Chance of K-5 to K-5II AA Filter Retrofit (or removal?)

snake · 02-14-2013, 07:45 AM

I know that attempts were made on the K-5 by a service to remove the AA filter, which resulted in the cam essentially not being usable.

Seeing now we have a K-5ii, which SUPPOSEDLY has a less aggressive AA filter or the IIs, which simply has a neutral glass in the AA filter's place, is there a chance we might finally have a viable option for the original K-5?

Anvh · 02-14-2013, 10:02 AM

If you say they werent able to, why do you think with the release of a new camera they suddenly would?

They might be able to dit a sensor from a mkII in it but i doubt that would be cheap, better to buy mkII instead.

snake · 02-14-2013, 10:10 AM

Originally posted by Anvh

If you say they werent able to, why do you think with the release of a new camera they suddenly would?

They might be able to dit a sensor from a mkII in it but i doubt that would be cheap, better to buy mkII instead.

Because, as I understand it, the removal was a real removal. In this case, as mentioned clearly in the title, we would have a retrofit because now we have either a weaker one or a neutral glass that can be replaced there.

There's a difference between removal of the AA filter and retrofitting a later variant (or neutral glass).

I don't know why you're talking about replacing sensors now, especially since the sensors are supposedly the same.

Anvh · 02-14-2013, 11:08 AM

But that was already posiable to begin with.

I said replacing the sensor because i don't see what the release of the new cameras brings to the ball game to make a differnce.

snake · 02-14-2013, 11:12 AM

Originally posted by Anvh

But that was already posiable to begin with.

I said replacing the sensor because i don't see what the release of the new cameras brings to the ball game to make a differnce.

I haven't the slightest clue of what you're saying.

Anvh · 02-14-2013, 02:41 PM

Correct me if i'm wrong but i'm understanding that you're saying that since the MKII has a weaker AA or no AA that that means companies can use weaker AA or no AA also on the older K5.

What i'm saying is that weaker AA already excisteted to begin with, so i don't understand why having it in the new version makes the differnce.
Some for example actually put heavier AA inside their Canon to reduce moire when filming.

snake · 02-14-2013, 02:58 PM

Originally posted by Anvh

Correct me if i'm wrong but i'm understanding that you're saying that since the MKII has a weaker AA or no AA that that means companies can use weaker AA or no AA also on the older K5.

What i'm saying is that weaker AA already excisteted to begin with, so i don't understand why having it in the new version makes the differnce.
Some for example actually put heavier AA inside their Canon to reduce moire when filming.

So you're suggesting that I should install a stronger AA filter in my K-5?

Anvh · 02-14-2013, 03:21 PM

No i don't.
I'm saying that different strengths of AA filter where on the market to begin with.

So I don't see what the K5 mkII brings to the table when looking at your first comment.

snake · 02-14-2013, 03:34 PM

Originally posted by Anvh

No i don't.
I'm saying that different strengths of AA filter where on the market to begin with.

So I don't see what the K5 mkII brings to the table when looking at your first comment.

Huh??

Anvh · 02-14-2013, 05:46 PM

Originally posted by Ex Finn.

edit: in the case you are wondering if the current models somehow have made it possible to revisit the filter removal, in the K-5 classic, then I would think the answer is no.

This is what i meant, but i also said why.

awaldram · 02-14-2013, 11:46 PM

Originally posted by snake

Huh??

The poitn Anvh is trying to make is

If previously they could not remove the AA filter without rendering the camera useless , then the reason must be they could not remove the AA filter due to sensor design.

Having a new camera without an AA filter does not alter the fact above, So NO the chances of retro fitting the AA/Glass from the ii/s to the k5 are low.

snake · 02-15-2013, 12:03 AM

Originally posted by Ex Finn.

The K-5IIs most certainly is a viable option (I am stating this w/o actually having one) v.s. trying to modify the K-5 classic.

edit: in the case you are wondering if the current models somehow have made it possible to revisit the filter removal, in the K-5 classic, then I would think the answer is no.

That is not what I stated.

What is stated now, which is constantly being ignored (or answered in a garbled fashion by the other) is that we don't know if in the previous, unsuccessful modification, if a neutral glass was placed over the sensor after removing the AA filter. For the most part, it appears the answer is none was replaced.

Now, supposedly, the K-5II, K-30, and K-01 use weaker filters. The IIs likely uses a neutral glass. This makes parts available to replace the K-5's filter with either a lighter one or a neutral glass and preserve function.

What the other person is going on about, I have no idea, from putting in a new sensor (when they're the same sensor) to you saying that somehow new models make it possible to remove an old model's filter somehow?

The last poster also inserted some assumption in there. When the filter was removed, it resulted in some sort of metering issues. There could be a better possibility that now the parts are available, we could have successful retrofitting, rather than plainly removing the AA.

adwb · 02-15-2013, 01:05 AM

Snake, I understand what you are asking but the answer will only come from
[a] Pentax which is unlikely.
[b] from a repair tech at a pentax repair facility and that would I suspect presume you knew him/her as a friend because otherwise you still would not get the answer.

The same though crossed my mind when the first announced it, and in fact I wondered if the AA filter was removable on any of the previous models.?

snake · 02-15-2013, 01:10 AM

Originally posted by adwb

Snake, I understand what you are asking but the answer will only come from
[a] Pentax which is unlikely.
[b] from a repair tech at a pentax repair facility and that would I suspect presume you knew him/her as a friend because otherwise you still would not get the answer.

The same though crossed my mind when the first announced it, and in fact I wondered if the AA filter was removable on any of the previous models.?

a. Why would Pentax answer anything about a discontinued camera being modified by aftermarket AA removal services?
b. What does a repair tech a pentax repair facility have anything to do with this, when the AA filter removals were being done by an independent AA removal service?

Again, you're expressing confusion, at best. Perhaps it's best for you to bow out for a while until what's going on is a bit clearer.

Anvh · 02-15-2013, 04:31 PM

Originally posted by snake

That is not what I stated.

What is stated now, which is constantly being ignored (or answered in a garbled fashion by the other) is that we don't know if in the previous, unsuccessful modification, if a neutral glass was placed over the sensor after removing the AA filter. For the most part, it appears the answer is none was replaced.

It was not ignored since that is preciesly what i'm talking about but you don't seem to understood it that way.

The neutral glass and the weaker AA filters were already availble before the MKII come to the market.
So they could already replace the AA filter with neutral glass 2 years ago, if they actually did that is another question.
But it's well known that simply removing the AA filter does not work so well.

02-14-2013, 07:45 AM	#1
snake Banned Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: NY/Germany Posts: 1,183	Chance of K-5 to K-5II AA Filter Retrofit (or removal?) I know that attempts were made on the K-5 by a service to remove the AA filter, which resulted in the cam essentially not being usable. Seeing now we have a K-5ii, which SUPPOSEDLY has a less aggressive AA filter or the IIs, which simply has a neutral glass in the AA filter's place, is there a chance we might finally have a viable option for the original K-5?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K-5 IIs -- The Pros and Cons of Omitting an AA-Filter	Class A	Pentax DSLR Discussion	114	12-18-2012 10:22 PM
Fujifilm X-E1 or Pentax K-5/K-5II	Snajder	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	39	12-06-2012 05:01 PM
How best to de-blur k-5/k-5II users to match k-5IIs	close-enough	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	11	12-03-2012 02:14 PM
K-5 or K-5II	C_Jones	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	16	11-22-2012 03:43 PM
From a K-7...K-30 or K-5II?	Daemos	Pentax DSLR Discussion	14	11-09-2012 07:04 PM

02-14-2013, 10:02 AM	#2
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	If you say they werent able to, why do you think with the release of a new camera they suddenly would? They might be able to dit a sensor from a mkII in it but i doubt that would be cheap, better to buy mkII instead.

02-14-2013, 10:10 AM	#3
snake Banned Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: NY/Germany Posts: 1,183 Original Poster	Originally posted by Anvh If you say they werent able to, why do you think with the release of a new camera they suddenly would? They might be able to dit a sensor from a mkII in it but i doubt that would be cheap, better to buy mkII instead. Because, as I understand it, the removal was a real removal. In this case, as mentioned clearly in the title, we would have a retrofit because now we have either a weaker one or a neutral glass that can be replaced there. There's a difference between removal of the AA filter and retrofitting a later variant (or neutral glass). I don't know why you're talking about replacing sensors now, especially since the sensors are supposedly the same.

02-14-2013, 11:08 AM	#4
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	But that was already posiable to begin with. I said replacing the sensor because i don't see what the release of the new cameras brings to the ball game to make a differnce.

02-14-2013, 11:12 AM	#5
snake Banned Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: NY/Germany Posts: 1,183 Original Poster	Originally posted by Anvh But that was already posiable to begin with. I said replacing the sensor because i don't see what the release of the new cameras brings to the ball game to make a differnce. I haven't the slightest clue of what you're saying.

02-14-2013, 02:41 PM	#6
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Correct me if i'm wrong but i'm understanding that you're saying that since the MKII has a weaker AA or no AA that that means companies can use weaker AA or no AA also on the older K5. What i'm saying is that weaker AA already excisteted to begin with, so i don't understand why having it in the new version makes the differnce. Some for example actually put heavier AA inside their Canon to reduce moire when filming.

02-14-2013, 02:58 PM	#7
snake Banned Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: NY/Germany Posts: 1,183 Original Poster	Originally posted by Anvh Correct me if i'm wrong but i'm understanding that you're saying that since the MKII has a weaker AA or no AA that that means companies can use weaker AA or no AA also on the older K5. What i'm saying is that weaker AA already excisteted to begin with, so i don't understand why having it in the new version makes the differnce. Some for example actually put heavier AA inside their Canon to reduce moire when filming. So you're suggesting that I should install a stronger AA filter in my K-5?

02-14-2013, 03:21 PM	#8
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	No i don't. I'm saying that different strengths of AA filter where on the market to begin with. So I don't see what the K5 mkII brings to the table when looking at your first comment.

02-14-2013, 03:34 PM	#9
snake Banned Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: NY/Germany Posts: 1,183 Original Poster	Originally posted by Anvh No i don't. I'm saying that different strengths of AA filter where on the market to begin with. So I don't see what the K5 mkII brings to the table when looking at your first comment. Huh??

02-14-2013, 05:46 PM	#10
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Originally posted by Ex Finn. edit: in the case you are wondering if the current models somehow have made it possible to revisit the filter removal, in the K-5 classic, then I would think the answer is no. This is what i meant, but i also said why.

02-14-2013, 11:46 PM	#11
awaldram Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Hampshire Photos: Gallery Posts: 732	Originally posted by snake Huh?? The poitn Anvh is trying to make is If previously they could not remove the AA filter without rendering the camera useless , then the reason must be they could not remove the AA filter due to sensor design. Having a new camera without an AA filter does not alter the fact above, So NO the chances of retro fitting the AA/Glass from the ii/s to the k5 are low.

02-15-2013, 12:03 AM	#12
snake Banned Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: NY/Germany Posts: 1,183 Original Poster	Originally posted by Ex Finn. The K-5IIs most certainly is a viable option (I am stating this w/o actually having one) v.s. trying to modify the K-5 classic. edit: in the case you are wondering if the current models somehow have made it possible to revisit the filter removal, in the K-5 classic, then I would think the answer is no. That is not what I stated. What is stated now, which is constantly being ignored (or answered in a garbled fashion by the other) is that we don't know if in the previous, unsuccessful modification, if a neutral glass was placed over the sensor after removing the AA filter. For the most part, it appears the answer is none was replaced. Now, supposedly, the K-5II, K-30, and K-01 use weaker filters. The IIs likely uses a neutral glass. This makes parts available to replace the K-5's filter with either a lighter one or a neutral glass and preserve function. What the other person is going on about, I have no idea, from putting in a new sensor (when they're the same sensor) to you saying that somehow new models make it possible to remove an old model's filter somehow? The last poster also inserted some assumption in there. When the filter was removed, it resulted in some sort of metering issues. There could be a better possibility that now the parts are available, we could have successful retrofitting, rather than plainly removing the AA.

02-15-2013, 01:05 AM	#13
adwb Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Bristol UK Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,636	Snake, I understand what you are asking but the answer will only come from [a] Pentax which is unlikely. [b] from a repair tech at a pentax repair facility and that would I suspect presume you knew him/her as a friend because otherwise you still would not get the answer. The same though crossed my mind when the first announced it, and in fact I wondered if the AA filter was removable on any of the previous models.?

02-15-2013, 01:10 AM	#14
snake Banned Join Date: Jun 2012 Location: NY/Germany Posts: 1,183 Original Poster	Originally posted by adwb Snake, I understand what you are asking but the answer will only come from [a] Pentax which is unlikely. [b] from a repair tech at a pentax repair facility and that would I suspect presume you knew him/her as a friend because otherwise you still would not get the answer. The same though crossed my mind when the first announced it, and in fact I wondered if the AA filter was removable on any of the previous models.? a. Why would Pentax answer anything about a discontinued camera being modified by aftermarket AA removal services? b. What does a repair tech a pentax repair facility have anything to do with this, when the AA filter removals were being done by an independent AA removal service? Again, you're expressing confusion, at best. Perhaps it's best for you to bow out for a while until what's going on is a bit clearer.

02-15-2013, 04:31 PM	#15
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Originally posted by snake That is not what I stated. What is stated now, which is constantly being ignored (or answered in a garbled fashion by the other) is that we don't know if in the previous, unsuccessful modification, if a neutral glass was placed over the sensor after removing the AA filter. For the most part, it appears the answer is none was replaced. It was not ignored since that is preciesly what i'm talking about but you don't seem to understood it that way. The neutral glass and the weaker AA filters were already availble before the MKII come to the market. So they could already replace the AA filter with neutral glass 2 years ago, if they actually did that is another question. But it's well known that simply removing the AA filter does not work so well.