[adwb]

I have for some time been unhappy at the IQ of images when viewed at 1:1 in lightroom, and I have recently asked for advice through these forums re the best IQ lenses for a k5 in a given range kindly had several useful suggestions, and in fact two the 3rd party lenses recommended I already have.

However, when I look at images posted here stating they are a 100% crop of a image [which is often shown as well] and I look at my 1:1 images I always think think mine do not look like these. and are no way as sharp

I also see images posted here that not only look incredibly sharp but also see to almost stand out from the background, my images never ever look like that.

I have just shot a full size jpeg settings on 2 x k5 and one k5IIs body, the same subjects, on a tripod with the same lens and settings. While one body is back focusing slightly i cannot see any difference between the K5IIr body in sharpness compared to the K5 bodies.

I assume I am screwing something up so to try to find out what I am putting them in dropbox for anyone who would like to look at them and comment for me .

I have also included what I would like to be able to achieve which is a online image from a newspaper, and yes it will be FF and wide open but my lens at 2.8 are all soft till you get to 4.5 - 5.6

For the test images the red square focus point was set at the base of the tall cactus which is the centre of the image in all three shots and on all the bodies i first used live view to focus then switched to button focus and in no case did I see or hear the lens change focus, I used the settings as I assume the lens will be at close to its best at 5.6.

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/88igeugjt70iudx/AAAhRSoHnPchHvGX5Vxql64xa?dl=0

I look forward to your comments

Alistair

[JinDesu]

Do we evaluate the soccer shot too ?

From looking at the exif, the settings are: 1/15 sec, f/5.6, ISO 100

This image is focused slightly behind the first brown cactus. The text on the card is sharp, and in focus.
This image is focused in front - the first brown cactus is sharp (oversharpened, in JPEG). The card is soft, OOF.
This image is focused even more in front, so that the first brown cactus is a little less sharp and the fluffy ball cactus next to it is not as sharp as the second image.

I would say that the images are not as sharp due to the limitations on your jpeg engine in camera. The details are being resolved (as per the fine cactus spines in the tall cactus) and the fine grains on the pot (in the second and third image), but some oversharpening is creating artifacts that muddy up the image. If you had shot RAW and run it through a good image processing software with sharpening, it would come out clearer and better.

[jrpower10]

To get the best results you really need to shoot RAW and become fully knowledgable in the sharpening and noise reduction modules of lightroom (and what to do with the clarity slider). These are things I'm still learning, but the more I practice, the better my results have gotten. There are lots of online tutorials that fully explain what each slider is doing to the image. I subscribed to the Scott Kelby tutorials for a couple of months and worked through a lot of those, and that did more to improve my images than any lens I ever bought. There are freebies out there as well if you don't want to pay for a subscription.

[adwb]

Do we evaluate the soccer shot too ?

From looking at the exif, the settings are: 1/15 sec, f/5.6, ISO 100

This image is focused slightly behind the first brown cactus. The text on the card is sharp, and in focus.
This image is focused in front - the first brown cactus is sharp (oversharpened, in JPEG). The card is soft, OOF.
This image is focused even more in front, so that the first brown cactus is a little less sharp and the fluffy ball cactus next to it is not as sharp as the second image.

I would say that the images are not as sharp due to the limitations on your jpeg engine in camera. The details are being resolved (as per the fine cactus spines in the tall cactus) and the fine grains on the pot (in the second and third image), but some oversharpening is creating artifacts that muddy up the image. If you had shot RAW and run it through a good image processing software with sharpening, it would come out clearer and better.

thanks,
i'm sorry but your This image links don't work i get a locked out screen, can you pls tell me which is k5a k5b k5c and can you see with looking at exif which is the k5IIs ?

I normally shoot raw but I only posted jpegs as I was going originally to put them in the thread and i have not touched them at all , as I wanted comments on them from a camera / lens point ; they are shot at 16mp 4 stars

---

Last edited by adwb; 09-18-2014 at 08:02 AM.

[JinDesu]

Ah ok, let me try doing that. How annoying.

My first comment applies to K5C_6140 (K-5)
My second comment applies to K5B0569 (K-5)
My third comment applies to k5A0033 (K-5IIs)

I'll update the exif info as it comes.

[adwb]

here are some untouched raw images two different lenses but only two bodies

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/fu989306nfqfe78/AABKrbqhiNrsGB2p6ClkZsO9a?dl=0

[JinDesu]

I won't be able to play with those until I get home tonight, unfortunately. My work computer doesn't have my photo processing software.

[adwb]

thats fine thank for your time and help,

I have included a shot of the same scene from my little oly xz-2 and apart from the noise it is a sharp if not sharper, and from a cheap point and shoot, thats what is seriously starting to annoy me, the two long shots were both on a tripod with timer, both focused but one is soft, i am fed up with inaccurate focusing that is in the k 5 bodies.

[osv]

don't ever use autofocus for critical work like this.

i looked at the lamp(?) hanging from the pole, it's soft, looks like a focus issue.

i would pick better subject matter for testing.

does the pentax liveview have magnify functionality?

[JinDesu]

Ah I apologies, I forgot to work on your files. I'll check them out tonight.

[adwb]

I had continuous focus on which might have been a mistake but I to often get images liked the soft one, which was with K5IIs but even they " sharp" on taken with the K5 is to my eyes soft and even if I hand or live view focus this is what I get , btw it's a bird feeder about 12 meter 36? Foot away

[fgaudet]

At 1/15 even with SR on you might be getting a bit of camera shake. Even when using a cheaper tripod, just pressing the shutter button is often enough to create a bit of blur. The old rule of not going any slower than your focal length is often overlook now with SR bodies but it should still be used as a guideline. (at 200mm don't go slower than 1/200... at 50mm not slower than 1/50...). I think Pentax states that the SR will allow you to shoot 4 stops slower in their marketing stuff, so take a stop out to correct for the marketing bulls**t and because you're not shooting in a lab. And then take another stop out if you're shooting with a longer lens since SR is less efficient with longer lens... So at 1/15 speed and your FL at 50mm, you're pushing it if shot hand held.

If I get too many "soft" shots I do a quick check up to rule out any D.O.I. (Defective Operator Issues). I take a picture of something with text on it, as far as I can get while still being able to read the text in the viewfinder. The trick is I use the popup flash to light the scene. In a normally lit house, you'll get a fairly short flash pulse (maybe 1/1000) giving you a pseudo shutter speed of the same duration... sure the picture will look like crap but in my case if my lens/body are focusing right, the picture will be sharp. Just for the fun of it, redo your tests but use the flash

Since I started doing this I figured that more often than not, the problem with my soft pictures was me...

[kh1234567890]

What is the problem ? They look sharp enough to me. The bushes ones are a bit overexposed though. I put the RAWs through my usual workflow in Silkypix Studio Pro 6 and the JPEGs are here. I have left them private but the Flickr guest pass in the link should work and let you view or download the full sizes.

[JinDesu]

I had continuous focus on which might have been a mistake but I to often get images liked the soft one, which was with K5IIs but even they " sharp" on taken with the K5 is to my eyes soft and even if I hand or live view focus this is what I get , btw it's a bird feeder about 12 meter 36? Foot away

Wait, what lens did you use on the backyard pictures? It's shot at F5.6 and it's quite lacking in contrast/sharpness IMO.

You're confusing two things - the k-5 and k-5IIs are capable of resolving far greater details than your sample images so far.

https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8482/8274096584_91572204d6_o.jpg

This was shot on my old k-x (12MP) with my Tamron 70-200 F2.8, and I know that a k-5 can resolve even better with the 16MP sensor. What your images show is your lens not performing as well as you'd like. For some reason, the backyard shots are not showing me your lens information in Lightroom (normally I can see the lens brand, type, etc).

[adwb]

@JinDesu, the lens is a sigma 26-70 f2.8 hsm and never has shown in lr what it is for some reason, I spoke to sigma about it and they said they could look at it but it seemed pointless to send in for that.

---------- Post added 09-24-2014 at 09:53 AM ----------

@fgaudet I will give your print test a try, and see what happens