[leonsroar]

It has been found out that K-01 has only 1 LPF (Low Pass Filter).
Usually LPF consist of 3 layers (2 LPFs and 1 Wave Plate) but they omitted 1 LPF and Wave plate as a result it equips only 1 layer of LPF.

Professional Photographer Tanaka's Blog.
http://thisistanaka.blog66.fc2.com/entry/685/ (source is only in Japanese).

[JinDesu]

Does that help in improving sharpness of images from the K-01 sensor in comparison with the k-5?

[rester]

Yes, it gives sharper results.

[Docrwm]

Yes, it gives sharper results.

First significant, for me, reason to consider the K-01.

[monochrome]

Saw something about this on anohter thread here yesterday. Those of us who have a K-5 and a K-01 have been surprised at the improved IQ of the K-01 output vs. the K-5, especially the sharpness.

[Docrwm]

Are those filters useful in the AF process? Why are they present for the K-5 but not for the K-01?

[monochrome]

IIRC the Optical Low Pass filter (or Anti-Aliasing Filter) is present to reduce moire at points of high contrast. The tradeoff is to reduce sharpness, similar to what High ISO noise reduction algorithms do. As to why they remain in the K-5, the design is older than the K-01, which has a new Prime M Imager and other processing inprovements. This change does not affect autofocus.

The K-01 is a better camera for image cration than it gets credit for, given all the other objections .

Wikipedia - Anti-Aliasing Filter

In the case of optical image sampling, as by image sensors in digital cameras, the anti-aliasing filter is also known as an optical lowpass filter or blur filter or AA filter. The mathematics of sampling in two spatial dimensions is similar to the mathematics of time-domain sampling, but the filter implementation technologies are different. The typical implementation in digital cameras is two layers of birefringent material such as lithium niobate, which spreads each optical point into a cluster of four points.[1]
The choice of spot separation for such a filter involves a tradeoff among sharpness, aliasing, and fill factor. In a monochrome or three-CCD or Foveon X3 camera, the fill factor alone, if near 100% effective with microlenses, can provide a significant anti-aliasing effect,[2] while in color filter array (CFA, e.g. Bayer filter) cameras, an additional filter is generally needed to reduce aliasing to an acceptable level.[3][4][5]

[Docrwm]

IIRC the Optical Low Pass filter (or Anti-Aliasing Filter) is present to reduce moire at points of high contrast. The tradeoff is to reduce sharpness, similar to what High ISO noise reduction algorithms do.

Wikipedia - Anti-Aliasing Filter

In the case of optical image sampling, as by image sensors in digital cameras, the anti-aliasing filter is also known as an optical lowpass filter or blur filter or AA filter. The mathematics of sampling in two spatial dimensions is similar to the mathematics of time-domain sampling, but the filter implementation technologies are different. The typical implementation in digital cameras is two layers of birefringent material such as lithium niobate, which spreads each optical point into a cluster of four points.[1]
The choice of spot separation for such a filter involves a tradeoff among sharpness, aliasing, and fill factor. In a monochrome or three-CCD or Foveon X3 camera, the fill factor alone, if near 100% effective with microlenses, can provide a significant anti-aliasing effect,[2] while in color filter array (CFA, e.g. Bayer filter) cameras, an additional filter is generally needed to reduce aliasing to an acceptable level.[3][4][5]

So, because the K-01 relies on contrast to focus it makes it more likely that it will be able to focus without the filter. Hmmm, seems that greater sharpness would be preferable for the K-5 as well. I wonder how it would perform with only the 1 filter?

[JinDesu]

So, because the K-01 relies on contrast to focus it makes it more likely that it will be able to focus without the filter. Hmmm, seems that greater sharpness would be preferable for the K-5 as well. I wonder how it would perform with only the 1 filter?

Like a 16mp crop of a D800E =p

[Frogfish]

First significant, for me, reason to consider the K-01.

I thought it worth a gander too ... until seeing all three versions in the flesh today. It may get excellent test results but I would never buy it, my goodness is it fugly and toy-like. On the other hand the Q looks impressive in looks and build.... but just too tiny for my mighty mitts. Please Pentax don't let Newsome near another one of your cameras ... ever !!

[AKum8]

any comparison between K-5 and K-01 to prove the evidence?

[JinDesu]

any comparison between K-5 and K-01 to prove the evidence?

Quite a few people have been saying that the K-01 has been producing sharper shots than their k-5. Most were assuming that it was just the Prime-M engine.

You can search around the forum, there are many K-01 owners who are of that opinion.

[monochrome]

any comparison between K-5 and K-01 to prove the evidence?

Haven't seen a real head-to-head test yet. So far comparison is all hearsay, but regardless, IMPE the IQ is stunning.

[monochrome]

So, because the K-01 relies on contrast to focus it makes it more likely that it will be able to focus without the filter. Hmmm, seems that greater sharpness would be preferable for the K-5 as well. I wonder how it would perform with only the 1 filter?

I think I understand, but I probably have it wrong. If so Falk or somebody will fix this.

Not quite; for Live View, yes - maybe, if they use CDAF. PDAF requires separate, dedicated hardware (cross sensors) independent of the image sensor (since it works with the mirror down). Contrast detect works with the mirror up (or mirrorless) and permits Live-View focusing. Therefore unless the K-5 replacement were to use CDAF instead of PDAF the removal of the AA filter(s) from the image sensor should not affect autofocus.

And if they're going to do that, why have a mirror at all.

Phase Detect and Contrast detect are quite siimilar in the method of measurement. The PDAF algorithm, though, can anticipate the direction the focus should move and can even anticipate where focus will be for a moving subject whereas the CDAF algorithm seems to do neither.

Cambridge in Colour resource #1

Cambridge in Colour resource #2

[Docrwm]

Quite a few people have been saying that the K-01 has been producing sharper shots than their k-5. Most were assuming that it was just the Prime-M engine.

Until this thread that was my take-away from the posts. The new engine may be a factor but it sounds like it is merely one of at least two significant changes likely to have improved the sharpness.