus had introduced previously. I just don't see new markets opening because of this extra feature, particularly on a model pitched at action.

--
Raist3d/Ricardo (Photographer, software dev.)- I photograph black cats in coal mines at night...
“The further a society drifts from truth the more it will hate those who speak it.” - George Orwell

 

[Raist3d]

It's nice it exists, but I wonder if it'll make it into any other cameras, like....an E-M5III? Or, do you need dual processors for it?

One can hope

I don't know if the processing or the Ibis or both are critical.

Both are. You need the IBIS to be fast and precise enough to do it. As far as processors it would be only a matter of time for them to be in if they can't be in now. The IBIS could also improve.

Maybe it would lower the battery life more when in that mode but I think that's a reasonable trade off for the smaller body.

 

[TN Args]

Yes, High res does make a better quality image.

better than what? better than other M43 cameras without HiRes?

There are IQ advantages over any single-frame Bayer sensor image.

Can the Hires photo from the M1X beat the 50 MP photos from a Canon 5Ds,

Yes, no aliasing

or the Nikon Z7, ?

Yes, same

At $3000 and 1 kg, this M1X needs to clearly beat those other cameras' photos in order to change any game.

Done, see above. Easy.

Except that it's only under very specific situations. No light changes, no movement, no DR challenges. But yes, in some situations it can.

Watch those exaggerations. So ironic that you made them two words after writing "very specific", LOL.

And of course, the M1X already lost, if there is any motion in the picture.

I'll fix that naive exaggeration for you: "lost, in the moving areas of the picture, if there is excessive motion and neither you nor the camera does the basic PP needed to fix it."

It doesn't require to be excessive. Check out the dpreview high res shots with someone just walking. Of course, at 1/60 by 8 or 16 frames, you will have movement to merge or process.

By definition, excessive is the exact word.

Anyone who denies that hand-held PSHR is a game changer of sorts, simply doesn't understand photo technology. It is a kind of holy grail. The challenge is not its potential, the challenge is implementation.

The game changer there would have been the Sigma Foveon. Doesn't require this to de-bayerise. But speaking of understanding photo technology, apparently there is a lack of understanding of the scope of where super high res can be used.

Not by me. But yes, your understanding, as per your comments above and below, could be improved.

I don't expect the first couple of camera models to sport HHPSHR will have the ultimate implementation, that is an unfair ask. But the first cameras to implement it deserve to be celebrated. I'm really surprised (only kidding, of course I'm not surprised) by the retro-minded denialism of your cohort.

But it is a game-changer. That is not in doubt.

Looks like not everyone share your opinion.

I gave no opinion. At least, not on technology. My opinion on retro-minded denialism, will of course, not be shared by those thusly identified. Didn't need saying.

This camera aimed at sports, action and wildlife super high res doesn't help you with sports, a lot of the wild life. Landscape yes as long as it's not moving.

You are making the same exaggerations as AD. Fancy that. And I thought your post was about correcting imagined exaggerations by me.

 

[Raist3d]

Yes, High res does make a better quality image.

better than what? better than other M43 cameras without HiRes?

There are IQ advantages over any single-frame Bayer sensor image.

Can the Hires photo from the M1X beat the 50 MP photos from a Canon 5Ds,

Yes, no aliasing

or the Nikon Z7, ?

Yes, same

At $3000 and 1 kg, this M1X needs to clearly beat those other cameras' photos in order to change any game.

Done, see above. Easy.

Except that it's only under very specific situations. No light changes, no movement, no DR challenges. But yes, in some situations it can.

Watch those exaggerations. So ironic that you made them two words after writing "very specific", LOL.

Oh, don't LOL too hard :_). I just happen to see and know some trade offs here of this mode.

And of course, the M1X already lost, if there is any motion in the picture.

I'll fix that naive exaggeration for you: "lost, in the moving areas of the picture, if there is excessive motion and neither you nor the camera does the basic PP needed to fix it."

It doesn't require to be excessive. Check out the dpreview high res shots with someone just walking. Of course, at 1/60 by 8 or 16 frames, you will have movement to merge or process.

By definition, excessive is the exact word.

Ok, then basically the bar for excessive is far lower than the expression and word may have conveyed then. Thanks for the correction ;-)

Anyone who denies that hand-held PSHR is a game changer of sorts, simply doesn't understand photo technology. It is a kind of holy grail. The challenge is not its potential, the challenge is implementation.

The game changer there would have been the Sigma Foveon. Doesn't require this to de-bayerise. But speaking of understanding photo technology, apparently there is a lack of understanding of the scope of where super high res can be used.

Not by me. But yes, your understanding, as per your comments above and below, could be improved.

Not sure about that. I have tried super high resolution quite a bit. Having handheld with the movement limits what you can do, and at night you get moving lights often in many situations. Of course, there are times where it does work.

I don't expect the first couple of camera models to sport HHPSHR will have the ultimate implementation, that is an unfair ask. But the first cameras to implement it deserve to be celebrated. I'm really surprised (only kidding, of course I'm not surprised) by the retro-minded denialism of your cohort.

But it is a game-changer. That is not in doubt.

Looks like not everyone share your opinion.

I gave no opinion. At least, not on technology.

Oh I do think so. Certainly. What you consider excessive is an opinion.

My opinion on retro-minded denialism, will of course, not be shared by those thusly identified. Didn't need saying.

I think "retro-minded denialism" is being confused with understanding that a feature while nice is not going to "change the game."

This camera aimed at sports, action and wildlife super high res doesn't help you with sports, a lot of the wild life. Landscape yes as long as it's not moving.

You are making the same exaggerations as AD. Fancy that. And I thought your post was about correcting imagined exaggerations by me.

According to your opinion and criteria, certainly. That much seems clear.

 

[ProDude]

Except that it's only under very specific situations. No light changes, no movement, no DR challenges. But yes, in some situations it can.

Watch those exaggerations. So ironic that you made them two words after writing "very specific", LOL.

Well.......a 12.7 dynamic range ain't too impressive considering my Sony RX10MkIV with superior tracking is a 12.6 on a paltry 1" sensor that to date I have had NO issues with regarding noise and color depth. It's EVF has the same rez of the new X with no notable tearing and such. So I'm not so motivated to go that route as yet. Besides, having a 24mm -600mm reach with NO lens changes and a constant F4 hasn't to date caused me any grief. I've owned Mft cameras before (like the OMD-EM5) and I doubt any Mft camera would beat the results I get on shots like this one as it's most of what I do.

 

[TN Args]

Yes, High res does make a better quality image.

better than what? better than other M43 cameras without HiRes?

There are IQ advantages over any single-frame Bayer sensor image.

Can the Hires photo from the M1X beat the 50 MP photos from a Canon 5Ds,

Yes, no aliasing

or the Nikon Z7, ?

Yes, same

At $3000 and 1 kg, this M1X needs to clearly beat those other cameras' photos in order to change any game.

Done, see above. Easy.

Except that it's only under very specific situations. No light changes, no movement, no DR challenges. But yes, in some situations it can.

Watch those exaggerations. So ironic that you made them two words after writing "very specific", LOL.

Oh, don't LOL too hard :_). I just happen to see and know some trade offs here of this mode.

Me too, LOL.

And of course, the M1X already lost, if there is any motion in the picture.

I'll fix that naive exaggeration for you: "lost, in the moving areas of the picture, if there is excessive motion and neither you nor the camera does the basic PP needed to fix it."

It doesn't require to be excessive. Check out the dpreview high res shots with someone just walking. Of course, at 1/60 by 8 or 16 frames, you will have movement to merge or process.

By definition, excessive is the exact word.

Ok, then basically the bar for excessive is far lower than the expression and word may have conveyed then. Thanks for the correction ;-)

Anyone who denies that hand-held PSHR is a game changer of sorts, simply doesn't understand photo technology. It is a kind of holy grail. The challenge is not its potential, the challenge is implementation.

The game changer there would have been the Sigma Foveon. Doesn't require this to de-bayerise. But speaking of understanding photo technology, apparently there is a lack of understanding of the scope of where super high res can be used.

Not by me. But yes, your understanding, as per your comments above and below, could be improved.

Not sure about that. I have tried super high resolution quite a bit. Having handheld with the movement limits what you can do, and at night you get moving lights often in many situations. Of course, there are times where it does work.

Did DPR offer the usual caveats about pre-production samples, or did they overlook it and that is why you are jumping to conclusions?

I don't expect the first couple of camera models to sport HHPSHR will have the ultimate implementation, that is an unfair ask. But the first cameras to implement it deserve to be celebrated. I'm really surprised (only kidding, of course I'm not surprised) by the retro-minded denialism of your cohort.

But it is a game-changer. That is not in doubt.

Looks like not everyone share your opinion.

I gave no opinion. At least, not on technology.

Oh I do think so. Certainly. What you consider excessive is an opinion.

Nope. You were commenting on the term game-changer, not the term excessive. Either you got lost, or moved the goal posts to suit yourself, choose.

My opinion on retro-minded denialism, will of course, not be shared by those thusly identified. Didn't need saying.

I think "retro-minded denialism" is being confused with understanding that a feature while nice is not going to "change the game."

You do indeed think that.

This camera aimed at sports, action and wildlife super high res doesn't help you with sports, a lot of the wild life. Landscape yes as long as it's not moving.

You are making the same exaggerations as AD. Fancy that. And I thought your post was about correcting imagined exaggerations by me.

According to your opinion and criteria, certainly. That much seems clear.

My criteria are truth and accuracy. "No light changes, no movement, no DR challenges".... "not moving".... all untrue and inaccurate, all your words, exact quotes. The clarity is entirely mine.

Pray continue shuffling feet, moving goalposts, accusing others of setting criteria while doing it yourself to a chronic degree, and trying to be right when you are wrong. Or better still, let something go and move on.

 

[Alexis D]

Yes, High res does make a better quality image.

better than what? better than other M43 cameras without HiRes?

There are IQ advantages over any single-frame Bayer sensor image.

Can the Hires photo from the M1X beat the 50 MP photos from a Canon 5Ds,

Yes, no aliasing

or the Nikon Z7, ?

Yes, same

At $3000 and 1 kg, this M1X needs to clearly beat those other cameras' photos in order to change any game.

Done, see above. Easy.

And of course, the M1X already lost, if there is any motion in the picture.

I'll fix that naive exaggeration for you: "lost, in the moving areas of the picture, if there is excessive motion and neither you nor the camera does the basic PP needed to fix it."

Anyone who denies that hand-held PSHR is a game changer of sorts, simply doesn't understand photo technology. It is a kind of holy grail. The challenge is not its potential, the challenge is implementation. I don't expect the first couple of camera models to sport HHPSHR will have the ultimate implementation, that is an unfair ask. But the first cameras to implement it deserve to be celebrated. I'm really surprised (only kidding, of course I'm not surprised) by the retro-minded denialism of your cohort.

But it is a game-changer. That is not in doubt.

It is only a game changer if handheld Hires is so good that it allows a lightweight small sensored camera to take 40MP or higher resolution photos better than equivalent priced cameras. It can't, not for many years because those FF cameras can take those photos at 1/1000 sec or faster with enough light and some of them are lighter than this E-M1X and almost priced the same. Sensor technology is moving faster than pixel-shifting technology. 100MP is around the corner. In fact, smartphones will soon be able to take good quality high resolution photos using multiple cameras, most likely before a usable or more practical pixel shifting solution can be implemented in M43 cameras due to the problem with motion. I bet that in a couple of years, nobody will bother with pixel-shifting. It's not a game changer.

 

[TN Args]

...my Sony RX10MkIV ...that to date I have had NO issues with regarding noise and color depth.

Good camera.

...the results I get on shots like this one as it's most of what I do.

A camera that suits your needs is a wonderful thing. Notice how I don't lash it to death for every single thing that isn't like a D850...

 

[DiffractionLtd]

The Sony's are not pro bodies. Starting with their weather sealing. Comparing an A7iii to the Olympus is like comparing a Nikon D750 with a D5.