Originally posted by Digitalis Not a fair comparison IMO Sigma sharpen their raw files - especially the red channel.
I've tried sharpening the K-3 files in post and still can't replicate the sharpness of the Sigma. Believe me, I tried. After the Sigma trounced the K-01 and K-5, I was hoping that the lack of an AA filter and 24 megapickles would give the K-3 a fighting chance. It's closer, but still no cigar.
And, to be honest, I don't care much about a "fair comparison". I just want results. And the Sigma, under certain circumstances, gives me results that I can't replicate with any of my Pentax gear. It's a specialty tool for sure, but OMG it's great at what it does. As is the K-3 for nearly everything else.
Originally posted by jrpower10 This is a better comparison, but it's still using different lenses. How much of the difference can be attributed to the lens? I love my 31, but if I'm looking for super-sharp from it, I'm stopped down to f8. A great comparison would be both cameras using the Sigma 30mm f1.4, set up side by side, same exposure set up and shot together to insure the same lighting. Probably asking way too much for anyone to own both cameras and both versions of the lens, but that'd be the true test (OK, maybe that's a bit overboard, but all you can do is ask).
Here's the Sigma DP2M:
Sigma DP2m by
john m flores, on Flickr
If you can figure out how to hack off the fixed lens and then attach the Sigma 30mm F1.4, then let me know LOL. Seriously, I suspect that a part of the Sigma advantage is due to the fact that it's a fixed lens camera with tighter tolerances. And there's definitely a benefit to be razor sharp from F2.8 like the Sigma vs. having to stop down.
FWIW, I compared the Sigma for the K-3/FA43 as well. The Sigma still "won".