Win a Pentax Limited Lens: Raffle Now Live!

**loveisageless** · 02-27-2016, 08:14 PM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by esrandall

Agreed on this. I loved my K-3 when it was bright out, but didn't like the noise when I had to dial the ISO up over 800. I briefly owned the KS-1, and while it wasn't a camera that was great to shoot for long outings, I really liked the balance between resolution/noise with that 20MP sensor. If I were to buy Pentax again, I would take a strong look at a KS-2 TBH.

I also found that there was more noise when I cropped photos even at lower ISO. It surprised me because the rest of the image was nice and sharp, but the background looked noticeably grainy even when the bokeh was creamy otherwise.

jayman_1975 · 02-27-2016, 08:52 PM

Originally posted by loveisageless

I have used both the K-3 and the K-5IIS. With the higher resolution of the K-3 comes more noise at high ISO. I have found that I actually prefer the image quality of the K-5IIS. Now maybe it is a technique issue on my part, but when I look at my photographs taken with the K-5IIS I just like them better. I have to figure user error can account for that some of the time, but not all of the time. I am about to put my K-3 up for sale.

This was my findings exactly. I did sell my K3 and never looked back. I haven't missed it.

Davidparis · 02-28-2016, 12:27 AM

Just my 2 cents : the only possible citicism I can have on photos from either the K-30 or K-5iis with quality glass is my own user error or technique. This equipment can produce perfectly excellent results. Beyond reviewing one's own skills and technique, perhaps it's wise to put into perspective and analyze your photography goals. If it's "space photography" or the like with the need for a billion pixels and other-wordly resolution, that's one thing. If it's capturing moments in life with pleasing artistic creativity, that's another...Look what people are recording with smartphones these days...or cameras of inferior quality compared to the average DSLR.

I've thrown my gear obsessions out the window a good while back since I've realized that the limiting factor is myself and not my modest Pentax equipment. That hasn't prevented me from collecting "oohs and aaahhs" for my photos or from having them published in magazines here in France.

Lastly, I'd say that PP is imperative. I do not even judge my results from the LCD screen, except for quick histo, comp and focus check. All my results coming SOOC probably would be disappointing. Going through PP transforms them nicely and while shooting I concentrate on mood, feeling and the story.

I'm not anywhere near changing from Pentax. Good luck in your quest.

**BigMackCam** · 02-28-2016, 12:48 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by kjphilippona

I have the K-01, K5II, K30 & K50 along with some of the best lenses Pentax makes. I am still not happy with the image quality/sharpness my cameras produce. Should I purchase the K5IIs or K3 ?

All four of the cameras you own are routinely capable of outstanding image quality with decent lenses - and you have some fine lenses. In addition to my K3 & K3II, I regularly use my old K5 with some quite old glass, and the results are excellent. I think it's very unlikely that you would notice a significant improvement in IQ with a different model. What is it that you're unhappy with in terms of the results you're achieving? Let us know what your expectations are, and where your images are falling short (some examples, at the magnification you are viewing at, would be helpful). I'm sure we can help you get what you're looking for without you needing to spend any more money.

EDIT: Some recommendations to get you started (apologies if you know all of this already!)...

- try not to shoot with the lens aperture wide open - ideally, shoot one f-stop down or more (so, on an f/2.8 lens, stop down to f/4 or smaller)
- minimum shutter speed for static scenes hand-held should be 1 / (focal length x crop factor)... so, with a 100mm lens, you want to be shooting at 1 / (100 *1.5) = 1/150s
- carry out AF fine adjustment for your lenses (there are articles here on the forum and elsewhere on the internet explaining how to do this)
- use Lightroom, Photoshop or one of the many other commercial or freeware post-processing tools to gently sharpen your final images

EDIT #2: I've attached a couple of screenshots to show the importance of sharpening in post processing... I took a quick RAW shot just now with my K5. The first screenshot shows a comparison of 100% crops of that image - on the left, with no sharpening, and on the right, with sharpening. The next screenshot shows the same comparison, but this time viewed at 50% magnification.

Attached Images

Last edited by BigMackCam; 02-28-2016 at 02:51 AM.

**BigMackCam** · 02-28-2016, 06:40 AM

Originally posted by Oldbayrunner

If your going to post samples for others opinion I suggest you don't direct upload to this site as it Will soften the images as with your currently posted. What your settings were with what you post helps others to advise possible changes which may assist you.

You know, I was never certain of that being the case, but I just checked my JPEGs of the above images I posted for the OP's benefit... wow, they really are much softer here on the forum compared to the originals...

Na Horuk · 02-28-2016, 07:14 AM

Originally posted by BigMackCam

You know, I was never certain of that being the case, but I just checked my JPEGs of the above images I posted for the OP's benefit... wow, they really are much softer here on the forum compared to the originals...

Oh yes, many websites (forums, facebook,..) will resize and recompress image files. Sometimes they even change the colour space (to sRGB if it isn't already). All of this can severely ruin the image quality. It can add compression artifacts, introduce banding, ruin sharpness and detail, and even change the colours.

Edit: This might even be part of OP's problem, if they share photos on websites. Another problem could be if OP shoots raw, but doesn't process the raw files into jpeg (for example, some codecs and raw viewers will only show a low-quality preview, not the actual raw content). The whole chain, having enough light, using correct camera settings, taking photo correctly, recording it in the correct format, post-processing it, uploading it without ruining its quality, is important. A problem in just one of those places means the end result will not look as good as it could.
But using something like K-01 or K-50 on a tripod with 2 sec timer should give consistent sharp results, even if shooting jpeg (as long as jpeg settings are high quality).

kjphilippona · 02-28-2016, 07:18 AM

Here are a few pictures taken with the K5II & K-01 using the DA*55, FA43 & FA77 lenses.

Attached Images

View Picture EXIF

View Picture EXIF

View Picture EXIF

Last edited by kjphilippona; 02-28-2016 at 04:56 PM.

**BigMackCam** · 02-28-2016, 07:25 AM

Originally posted by kjphilippona

Here are a few pictures taken with the K5II & K-01 using the DA*55, FA43 & FA77 lenses.

OK, great, and just to help us a bit further - what is it about these images that you don't like? Is it the same problem(s) with each one, or are there different problems?

jayman_1975 · 02-28-2016, 08:39 AM

I was thinking these look pretty darn good to me.

**BigMackCam** · 02-28-2016, 08:47 AM

Originally posted by jayman_1975

I was thinking these look pretty darn good to me.

Yes, and this is the reason I'm asking the OP to explain what he isn't happy about with them. In one of them. I potentially see a little subject movement in one photo that could have been avoided with faster shutter... in another, perhaps the choice of aperture and focus point are such that the desired depth of field isn't what was intended... but sharpness in the "in focus" areas looks good. Without knowing the perceived problem, it's difficult to say if there is anything wrong with the results...

Rupert · 02-28-2016, 09:03 AM

My K5IIs is the best Pentax I have ever owned...it is just wonderful! I'm sure the K3 is too, and has more features, but I like the smaller files for my needs and it is better with noise at high ISO values.

ISO 4,000

However......either the K5IIs or any version of the K3 will deliver superb shots.......it all depends on the lens used and more importantly, on the shooter and his/her skills.

Most here have better skills than me, and some have better lenses. It makes all the difference! You can see crummy shots with the 645...or any other camera.....and superb shots with a $2. disposable..........rethink your search for the best camera!

Regards!

mtgmansf · 02-28-2016, 09:42 AM

As a former, professional portrait photographer, I would say that using a good, off-camera reflector or a off-camera, fill flash would do much more for these images of a lovely child than anything else! However, adjusting jpeg parameters and/or using a good image editor in PP - with selective sharpening, burning and dodging, contract enhancements, etc.- would give these images a significant boost, as well! Further, I would be more careful in choosing background elements for some of these images to maximize your subject in the foreground. Also, keep sun spots off of your subject, since these are difficult, if not impossible, to fill in later.
Lastly, getting a significantly better image, IMO, would entail using either a Pentax K1 or 645z with corresponding FX lenses, but would also require more careful shooting too. However, my first recommendations would still yield the greatest results overall...

BrianR · 02-28-2016, 10:01 AM

Lighting looks like the main issue to me as well. The 2nd one looks the best to me - the exposure and white balance match the shade where you daughters face is and the sun is acting as a warm rim light but not obscuring any important details. Compare with the 3rd where you had to balance a bright hotspot on a major part of her face and still leave the lovely smile in a deep shadow. These kinds of high contrast situations are tough to deal with, a k5iis or k3 won't end up much different.

The biggest improvements I think you'd see with a k3 would be the autofocus. It's hard to tell from the sizes of the pictures you've posted, but they mostly look pretty well focused to me (a couple of them look to have some motion blur and the second from the end might be a little front focused).

**loveisageless** · 02-28-2016, 12:02 PM

Originally posted by Rupert

My K5IIs is the best Pentax I have ever owned...it is just wonderful! I'm sure the K3 is too, and has more features, but I like the smaller files for my needs and it is better with noise at high ISO values.

ISO 4,000

However......either the K5IIs or any version of the K3 will deliver superb shots.......it all depends on the lens used and more importantly, on the shooter and his/her skills.

Most here have better skills than me, and some have better lenses. It makes all the difference! You can see crummy shots with the 645...or any other camera.....and superb shots with a $2. disposable..........rethink your search for the best camera!

Regards!

From a hardware perspective, the K-3 has duel card slots, higher resolution LCD display, slightly better autofocus, and is wi-fi capable with the Pentax Flu-card. The trade off with the K-5IIS is high ISO noise and less pleasing results (without significant post processing) when cropping images. As several have mentioned there are software programs that can address the noise and grain issues. I use an Apple computer with the Aperture program. It is about as much post processing as I am interested in doing as an amateur photographer at this point. I definitely spent less time doing post processing with the K-5IIS than I have with the K-3 with more pleasing results overall. I think the observations/suggestions made here about lens quality, technique and proper lighting are good ones. I frequently review photos that I particularly like for the elements that contribute to their success. Likewise I also frequently review the "almost but not quite" photos to see what I could have done differently. It is a process of continual learning and practice. I think it is so easy to fixate on number of pixels, wi-fi, number of card slots, etc. The camera manufacturers count on motivating us to do so. Like another poster here, I am withdrawing from the "latest and greatest game/race". The upcoming K-1 will only really be of interest to me if the in-camera image stabilization is as good as alleged due to my somewhat shaky hands and dislike of schlepping tripods and monopods around with me.

kjphilippona · 02-28-2016, 04:51 PM

Originally posted by BigMackCam

OK, great, and just to help us a bit further - what is it about these images that you don't like? Is it the same problem(s) with each one, or are there different problems?

My problem is the images not being in focus, and the one in focus are not sharp. The three lenses are F1.4 or f1.8 and stoped down to f4 or more and still not sharp. I am also shooting at fast shutter speeds so it should freeze any movement. I just hate missing so many pictures due to these problems.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Canadian buyers - did you buy your K5IIs or K3 in the USA ?	jpzk	Pentax DSLR Discussion	29	04-02-2015 10:22 AM
Another k3 or k5IIs	jayman_1975	Pentax DSLR Discussion	4	03-16-2015 03:06 PM
K5IIs vs K3 AF	alamo5000	Pentax DSLR Discussion	22	11-21-2014 08:30 PM
K3 or K5IIs for black and white?	yorik	Pentax DSLR Discussion	3	11-06-2014 08:54 AM

02-27-2016, 08:14 PM - 1 Like	#16
loveisageless Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Oakland, California Photos: Albums Posts: 1,250	Originally posted by esrandall Agreed on this. I loved my K-3 when it was bright out, but didn't like the noise when I had to dial the ISO up over 800. I briefly owned the KS-1, and while it wasn't a camera that was great to shoot for long outings, I really liked the balance between resolution/noise with that 20MP sensor. If I were to buy Pentax again, I would take a strong look at a KS-2 TBH. I also found that there was more noise when I cropped photos even at lower ISO. It surprised me because the rest of the image was nice and sharp, but the background looked noticeably grainy even when the bokeh was creamy otherwise.

02-27-2016, 08:52 PM	#17
jayman_1975 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2014 Posts: 385	Originally posted by loveisageless I have used both the K-3 and the K-5IIS. With the higher resolution of the K-3 comes more noise at high ISO. I have found that I actually prefer the image quality of the K-5IIS. Now maybe it is a technique issue on my part, but when I look at my photographs taken with the K-5IIS I just like them better. I have to figure user error can account for that some of the time, but not all of the time. I am about to put my K-3 up for sale. This was my findings exactly. I did sell my K3 and never looked back. I haven't missed it.

02-28-2016, 12:27 AM	#18
Davidparis Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Paris, France Posts: 290	Just my 2 cents : the only possible citicism I can have on photos from either the K-30 or K-5iis with quality glass is my own user error or technique. This equipment can produce perfectly excellent results. Beyond reviewing one's own skills and technique, perhaps it's wise to put into perspective and analyze your photography goals. If it's "space photography" or the like with the need for a billion pixels and other-wordly resolution, that's one thing. If it's capturing moments in life with pleasing artistic creativity, that's another...Look what people are recording with smartphones these days...or cameras of inferior quality compared to the average DSLR. I've thrown my gear obsessions out the window a good while back since I've realized that the limiting factor is myself and not my modest Pentax equipment. That hasn't prevented me from collecting "oohs and aaahhs" for my photos or from having them published in magazines here in France. Lastly, I'd say that PP is imperative. I do not even judge my results from the LCD screen, except for quick histo, comp and focus check. All my results coming SOOC probably would be disappointing. Going through PP transforms them nicely and while shooting I concentrate on mood, feeling and the story. I'm not anywhere near changing from Pentax. Good luck in your quest.

02-28-2016, 12:48 AM - 1 Like	#19
BigMackCam Digitiser of Film Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: North East of England Posts: 20,701	Originally posted by kjphilippona I have the K-01, K5II, K30 & K50 along with some of the best lenses Pentax makes. I am still not happy with the image quality/sharpness my cameras produce. Should I purchase the K5IIs or K3 ? All four of the cameras you own are routinely capable of outstanding image quality with decent lenses - and you have some fine lenses. In addition to my K3 & K3II, I regularly use my old K5 with some quite old glass, and the results are excellent. I think it's very unlikely that you would notice a significant improvement in IQ with a different model. What is it that you're unhappy with in terms of the results you're achieving? Let us know what your expectations are, and where your images are falling short (some examples, at the magnification you are viewing at, would be helpful). I'm sure we can help you get what you're looking for without you needing to spend any more money. EDIT: Some recommendations to get you started (apologies if you know all of this already!)... - try not to shoot with the lens aperture wide open - ideally, shoot one f-stop down or more (so, on an f/2.8 lens, stop down to f/4 or smaller) - minimum shutter speed for static scenes hand-held should be 1 / (focal length x crop factor)... so, with a 100mm lens, you want to be shooting at 1 / (100 1.5) = 1/150s - carry out AF fine adjustment for your lenses (there are articles here on the forum and elsewhere on the internet explaining how to do this) - use Lightroom, Photoshop or one of the many other commercial or freeware post-processing tools to gently sharpen your final images EDIT #2: I've attached a couple of screenshots to show the importance of sharpening in post processing... I took a quick RAW shot just now with my K5. The first screenshot shows a comparison of 100% crops of that image - on the left, with no sharpening, and on the right, with sharpening. The next screenshot shows the same comparison, but this time viewed at 50% magnification. Attached Images Last edited by BigMackCam; 02-28-2016 at 02:51 AM.*

02-28-2016, 06:40 AM	#20
BigMackCam Digitiser of Film Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: North East of England Posts: 20,701	Originally posted by Oldbayrunner If your going to post samples for others opinion I suggest you don't direct upload to this site as it Will soften the images as with your currently posted. What your settings were with what you post helps others to advise possible changes which may assist you. You know, I was never certain of that being the case, but I just checked my JPEGs of the above images I posted for the OP's benefit... wow, they really are much softer here on the forum compared to the originals...

02-28-2016, 07:14 AM	#21
Na Horuk Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Slovenia, probably Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,186	Originally posted by BigMackCam You know, I was never certain of that being the case, but I just checked my JPEGs of the above images I posted for the OP's benefit... wow, they really are much softer here on the forum compared to the originals... Oh yes, many websites (forums, facebook,..) will resize and recompress image files. Sometimes they even change the colour space (to sRGB if it isn't already). All of this can severely ruin the image quality. It can add compression artifacts, introduce banding, ruin sharpness and detail, and even change the colours. Edit: This might even be part of OP's problem, if they share photos on websites. Another problem could be if OP shoots raw, but doesn't process the raw files into jpeg (for example, some codecs and raw viewers will only show a low-quality preview, not the actual raw content). The whole chain, having enough light, using correct camera settings, taking photo correctly, recording it in the correct format, post-processing it, uploading it without ruining its quality, is important. A problem in just one of those places means the end result will not look as good as it could. But using something like K-01 or K-50 on a tripod with 2 sec timer should give consistent sharp results, even if shooting jpeg (as long as jpeg settings are high quality).

02-28-2016, 07:25 AM	#23
BigMackCam Digitiser of Film Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: North East of England Posts: 20,701	Originally posted by kjphilippona Here are a few pictures taken with the K5II & K-01 using the DA*55, FA43 & FA77 lenses. OK, great, and just to help us a bit further - what is it about these images that you don't like? Is it the same problem(s) with each one, or are there different problems?

02-28-2016, 08:39 AM	#24
jayman_1975 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2014 Posts: 385	I was thinking these look pretty darn good to me.

02-28-2016, 08:47 AM	#25
BigMackCam Digitiser of Film Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: North East of England Posts: 20,701	Originally posted by jayman_1975 I was thinking these look pretty darn good to me. Yes, and this is the reason I'm asking the OP to explain what he isn't happy about with them. In one of them. I potentially see a little subject movement in one photo that could have been avoided with faster shutter... in another, perhaps the choice of aperture and focus point are such that the desired depth of field isn't what was intended... but sharpness in the "in focus" areas looks good. Without knowing the perceived problem, it's difficult to say if there is anything wrong with the results...

02-28-2016, 09:03 AM	#26
Rupert Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 25,123	My K5IIs is the best Pentax I have ever owned...it is just wonderful! I'm sure the K3 is too, and has more features, but I like the smaller files for my needs and it is better with noise at high ISO values. ISO 4,000 However......either the K5IIs or any version of the K3 will deliver superb shots.......it all depends on the lens used and more importantly, on the shooter and his/her skills. Most here have better skills than me, and some have better lenses. It makes all the difference! You can see crummy shots with the 645...or any other camera.....and superb shots with a $2. disposable..........rethink your search for the best camera! Regards!

02-28-2016, 09:42 AM	#27
mtgmansf Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Posts: 321	As a former, professional portrait photographer, I would say that using a good, off-camera reflector or a off-camera, fill flash would do much more for these images of a lovely child than anything else! However, adjusting jpeg parameters and/or using a good image editor in PP - with selective sharpening, burning and dodging, contract enhancements, etc.- would give these images a significant boost, as well! Further, I would be more careful in choosing background elements for some of these images to maximize your subject in the foreground. Also, keep sun spots off of your subject, since these are difficult, if not impossible, to fill in later. Lastly, getting a significantly better image, IMO, would entail using either a Pentax K1 or 645z with corresponding FX lenses, but would also require more careful shooting too. However, my first recommendations would still yield the greatest results overall...

02-28-2016, 10:01 AM	#28
BrianR Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Location: Ontario Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,332	Lighting looks like the main issue to me as well. The 2nd one looks the best to me - the exposure and white balance match the shade where you daughters face is and the sun is acting as a warm rim light but not obscuring any important details. Compare with the 3rd where you had to balance a bright hotspot on a major part of her face and still leave the lovely smile in a deep shadow. These kinds of high contrast situations are tough to deal with, a k5iis or k3 won't end up much different. The biggest improvements I think you'd see with a k3 would be the autofocus. It's hard to tell from the sizes of the pictures you've posted, but they mostly look pretty well focused to me (a couple of them look to have some motion blur and the second from the end might be a little front focused).

02-28-2016, 12:02 PM	#29
loveisageless Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: Oakland, California Photos: Albums Posts: 1,250	Originally posted by Rupert My K5IIs is the best Pentax I have ever owned...it is just wonderful! I'm sure the K3 is too, and has more features, but I like the smaller files for my needs and it is better with noise at high ISO values. ISO 4,000 However......either the K5IIs or any version of the K3 will deliver superb shots.......it all depends on the lens used and more importantly, on the shooter and his/her skills. Most here have better skills than me, and some have better lenses. It makes all the difference! You can see crummy shots with the 645...or any other camera.....and superb shots with a $2. disposable..........rethink your search for the best camera! Regards! From a hardware perspective, the K-3 has duel card slots, higher resolution LCD display, slightly better autofocus, and is wi-fi capable with the Pentax Flu-card. The trade off with the K-5IIS is high ISO noise and less pleasing results (without significant post processing) when cropping images. As several have mentioned there are software programs that can address the noise and grain issues. I use an Apple computer with the Aperture program. It is about as much post processing as I am interested in doing as an amateur photographer at this point. I definitely spent less time doing post processing with the K-5IIS than I have with the K-3 with more pleasing results overall. I think the observations/suggestions made here about lens quality, technique and proper lighting are good ones. I frequently review photos that I particularly like for the elements that contribute to their success. Likewise I also frequently review the "almost but not quite" photos to see what I could have done differently. It is a process of continual learning and practice. I think it is so easy to fixate on number of pixels, wi-fi, number of card slots, etc. The camera manufacturers count on motivating us to do so. Like another poster here, I am withdrawing from the "latest and greatest game/race". The upcoming K-1 will only really be of interest to me if the in-camera image stabilization is as good as alleged due to my somewhat shaky hands and dislike of schlepping tripods and monopods around with me.

02-28-2016, 04:51 PM	#30
kjphilippona Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2014 Location: Enterprise, Alabama Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,298 Original Poster	Originally posted by BigMackCam OK, great, and just to help us a bit further - what is it about these images that you don't like? Is it the same problem(s) with each one, or are there different problems? My problem is the images not being in focus, and the one in focus are not sharp. The three lenses are F1.4 or f1.8 and stoped down to f4 or more and still not sharp. I am also shooting at fast shutter speeds so it should freeze any movement. I just hate missing so many pictures due to these problems.