Photozone.de and K-5's resolution

ogl · 11-25-2010, 10:18 AM

Originally posted by JonPB

In summary, the stock K-5 isn't a significant upgrade from the K10D for people who want to shoot nothing but test charts.

Who want to make sharp photos. You are wrong. I've never make pictures of test chart.

ogl · 11-25-2010, 10:20 AM

Originally posted by Asahiflex

Ogl, I don't understand why you didn't reply to my question???

Anyway: I can offer you DNG's of my K-5 with FA43 and FA77 attached at any f/stop you want, but only after resizing them to K200D resolution. You do agree with this? Only then it makes sense to compare the K-5's IQ to the K200D.

No. I can make resize myself.

Asahiflex · 11-25-2010, 10:21 AM

Originally posted by ogl

No. I can make resize myself.

Then I retract my offer

ogl · 11-25-2010, 10:22 AM

Originally posted by JamieP

No need to think further. Just trust these opinions:

Yes...With FA77. FA*24 is much worse.
I'm waiting for FA43 samples now.

paperbag846 · 11-25-2010, 10:28 AM

Originally posted by ogl

JPEG photos

no

Machspeed · 11-25-2010, 10:30 AM

Seems like nobody's complaining about the lack of AA filter on the Leica M9 (it delivers on par with MF backs precisely because of this).. just saying.
Regardless of this, I will still buy the K5, by the way.

paperbag846 · 11-25-2010, 10:35 AM

Originally posted by ogl

No. I can make resize myself.

OGL, instead of being snarky and argumentative, why don't you send a good DNG over to Asahiflex? I have a feeling he is more qualified to make this comparison than you are anyways.

For SOME reason I see you skewing the results in your favor

.

ogl · 11-25-2010, 10:42 AM

Originally posted by paperbag846

OGL, instead of being snarky and argumentative, why don't you send a good DNG over to Asahiflex? I have a feeling he is more qualified to make this comparison than you are anyways.

For SOME reason I see you skewing the results in your favor

.

I can't prohibit Asahiflex to make photos of K-5 with FA43, resize till 10 MP and show us...

I have no such DNG yet.

robgo2 · 11-25-2010, 10:43 AM

Originally posted by cbaytan

Well then you have to admit some of us not only amateurs, besides some of those obsessive-compulsive ones about sharpness, like me. I can't help myself as a close-up, macro shooter.

There are many macro photos from the K-5 floating around the internet that are exceedingly sharp. Have you looked? But even macro images are viewed at normal size, not 100-400%. Pixel peeping may be fun, and it keeps certain people off the streets, but it is not what photography is supposed to be about.

Rob

ogl · 11-25-2010, 10:43 AM

Originally posted by robgo2

There are many macro photos from the K-5 floating around the internet that are exceedingly sharp. Have you looked? But even macro images are viewed at normal size, not 100-400%. Pixel peeping may be fun, and it keeps certain people off the streets, but it is not what photography is supposed to be about.

Rob

Show us, please, such photos in full-size.

Parallax · 11-25-2010, 10:47 AM

ogl, I'm just curious about something. You apparently don't like the K5. Understood; but why the crusade to convince everyone else that it is junk? Why particularly in the face of a plethora of hard evidence to the contrary?

robgo2 · 11-25-2010, 10:59 AM

Originally posted by ogl

Show us, please, such photos in full-size.

Find them yourself, if you want to pixel peep. It isn't that hard.

Rob

Atindra · 11-25-2010, 11:02 AM

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-k-5-forum/123731-no-more-tests-just-pictures.html

for full size flickr could be used.

Atindra

**ManuH** · 11-25-2010, 11:13 AM

Originally posted by Machspeed

Seems like nobody's complaining about the lack of AA filter on the Leica M9

Are you sure? (5 seconds search on Google)

Machspeed · 11-25-2010, 11:24 AM

Originally posted by ManuH

Are you sure? (5 seconds search on Google)

Certainly not the same amount of drama this "K5 sharpness issue" seems to get..

11-25-2010, 11:02 AM	#88
Atindra Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bhavnagar (Gujarat),India Photos: Gallery Posts: 375	See some here https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-k-5-forum/123731-no-more-tests-just-pictures.html for full size flickr could be used. Atindra

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, 10:18 AM	#76
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382 Original Poster	Originally posted by JonPB In summary, the stock K-5 isn't a significant upgrade from the K10D for people who want to shoot nothing but test charts. Who want to make sharp photos. You are wrong. I've never make pictures of test chart.

11-25-2010, 10:20 AM	#77
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382 Original Poster	Originally posted by Asahiflex Ogl, I don't understand why you didn't reply to my question??? Anyway: I can offer you DNG's of my K-5 with FA43 and FA77 attached at any f/stop you want, but only after resizing them to K200D resolution. You do agree with this? Only then it makes sense to compare the K-5's IQ to the K200D. No. I can make resize myself.

11-25-2010, 10:21 AM	#78
Asahiflex Pentaxian Join Date: Jan 2008 Location: Netherlands Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,795	Originally posted by ogl No. I can make resize myself. Then I retract my offer

11-25-2010, 10:22 AM	#79
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382 Original Poster	Originally posted by JamieP No need to think further. Just trust these opinions: Yes...With FA77. FA*24 is much worse. I'm waiting for FA43 samples now.

11-25-2010, 10:28 AM	#80
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Originally posted by ogl JPEG photos no

11-25-2010, 10:30 AM	#81
Machspeed New Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Bucharest Posts: 8	Seems like nobody's complaining about the lack of AA filter on the Leica M9 (it delivers on par with MF backs precisely because of this).. just saying. Regardless of this, I will still buy the K5, by the way.

11-25-2010, 10:35 AM	#82
paperbag846 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,395	Originally posted by ogl No. I can make resize myself. OGL, instead of being snarky and argumentative, why don't you send a good DNG over to Asahiflex? I have a feeling he is more qualified to make this comparison than you are anyways. For SOME reason I see you skewing the results in your favor .

11-25-2010, 10:42 AM	#83
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382 Original Poster	Originally posted by paperbag846 OGL, instead of being snarky and argumentative, why don't you send a good DNG over to Asahiflex? I have a feeling he is more qualified to make this comparison than you are anyways. For SOME reason I see you skewing the results in your favor . I can't prohibit Asahiflex to make photos of K-5 with FA43, resize till 10 MP and show us... I have no such DNG yet.

11-25-2010, 10:43 AM	#84
robgo2 Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: New Mexico Photos: Albums Posts: 1,125	Originally posted by cbaytan Well then you have to admit some of us not only amateurs, besides some of those obsessive-compulsive ones about sharpness, like me. I can't help myself as a close-up, macro shooter. There are many macro photos from the K-5 floating around the internet that are exceedingly sharp. Have you looked? But even macro images are viewed at normal size, not 100-400%. Pixel peeping may be fun, and it keeps certain people off the streets, but it is not what photography is supposed to be about. Rob

11-25-2010, 10:43 AM	#85
ogl Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Sankt Peterburg Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 8,382 Original Poster	Originally posted by robgo2 There are many macro photos from the K-5 floating around the internet that are exceedingly sharp. Have you looked? But even macro images are viewed at normal size, not 100-400%. Pixel peeping may be fun, and it keeps certain people off the streets, but it is not what photography is supposed to be about. Rob Show us, please, such photos in full-size.

11-25-2010, 10:47 AM	#86
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	ogl, I'm just curious about something. You apparently don't like the K5. Understood; but why the crusade to convince everyone else that it is junk? Why particularly in the face of a plethora of hard evidence to the contrary?

11-25-2010, 10:59 AM	#87
robgo2 Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: New Mexico Photos: Albums Posts: 1,125	Originally posted by ogl Show us, please, such photos in full-size. Find them yourself, if you want to pixel peep. It isn't that hard. Rob

11-25-2010, 11:13 AM	#89
ManuH Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Montreal Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,249	Originally posted by Machspeed Seems like nobody's complaining about the lack of AA filter on the Leica M9 Are you sure? (5 seconds search on Google)

11-25-2010, 11:24 AM	#90
Machspeed New Member Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Bucharest Posts: 8	Originally posted by ManuH Are you sure? (5 seconds search on Google) Certainly not the same amount of drama this "K5 sharpness issue" seems to get..