[Taviali]

Hello. So I can't really see any difference, supposedly "Sharpness" is well... sharp, "Fine Sharpness" is a little sharper and "Extra Sharpness" is the sharpest?
Then there's -5 to +5 (or maybe it's -4 to +4, can't remember exactly) to each sharp setting. This is the part that confuses me the most.
What is sharper, "Fine Sharpness" + 5 or "Extra Sharpness" - 5?
One more question: which one do you use under what circumstances and why?
Thanks!

[Pioneer]

Do a test. Take a shot of something with some fine detail in it once at each setting, throw them up on the screen and see if you can see any difference?

Your mileage may vary but when I did my test I ended up preferring the setting at Fine Sharpness. My eyes were not good enough, or my monitor is not sharp enough, to resolve things well enough to tell any clear difference in the positive or negative settings so I left them at 0.

As for when they are useful? If you are taking a portrait of a pretty girl, then to satisfy that girl's vanity I would probably avoid the extra sharp settings. Actually anyones vanity. If I were taking a photo to document some scientific result, or to capture the detail in a document or an old photo, then I may prefer to set my camera to get all the sharpness I possibly could, assuming my lens can resolve it.

Beyond that, you kind of have to make your own judgments. But there is really no way to avoid doing your own tests, otherwise you are just accepting the opinion of some unknown old fart like me, and I may have no idea what I'm talking about.

[Docrwm]

I'm finding that I get better performance from my lenses when I turn AF Fine Adjustment to "Off" and disable the AF fine adjustment so that the lenses focus according to factory defaults.

[Taviali]

I'm finding that I get better performance from my lenses when I turn AF Fine Adjustment to "Off" and disable the AF fine adjustment so that the lenses focus according to factory defaults.

Hehe that's not really what I'm talking about, what you mentioned here is front/back focus of a lens or/and camera

[Taviali]

Do a test. Take a shot of something with some fine detail in it once at each setting, throw them up on the screen and see if you can see any difference?

Your mileage may vary but when I did my test I ended up preferring the setting at Fine Sharpness. My eyes were not good enough, or my monitor is not sharp enough, to resolve things well enough to tell any clear difference in the positive or negative settings so I left them at 0.

As for when they are useful? If you are taking a portrait of a pretty girl, then to satisfy that girl's vanity I would probably avoid the extra sharp settings. Actually anyones vanity. If I were taking a photo to document some scientific result, or to capture the detail in a document or an old photo, then I may prefer to set my camera to get all the sharpness I possibly could, assuming my lens can resolve it.

Beyond that, you kind of have to make your own judgments. But there is really no way to avoid doing your own tests, otherwise you are just accepting the opinion of some unknown old fart like me, and I may have no idea what I'm talking about.

Someone on other forum replied to me, that if I shoot RAW I should simply turn sharpness off, well not off, but leave it to 0, because I can put sharpness in Photoshop, so I guess that's what I'll be doing for now, at least until I can make some photos with great detail and compare.
Thanks for an awesome answer!

[Docrwm]

Hehe that's not really what I'm talking about, what you mentioned here is front/back focus of a lens or/and camera

Sorry, hadn't explored all the jpg settings. But no, its not just for front/back focus. I found that even when it was set at "0" there was an impact on the AF performance. Turning it off solved it. Take a look.

[Philoslothical]

Someone on other forum replied to me, that if I shoot RAW I should simply turn sharpness off, well not off, but leave it to 0, because I can put sharpness in Photoshop, so I guess that's what I'll be doing for now, at least until I can make some photos with great detail and compare.

If you're shooting raw you can totally ignore it. You don't need to set it to 0 or anything else, because it simply isn't applied to the camera output when shooting raw. It's part of the jpeg rendering engine, and that's it. So, no worries.

[Pioneer]

If you're shooting raw you can totally ignore it. You don't need to set it to 0 or anything else, because it simply isn't applied to the camera output when shooting raw. It's part of the jpeg rendering engine, and that's it. So, no worries.

But that's not just it. Some of use shoot both. Heck, I imagine there are a lot of people who shoot just JPEG. I personally shoot both. I like to keep the RAW file just in case I get a particularly fine picture that I am inclined to spend the time with in Photoshop making it all it can be. But I am not particularly fond of spending all my time manipulating my pictures in Photoshop. So I also try to make my JPEGs as nice as I can right from the camera. A lot of the time that is as far as I ever go with my images.

If all you ever shoot are RAW files then Philoslothical is absolutely right. Don't worry about sharpness, you will always make those adjustments in Photoshop/GIMP/whatever. But if you do like to ensure that your JPEGS are also reasonably presentable right from the camera then it is worth taking a little time to figure out what you do and don't like. Pentax gives you tons of control options right in the camera. Seems a shame to waste all that by never trying those settings out to figure out what they can do for you.

[Taviali]

Pentax K-5 Sharpness Settings | Neocamera