[Deimos]

WOW impressive!

[JohnBee]

What really gets me is how close the 5IIs is to the D600 and 5D Mark III in terms of resolution. (so close).

[greg_77]

Looks amazing. I wish they had the K20 in their database so I could compare side by side.

[RBellavance]

What really gets me is how close the 5IIs is to the D600 and 5D Mark III in terms of resolution. (so close).

What do you mean, "close" ? In this comparison, the IIs appears to beats them all of them at any ISO below 6400... I know resolution is not everything, but I am surprised.

---

Last edited by RBellavance; 11-09-2012 at 09:33 PM.

[JohnBee]

What do you mean, "close" ? In this comparison, the IIs beats them all, at all ISO below 6400...

If you look at the red piece of weave above the carpet you'll see that the K-5 looses some of the horizontal detail in contrast to the 5D Mark III and D600. Likewise, if you look at the globe, you can see that some of the text(label) characters don't quite render against the D600 at that particular point.

That being said, I found these slight differences from direct samples. Though I'm thinking a better RAW developer will likely accentuate these differences further.

PS. haven't had a chance to do a high ISO comparison myself.

[JohnBee]

What do you mean, "close" ? In this comparison, the IIs appears to beats them all of them at any ISO below 6400...

Okay, to confirm my suspicions, here are two samples using Raw Therapee without any special processing.


Direct link to image


Direct link to image

The first thing I'd point-out is the obvious moire in the scene which is kind of bummer. And the second thing is striking difference between the DPReview samples and these ones.
To which I'd add, I have no idea how they develop their RAW files, but... based on what I've seen, I really don't think they're doing the files justice at this point.

At any rate, I think the D600 really does strut its stuff in this particular example. Not that it matters since most people won't likely be shooting still studio images with their K-5's but...
I guess it does a good job of exposing some of the worst case scenario's that one might encounter with a AA' filter'less type sensor.

[tuco]

I get to compare my XP1 files, which has no AA filter, to my D600 files. They are really close. A lot depends on what lenses were used and how sharp the shot was taken **

I'd expect the K-5s to be the same. And like the XP1 with its occasional problematic RAW files with LR, so too will moire raise its head on the K-5s shots now and then. It is not trivial to remove most the time and without cost to the image quality. I actually got some moire on the XP1 once and I gave up trying to fix that one.


** By that I mean a handheld shot on a D600 without an image stabilized lens and without a really fast shutter speed for the focal length is rarely as sharp at 200/400% as one taken on a tripod.

---

Last edited by tuco; 11-09-2012 at 10:31 PM.

[wahid_satu]

Is it just me or is moire much more visible on the K-5IIs than any other camera? The resolution is amazing though, just as I've seen in other comparisons.

[RBellavance]

Okay, to confirm my suspicions, here are two samples using Raw Therapee without any special processing.

Thanks for doing this, JohnBee. It does show a different picture, and in any event I had maybe not been thorough enough in my comparison yesterday.

The moire is very noticeable indeed, but given the fine mesh texture I guess that is to be expected.

[causey]

I'm comparing K-5IIs with Nex 7, and the Sony looks much better at low ISO (except in the corners, which I think are weak on account of Nex 7's kit lens poor corner performance). At ISO 1600 Nex 7 has more noise, but I think also enough more detail to makes up for the additional noise. From ISO 3200, the Pentax seems to fare better. Interestingly, the Nex beats the D600 up to, and including, ISO 1600. Anyway, hope Pentax will release its 24mp camera soon, and maybe make it filterless. The K5-IIs looks really, really good, though.

[baro-nite]

Interesting that even the K-5 has moire where the D800E doesn't:



And in this set at least, the K-5II has less moire than the K-5. The K-5II shots looks correctly focused to me.

[JohnBee]

Interesting that even the K-5 has moire where the D800E doesn't:

The frequency triggering the moire will change with resolution. ie. the higher the resolution, the higher the threshold.

[slip]

when I compare the samples of the Medillian in the center near goofy, the K5IIs and the K30 has the same amount of Moire. strange





anyone else notice this?

thanks

randy

[JohnBee]

when I compare the samples of the Medillian in the center near goofy, the K5IIs and the K30 has the same amount of Moire. strange
anyone else notice this?

I've been playing with some K-5 RAW files in RT and found the following:










What stands-out to me is how well the K30 holds-up against the IIs in terms of resolution and detail.
That being said, the K-5 does seem to exhibit quite a bit of moire in contrast to the K30 in this particular scene.

[Dr_who]

Around the blue bug the K5IIs is worst of the bunch for sure. Its hard comparing the D800E as its images are twice as large as the K5IIs. I'd say the D800E is the winner in this comparison, but then it should be as its in a league above the K5IIs. If anything the future looks promising for Pentax if they keep heading this way, and come out with their own Full Frame without AA filter.