K-5 IIs vs K-5 II - can you tell the difference?

Anvh · 11-13-2012, 02:59 PM

Originally posted by adi3000

Form my experience until now, K5IIs support more sharpening then K5II. You can judge yourselves:

The mkIIs has more pronounced halo then the normal version in your photos... look at the cross near the card of queens.

Parallax · 11-13-2012, 03:02 PM

The IIs appears slightly sharper, but I had to look really close. There is a bit of moire from the IIs on the roman coin (Just above Mickey's head)

JohnBee · 11-13-2012, 03:05 PM

Originally posted by adi3000

They are not correct compared. You cannot sharpen only K5II and not K5IIs. From my experience until now, K5IIs support more sharpening then K5II. You can judge yourselves:.

Consider the following:

If the K-5 IIs holds a detail advantage, then the question as to whether or not the K-5 II can match it comes up. Therefore, to help illustrate, I published and adjusted samples from both systems to match. Therefore, once we have an equal footing to work with, it becomes possible for anyone interesting to get a feel on how each system responds or holds-up to further processing(sharpening etc),

Hope this helps clarify the intent behind this particular exercise.

adi3000 · 11-13-2012, 03:05 PM

I choose ISO1600 because is exact when noise came to life and details start to fade. At lower iso differences are not as pronounced. But this is important at k5IIs, to have more details at high iso.
I choose that parameters in LR exactly to extract maximum of details and keep noise low (and I think is very low for iso1600).
Noise in both images is equal and I cannot rise more sharpness in K5II without to degrade the quality of the image, therefore, k5IIs is better.

PS: I compare images processed with LR and RawTherapee and for some reasons, RawTherapee is much worse.

Last edited by adi3000; 11-13-2012 at 03:12 PM.

JohnBee · 11-13-2012, 03:13 PM

Originally posted by adi3000

PS: I compare images processed with LR and RawTherapee and for some reasons, RawTherapee is much worse.

Define worst?

civiletti · 11-13-2012, 03:16 PM - **1 Like**

Unless one can add just enough sharpness to counteract AA filter blurring, the comparison to an unsharpened K-5IIs image is not valid. I suggest PP both to optimal sharpening and microcontrast without adding objectionable artifacts. That is what a critical user would do in practice, so it makes a better comparison test. Of course, some subjectivity is introduced, but that's how photography works.

JohnBee · 11-13-2012, 03:19 PM

Originally posted by civiletti

Unless one can add just enough sharpness to counteract AA filter blurring...

That was the objective(ie. deconvoluted sharpening aka deblurring).
And though I can't confirm, I'm thinking it is very close.

Last edited by JohnBee; 11-13-2012 at 03:24 PM.

adi3000 · 11-13-2012, 03:24 PM

I cannot define exactly, but how colors appear and how sharpness is applied I personally don't like. In RawTherapee I cannot set the sharpness as I like. It has the different algorithm and it is applied diffident as in LR. But it's just my preference and may be the lack of experience with RawTherapee.

JohnBee · 11-13-2012, 03:32 PM

Originally posted by adi3000

I cannot define exactly, but how colors appear and how sharpness is applied I personally don't like. In RawTherapee I cannot set the sharpness as I like. It has the different algorithm and it is applied diffident as in LR. But it's just my preference and may be the lack of experience with RawTherapee.

Okay I understand.

The first things I'd point-out, is where both images were developed without any adjustments. And the idea behind this was to generate neutral files so that people could adjust them accordingly afterward. Though in principal, I wanted to counter the effects of the AA filter on the K-5 II against the K-5 IIs.

As for Raw Therapee and color, I can assure you that it is every bit as good(if not better) than ACR or LR4. However, I'd also add that is isn't nearly as easy to use and so I think this can often give people the wrong impression at first glance.

BTW. thanks for the adjustment in your initial post. (heavy files).

adi3000 · 11-13-2012, 03:36 PM

Originally posted by Anvh

The mkIIs has more pronounced halo then the normal version in your photos... look at the cross near the card of queens.

Of course there are small artifacts, but I squeeze almost everything form the images and I cannot do more with K5II and still in this stage it has some blur. I can match sharpness and clarity but k5II will become more noisy then k5IIs.

JohnBee · 11-13-2012, 03:39 PM

Originally posted by adi3000

Of course there are small artifacts, but I squeeze almost everything form the images and I cannot do more with K5II and still in this stage it has some blur. I can match sharpness and clarity but k5II will become more noisy then k5IIs.

Are you referring to these samples, or some of your own?
BTW. I haven't sharpened these myself to date.

NVSteve · 11-13-2012, 03:43 PM

Originally posted by civiletti

Unless one can add just enough sharpness to counteract AA filter blurring, the comparison to an unsharpened K-5IIs image is not valid. I suggest PP both to optimal sharpening and microcontrast without adding objectionable artifacts. That is what a critical user would do in practice, so it makes a better comparison test. Of course, some subjectivity is introduced, but that's how photography works.

I agree. Doing something to one, yet not the other, is pointless. Sorry, John, but your posted intentions at the start of this thread were fairly cryptic. Now that I know what you did, why don't you start another thread following along the lines of what civiletti posted? Work a II and IIs sample to personal perfection and post the results. Given the latitude available, I can't imagine anyone not applying any type of sharpening to RAW.

adi3000 · 11-13-2012, 03:47 PM

I spoke about mine. Bay the way, I do't have yet k5IIs (it is ordered and hope to arrive at the end of this month) but I spent many hours analyzing all images came from k5IIs. My only worry is aliasing (not moire in special) but false colors that seems to appear more often.

JohnBee · 11-13-2012, 03:55 PM

Originally posted by NVSteve

I agree. Doing something to one, yet not the other, is pointless. Sorry, John, but your posted intentions at the start of this thread were fairly cryptic. Now that I know what you did, why don't you start another thread following along the lines of what civiletti posted? Work a II and IIs sample to personal perfection and post the results. Given the latitude available, I can't imagine anyone not applying any type of sharpening to RAW.

Since the images are from different system, it wouldn't be very helpful to process them identically. That being said, we can however address the inherent difference between both systems. ie. in this case, we can counter the effects of the AA filter by deblurring the K-5 II RAW image to match the K-5 IIs. At which point both images can then be developed accordingly.

Let me know if this makes sense.

JohnBee · 11-13-2012, 04:04 PM

Originally posted by adi3000

I spoke about mine. Bay the way, I do't have yet k5IIs (it is ordered and hope to arrive at the end of this month) but I spent many hours analyzing all images came from k5IIs. My only worry is aliasing (not moire in special) but false colors that seems to appear more often.

Ah ic.

I used to shoot with an AA'less system several years ago and got a first hand account of the effects of moire. Then again... it was only a 6MP system and so I think that may have contributed to the effect. Needless to say, I was somewhat shocked to find how often it came up in my own case, since shot mainly landscape images.

That being said, it looks as though things get better as resolution increases and so I thinking there's that to consider also.

PS. have you tried sharpening the samples posted in my opening post?

11-13-2012, 03:05 PM	#18
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667 Original Poster	Originally posted by adi3000 They are not correct compared. You cannot sharpen only K5II and not K5IIs. From my experience until now, K5IIs support more sharpening then K5II. You can judge yourselves:. Consider the following: If the K-5 IIs holds a detail advantage, then the question as to whether or not the K-5 II can match it comes up. Therefore, to help illustrate, I published and adjusted samples from both systems to match. Therefore, once we have an equal footing to work with, it becomes possible for anyone interesting to get a feel on how each system responds or holds-up to further processing(sharpening etc), Hope this helps clarify the intent behind this particular exercise. Last edited by JohnBee; 11-13-2012 at 03:14 PM.

11-13-2012, 03:32 PM	#24
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667 Original Poster	Originally posted by adi3000 I cannot define exactly, but how colors appear and how sharpness is applied I personally don't like. In RawTherapee I cannot set the sharpness as I like. It has the different algorithm and it is applied diffident as in LR. But it's just my preference and may be the lack of experience with RawTherapee. Okay I understand. The first things I'd point-out, is where both images were developed without any adjustments. And the idea behind this was to generate neutral files so that people could adjust them accordingly afterward. Though in principal, I wanted to counter the effects of the AA filter on the K-5 II against the K-5 IIs. As for Raw Therapee and color, I can assure you that it is every bit as good(if not better) than ACR or LR4. However, I'd also add that is isn't nearly as easy to use and so I think this can often give people the wrong impression at first glance. BTW. thanks for the adjustment in your initial post. (heavy files). Last edited by JohnBee; 11-13-2012 at 05:01 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K-5 K-5 II K-5 IIs, e dial issue, Noise	Eder	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	17	06-03-2014 12:33 AM
Pentax K-5 II and K-5 IIs Now In Stock!	Adam	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	24	10-25-2012 03:38 PM
Suggestion K-5 forum renamed to K-5, K-5 II, and K-5 IIs?	Buschmaster	Site Suggestions and Help	2	10-16-2012 02:17 PM
Pentax could we get the K-5 II / K-5 IIs in color please?	Hegemon	Pentax DSLR Discussion	17	10-14-2012 01:59 AM
Facts and rumors regarding the 16.28 Megapixel sensor in K- 5 II and K-5 IIs	F-pix	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	11	09-28-2012 08:17 AM

11-13-2012, 02:59 PM	#16
Anvh Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2011 Posts: 4,616	Originally posted by adi3000 Form my experience until now, K5IIs support more sharpening then K5II. You can judge yourselves: The mkIIs has more pronounced halo then the normal version in your photos... look at the cross near the card of queens.

11-13-2012, 03:02 PM	#17
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	The IIs appears slightly sharper, but I had to look really close. There is a bit of moire from the IIs on the roman coin (Just above Mickey's head)

11-13-2012, 03:05 PM	#19
adi3000 New Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Bucharest Posts: 20	I choose ISO1600 because is exact when noise came to life and details start to fade. At lower iso differences are not as pronounced. But this is important at k5IIs, to have more details at high iso. I choose that parameters in LR exactly to extract maximum of details and keep noise low (and I think is very low for iso1600). Noise in both images is equal and I cannot rise more sharpness in K5II without to degrade the quality of the image, therefore, k5IIs is better. PS: I compare images processed with LR and RawTherapee and for some reasons, RawTherapee is much worse. Last edited by adi3000; 11-13-2012 at 03:12 PM.

11-13-2012, 03:13 PM	#20
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667 Original Poster	Originally posted by adi3000 PS: I compare images processed with LR and RawTherapee and for some reasons, RawTherapee is much worse. Define worst?

11-13-2012, 03:16 PM - 1 Like	#21
civiletti Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Oregon Photos: Albums Posts: 1,435	Unless one can add just enough sharpness to counteract AA filter blurring, the comparison to an unsharpened K-5IIs image is not valid. I suggest PP both to optimal sharpening and microcontrast without adding objectionable artifacts. That is what a critical user would do in practice, so it makes a better comparison test. Of course, some subjectivity is introduced, but that's how photography works.

11-13-2012, 03:19 PM	#22
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667 Original Poster	Originally posted by civiletti Unless one can add just enough sharpness to counteract AA filter blurring... That was the objective(ie. deconvoluted sharpening aka deblurring). And though I can't confirm, I'm thinking it is very close. Last edited by JohnBee; 11-13-2012 at 03:24 PM.

11-13-2012, 03:24 PM	#23
adi3000 New Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Bucharest Posts: 20	I cannot define exactly, but how colors appear and how sharpness is applied I personally don't like. In RawTherapee I cannot set the sharpness as I like. It has the different algorithm and it is applied diffident as in LR. But it's just my preference and may be the lack of experience with RawTherapee.

11-13-2012, 03:36 PM	#25
adi3000 New Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Bucharest Posts: 20	Originally posted by Anvh The mkIIs has more pronounced halo then the normal version in your photos... look at the cross near the card of queens. Of course there are small artifacts, but I squeeze almost everything form the images and I cannot do more with K5II and still in this stage it has some blur. I can match sharpness and clarity but k5II will become more noisy then k5IIs.

11-13-2012, 03:39 PM	#26
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667 Original Poster	Originally posted by adi3000 Of course there are small artifacts, but I squeeze almost everything form the images and I cannot do more with K5II and still in this stage it has some blur. I can match sharpness and clarity but k5II will become more noisy then k5IIs. Are you referring to these samples, or some of your own? BTW. I haven't sharpened these myself to date.

11-13-2012, 03:43 PM	#27
NVSteve Junior Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Salt Lake City Posts: 47	Originally posted by civiletti Unless one can add just enough sharpness to counteract AA filter blurring, the comparison to an unsharpened K-5IIs image is not valid. I suggest PP both to optimal sharpening and microcontrast without adding objectionable artifacts. That is what a critical user would do in practice, so it makes a better comparison test. Of course, some subjectivity is introduced, but that's how photography works. I agree. Doing something to one, yet not the other, is pointless. Sorry, John, but your posted intentions at the start of this thread were fairly cryptic. Now that I know what you did, why don't you start another thread following along the lines of what civiletti posted? Work a II and IIs sample to personal perfection and post the results. Given the latitude available, I can't imagine anyone not applying any type of sharpening to RAW.

11-13-2012, 03:47 PM	#28
adi3000 New Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Bucharest Posts: 20	I spoke about mine. Bay the way, I do't have yet k5IIs (it is ordered and hope to arrive at the end of this month) but I spent many hours analyzing all images came from k5IIs. My only worry is aliasing (not moire in special) but false colors that seems to appear more often.

11-13-2012, 03:55 PM	#29
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667 Original Poster	Originally posted by NVSteve I agree. Doing something to one, yet not the other, is pointless. Sorry, John, but your posted intentions at the start of this thread were fairly cryptic. Now that I know what you did, why don't you start another thread following along the lines of what civiletti posted? Work a II and IIs sample to personal perfection and post the results. Given the latitude available, I can't imagine anyone not applying any type of sharpening to RAW. Since the images are from different system, it wouldn't be very helpful to process them identically. That being said, we can however address the inherent difference between both systems. ie. in this case, we can counter the effects of the AA filter by deblurring the K-5 II RAW image to match the K-5 IIs. At which point both images can then be developed accordingly. Let me know if this makes sense.

11-13-2012, 04:04 PM	#30
JohnBee Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Newrfoundland Photos: Albums Posts: 4,667 Original Poster	Originally posted by adi3000 I spoke about mine. Bay the way, I do't have yet k5IIs (it is ordered and hope to arrive at the end of this month) but I spent many hours analyzing all images came from k5IIs. My only worry is aliasing (not moire in special) but false colors that seems to appear more often. Ah ic. I used to shoot with an AA'less system several years ago and got a first hand account of the effects of moire. Then again... it was only a 6MP system and so I think that may have contributed to the effect. Needless to say, I was somewhat shocked to find how often it came up in my own case, since shot mainly landscape images. That being said, it looks as though things get better as resolution increases and so I thinking there's that to consider also. PS. have you tried sharpening the samples posted in my opening post?