David, on the ground I get no problems whatsoever, apart from occasionally using my FA24-90mm, also with greens, which as someone pointed out on another thread could be because it was designed specifically for film. I've even been getting excellent results at ISO 3200, and the aerial shots are at ISO 100. Using any of my primes, or my Sigma 24-60mm, I get perfect results (on the ground).

As I pointed out above, noise reduction is definitely not the issue, as there is very little. The image was shot at ISO 100, so there wasn't much noise created during processing to begin with. I've also tried processing with no noise reduction at all, and it makes no difference whatsoever to the level of detail. I've been processing images long enough (and especially aerial images) to know when I'm applying too much NR, and I regularly use far more noise reduction on shots from the GR (on much higher ISO images) without seeing this level of smudging of detail.

If you look at the crop, the right hand side (on the right of the road) is sharper than than everything to the left. I realise the whole image is a bit blurry, but it's not constant. If I compare shots of similar areas from the K5, and especially from the GR, they are much sharper, and also they respond to sharpening, either unsharp mask or high-pass, which images like the one above don't, as the detail is too smudged to begin with. I'm getting images sharper than the one above using the GR at ISO 800, and the K3 image is shot at ISO 100. Even images from my Fuji X20 are sharper, resolving more detail, eg outlines of buildings.

Shots of areas without large areas of green in them are also much sharper overall. Even if I'm exceeding the resolution of the camera shooting through windows (which I no doubt am), I shouldn't end up with shots that are less sharp overall when the images are resized to the same size as K5 or GR images, which is what is happening. As for noise reduction, there is very little, and what there is is done using Optics Pro, which at the same level on any shots taken on the ground is completely unnoticeable.

I'll find some other images and post them, though it'll have to wait until I get home; at the moment I'm in a hotel with very slow internet and can't upload or download very well (it took 15 minutes to upload the example above).

DOF Calculator is useful for working out hyperfocal distances, and has Pentax cameras in it's database Edit: JohnX just posted that before me, I see).. DSLR Remote works as a remote for Pentax In fact only for Pentax) cameras, but doesn't work with the K3 for some reason.

Meanwhile, a better example of the nature of what I'm talking about....100% crop




Initially I thought it might be defects in the windows; usually this occurs at the edges of the frame, where I've shot too close to edges of the window, but this is occurring in a lot of images all over the place, and only in areas of green. Images with lots of green generally have worse focus overall too. It also seems to more affect areas of green bordered by a different colour.

Thanks, might try one....got to be worth a try.

Meanwhile, link to the other thread. If a mod wants to look this one, it will save duplication.

I've added the post I put to David Storm's query on my thread in the Classifieds here as it's probably a more appropriate place for it than the Classifieds section....


David, I'm still trying to get my head round some of it, and will post more detail when I have. I think I'm dealing with effects caused by shooting in a high UV environment, possibly aggravated by prismatic effects from the aircraft windows. I also think the effects may be worse with a higher pixel density, ie 24mp as opposed to 16mp on the same sized sensor.

An example of the stuff I'm trying to work out is here, the link provided by someone on another site (Z). Interestingly, this paper was all based on experiments with a K5. The findings here are mainly to do with low-key scenes, while I am dealing with low contrast (very low in a lot of cases), often with a very low dynamic range (if no sky is involved).

I'm going to experiment with using different white balances (even ridiculous ones) to see if a) I get better focus accuracy, and b) if a different WB might actually lessen the green smearing I sometimes get. However, my experiences in IR lead me to think I probably need a UV filter with a cut-off of at least 450nm instead of 420nm. A standard UV (420nm) filter makes no difference at all. I've not been able to find such a filter anywhere, probably as they will affect colour reproduction. My 665nm IR camera is affected very much less by atmospheric haze, and also achieves better focus than both my K5 and K3. My GR seems unaffected. My experiments in processing 665nm images makes me think I can deal with any colour shifts presented by images shot above 450 or even 470nm.

If anyone fancies going through the article and letting me know their thoughts, I'd be very interested to hear them. Meanwhile, I also have some other esoteric stuff to sift through and then if anyone's interested I'll post more stuff. Also, if anyone knows where I could find a filter that blocks everything below 450-470nm, I'd be extremely grateful for the info.

I've copied my last post to the thread I'd previously started about this problem, as it's probably a more appropriate place for it if anyone wants to continue the discussion.....

David, I'm still trying to get my head round some of it, and will post more detail when I have. I think I'm dealing with effects caused by shooting in a high UV environment, possibly aggravated by prismatic effects from the aircraft windows. I also think the effects may be worse with a higher pixel density, ie 24mp as opposed to 16mp on the same sized sensor.

An example of the stuff I'm trying to work out is here, the link provided by someone on another site (Z). Interestingly, this paper was all based on experiments with a K5. The findings here are mainly to do with low-key scenes, while I am dealing with low contrast (very low in a lot of cases), often with a very low dynamic range (if no sky is involved).

I'm going to experiment with using different white balances (even ridiculous ones) to see if a) I get better focus accuracy, and b) if a different WB might actually lessen the green smearing I sometimes get. However, my experiences in IR lead me to think I probably need a UV filter with a cut-off of at least 450nm instead of 420nm. A standard UV (420nm) filter makes no difference at all. I've not been able to find such a filter anywhere, probably as they will affect colour reproduction. My 665nm IR camera is affected very much less by atmospheric haze, and also achieves better focus than both my K5 and K3. My GR seems unaffected. My experiments in processing 665nm images makes me think I can deal with any colour shifts presented by images shot above 450 or even 470nm.

If anyone fancies going through the article and letting me know their thoughts, I'd be very interested to hear them. Meanwhile, I also have some other esoteric stuff to sift through and then if anyone's interested I'll post more stuff. Also, if anyone knows where I could find a filter that blocks everything below 450-470nm, I'd be extremely grateful for the info.

Maybe a bit late with input here, but from my experience the GR takes some beating...ok, it's a fixed lens, but I've found that in spite of having a Fuji X20, which is a great camera too, I haven't used the Fuji at all for 3 months. I use my feet to zoom (where possible), plus the 35mm crop mode uses a portion of the sensor far bigger (equivalent to four thirds) than the sensor on the MX-1; even at 50mm crop mode it's still effectively a bigger sensor, though you're down to 6mp. With the option of the 21mm lens, it's quite versatile, and smaller than the MX-1. Not cheap though...