[desmoface]

Gooseta, is moire something that can be fixed in post processing by a novice? I read that the IIs might not be the best choice for overall/general photography due to the lack of a/a filter. Also, how do you find the jpeg engine? Oly is legendary for it's jpeg output. Thanks again for the advice.

Steve

[gooseta]

Gooseta, is moire something that can be fixed in post processing by a novice? I read that the IIs might not be the best choice for overall/general photography due to the lack of a/a filter. Also, how do you find the jpeg engine? Oly is legendary for it's jpeg output. Thanks again for the advice.

Steve

Well Steve, I don't know about fixing moire in PP, but for small cases I guess you could blur it like an aa filter does. The JPEGs have gotten better but as always with Pentax the RAWs are way better, but they aren't too big, I can fit around 400 DNG RAWs on a 16 GB card, so invest in a big card.

[gooseta]

Here are some of my shots with the K5iis if you are interested in real world samples, taken with a good walkaround lens, decently priced, the 17-70 f4. Also note no moire, but do you shoot fine detail like textiles?
Paris - a set on Flickr
Fall/Winter Walkarounds - a set on Flickr

[desmoface]

Gooseta, those look great. Looks like your right at home with the k5. Thanks for sharing and thanks for the info/advice.

Steve

[Rondec]

The sharpness is actually quite a bit betteer than the K-5, I have seen some comparisons which show way more sharpness on the 5iis, from my shots with my iis it is unbelievably sharp and I have just past 5k shots, 0 moire.

Well, take my opinion with a grain of salt, because I own a couple of K5 classics and neither one of the the new cameras. I just based my opinion on the photos in this thread: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-k-5/205185-k-5-iis-vs-k-5-ii-can-y...ifference.html.

[gooseta]

Gooseta, those look great. Looks like your right at home with the k5. Thanks for sharing and thanks for the info/advice.

Steve

Good luck, if you go Pentax post your pics here i'm sure we'd all love to see 'em.

[Anvh]

Gooseta, is moire something that can be fixed in post processing by a novice? I read that the IIs might not be the best choice for overall/general photography due to the lack of a/a filter.

Depends on the kind of moire but it can be fixed to a degree but i won't bother with it.
The increase in sharpness is only interesting for some since it's doubtful you see the difference in the end product and the moire would be visible with clothing and buildings.

The s version is meant to be a specialist tool not an everyday camera.

[desmoface]

Thanks for the link. Someone posted a video in that thread, apparently he has the k5 and the k5IIs, he said to go with the s as moire will show up in 1/2 % of the shots unless all you shoot is fabrics. I do like the idea of more detail.

Steve

Well, take my opinion with a grain of salt, because I own a couple of K5 classics and neither one of the the new cameras. I just based my opinion on the photos in this thread: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-k-5/205185-k-5-iis-vs-k-5-ii-can-y...ifference.html.

[Ash]

A lot of my portraits I do need some sharpening in PP, which helps bring out a tad more microcontrast using the quite sophisticated tools in Topaz Detail and Adjust as well as Photoshop USM/Smart Sharpen. In this regard, the presence of an AA filter may not be a setback for this type of work unless perhaps you do it for a living.

K-5 classic


K20D


At 100%, these portraits were very sharp, even before sharpening in PP, and in many cases, an element of softness is desired in close up portraiture.

[Nuff]

I used to have the original e-p1. I will first mention the benefits of m43 over pentax:
It was lighter and smaller, but not significantly so.
The lenses are smaller then usual DSLR lenses, thanks to that system I became prime shooter.
The jpegs are great, but they didn't always delivered what I wanted so I became a RAW shooter, as such jpeg engine became irrelevant.

The big disadvantage for me was:
Lenses are overpriced.
Not as much dof control as I desired.
Loud shutter.

I got a k5 because of the small size compared to other dslrs. Quiet shutter, excellent sensor (especially for RAW shooter) and excellent limited prime lenses.

[NVSteve]

I had the OMD E-M5 for 4 or 5 months. I also had the grip permanently attached to it because otherwise, the body was way too small for me. The IQ is definitely there, but I really felt that it was pushing the limits. I could squash highlights and bring back the blackest of shadows with virtually no penalty, but I had a tough time applying sharpening: once I got to a certain point, skin would become mottled. With the grip attached, it was virtually the same size as a DSLR, so no real size advantage. I had a number of fantastic 4/3rds lenses that I really wanted to have work on the E-M5, even knowing the limitation concerning focus speed, but I ended up shooting all my fantastic lenses in manual mode. My biggest problem is that there are no sealed lenses to go with the body. The kit 12-50 is ok, but it's slow and not even close to something like the 4/3rds 12-60. There is one weather sealed prime, but that won't help if you are looking for a good zoom. The only other options available are 2 $1000 plus lenses from Panasonic that are the poster children for purple fringing.

If you have the opportunity to test drive the E-M5, do so. I know a ton of people love them, but it just didn't work out for me (body & lack of weather sealed fast lenses). Just my $.02 as a former owner.

[desmoface]

Hi Steve,

Thanks for the reply, and thanks for sharing your experience with the em5 with me. I actually like the small size of the em5 for portability, but your not the first person I've heard say that the ergos were greatly improved with the addition of the grip.

I've only briefly handled the oly so I can't really form an opinion at this point. What did you replace the em5 with? One concern is that there isn't a lot of info on the af performance on the mark II, but it's said to have better low light performance than it's predessor. The oly has proven too have a pretty good/fast af.

Thanks again for the advice.

Steve

I had the OMD E-M5 for 4 or 5 months. I also had the grip permanently attached to it because otherwise, the body was way too small for me. The IQ is definitely there, but I really felt that it was pushing the limits. I could squash highlights and bring back the blackest of shadows with virtually no penalty, but I had a tough time applying sharpening: once I got to a certain point, skin would become mottled. With the grip attached, it was virtually the same size as a DSLR, so no real size advantage. I had a number of fantastic 4/3rds lenses that I really wanted to have work on the E-M5, even knowing the limitation concerning focus speed, but I ended up shooting all my fantastic lenses in manual mode. My biggest problem is that there are no sealed lenses to go with the body. The kit 12-50 is ok, but it's slow and not even close to something like the 4/3rds 12-60. There is one weather sealed prime, but that won't help if you are looking for a good zoom. The only other options available are 2 $1000 plus lenses from Panasonic that are the poster children for purple fringing.

If you have the opportunity to test drive the E-M5, do so. I know a ton of people love them, but it just didn't work out for me (body & lack of weather sealed fast lenses). Just my $.02 as a former owner.

[NVSteve]

Hi Steve,

Thanks for the reply, and thanks for sharing your experience with the em5 with me. I actually like the small size of the em5 for portability, but your not the first person I've heard say that the ergos were greatly improved with the addition of the grip.

I have small cameras in the past, but the ergonomics were a bit better. If my hands were about 1/10th their current size, the body only E-M5 would probably fit just fine. It was still pretty tiny with the grip, although the grip really made a world of difference...for another $299, or whatever the going rate is now.

I've only briefly handled the oly so I can't really form an opinion at this point. What did you replace the em5 with? One concern is that there isn't a lot of info on the af performance on the mark II, but it's said to have better low light performance than it's predessor. The oly has proven too have a pretty good/fast af.

I haven't really directly replaced it with anything. I sold off ALL of my Olympus gear as I just don't see anything in the future that will interest me, and I also sold off the majority of my camera collection (mostly Canon FD stuff). It's a bummer, because the high & super high grade Olympus lenses were spactacular. I have a D600 now, but no way am I going to take that thing into the rain like I would my E-M5 or E-3, so now I'm looking primarily at the K-5 II/IIs bodies to fill my weather sealed needs. It's really a shame that there are so few REAL weather sealed bodies & lenses on the market.

[RyanW]

I like the idea of the OMD, small, weatherproofed m4/3 body. Sadly to me, the body looks like it was designed by a committee. With the grip, it only gets worse. One the other hand the files are pretty nice.

What type of shooting do you do?
How big of a camera do you want to carry?
Sounds like either brand would meet your glass needs based on what you told us.

[desmoface]

Hi Ryan, general stuff, but a lot of indoor, low-light stuff which is why I like the mark II for its rumored improved low light af performance. I like the idea of the smaller camera for portability, but the pentax ticks a lot of other boxes, such as sensor performance and the ability to shoot in dng. Thanks for the reply.

Steve