Photozone.de and K-5's resolution

JohnBee · 11-25-2010, 09:36 PM

Originally posted by falconeye

And that the K-5 renders tack-sharp images.

... I once looked at the tip of a tack under a microscope and thought "pffft! that's not sharp"

Having said that, I was mucking around with Capture NX-2 this evening and noticed that it had an elaborate moire control panel. I didn't get a chance to test it out, but I'm wondering if this wouldn't address the potential side-effects of the weaker AA filter on the D7K and.... what effects that might have on final IQ(might be interesting).

Other than that, I've been thinking of conducting some controlled tests with a K-5 and D7K using the same lens. And I wondered if anyone thought of an M42 Super Takumar(SMC) 55/1.8 would be suitable for the task?

I plan on shooting some resolution charts and various color patterns with the hope of establishing some form of conclusiveness with regards to the differences between both systems. The target date is this weekend, so if anyone has any suggestions and/or ideas to add, I'd love to hear them.

Rupert · 11-25-2010, 09:41 PM

Enjoyed the back and forth feuding......good points all around....I guess, but I have seen the K5 Photos posted all over the place, and they are Most Excellent! Granted, I am just an old Squirrel shooter, not much on pixel peekin' and certainly not qualified to judge any high tech test results, but I have already seen some damn good Squirrel shots with the K5 and intend to have me one very soon!....K5 that is, I already have more Squirrels than I can feed.
Best Regards!

ogl · 11-25-2010, 09:46 PM

Originally posted by falconeye

JP, my entire post was meant to illustrate that "MTF" shouldn't be used in any single plain English language sentence. Not in mine and not in the OP. Nor in any "review" hiding "MTF" behind "resolution".

And that the K-5 renders tack-sharp images.

OK. K-5 has better resolution than all previous Pentax cameras, but...
photos looks not better than all previous cameras in term of sharpness.
Even resized. And even worse in some cases.

Not huge difference with K-7, but there is. And higher difference with 10 MP CCD and 12 MP CMOS.

To say honest, K-5's IQ is better than 7D. And the structure of picture is not bad.

http://fotkidepo.ru/?id=album:32163
here are (there are full-sizes pictures there) rather good pictures in terms of sharpness with Sigma 70/2.8 and not bad picture of house with DA17-70.
but, there is some blur.

This is PEF file from DPREVIEW's review made with cheapest 18-55 DAL
http://www.*************/reviews/pentaxkx/page14.asp

What can I say? Very good sharpness level even with default settings.
Put 18-55 at K-5 and you never get such photo.
http://fotkidepo.ru/photo/132601/32162qXOjQehHIw/E9QALj3fZV/567107.jpg

rawr · 11-25-2010, 10:38 PM

Originally posted by ogl

This is PEF file from DPREVIEW's review made with cheapest 18-55 DAL

Speaking of the K-5 and kit lenses, what do you think about PhotographyBlog's K-5 sample PEF's, by the way:
Pentax K-5 Review - Sample Images | PhotographyBLOG

Are they of any use?

Class A · 11-25-2010, 10:44 PM

Falk, first of all thanks for your "Thanks giving present". Your findings are what I expected and I'm glad Pentax did the right thing.

Originally posted by falconeye

I don't have time to involve myself into this but may give him a ring

That'll be great. There ought to be a lesson in all this for someone. If it turns out that I will have learned something after all this has been resolved, that'll be fine by me!

Originally posted by falconeye

MTF50 isn't measuring resolution.

To be fair and precise, Klaus didn't use the term "resolution" but "pixel-to-pixel sharpness" and I computed the 6% difference from the LP/PH figures he provided for the K10D & K-5 respectively.

My slight imprecision notwithstanding, I think the message was accurate in spirit.

Class A · 11-25-2010, 10:53 PM

Originally posted by ogl

OK. K-5 has better resolution than all previous Pentax cameras, but...
photos looks not better than all previous cameras in term of sharpness.

?
What is your definition of "resolution" and "sharpness"? What makes you think you cannot achieve the latter (which typically is assumed to be a combination of resolution and contrast) with appropriate sharpening (contrast boost)?

Originally posted by ogl

Even resized.

I don't think the resizing was done appropriately for this purpose.

If you continue to claim that the K200D / K-x give you better sharpness than the K-5 then I can only assume that you are not looking correctly. Maybe you should try my 6MP K100D? There's more pixel to pixel contrast than with any of the other cameras mentioned here.

But of course this is irrelevant for image sharpness.

You shouldn't hold it against the K-5 that it is a better microscope and thus makes the tack appear less sharp.

paperbag846 · 11-25-2010, 11:11 PM

Originally posted by ogl

No. it's not sharp.

A) That picture was taken at ISO 12800. I think it is VERY sharp for that ISO.

B) The picture was of a freaking knife. How could you miss the joke???

C) Here is a picture YOU took https://www.pentaxforums.com/gallery/images/4485/1_IMGP5727.jpg

I've seen much sharper images from the K5... e.g.,

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/1280571-post31.html

Stop pixel peeping, you don't know what you are doing. If you fail to understand the difference that increasing pixel density will have on your pictures viewed at 100%, you should save your money anyways because you aren't going to make use of this new, improved technology.

And it is improved. There is lots of DATA to substantiate that claim.

Last edited by paperbag846; 11-25-2010 at 11:17 PM.

paperbag846 · 11-25-2010, 11:16 PM

Originally posted by JohnBee

Super Takumar(SMC) 55/1.8

You could do that, but I would suggest having a look here Nifty 50 Shootout ERPhotoReview and considering using a sharper lens for this kind of work. These sensors are likely capable of better sharpness and contrast than the 55 1.8 is able to deliver.

ogl · 11-25-2010, 11:57 PM

Originally posted by rawr

Speaking of the K-5 and kit lenses, what do you think about PhotographyBlog's K-5 sample PEF's, by the way:
Pentax K-5 Review - Sample Images | PhotographyBLOG

Are they of any use?

Already got it and converted. No good result for me.

ogl · 11-26-2010, 12:02 AM

Originally posted by Class A

?
What is your definition of "resolution" and "sharpness"? What makes you think you cannot achieve the latter (which typically is assumed to be a combination of resolution and contrast) with appropriate sharpening (contrast boost)?

Sharpness is the combination of resolution and contrast.
The sharpness capacity of camera with weak or without AA filter is higher.

ogl · 11-26-2010, 12:04 AM

Originally posted by paperbag846

A) That picture was taken at ISO 12800. I think it is VERY sharp for that ISO.

To make photos at ISO12800 and then discuss the sharpness of such photos is absurdly.

ogl · 11-26-2010, 12:09 AM

Originally posted by paperbag846

A) That picture was taken at ISO 12800. I think it is VERY sharp for that ISO.

I've seen much sharper images from the K5... e.g.,

Can't you really understand that such photо has VERY GOOD resolution and rather mediocre sharpness?
Don't you see that even 100% crop is a bit blurry?

cbaytan · 11-26-2010, 12:33 AM

Originally posted by ogl

What can I say? Very good sharpness level even with default settings.
Put 18-55 at K-5 and you never get such photo.
http://fotkidepo.ru/photo/132601/32162qXOjQehHIw/E9QALj3fZV/567107.jpg

This photo sharpness and IQ is great. Wondering what lens is used, photome doesn't tell.

ogl · 11-26-2010, 01:20 AM

Originally posted by cbaytan

This photo sharpness and IQ is great. Wondering what lens is used, photome doesn't tell.

It's K-x with DAL18-55 at 35 mm @f8
(smc PENTAX-DA 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 AL II)

Asahiflex · 11-26-2010, 04:32 AM

The last from me on the subject. K-5, ISO 80, FA43 Limited, f/5.6, fullsize (focus is on top leftmost flower). Converted in ACR and saved as JPEG. If this is not good enough then I feel very sorry for you.

http://www.camerac.nl/foto/flowers.jpg

11-26-2010, 04:32 AM	#135
Asahiflex Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Netherlands Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,795	The last from me on the subject. K-5, ISO 80, FA43 Limited, f/5.6, fullsize (focus is on top leftmost flower). Converted in ACR and saved as JPEG. If this is not good enough then I feel very sorry for you. http://www.camerac.nl/foto/flowers.jpg Last edited by Asahiflex; 11-26-2010 at 04:38 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Question Exploring the K-5's Features	rechmbrs	Site Suggestions and Help	9	11-11-2010 03:47 PM
The K-5's five 5 user modes	Adam	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	8	11-04-2010 08:32 AM
Video of K-5's LiveView AF	inferno10	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	22	10-31-2010 08:37 PM
Two different Takumar 135mm 2.5's ?	kenhreed	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	4	06-06-2010 10:41 PM
New year resolution Vs camera resolution	Tripod	General Talk	1	01-04-2009 05:10 AM

11-25-2010, 09:36 PM	#121
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667	Originally posted by falconeye And that the K-5 renders tack-sharp images. ... I once looked at the tip of a tack under a microscope and thought "pffft! that's not sharp" Having said that, I was mucking around with Capture NX-2 this evening and noticed that it had an elaborate moire control panel. I didn't get a chance to test it out, but I'm wondering if this wouldn't address the potential side-effects of the weaker AA filter on the D7K and.... what effects that might have on final IQ(might be interesting). Other than that, I've been thinking of conducting some controlled tests with a K-5 and D7K using the same lens. And I wondered if anyone thought of an M42 Super Takumar(SMC) 55/1.8 would be suitable for the task? I plan on shooting some resolution charts and various color patterns with the hope of establishing some form of conclusiveness with regards to the differences between both systems. The target date is this weekend, so if anyone has any suggestions and/or ideas to add, I'd love to hear them.

11-25-2010, 09:41 PM	#122
Rupert Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,123	Enjoyed the back and forth feuding......good points all around....I guess, but I have seen the K5 Photos posted all over the place, and they are Most Excellent! Granted, I am just an old Squirrel shooter, not much on pixel peekin' and certainly not qualified to judge any high tech test results, but I have already seen some damn good Squirrel shots with the K5 and intend to have me one very soon!....K5 that is, I already have more Squirrels than I can feed. Best Regards!

11-25-2010, 09:46 PM	#123
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382 Original Poster	Originally posted by falconeye JP, my entire post was meant to illustrate that "MTF" shouldn't be used in any single plain English language sentence. Not in mine and not in the OP. Nor in any "review" hiding "MTF" behind "resolution". And that the K-5 renders tack-sharp images. OK. K-5 has better resolution than all previous Pentax cameras, but... photos looks not better than all previous cameras in term of sharpness. Even resized. And even worse in some cases. Not huge difference with K-7, but there is. And higher difference with 10 MP CCD and 12 MP CMOS. To say honest, K-5's IQ is better than 7D. And the structure of picture is not bad. http://fotkidepo.ru/?id=album:32163 here are (there are full-sizes pictures there) rather good pictures in terms of sharpness with Sigma 70/2.8 and not bad picture of house with DA17-70. but, there is some blur. This is PEF file from DPREVIEW's review made with cheapest 18-55 DAL http://www.*************/reviews/pentaxkx/page14.asp What can I say? Very good sharpness level even with default settings. Put 18-55 at K-5 and you never get such photo. http://fotkidepo.ru/photo/132601/32162qXOjQehHIw/E9QALj3fZV/567107.jpg

11-25-2010, 10:38 PM	#124
rawr Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 11,913	Originally posted by ogl This is PEF file from DPREVIEW's review made with cheapest 18-55 DAL Speaking of the K-5 and kit lenses, what do you think about PhotographyBlog's K-5 sample PEF's, by the way: Pentax K-5 Review - Sample Images \| PhotographyBLOG Are they of any use?

11-25-2010, 10:44 PM	#125
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Falk, first of all thanks for your "Thanks giving present". Your findings are what I expected and I'm glad Pentax did the right thing. Originally posted by falconeye I don't have time to involve myself into this but may give him a ring That'll be great. There ought to be a lesson in all this for someone. If it turns out that I will have learned something after all this has been resolved, that'll be fine by me! Originally posted by falconeye MTF50 isn't measuring resolution. To be fair and precise, Klaus didn't use the term "resolution" but "pixel-to-pixel sharpness" and I computed the 6% difference from the LP/PH figures he provided for the K10D & K-5 respectively. My slight imprecision notwithstanding, I think the message was accurate in spirit.

11-25-2010, 10:53 PM	#126
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Originally posted by ogl OK. K-5 has better resolution than all previous Pentax cameras, but... photos looks not better than all previous cameras in term of sharpness. ? What is your definition of "resolution" and "sharpness"? What makes you think you cannot achieve the latter (which typically is assumed to be a combination of resolution and contrast) with appropriate sharpening (contrast boost)? Originally posted by ogl Even resized. I don't think the resizing was done appropriately for this purpose. If you continue to claim that the K200D / K-x give you better sharpness than the K-5 then I can only assume that you are not looking correctly. Maybe you should try my 6MP K100D? There's more pixel to pixel contrast than with any of the other cameras mentioned here. But of course this is irrelevant for image sharpness. You shouldn't hold it against the K-5 that it is a better microscope and thus makes the tack appear less sharp.

11-25-2010, 11:11 PM	#127
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Originally posted by ogl No. it's not sharp. A) That picture was taken at ISO 12800. I think it is VERY sharp for that ISO. B) The picture was of a freaking knife. How could you miss the joke??? C) Here is a picture YOU took https://www.pentaxforums.com/gallery/images/4485/1_IMGP5727.jpg I've seen much sharper images from the K5... e.g., https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/1280571-post31.html Stop pixel peeping, you don't know what you are doing. If you fail to understand the difference that increasing pixel density will have on your pictures viewed at 100%, you should save your money anyways because you aren't going to make use of this new, improved technology. And it is improved. There is lots of DATA to substantiate that claim. Last edited by paperbag846; 11-25-2010 at 11:17 PM.

11-25-2010, 11:16 PM	#128
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Originally posted by JohnBee Super Takumar(SMC) 55/1.8 You could do that, but I would suggest having a look here Nifty 50 Shootout ERPhotoReview and considering using a sharper lens for this kind of work. These sensors are likely capable of better sharpness and contrast than the 55 1.8 is able to deliver.

11-25-2010, 11:57 PM	#129
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382 Original Poster	Originally posted by rawr Speaking of the K-5 and kit lenses, what do you think about PhotographyBlog's K-5 sample PEF's, by the way: Pentax K-5 Review - Sample Images \| PhotographyBLOG Are they of any use? Already got it and converted. No good result for me.

11-26-2010, 12:02 AM	#130
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382 Original Poster	Originally posted by Class A ? What is your definition of "resolution" and "sharpness"? What makes you think you cannot achieve the latter (which typically is assumed to be a combination of resolution and contrast) with appropriate sharpening (contrast boost)? Sharpness is the combination of resolution and contrast. The sharpness capacity of camera with weak or without AA filter is higher.

11-26-2010, 12:04 AM	#131
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382 Original Poster	Originally posted by paperbag846 A) That picture was taken at ISO 12800. I think it is VERY sharp for that ISO. To make photos at ISO12800 and then discuss the sharpness of such photos is absurdly.

11-26-2010, 12:09 AM	#132
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382 Original Poster	Originally posted by paperbag846 A) That picture was taken at ISO 12800. I think it is VERY sharp for that ISO. I've seen much sharper images from the K5... e.g., Can't you really understand that such photо has VERY GOOD resolution and rather mediocre sharpness? Don't you see that even 100% crop is a bit blurry?

11-26-2010, 12:33 AM	#133
cbaytan Inactive Account Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Trabzon/Turkey Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,010	Originally posted by ogl What can I say? Very good sharpness level even with default settings. Put 18-55 at K-5 and you never get such photo. http://fotkidepo.ru/photo/132601/32162qXOjQehHIw/E9QALj3fZV/567107.jpg This photo sharpness and IQ is great. Wondering what lens is used, photome doesn't tell.

11-26-2010, 01:20 AM	#134
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382 Original Poster	Originally posted by cbaytan This photo sharpness and IQ is great. Wondering what lens is used, photome doesn't tell. It's K-x with DAL18-55 at 35 mm @f8 (smc PENTAX-DA 18-55mm F3.5-5.6 AL II)