The death of The Soft K5 urban legend

Rupert · 04-29-2011, 08:11 AM

Originally posted by Parallax

I've seen your drawings, Jim. Remember? Stick to photography.

That sort of hurts my tender feelings Jim......you know how I am.

Back to soft photos....I never find soft photos to be the fault of my camera, the K5 or my previous Pentax bodies. If I fail, or ask the lens to perform beyond its capabilities I get soft or otherwise bad photos, just plain and simple.
I try to avoid being overly critical of my own shots, or those of others.....and look beyond the pixels to the subject matter, the composition and the story the shot may tell.......to me these all outweigh sharpness....in any brand of camera.

Right Katie?

[IMG]

[/IMG]

Best Regards!

**Schraubstock** · 04-30-2011, 07:16 AM

Originally posted by Rupert

I try to avoid being overly critical of my own shots, or those of others.....and look beyond the pixels to the subject matter, the composition and the story the shot may tell.......to me these all outweigh sharpness....in any brand of camera.

Precisely, just Google: 13 Photographs that changed the world and count the ones that are really sharp. You'll be surprised.

Greetings from polluted Shanghai

Designosophy · 04-30-2011, 07:27 AM

Originally posted by Gimbal

No, more probably it was based on the fact that most (all?) early reviews that included side by side shoots with Nikon d7000 (supposedly same or similar sensor) had the K5 looking softer. Excuses invented for this was bad lens, bad focus, bad photographer, stronger AA, and maybe a case of shutter vs SR blur again.

If early reviews did this, it does not explain the persistence of the view that the K-5 cannot produce sharp photos. This thread, for example, has a number of photos that are sharp. Do you say that none are? What is your definition of a sharp photograph?

Gimbal · 04-30-2011, 07:47 AM

Originally posted by Designosophy

If early reviews did this, it does not explain the persistence of the view that the K-5 cannot produce sharp photos. This thread, for example, has a number of photos that are sharp. Do you say that none are? What is your definition of a sharp photograph?

No I didn't say that, I explained where the view came from. But I partially agree, the raw files from my k10 feels sharper when viewed at pixel-level, and yes, I know all the reasons for that.

Most pictures in this thread are not viewed at 100% so they are not really good for judging sharpness in the first place.

Rupert · 04-30-2011, 01:22 PM

Sharpness is overrated for most purposes, in my humble opinion. Macro.....yes, I want sharp, but in many shots it is just not the defining factor, and getting "hung up" on sharpness will detract from you overall shooting success.

This one...not really all that sharp, but it has "value"....at least to me. Would I delete it because it is not "tack sharp"? No, I'm a realist, not a pixel peeping razor sharp kind of guy.....

Best Regards!

Sarah smile......just a little?

Skymist · 04-30-2011, 04:13 PM

Pentax K-5, kit zoom @21mm, plus 100% scale cropped. Not too bad for a kit lens.

Rupert · 04-30-2011, 04:34 PM

That could be a fake bike....and this could be a fake Otis.....as an old bike rider myself, maybe we could trade for a week and verify each others shots?

[IMG]

[/IMG]

Skymist · 04-30-2011, 04:42 PM

Satellite in high earth orbit, night of April 27, 2011. Pentax K-5, 10s, F/1.4, 50mm using Zeiss Planar T* 50mm F/1.4 ZK lens. In the uncropped scaled down original, the satellite is a short track just to the right of the brightest star - it may be hard to see. The brightest stars are blown out due to light from the lens edge - not a problem I was concerned about in this particular setting. The second image is the 100% crop. Photo taken while meteor hunting. I made the mistake of leaving shake reduction on despite shooting from a tripod, but obviously it didn't hurt. Converted to BW in Lightroom and pushed 4 stops.

Skymist · 04-30-2011, 04:49 PM

That's my son's bike, Rupert. I don't think I can talk him into swapping it for a squirrel. Fab shot, though. Begs for a funny caption.

Rupert · 04-30-2011, 07:38 PM

Maybe he would trade for a pregnant Squirrel that has her own corn?
[IMG]

[/IMG]

Anyhow, that was no "Ordinary Squirrel" doing the limb lounging...that was the genuine Otis...sort of the Felix the Cat of the Squirrel world.

Best Regards!....nice bike!

CraneGuy1 · 05-01-2011, 09:21 AM

I'm wondering if those who complain about the K-5 sharpness just might need to upgrade their computer monitors so they can see what the rest of us see.

**jpzk** · 05-01-2011, 08:50 PM

Originally posted by Rupert

That sort of hurts my tender feelings Jim......you know how I am.

Back to soft photos....I never find soft photos to be the fault of my camera, the K5 or my previous Pentax bodies. If I fail, or ask the lens to perform beyond its capabilities I get soft or otherwise bad photos, just plain and simple.
I try to avoid being overly critical of my own shots, or those of others.....and look beyond the pixels to the subject matter, the composition and the story the shot may tell.......to me these all outweigh sharpness....in any brand of camera.

Right Katie?

[/url] [/IMG]

Best Regards!

Wowah!!!

That is one GREAT picture you've got here, Rup!

Now ... wanna share your technique here?

JP

Couscousdelight · 05-02-2011, 03:11 PM

Common blue butterflies :
No sharpness added in PP. And, i've used extension macro tube, which make the focus much harder. SR was off, lens was a SIgma 70-300APO.
I have the same insect taken with my K200D one year ago, the K5 do a better job.

100% :

------

100% :

Skymist · 05-03-2011, 07:50 PM

I went out into the lavender again today. This time I paired my Tamron 70-300 with a Tokina 2X Teleconvertor and shot at 600mm. I had to go to ISO 6400. The Pentax K-5 is the only camera of its type I know of which can give this kind of detail and texture at ISO 6400. What a camera!

Detail: Pentax K-5, Tamron AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 LD Di macro lens, and Tokina EL 2X Teleconvertor, in macro mode, 600mm, at 1/1600s, F/9, ISO 6400 (yes I had to go that high), TAv AE, manual focus, high speed continuous mode, one of a high-speed burst of 4.

hs57 · 05-03-2011, 11:07 PM

Pentax K-5 and the fine Pentax DA 35/2.8 Macro Ltd.

LG
.........

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

04-29-2011, 08:11 AM	#136
Rupert Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,123	Originally posted by Parallax I've seen your drawings, Jim. Remember? Stick to photography. That sort of hurts my tender feelings Jim......you know how I am. Back to soft photos....I never find soft photos to be the fault of my camera, the K5 or my previous Pentax bodies. If I fail, or ask the lens to perform beyond its capabilities I get soft or otherwise bad photos, just plain and simple. I try to avoid being overly critical of my own shots, or those of others.....and look beyond the pixels to the subject matter, the composition and the story the shot may tell.......to me these all outweigh sharpness....in any brand of camera. Right Katie? [IMG] [/IMG] Best Regards!

04-30-2011, 07:16 AM	#137
Schraubstock Site Supporter Join Date: Oct 2010 Location: Melbourne Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,386	Originally posted by Rupert I try to avoid being overly critical of my own shots, or those of others.....and look beyond the pixels to the subject matter, the composition and the story the shot may tell.......to me these all outweigh sharpness....in any brand of camera. Precisely, just Google: 13 Photographs that changed the world and count the ones that are really sharp. You'll be surprised. Greetings from polluted Shanghai

04-30-2011, 07:27 AM	#138
Designosophy Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Northeast Philadelphia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,137	Originally posted by Gimbal No, more probably it was based on the fact that most (all?) early reviews that included side by side shoots with Nikon d7000 (supposedly same or similar sensor) had the K5 looking softer. Excuses invented for this was bad lens, bad focus, bad photographer, stronger AA, and maybe a case of shutter vs SR blur again. If early reviews did this, it does not explain the persistence of the view that the K-5 cannot produce sharp photos. This thread, for example, has a number of photos that are sharp. Do you say that none are? What is your definition of a sharp photograph?

04-30-2011, 07:47 AM	#139
Gimbal Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Sweden Posts: 2,106	Originally posted by Designosophy If early reviews did this, it does not explain the persistence of the view that the K-5 cannot produce sharp photos. This thread, for example, has a number of photos that are sharp. Do you say that none are? What is your definition of a sharp photograph? No I didn't say that, I explained where the view came from. But I partially agree, the raw files from my k10 feels sharper when viewed at pixel-level, and yes, I know all the reasons for that. Most pictures in this thread are not viewed at 100% so they are not really good for judging sharpness in the first place.

04-30-2011, 01:22 PM	#140
Rupert Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,123	Sharpness is overrated for most purposes, in my humble opinion. Macro.....yes, I want sharp, but in many shots it is just not the defining factor, and getting "hung up" on sharpness will detract from you overall shooting success. This one...not really all that sharp, but it has "value"....at least to me. Would I delete it because it is not "tack sharp"? No, I'm a realist, not a pixel peeping razor sharp kind of guy..... Best Regards! Sarah smile......just a little?

04-30-2011, 04:13 PM	#141
Skymist Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Monterey Bay, Callifornia Posts: 107	Pentax K-5, kit zoom @21mm, plus 100% scale cropped. Not too bad for a kit lens.

04-30-2011, 04:34 PM	#142
Rupert Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,123	That could be a fake bike....and this could be a fake Otis.....as an old bike rider myself, maybe we could trade for a week and verify each others shots? [IMG] [/IMG]

04-30-2011, 04:42 PM	#143
Skymist Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Monterey Bay, Callifornia Posts: 107	Satellite in high earth orbit, night of April 27, 2011. Pentax K-5, 10s, F/1.4, 50mm using Zeiss Planar T* 50mm F/1.4 ZK lens. In the uncropped scaled down original, the satellite is a short track just to the right of the brightest star - it may be hard to see. The brightest stars are blown out due to light from the lens edge - not a problem I was concerned about in this particular setting. The second image is the 100% crop. Photo taken while meteor hunting. I made the mistake of leaving shake reduction on despite shooting from a tripod, but obviously it didn't hurt. Converted to BW in Lightroom and pushed 4 stops.

04-30-2011, 04:49 PM	#144
Skymist Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Monterey Bay, Callifornia Posts: 107	That's my son's bike, Rupert. I don't think I can talk him into swapping it for a squirrel. Fab shot, though. Begs for a funny caption.

04-30-2011, 07:38 PM	#145
Rupert Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,123	Maybe he would trade for a pregnant Squirrel that has her own corn? [IMG] [/IMG] Anyhow, that was no "Ordinary Squirrel" doing the limb lounging...that was the genuine Otis...sort of the Felix the Cat of the Squirrel world. Best Regards!....nice bike!

05-01-2011, 09:21 AM	#146
CraneGuy1 Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Photos: Gallery Posts: 102	I'm wondering if those who complain about the K-5 sharpness just might need to upgrade their computer monitors so they can see what the rest of us see.

05-01-2011, 08:50 PM	#147
jpzk Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Québec Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,251 Original Poster	Originally posted by Rupert That sort of hurts my tender feelings Jim......you know how I am. Back to soft photos....I never find soft photos to be the fault of my camera, the K5 or my previous Pentax bodies. If I fail, or ask the lens to perform beyond its capabilities I get soft or otherwise bad photos, just plain and simple. I try to avoid being overly critical of my own shots, or those of others.....and look beyond the pixels to the subject matter, the composition and the story the shot may tell.......to me these all outweigh sharpness....in any brand of camera. Right Katie? [/url] [/IMG] Best Regards! Wowah!!! That is one GREAT picture you've got here, Rup! Now ... wanna share your technique here? JP

05-02-2011, 03:11 PM	#148
Couscousdelight Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Frog-eaters country Photos: Gallery Posts: 357	Common blue butterflies : No sharpness added in PP. And, i've used extension macro tube, which make the focus much harder. SR was off, lens was a SIgma 70-300APO. I have the same insect taken with my K200D one year ago, the K5 do a better job. 100% : ------ 100% :

05-03-2011, 07:50 PM	#149
Skymist Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: Monterey Bay, Callifornia Posts: 107	I went out into the lavender again today. This time I paired my Tamron 70-300 with a Tokina 2X Teleconvertor and shot at 600mm. I had to go to ISO 6400. The Pentax K-5 is the only camera of its type I know of which can give this kind of detail and texture at ISO 6400. What a camera! Detail: Pentax K-5, Tamron AF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 LD Di macro lens, and Tokina EL 2X Teleconvertor, in macro mode, 600mm, at 1/1600s, F/9, ISO 6400 (yes I had to go that high), TAv AE, manual focus, high speed continuous mode, one of a high-speed burst of 4.

05-03-2011, 11:07 PM	#150
hs57 Inactive Account Join Date: May 2009 Location: Germany Photos: Gallery Posts: 69	Pentax K-5 and the fine Pentax DA 35/2.8 Macro Ltd. LG .........