The death of The Soft K5 urban legend

alessandro63 · 11-30-2010, 04:05 AM

Not sure DPR changed or not the first version they posted, some were heavily backfocused; now they are almost good, but there's the mistery of crisper shots at high iso than at low iso. IR fixed the photos, that were taken at f/5.6 intead of f/8.0 and also backfocused (I have an example of the first batch and compared it to the second).
I am not going anymore to judge a camera based on DPR and IR samples. At the same level/age of camera, a print would be indistinguishable; that pixel-peeping exercise is just time consuming and absolutely unuseful.

Originally posted by garyk

I think until dpreview fixes the crops of the k-5, if it needs it? I sure hope it needs fixing. Then this will never end. It has stopped me in my tracks. I am very critical of crops and sharpness. I think all the pics here show it is a good camera. What is the problem with the other sites posting the comparison pics? It has stopped me though.

What is the possible motive putting up very bad pics? What is there response to this?

Just very bad.

garyk · 11-30-2010, 04:50 AM

Ok, Thanks.
I will check it out again.

Malake · 11-30-2010, 05:19 AM

Quote:

I am not going anymore to judge a camera based on DPR and IR samples. At the same level/age of camera, a print would be indistinguishable; that pixel-peeping exercise is just time consuming and absolutely unuseful.

+10000

Certainly, there are a lot of aspects more importants than pixel-peeping exercise, like construction, ergonomie, color rendition, reliability, etc...

planedriver · 11-30-2010, 05:31 AM

I like sharp pictures and I have to tell you this camera can produce sharp ones. If the previous one was not enough here's another "test". I realized that actually the clock has a quite thick glass on it (which can reduce the effectiveness of my deliberately non-scientific test) but it is still sharp.

FA50 f4 iso100

Andras

Erik · 11-30-2010, 05:56 AM

What's sharp in the above is the dust particles on top of the clock glass, not necessarily the clock face itself

planedriver · 11-30-2010, 06:05 AM

Originally posted by Erik

What's sharp in the above is the dust particles on top of the clock glass, not necessarily the clock face itself

ok

so we can say that this picture is sharp!!

Andras

**jpzk** · 11-30-2010, 02:28 PM

Originally posted by planedriver

I like sharp pictures and I have to tell you this camera can produce sharp ones. If the previous one was not enough here's another "test". I realized that actually the clock has a quite thick glass on it (which can reduce the effectiveness of my deliberately non-scientific test) but it is still sharp.

FA50 f4 iso100

Andras

Convincingly sharp when you look at the number "11" on the clock.

JP

Catalana · 12-02-2010, 03:48 PM

I'm wondering if fixing the CA would make the picture even better (sharper).
I see green on the "9" and purple on the "30". Fixing even the smallest amount of CA can make a big difference... :-)

Stratman · 12-04-2010, 06:49 PM

I don't see a lack of sharpness in any of these photos, I guess some folks just like to egg people on.....

Malake · 12-05-2010, 04:36 AM

[lang=es]Certainly, this is not a sharp camera

http://pentax.photoble.net/image/2010/12/qGJSFLAKT9tYlzS/101203005.jpg

eagle2 · 03-06-2011, 11:11 PM

Erik: Now this is a really sharp shot and shows what the K5 is capable of. I can count the dust particles on your Olympus camera. Great test!

Thanks for taking the time to post.

Don

Originally posted by Erik

I got my K-5 two days ago and decided to test what's up with its IQ. Click here, folks: http://algol.nu/~erik/k5-sharpness-test.jpg

ISO 80, tripod, FA50/1.7 at f/8, converted with Lightroom 3.0, sharpened a bit with Nik Sharpener Pro. Focus point is on the Olympus logo.

Sloglass · 04-25-2011, 07:51 PM

I was playing around and decided to shoot the moon late one afternoon. After the picture was taken I noticed an interesting speck. Here is the full picture, shot at 93mm and a 100% crop of the speck. I think Burt Rutan had something to do with it.

JohnBee · 04-25-2011, 08:13 PM

Is that a canard design?

Couscousdelight · 04-26-2011, 03:42 PM

Here are some shot i've made these last 2 weeks. I was thiking about a sharpness issue with my K5 2 month ago. Then i realize than it was my Tamron 17-50 which was totaly faulty, and my Sigma 70-300 APO was too, but only above 250mm. No more sharpness issue since i know about that )
(sorry for the exifs, i use picasa which remove them, you can check them here :https://picasaweb.google.com/Couscousdelight/Misc# )
These are made with the cheap Sigma 70-300 APO :

1OO% crop :

100% crop :

F 35-80 f3.4/4.5 macro (a nice cheap lens) :

Pentax dal 18-55 WR !

And many many more...

**DRabbit** · 04-26-2011, 03:48 PM

Sharpness issue? ha!

11-30-2010, 06:05 AM	#96
planedriver Inactive Account Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Velence, Hungary Posts: 664	Originally posted by Erik What's sharp in the above is the dust particles on top of the clock glass, not necessarily the clock face itself okso we can say that this picture is sharp!! Andras

03-06-2011, 11:11 PM	#101
eagle2 Junior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Southwest Posts: 28	Erik: Now this is a really sharp shot and shows what the K5 is capable of. I can count the dust particles on your Olympus camera. Great test! Thanks for taking the time to post. Don Originally posted by Erik I got my K-5 two days ago and decided to test what's up with its IQ. Click here, folks: http://algol.nu/~erik/k5-sharpness-test.jpg ISO 80, tripod, FA50/1.7 at f/8, converted with Lightroom 3.0, sharpened a bit with Nik Sharpener Pro. Focus point is on the Olympus logo. Last edited by eagle2; 03-06-2011 at 11:19 PM.

04-26-2011, 03:42 PM	#104
Couscousdelight Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Frog-eaters country Photos: Gallery Posts: 357	Here are some shot i've made these last 2 weeks. I was thiking about a sharpness issue with my K5 2 month ago. Then i realize than it was my Tamron 17-50 which was totaly faulty, and my Sigma 70-300 APO was too, but only above 250mm. No more sharpness issue since i know about that ) (sorry for the exifs, i use picasa which remove them, you can check them here :https://picasaweb.google.com/Couscousdelight/Misc# ) These are made with the cheap Sigma 70-300 APO : 1OO% crop : 100% crop : F 35-80 f3.4/4.5 macro (a nice cheap lens) : Pentax dal 18-55 WR ! And many many more... Last edited by Couscousdelight; 04-26-2011 at 04:33 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
A legend passes	Hey Elwood	General Talk	1	04-28-2009 06:55 AM
The Soft Place: Post Your Soft Focus Images	jeffkpotter	Post Your Photos!	22	04-23-2009 09:04 PM
gone of a legend	Gooshin	General Talk	4	11-22-2008 05:28 AM
The Legend [Taken with my new FA77]	barbosas	Post Your Photos!	3	08-19-2008 07:10 AM
I am Legend + K10(D)	bt*ist	Photographic Technique	4	01-13-2008 02:23 PM

11-30-2010, 04:05 AM	#91
alessandro63 Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Italy Posts: 57	Not sure DPR changed or not the first version they posted, some were heavily backfocused; now they are almost good, but there's the mistery of crisper shots at high iso than at low iso. IR fixed the photos, that were taken at f/5.6 intead of f/8.0 and also backfocused (I have an example of the first batch and compared it to the second). I am not going anymore to judge a camera based on DPR and IR samples. At the same level/age of camera, a print would be indistinguishable; that pixel-peeping exercise is just time consuming and absolutely unuseful. Originally posted by garyk I think until dpreview fixes the crops of the k-5, if it needs it? I sure hope it needs fixing. Then this will never end. It has stopped me in my tracks. I am very critical of crops and sharpness. I think all the pics here show it is a good camera. What is the problem with the other sites posting the comparison pics? It has stopped me though. What is the possible motive putting up very bad pics? What is there response to this? Just very bad.

11-30-2010, 04:50 AM	#92
garyk Inactive Account Join Date: Feb 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 488	Ok, Thanks. I will check it out again.

11-30-2010, 05:19 AM	#93
Malake New Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 12	Quote: I am not going anymore to judge a camera based on DPR and IR samples. At the same level/age of camera, a print would be indistinguishable; that pixel-peeping exercise is just time consuming and absolutely unuseful. +10000 Certainly, there are a lot of aspects more importants than pixel-peeping exercise, like construction, ergonomie, color rendition, reliability, etc...

11-30-2010, 05:31 AM	#94
planedriver Inactive Account Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Velence, Hungary Posts: 664	I like sharp pictures and I have to tell you this camera can produce sharp ones. If the previous one was not enough here's another "test". I realized that actually the clock has a quite thick glass on it (which can reduce the effectiveness of my deliberately non-scientific test) but it is still sharp. FA50 f4 iso100 Andras

11-30-2010, 05:56 AM	#95
Erik Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Umeå, Sweden Posts: 755	What's sharp in the above is the dust particles on top of the clock glass, not necessarily the clock face itself

11-30-2010, 02:28 PM	#97
jpzk Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Québec Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,251 Original Poster	Originally posted by planedriver I like sharp pictures and I have to tell you this camera can produce sharp ones. If the previous one was not enough here's another "test". I realized that actually the clock has a quite thick glass on it (which can reduce the effectiveness of my deliberately non-scientific test) but it is still sharp. FA50 f4 iso100 Andras Convincingly sharp when you look at the number "11" on the clock. JP

12-02-2010, 03:48 PM	#98
Catalana Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2010 Location: California Posts: 190	I'm wondering if fixing the CA would make the picture even better (sharper). I see green on the "9" and purple on the "30". Fixing even the smallest amount of CA can make a big difference... :-)

12-04-2010, 06:49 PM	#99
Stratman Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: St Louis, Missouri U S A Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,464	I don't see a lack of sharpness in any of these photos, I guess some folks just like to egg people on.....

12-05-2010, 04:36 AM	#100
Malake New Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Posts: 12	[lang=es]Certainly, this is not a sharp camera http://pentax.photoble.net/image/2010/12/qGJSFLAKT9tYlzS/101203005.jpg

04-25-2011, 08:13 PM	#103
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667	Is that a canard design?

04-26-2011, 03:48 PM	#105
DRabbit Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Long Island, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 593	Sharpness issue? ha!