Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-26-2013, 05:55 PM   #16
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Santa Fe, NM
Posts: 7,444
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by lightbulb Quote
Oops. It was suppose to boost the sale of k5ii and it backed fire.
What?

02-26-2013, 06:06 PM   #17
Pentaxian
halfspin's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2012
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 251
<insert laughter at humor joke>
02-26-2013, 06:07 PM   #18
Pentaxian
JohnBee's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: front of computer
Posts: 4,533
QuoteOriginally posted by bkpix Quote
Agree with Doc... Odd conclusion from the stated facts.

I bought the IIs and found its improved sharpness more than worth it for making 20x30 prints. Once information is gone -- smudged away by a low-pass filter -- it's gone. The filterless sensor captures more in the first place, and keeps it.

Yes, the difference is small -- but so are the differences between lenses whose cost varies by hundreds or thousands of dollars.
I think this works with JPG shooting. Though for those shooting and post processing RAW, I'ts very unlikely that there will ever be any detail advantages with the K-5 IIs over the K-5 II. Then again... I think a lack of AA filter could benefit higher ISO images as the need for sharpening would likely work to amplify noise. And so there's that to consider I suppose.
02-26-2013, 07:19 PM   #19
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,843
I've been playing around with adding a deconvolution sharpening step into my RAW conversion a bit.
My conclusions :

1. It works very well in controlled conditions esp. landscape and portrait sessions. All that is needed is to batch process the same sharpening parameters to all the shots.

2. Its not practical in many other situations (eg. travels; walkabouts; family shots) where conditions and settings change (eg. ISO). So the user has to go thru which shots use what sharpening setting. Obviously time consuming and a pain.
Sharpening and NR has to be done at larger magnification unlike other tweaks like exposure/WB so its more painful and slow and can't be waved off with a statement like "You'd need to do RAW processing anyway"

3. It accentuates noise. Obviously less so with low ISO shots and Pentax's very nice low+smooth noise grains RAWs.
Played with the same sharpening on D90 and 5D RAWs and they were horrendous (esp. the D90)
But its very obvious in ISO800 and above. Better results can be yielded thru individual tweaking of the sharpening settings per higher ISO shot, but then again its a pain if each tour day yielded 200-400 shots.

As mentioned by another poster, we pay so much for the diminishing returns on lenses, we can fork out that $100 more for the straight out gain from the AA-filterless.

Edit :
Its always easy to take some controlled shot in the internet and tweak that 1 shot to show that its better.
Try that over a real world use of hundreds of shots taken in a photo session/outing and the same workflow formula does not work out as well.
For the photographer who lives and shoots for himself, it may still work out by reducing the number of keepers and junking the rest before applying deconvolution sharpening.
But for the general shooter, I must say that its not as plain sailing.
Of course everyone likes to get better performance w/o spending that little bit extra $, so very often we tend to want to believe that deconvolution sharpening will remedy all that difference.
MHO.


Last edited by pinholecam; 02-26-2013 at 09:50 PM.
02-26-2013, 07:56 PM   #20
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Santa Fe, NM
Posts: 7,444
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by JohnBee Quote
I think this works with JPG shooting. Though for those shooting and post processing RAW, I'ts very unlikely that there will ever be any detail advantages with the K-5 IIs over the K-5 II. Then again... I think a lack of AA filter could benefit higher ISO images as the need for sharpening would likely work to amplify noise. And so there's that to consider I suppose.
Yes, this is a good point that we didn't consider in the article.
02-26-2013, 09:37 PM   #21
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 691
QuoteOriginally posted by halfspin Quote
<insert laughter at humor joke>
02-26-2013, 09:49 PM   #22
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Santa Fe, NM
Posts: 7,444
Original Poster
Man, I love humor jokes, but I have to admit that one just sailed right over my head.
02-26-2013, 10:12 PM   #23
Pentaxian
jeffshaddix's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Albuquerque, NM
Posts: 1,371
I like it, and s for subtle seems right to me. Whether it's worth it...can't say. I'm interested in what else Pentax has up their sleeve to boost effective resolution besides dropping the AA filter (from the hint they dropped in an interview, photokina perhaps).

02-27-2013, 05:19 AM   #24
Senior Member
romeck's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Piekary Śląskie
Photos: Albums
Posts: 156

I'm first interesting RAW shots:


next, twice reduction

Look at the branches and the wall!
02-27-2013, 07:29 AM   #25
Veteran Member
froeschle's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 552
Thanks, deadwolfbones.
I have stumbled across this article and then - before posting it here - looked whether it has already been cited.
So, here we go.

In contrary to some already mentioned opinions, I will be devil's advocate and conclude

Data (fair comparison) = No
Conclusion = Yes

Why?

Obviously, the difference between the cameras is the existence of the "AA-filter".
This cost-adding part normally is there on purpose.
It blurs the picture to some extent to ensure correct colour encoding.
Thus, an image taken with an "AA-filter" always requires some global capture sharpening.
This should be acknowledged when setting in-camera JPG parameters and developing RAW files.
In conclusion, the image processing should be optimized for both cameras separately.
So, all pictures (and even the resolution figures) should be compared with appropriate levels of sharpening, which must differ for the two cameras.
Only then it will become obvious to which extent the K-5 IIs images contain more real detail.
Noise and purple fringing might be of further interest - apart from false colour, colour moir and demosaicing artefacts.
An "AA-filter"less camera may attract some enthusiast (like me).
Whether the "subtle" differences then justify a purchase is a personal decision.
However, please also note that e.g. in Germany the difference in MSRP is not 100$ but 250 (about 330$).
02-27-2013, 11:00 AM   #26
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Prince George, BC
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,268
Well, my IIs seems to be immune from purple fringing. Not sure if PR have added some software magic to the internal processing of the raw files that removes fringing but it is a welcome change.
02-27-2013, 11:17 PM   #27
Pentaxian
reeftool's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Upstate New York
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,043
Chances are pretty good that a serious photographer who is buying either already has the PP software needed to sharpen their shots. One thing that the article doesn't address is that chances are also very high that the potential buyer for the K5lls already has another DSLR body and that one has an AA filter. I bought a K5 in late 2011 but if I was buying it today, I would probably get the K5lls.
02-28-2013, 03:23 AM   #28
Pentaxian
JohnBee's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: front of computer
Posts: 4,533
QuoteOriginally posted by romeck Quote
Look at the branches...
The moire/false color in the branch section is rather disappointing
02-28-2013, 03:43 AM   #29
Pentaxian
Clavius's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: De Klundert
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,115
It may be a subtle increase in sharpness. But the extra $100,- is equally subtle. I'm saying that you get a lot extra for a mere $100 extra. I've replaced lenses, for more money, for an even smaller sharpness increase. But that last bit may say more about myself then about the K5II(s).

Last edited by Clavius; 02-28-2013 at 03:49 AM.
02-28-2013, 07:31 AM   #30
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,612
It is indeed a subtle effect, but for someone like me who has been using cameras sans AA filter for well over 3 years now the differences go beyond the mere 8% the reviewers talk about, 8% of 16.3Mp is 1,304,000 Pixels which means the K5II is at a per-pixel level is only recording around 14.9mp of actual information*. As many people have posted above, there aren't many lenses that can offer an 8% increase in resolution in the same way that forking out an extra $100 for the K5IIs can give you - and that 8% sharpness bonus works with every lens you own, that sounds like the pentax we all know...

*though this depends on the kind of lenses you are using, if you aren't using a top-of the line lenses an 8% increase in sharpness isn't going make an earth shattering difference.I personally use some of the greatest lenses pentax has ever made FA31, 50mm f/1.2 and FA77 - and these three lenses are what the K5IIs was made for, the resolution and clarity from these lenses is extremely impressive.


Last edited by Digitalis; 02-28-2013 at 07:46 AM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, comparison, dslr, head, ii, k-5, k-5 ii, k-5 iis, k5, pentax k-5
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K-5 ii vs K-5 iis comparison with higher sharpness in K-5 ii kataria0 Pentax K-5 62 12-22-2012 10:12 PM
Pentax K-5 IIs vs K-5 II (take two...) JohnBee Pentax K-5 9 12-06-2012 04:10 AM
K-5 IIs vs K-5 II - can you tell the difference? JohnBee Pentax K-5 85 11-19-2012 10:48 PM
K-5 vs K-5 IIs Comparison Request Thread Adam Pentax K-5 41 11-05-2012 06:37 PM
Stop Sign: K-5 vs K-5 IIs Comparison Shots Adam Pentax K-5 14 10-28-2012 06:10 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:04 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top