[civiletti]

Comparison of K-5II to K-5IIs I would like to see:

Tripod mounted; manual focused using magnified live-view; high res. lens at optimum aperture; no filters; iso 80; high detail scene with no wind or other movement; RAW capture; each image sharpened to the maximum without artifacts visible; let's see the pixels.

I would also like to see these images processed with LightRoom 4's clarity function [or similar] to the point artifacts begin to appear or detail is lost in highlights or shadows. Why? Because test images I've seen suggest the advantage of the AA-less sensor is increased microcontrast, not resolution.

---

Last edited by civiletti; 10-29-2012 at 01:32 PM. Reason: add info

[ogl]

?????? ???? ? Pentax K-5 IIs ? ??????!
some DNG here with FA31

[Col]

Strange, I thought it was to come with a new 4 contact battery LI90P & charger?

Thanks for your work... links to RAW files don't seem to be working for me... opens as an html page of text.

[giuseppesavo]

I'd like to have the raw files to try different de-mosaicing engines.

[frogfoot]

Hi, Adam! Thank you for your review. Could you please compare AF accurasy of K-5 and K-5IIs at low tungsteen light? I'm talking about K-5's issue of front focus at such conditions. I'd like to know if it was fixed in new SAFOX?

[Pentafan]

I fell in love with Pentax ONCE AND FOR ALL!!! And К5 - for me while only DREAM!!! It is not easy to live in Ukraine and to have such expensive camera.... ((((

[Kona]

Well, I was thinking of upgrading from my Kr to the K5 II, but this review has made it sound less impressive than initial hype, so I will save my money and hope for an entirely new body down the line, I think. That, or just pick up a second hand K5. I would like top LCD, grip, higher DR etc, but II over the "classic" isn't worth the cost, it seems.

[ChrisJ]

I would like to see some small aperture shots taken with the K5-lls, as I wonder if without the AA filter you get diffraction effecting the image more as it does with the (herrumph) Pentax Q (sorry) which also has no AA filter, but, of course, is a much smaller sensor. Anything below f5.6 on a Q lowers image quality and I wonder if taking the AA filter out of the K5 would do the same.

It's gratifying to know that Pentax couldn't find much to 'improve' on the K5, still my favourite camera, if it ain't broke - don't fix it, which is exactly what Pentax has done. Basically it's just a re-issue of the K5 - well they HAD to bring something out just so they get mentioned in the press - didn't they?

Chris

[Rnovo]

Many thanks for this review Adam. Well done and the presentation of all features is excellent my favourite being the possibility offered to view different renditions by just clicking on an image.
Tops man!

[Adam]

One thing I'm missing badly is the SFOX X usability for apertures above f4 (f.ex. F2). You didn't mention this at all. Do you have any knowledge about it?

It's really hard to measure due to focusing throw playing a role, BUT it seems from the test results that the F stop does affect speed, but not whether or not focus will be achieved (this makes sense given the low-light sensitivity of the AF module).

[Adam]

I would like to see some small aperture shots taken with the K5-lls, as I wonder if without the AA filter you get diffraction effecting the image more as it does with the (herrumph) Pentax Q (sorry) which also has no AA filter, but, of course, is a much smaller sensor. Anything below f5.6 on a Q lowers image quality and I wonder if taking the AA filter out of the K5 would do the same.

Small aperture values make K-5 IIs images look like K-5 images according to the review. More samples illustrating this will be posted on the 5th.

[Adam]

Hi, Adam! Thank you for your review. Could you please compare AF accurasy of K-5 and K-5IIs at low tungsteen light? I'm talking about K-5's issue of front focus at such conditions. I'd like to know if it was fixed in new SAFOX?

User reports suggest that it has been fixed

[nanok]

Well, I was thinking of upgrading from my Kr to the K5 II, but this review has made it sound less impressive than initial hype, so I will save my money and hope for an entirely new body down the line, I think. That, or just pick up a second hand K5. I would like top LCD, grip, higher DR etc, but II over the "classic" isn't worth the cost, it seems.

you are comparing the wrong fruits here. this is why they had to discontinue the k-5 even before having the new camera ready to ship (to deplete stocks): the k-5II is worth every penny, you're comparing the greatest camera in the past 10 years at a bargain "cut-me-own-throat" price to it's successor, at a bargain but "i'd like to pay the rent now" price. the two year old k-5 (and thus k-5II) still has no challenger in terms of image quality and probably ergonomics/build today, even much more expensive bigger bulkier cameras don't compare.

if you like the k-5, i'd say get it now, new (not second hand), and smile: i paid almost double the price for mine, and i'm still not sorry. however, if you shoot (or plan to shoot) low light events (concerts for instance) and intend to do it (or, i should say, can afford to do it) using autofocus glass, get the II, as it seems the af system offers now, from that point of view, something which isn't available in any other camera anywhere near this price, afaik.

edit: do note though, a few years down the line, if you should want to sell your k-5, nobody will want the "old" k-5, if the "new" is available too on the used market. though why would anybody want to sell such camera, as long as it still works, escapes me :P

as to the review: i'm honestly not impressed. we need direct comparisons between the k-5 and the k-5 II s, for now the only thing that's impressive is the moire , i'm not convinced the resolution or level of detail is anything significantly better. maybe i'll take my samyang (85/1.4) for a walk one of these days, and try to shoot something "similar", see if i can do some meaningless comparison.

[fixinpost]

A little confused by the inclusion of a K-01 video to demonstrate a supposed audio problem with .AVI video files. The K-01 records to h.264 MOVs

[Rnovo]

Now that is a good question frogfoot, I avoid using flash like the plague thinking available light is it - but that is a personal opinion! So, let's concentrate on the review results of this new upgrade in the K5IIs which is low light AF and sharpness: we need test shots off a monopod or better (never mind a tripod), handheld, at wide open, speed at 1/15...and less, at ISO 400 to 1600 under tungsten or fluo lighting. Right now, I already get very acceptable results with the K5 and I ordered the K5IIs thinking I will do better...!