[skyoftexas]

I agree with your assessment. I'm not too worried about it because I believe(hope) it can be corrected in PP, but still, I would feel more comfortable it this were not the case. The K20D was noted for its sharpness and detail in high ISO photos, even at the expense in noise gain. Why Pentax has taken, what seems to be a heavy filtering approach is disappointing and seemingly inconsistent with their historical approach.

Michael

[garyk]

That is a huge difference. Even i can tell the difference very easily.
Thanks again johnbee.

[deadwolfbones]

Buncha people getting upset over a few samples and condemning the model as a whole.

Stupid.

[ogl]

Hello,



Taken from Imaging Resource:


I have more RAW/DNG samples coming in from DPReview as well....

Is it JPEG samples?

I've converted RAW (DNG) 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.


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

I don't care what any web-site tested and I don't care another pictures of another men.


How to convert PEF from K-5 if only PPL supports K-5. Not C1Pro, not LR...

---------- Post added 11-18-10 at 10:55 PM ----------

Is is soft picture?
http://fotkidepo.ru/photo/132601/32162qXOjQehHIw/E9QALj3fZV/565055.jpg

---------- Post added 11-18-10 at 10:58 PM ----------

Hello,



The first of the issues were uncovered by Imaging Resources. Which incidentally, have admitted to shooting the K-5 with improper settings(f/5.6 vs f/8). Which they claimed will be re-shot with the proper settings.

However, even in this scene(where focus was proper), there are clear detail distinctions between the K-5 and the D7K and Sony using the same sensor.

Don't you think that focus is in different places in D7000 and K-5?

It seems to me you want to be new Rice High...

---

Last edited by ogl; 11-18-2010 at 10:58 PM.

[cbaytan]

Some people seemed to be annoyed by discussing K-5's IQ on the forum, this is not an healthy attitude. It wouldn't help Pentaxians nor Pentax. Of course we need to discuss new models pros and cons here, thats what the forums for.

Discussed pictures are controlled lab results of highly regarded test sites. But their results are debatable too, thats what we are doing right now. DPreview seemed to taken K-5 samples with the wrong aperture intentionally and imaging resource admitted to photos taken with wrong aperture value by mistake, and they claimed they will correct it. Without Pentaxians intervention, they would get away with these results and letting the world know K-5 results are not up to 60D and D7000. And this forum would be an ego boosting-self-satisfying Pentax place. Is that what you want?

If you are faint hearted don't read the such discussions, it's better than calling names for fellow Pentaxian friends.. Show us sharp samples of K-5 instead.

[Kunzite]

Show us sharp samples of K-5 instead.

Digital Cameras, Pentax K-5 Digital Camera Test Image
Can we close the thread now?

[cbaytan]

Can we close the thread now?

No way! this will be a never ending discussion until all sensors including competitors, will outresolve the best lense.

[kittykat46]

Before we all get too upset, its worth reading John Bee's subsequent thread reexamining
his take on the K-5 vs D7000.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-k-5-forum/123138-k-5-vs-d7000-soft...-part-2-a.html

Pretty much in line with what I see with the K-5.
I'm no expert photographer, but I simply have no concerns about the K-5s sharpness in the few days I've been using it.

My main caveat is that the K-5 has a very unforgiving sensor. Stick on just an "average" lens or focus badly, and chances are the 16MP shot will just be exposing the flaws in the lens or whatever error has occured.
If you must keep that "so-so" lens, save your photo at 10MP or 6 MP then it would look a lot more acceptable.

[i83N]

You know what i notice, that K-5 starts to makes a micro focus corrections just moments before the shot and shot is made when focus is moving. Hope next firmware update will fix that minor bug.

[zelovoc]

this 400% crops pixel peeping just sucks. get to life.

[pscl57]

Here another crops with better results.

[gazonk]

Digital Cameras, Pentax K-5 Digital Camera Test Image
Can we close the thread now?

+1!!

I tried to close the thread with a link to that photo yesterday (3 pages ago or something... sigh) but didn't even get a comment, as far as I can tell.

But I'll repeat it here:

And they're far from soft! Looks absolutely breathtakingly fabulous to me, e.g.
Digital Cameras, Pentax K-5 Digital Camera Test Image

And it wasn't difficult to find an area with more details than in the D7000 version of the same image (K-5 is left, of course):

[eigelb]

NEW testshots at Digital Cameras, Digital Camera Reviews - The Imaging Resource!

nikon d7000




Pentax K-5

[Gimbal]

Talk about rendering color differently, especially the pink cloth (and the blue) above the fiddlers elbow bottle. I have no idea which one is correct though...

[falconeye]

I made an observation, less for the K-5 but rather for a D7000 sample shot shown.

Please, refer to Digital Cameras, Nikon D7000 Digital Camera Test Image for the original image.

It is an IR shot with a distant test chart (sitting under the bell). That's essential as the full test charts are too large to be interesting.

The interesting detail is the little zone plate chart in the center. At this distance, it is fine grain enough to show the zone plate alias pattern.

For a theory of sampling artifacts of the zone plate function ( sin[x^2+y^2] ), please refer to, e.g., http://www.cgl.uwaterloo.ca/~csk/papers/kaplan_bridges2005a.pdf

The attachment shows the center crop (200% and heavily resharpened).

You see that the zone plate alias pattern emerges at a 45° angle.

That's astonishing and a possible sign that Nikon samples the raw data in a finer pitch lattice turned 45° rather than the original grid of sensels. That, or the sensor is turned 45° which I would think is highly unlikely

I didn't open the NEF and look into it. Maybe interestig to compare though.

The K-5 images show the alias pattern at the expected 0°/90° angles.


So, I add yet another possible cause for the differences in sharpness: Different levels of sophistication in in-camera demosaicers.