Chossing the K5II over the K5IIs

**Biff** · 11-12-2012, 09:28 PM

OK, I probably missed something, but after reading dozens of threads and posts comparing the K5II with the K5IIs I haven't read a concise post about why, price aside, people are choosing the K5II over the K5IIs. It's usually the other way around.

They are both fine cameras and apparently some markets prefer the K5II. Does it simply come down to folks don't want to worry about moire?

JohnBee · 11-12-2012, 10:02 PM

Having run numerous tests over the past few days, I found that the K-5 II not only matches the K-5 IIs in resolution but will often show more detail than the IIs due to its moire and aliasing advantage.

That being said, I did find the K-5 IIs to have a very slight edge in color detail over the II, though I have yet to see this on screen on anything 1:1 let alone in print(including 1:1 samples). And so from what I can see, there are no visible advantages to buying the IIs for anyone shooting in RAW. Having said that... I can see where the IIs could be advantageous for someone looking to shoot OOC, at which point I think it could prove to be advantageous. Though in the end, I can't help but feel as though the lack of AA filter on a 16mp camera does not outweigh the penalties even for landscape type shooting.

vonBaloney · 11-12-2012, 10:18 PM

Originally posted by JohnBee

Having run numerous tests over the past few days, I found that the K-5 II not only matches the K-5 IIs in resolution but will often show more detail than the IIs due to its moire and aliasing advantage.

That being said, I did find the K-5 IIs to have a very slight edge in color detail over the II, though I have yet to see this on screen on anything 1:1 let alone in print(including 1:1 samples). And so from what I can see, there are no visible advantages to buying the IIs for anyone shooting in RAW. Having said that... I can see where the IIs could be advantageous for someone looking to shoot OOC, at which point I think it could prove to be advantageous. Though in the end, I can't help but feel as though the lack of AA filter on a 16mp camera does not outweigh the penalties even for landscape type shooting.

Do you think the IQ is any different between the K-5 II and the original K-5?

JohnBee · 11-12-2012, 10:36 PM

Originally posted by vonBaloney

Do you think the IQ is any different between the K-5 II and the original K-5?

Based on what I've seen, I'm tempted to say yes, though it would be near impossible to tell if were looking at sensor or hardware improvements or... changes made in the testing methods, tripod, lenses etc. etc.

Perhaps DxOMark will help shed some light on the issue in the near future.

Adam · 11-12-2012, 11:35 PM

Originally posted by vonBaloney

Do you think the IQ is any different between the K-5 II and the original K-5?

I've just requested a K-5 II, so we'll know soon enough, but:

According to Pentax (at Photokina), the K-5 II has the same internal hardware as the original K-5, and they said you could therefore expect the IQ to be the same as well.

11-12-2012, 09:28 PM	#1
Biff Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: SF Bay Area Photos: Albums Posts: 1,084	Chossing the K5II over the K5IIs OK, I probably missed something, but after reading dozens of threads and posts comparing the K5II with the K5IIs I haven't read a concise post about why, price aside, people are choosing the K5II over the K5IIs. It's usually the other way around. They are both fine cameras and apparently some markets prefer the K5II. Does it simply come down to folks don't want to worry about moire?

11-12-2012, 11:35 PM	#5
Adam Administrator Site Webmaster Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 51,608	Originally posted by vonBaloney Do you think the IQ is any different between the K-5 II and the original K-5? I've just requested a K-5 II, so we'll know soon enough, but: According to Pentax (at Photokina), the K-5 II has the same internal hardware as the original K-5, and they said you could therefore expect the IQ to be the same as well. Adam PentaxForums.com Webmaster (Site Usage Guide \| Site Help \| My Photography) PentaxForums.com server and development costs are user-supported. You can help cover these costs by donating or purchasing one of our Pentax eBooks. Or, buy your photo gear from our affiliates, Adorama, B&H Photo, KEH, or Topaz Labs, and get FREE Marketplace access - click here to see how! Trusted Pentax retailers:

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Official K5II and K5IIs sample is out with DA * lens	PentaxSX	Pentax News and Rumors	187	11-21-2012 07:03 PM
K5II or K5IIs for birding?	Shanti	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	25	11-09-2012 10:01 AM
k5II & K5IIs LCD screen	scunning14	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	6	10-12-2012 03:37 AM
K5II and K5IIs samples	scunning14	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	5	10-02-2012 03:42 PM
10 things to know about the K5II/K5IIs	jpzk	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	16	09-24-2012 05:33 AM

11-12-2012, 10:02 PM	#2
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667	Having run numerous tests over the past few days, I found that the K-5 II not only matches the K-5 IIs in resolution but will often show more detail than the IIs due to its moire and aliasing advantage. That being said, I did find the K-5 IIs to have a very slight edge in color detail over the II, though I have yet to see this on screen on anything 1:1 let alone in print(including 1:1 samples). And so from what I can see, there are no visible advantages to buying the IIs for anyone shooting in RAW. Having said that... I can see where the IIs could be advantageous for someone looking to shoot OOC, at which point I think it could prove to be advantageous. Though in the end, I can't help but feel as though the lack of AA filter on a 16mp camera does not outweigh the penalties even for landscape type shooting.

11-12-2012, 10:18 PM	#3
vonBaloney Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Albuquerque, NM Posts: 6,029	Originally posted by JohnBee Having run numerous tests over the past few days, I found that the K-5 II not only matches the K-5 IIs in resolution but will often show more detail than the IIs due to its moire and aliasing advantage. That being said, I did find the K-5 IIs to have a very slight edge in color detail over the II, though I have yet to see this on screen on anything 1:1 let alone in print(including 1:1 samples). And so from what I can see, there are no visible advantages to buying the IIs for anyone shooting in RAW. Having said that... I can see where the IIs could be advantageous for someone looking to shoot OOC, at which point I think it could prove to be advantageous. Though in the end, I can't help but feel as though the lack of AA filter on a 16mp camera does not outweigh the penalties even for landscape type shooting. Do you think the IQ is any different between the K-5 II and the original K-5?

11-12-2012, 10:36 PM	#4
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667	Originally posted by vonBaloney Do you think the IQ is any different between the K-5 II and the original K-5? Based on what I've seen, I'm tempted to say yes, though it would be near impossible to tell if were looking at sensor or hardware improvements or... changes made in the testing methods, tripod, lenses etc. etc. Perhaps DxOMark will help shed some light on the issue in the near future.