[kittykat46]

Very sharp indeed......
I'm afraid this "K-5 is soft" legend may take on a life of its own, like so many Internet Urban Legends....lack of real-life evidence notwithstanding...

[switters]

I'll try to post some more pics tomorrow at different ISOs, in different lighting conditions. You won't see any focus charts or bottles and Teddy Bears lined up against a wall, though

[skyoftexas]

I'm sorry, but if you think this is a sharp photo, then either the interpretation of sharpness is very flexible, or one of us is completely wrong. This is not a compelling example of K5 sharpness.

Michael

[ve2vfd]

Ok lets cut the crap... I wanna see pictures of knives and razor blades! We'll see just how sharp that puppy is!

Pat

[ogl]

I think it's some kind of antiK-5 campaign if somebody say about soft pictures of K-5.


I've converted RAW from K-5 + FA77 and I can say that K-5 has weaker AA filter than K-7 and offers better details and better sharpness.
The crops are very sharp and close to K10/K200D photos in terms of per-pixel sharpness.

I will plan to buy K-5 and kill this new myth.

As for me the worst APS-C pisture is from canon 7D in terms of sharpness.

All first pictures from prime + K-5 in this forum were very sharp...But somebody decided to create bad story about soft K-5....Or maybe I'm not right?

[Osama Binhidin]

Well unless I have a bad example of a K7 I am so impressed with the K5 results, sharpest results I have had ever. Only taken 20 0r 30 with DA* 16-50.

[Smeggypants]

I'm sorry, but if you think this is a sharp photo, then either the interpretation of sharpness is very flexible, or one of us is completely wrong. This is not a compelling example of K5 sharpness.

Michael

How is the K-5 not going to be sharp? You mean someone put on a lens with the AF uncalibrated? Camera shake? Partial blindness.

Come on!! If anything is not sharp, it's not the body. How can a body not be sharp? Let's not get paranoia get in the way of common sense

[Ben78]

I for one am stoked with my K-5, I may not have Limited or * glass, but my FA50 cuts em good...



100% crop

[falconeye]

Absolutely, and sadly it's only the second stage of internet hype (after "It's Great!"). Pixelpeepers are the worst for moaning "OMG this camera is worthless because this one pic on a review site is blurry! Glad I didn't buy one and try to take any photos with it!"

It's a weird reality, compounded by the internet "opinion amplifier" and the uniquely human desire to be told what to buy/believe/do. But that's a seriously sharp chicken...

If it were for pixel peeping alone ...

But what you wrote exactly describes the opinion amplifier called Wall Street

[Col]

If it were for pixel peeping alone ...

But what you wrote exactly describes the opinion amplifier called Wall Street

'tis the way of it

[Kikool_CH]

I think it's some kind of antiK-5 campaign if somebody say about soft pictures of K-5.


I've converted RAW from K-5 + FA77 and I can say that K-5 has weaker AA filter than K-7 and offers better details and better sharpness.
The crops are very sharp and close to K10/K200D photos in terms of per-pixel sharpness.

I will plan to buy K-5 and kill this new myth.

As for me the worst APS-C pisture is from canon 7D in terms of sharpness.

All first pictures from prime + K-5 in this forum were very sharp...But somebody decided to create bad story about soft K-5....

Well put, Ogl


That's what I could see from experience.

When I bought my K-7 one year ago, I missed the "sharpness" (we are talking about 100% pixel-peeping here) of the K200d. I also missed the colors, but it's not the topic here. Well, I told myself that 14.6Mp are more demanding than 10.2... Not that I was unhappy, the K-7 was a huge step forward

Now with the K-5, I'm very glad to experience the same feeling when I look at the shots I take, crispness (and colors). Of course it's even more demanding as regards to lens quality. But I also thought the AA filter is weaker than the one on the K-7.

I absolutely don't understand that measurebation turning into urban legend so that the K-5 has a kind of "soft" rendering. It might be depending on the JPEG settings, I don't care I just shoot RAW. What I don't understand is that you see plenty of people just getting hysteric on comparing 400% tests images from tests sites when one can find real sharp real world images.

Spending hours to compare quarters of pixels on studio targets when there are so many beautiful things to see and to shoot at

Cheers

[falconeye]

To be honest,

when I saw the thread title, I thought an image like this would be posted:

http://www.pentax.jp/japan/imaging/digital/slr/k-5/image/ex_02.jpg

This K-5 out-of-camera jpg-image was released by Pentax Japan a month ago and I would have guessed that a "soft images from K-5" meme would have had no chance to emerge after this image.

I still have to see a comparable image sample from another APS-C camera. It is full of splendid artefact-free detail.

[pinholecam]

This is the problem with people prematurely posting long threads that claim the K-5 is 'soft' on the basis of some poor quality images pulled off some sloppy photo review site. The idea, no matter how dumb and un-proven, suddenly gets legs and a life of its own, and then worried people get the idea that there is something amiss with their camera, and they need to prove to themselves that their K-5 is indeed sharp and doesn't have something wrong with it.

Soon I expect to see a stream of posts from people blaming every soft K- image of theirs (due to poor glass, crappy UV filters, motion blur or whatever) on their 'defective' camera, and lots of stories of angry people sending their K-5's back to Pentax etc etc etc.

Sigh.

Totally agree.
Already we have ppl saying they will hold off buying a K5 (after holding off the K10, K20, K7) because of this imaginary softness.
They should really go find some better excuse to hide the fact that they are just cheap.

There are already so many samples of fantastic photos out of the K5 and they choose to look the other way.

If this is the sort of attitude coming from people who supposedly like what Pentax offers, then Pentax will be no more in a year or two, cause their user base was just too cheap to get a new camera and kept finding lame excuses.


I'm pretty sure those who want to pick the wrong info will continue to do so and contort them to suit their needs.

[Jeff Charles]

Absolutely, and sadly it's only the second stage of internet hype (after "It's Great!")....

Your graph sums up the new camera cycle well. If it wasn't so true, it would be funny.

Even before a new camera is announced, anticipation, speculation, and complaining can go on for years.

Jeff

[thoughton]

To be honest,

when I saw the thread title, I thought an image like this would be posted:

http://www.pentax.jp/japan/imaging/digital/slr/k-5/image/ex_02.jpg

This K-5 out-of-camera jpg-image was released by Pentax Japan a month ago and I would have guessed that a "soft images from K-5" meme would have had no chance to emerge after this image.

I still have to see a comparable image sample from another APS-C camera. It is full of splendid artefact-free detail.

Phew, thanks for posting that. About to order a K5 so I was worried for a moment The original chicken shot is sharp, but like the other naysayers I was expecting a better 1:1 crop especially considering the lens.