Imaging Resource Full K-5 review

djc737 · 04-13-2011, 04:43 PM

Originally posted by Urkeldaedalus

When you look at the type of shots Weese has in his blog, the K-5 would indeed be overkill. Any advantage the K-5 has over a M4/3 camera would be minimal, especially for the money difference, which I take to be his main conclusion.

Also, it seems like his main criticism isn't of the K-5, it's that Panasonic has better wide primes, which is what he's looking for. Although I'd be interested to see his print where the DA15 looked "pathetic," because that is a pretty well acclaimed lens in Pentax land.

I own the EPL1, GF1 both with EVF and 7-14, 20mm, 14-45, 14-150 and 45-200. After several trips both to Europe and the Rockies, I bought the K-5 plus 21, 31 and 77. I love this camera and the primes are to dies for. Future trips will be with the K-5 plus primes and the GF1 plus 7-14. Mirrorless just does UWA zoom so much smaller. Neither Panasonic nor Olympus have primes to match my Pentax primes. Even the 7-14 is part SW wizardry. May replace GF1 with GH2 and then I have best of both.

stanleyk · 04-13-2011, 05:48 PM

Originally posted by Urkeldaedalus

When you look at the type of shots Weese has in his blog, the K-5 would indeed be overkill. Any advantage the K-5 has over a M4/3 camera would be minimal, especially for the money difference, which I take to be his main conclusion.

Also, it seems like his main criticism isn't of the K-5, it's that Panasonic has better wide primes, which is what he's looking for. Although I'd be interested to see his print where the DA15 looked "pathetic," because that is a pretty well acclaimed lens in Pentax land.

I'm not sure I buy his criticism. I have the DA 15. It's a very good lens.

There is a rather large difference between say the K5 and the EPL2 (but I would expect that since there's also a big cost difference) but it also really depends on if you print, how large you print and then of course other things that people have mentioned.

I'm not sure I see a much to compare between a DSLR and a M 4/3 camera. They really are different cameras. I will say that I think the Panasonic 7-14 is as good a lens as the DA 15 as far as the quality of the optics. But they really are different lenses. And that's just an opinion not a statement of fact.

Again, the Panasonic lenses are really first rate but they aren't cheap either. So they better be good lenses.

lurchlarson · 04-14-2011, 01:02 AM

I've never really shot with m4/3 but I do shoot a lot with an oly e620. All I can say is that the 50mm f/2 macro is one crazy, wicked sharp lens. Little slow to focus and the af is noisy but boy is it sharp. If the ever circulating rumors of pentax going under ever come true, I will switch to Oly. I still love my pentax, I'm just aknowledging another good brand.

Urkeldaedalus · 04-14-2011, 05:18 AM - **1 Like**

Originally posted by stanleyk

I'm not sure I buy his criticism. I have the DA 15. It's a very good lens.

There is a rather large difference between say the K5 and the EPL2 (but I would expect that since there's also a big cost difference) but it also really depends on if you print, how large you print and then of course other things that people have mentioned.

I'm not sure I see a much to compare between a DSLR and a M 4/3 camera. They really are different cameras. I will say that I think the Panasonic 7-14 is as good a lens as the DA 15 as far as the quality of the optics. But they really are different lenses. And that's just an opinion not a statement of fact.

Again, the Panasonic lenses are really first rate but they aren't cheap either. So they better be good lenses.

It seemed to me that he was magnifying his gripes with the Pentax stuff to make him feel justified about something he wanted to do anyway, which is to keep shooting with his Panasonic stuff. That's alright, it's a pretty natural thing to do, and you should generally go with your first gut response anyway.

That said, I think the 28 mm (equivalent) lens on my Ricoh GXR is just as good if not better in many ways than the DA15 and DA21 mm, so it's not out of the question that this would be true for the Panasonic wide angles as well. Hard for me to discount the sensor advantage and other advantages of the K-5 just because of this, though. In fact, I wish Ricoh had used the K-5's sensor with this unit

lithos · 04-14-2011, 09:36 AM

Is it just me or does the Sony comparison shot have some insane levels of sharpening on it?

deejjjaaaa · 04-15-2011, 04:49 PM

Originally posted by johnmflores

I concur. I have the Panny 20 and the Pentax DA Limiteds (21, 35, 40, 70). The Panny 20 is very good. Some of it no doubt due to in-camera processing (distortion correction, etc...), but that doesn't bother me in the least. It's the output that counts...

yeap, the output w/ the banding

"The bands are introduced because uniform image noise becomes non-uniformly distributed upon image resampling (e.g., when spatially-varying optical corrections are applied). Ideally, one would redistribute the image scene values to make the rendered image rectilinear, without redistributing the noise (thereby keeping it uniform in appearance). Regrettably, that is not easy to do, since the noise is already "burned into" the image." (c) Eric Chan of Adobe Labs speaking about the software correction for Panasonic lenses

johnmflores · 04-15-2011, 05:30 PM

Originally posted by deejjjaaaa

yeap, the output w/ the banding

"The bands are introduced because uniform image noise becomes non-uniformly distributed upon image resampling (e.g., when spatially-varying optical corrections are applied). Ideally, one would redistribute the image scene values to make the rendered image rectilinear, without redistributing the noise (thereby keeping it uniform in appearance). Regrettably, that is not easy to do, since the noise is already "burned into" the image." (c) Eric Chan of Adobe Labs speaking about the software correction for Panasonic lenses

That's not a photograph so I don't care. Show me how that affects the IQ of an actual photo.

**Fontan** · 04-16-2011, 09:35 PM

Originally posted by johnmflores

That's not a photograph so I don't care. Show me how that affects the IQ of an actual photo.

Is there a banding around the light, you think?? I am not sure. Don't know enough about these things . . .

indy · 04-17-2011, 05:08 AM

Is thi the IR full review thread or is it the Weese K5 observations thread? :-)

jogiba · 04-17-2011, 06:51 AM

The K-5 1080p25 *** video mode looks more like standard definition compared to the GH2.

johnmflores · 04-17-2011, 07:24 AM

Originally posted by Fontan

Is there a banding around the light, you think?? I am not sure. Don't know enough about these things . . .

Looks more like lens flare to me. That effect will happen to most any camera and any lens in the same situation.

**Fontan** · 04-17-2011, 05:23 PM

Originally posted by johnmflores

Looks more like lens flare to me. That effect will happen to most any camera and any lens in the same situation.

It is very weird. If you keep starring at the background, especially around the light, you begin to see what appear to be, well, banding to me.

Now when I look at the same picture on my NEC Multisync p221w, I don't see it as much. It is a pity because the lens was sort of you know a bit expensive for my taste.

djc737 · 04-18-2011, 06:19 PM

Originally posted by Fontan

It is very weird. If you keep starring at the background, especially around the light, you begin to see what appear to be, well, banding to me.

Now when I look at the same picture on my NEC Multisync p221w, I don't see it as much. It is a pity because the lens was sort of you know a bit expensive for my taste.

I saw a pony and an elephant. ;-) Just joking, of course. Dave

Pentaxor · 04-20-2011, 12:58 PM

Originally posted by Fontan

The way k-5 is worshipped by some around here, I am utterly stunned that he is not being crucified on this forum.

this is a Pentax Forum, not Canon. I'm sue if he said something about the 7D on the other forum, he'd be kicked around in the forum from the moment he published that article.

**Fontan** · 04-20-2011, 02:29 PM

Originally posted by Pentaxor

this is a Pentax Forum, not Canon. I'm sue if he said something about the 7D on the other forum, he'd be kicked around in the forum from the moment he published that article.

Well, what I meant was that I am surprised that this guy is NOT thrashed around more here, because he really put k-5 down in ways that I thought would upset lots of people around here. Where is all this restraints coming from?

04-16-2011, 09:35 PM	#23
Fontan Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: 5th floor Posts: 1,610	Originally posted by johnmflores That's not a photograph so I don't care. Show me how that affects the IQ of an actual photo. Is there a banding around the light, you think?? I am not sure. Don't know enough about these things . . . Attached Images

04-17-2011, 06:51 AM	#25
jogiba Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Millstone,NJ Posts: 6,491	The K-5 1080p25 *** video mode looks more like standard definition compared to the GH2. Vimeo Vimeo

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Imaging Resource reviews K-x - in full	rawr	Pentax News and Rumors	4	03-17-2010 01:55 PM
Imaging-Resource full review of K-x	UnknownVT	Pentax DSLR Discussion	1	03-12-2010 12:35 PM
Full K-7 review up at Imaging Resource	gazonk	Pentax DSLR Discussion	15	08-23-2009 08:11 AM
K20D Review on Imaging Resource	ftpaddict	Pentax News and Rumors	7	02-18-2009 02:55 PM
Imaging Resource K20D Review	Rush2112	Pentax DSLR Discussion	5	02-17-2009 07:29 AM

04-13-2011, 04:43 PM	#16
djc737 Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: South jersey outside of Philly Posts: 281	Originally posted by Urkeldaedalus When you look at the type of shots Weese has in his blog, the K-5 would indeed be overkill. Any advantage the K-5 has over a M4/3 camera would be minimal, especially for the money difference, which I take to be his main conclusion. Also, it seems like his main criticism isn't of the K-5, it's that Panasonic has better wide primes, which is what he's looking for. Although I'd be interested to see his print where the DA15 looked "pathetic," because that is a pretty well acclaimed lens in Pentax land. I own the EPL1, GF1 both with EVF and 7-14, 20mm, 14-45, 14-150 and 45-200. After several trips both to Europe and the Rockies, I bought the K-5 plus 21, 31 and 77. I love this camera and the primes are to dies for. Future trips will be with the K-5 plus primes and the GF1 plus 7-14. Mirrorless just does UWA zoom so much smaller. Neither Panasonic nor Olympus have primes to match my Pentax primes. Even the 7-14 is part SW wizardry. May replace GF1 with GH2 and then I have best of both.

04-13-2011, 05:48 PM	#17
stanleyk Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Taylor, Texas Posts: 1,018	Originally posted by Urkeldaedalus When you look at the type of shots Weese has in his blog, the K-5 would indeed be overkill. Any advantage the K-5 has over a M4/3 camera would be minimal, especially for the money difference, which I take to be his main conclusion. Also, it seems like his main criticism isn't of the K-5, it's that Panasonic has better wide primes, which is what he's looking for. Although I'd be interested to see his print where the DA15 looked "pathetic," because that is a pretty well acclaimed lens in Pentax land. I'm not sure I buy his criticism. I have the DA 15. It's a very good lens. There is a rather large difference between say the K5 and the EPL2 (but I would expect that since there's also a big cost difference) but it also really depends on if you print, how large you print and then of course other things that people have mentioned. I'm not sure I see a much to compare between a DSLR and a M 4/3 camera. They really are different cameras. I will say that I think the Panasonic 7-14 is as good a lens as the DA 15 as far as the quality of the optics. But they really are different lenses. And that's just an opinion not a statement of fact. Again, the Panasonic lenses are really first rate but they aren't cheap either. So they better be good lenses.

04-14-2011, 01:02 AM	#18
lurchlarson Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Oregon, USA Photos: Albums Posts: 681	I've never really shot with m4/3 but I do shoot a lot with an oly e620. All I can say is that the 50mm f/2 macro is one crazy, wicked sharp lens. Little slow to focus and the af is noisy but boy is it sharp. If the ever circulating rumors of pentax going under ever come true, I will switch to Oly. I still love my pentax, I'm just aknowledging another good brand.

04-14-2011, 05:18 AM - 1 Like	#19
Urkeldaedalus Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Location: Iowa Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,369	Originally posted by stanleyk I'm not sure I buy his criticism. I have the DA 15. It's a very good lens. There is a rather large difference between say the K5 and the EPL2 (but I would expect that since there's also a big cost difference) but it also really depends on if you print, how large you print and then of course other things that people have mentioned. I'm not sure I see a much to compare between a DSLR and a M 4/3 camera. They really are different cameras. I will say that I think the Panasonic 7-14 is as good a lens as the DA 15 as far as the quality of the optics. But they really are different lenses. And that's just an opinion not a statement of fact. Again, the Panasonic lenses are really first rate but they aren't cheap either. So they better be good lenses. It seemed to me that he was magnifying his gripes with the Pentax stuff to make him feel justified about something he wanted to do anyway, which is to keep shooting with his Panasonic stuff. That's alright, it's a pretty natural thing to do, and you should generally go with your first gut response anyway. That said, I think the 28 mm (equivalent) lens on my Ricoh GXR is just as good if not better in many ways than the DA15 and DA21 mm, so it's not out of the question that this would be true for the Panasonic wide angles as well. Hard for me to discount the sensor advantage and other advantages of the K-5 just because of this, though. In fact, I wish Ricoh had used the K-5's sensor with this unit

04-14-2011, 09:36 AM	#20
lithos Inactive Account Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Brisbane, QLD, AUS Posts: 3,261	Is it just me or does the Sony comparison shot have some insane levels of sharpening on it?

04-15-2011, 04:49 PM	#21
deejjjaaaa Veteran Member Join Date: May 2007 Location: steel city / rust belt Posts: 2,043	Originally posted by johnmflores I concur. I have the Panny 20 and the Pentax DA Limiteds (21, 35, 40, 70). The Panny 20 is very good. Some of it no doubt due to in-camera processing (distortion correction, etc...), but that doesn't bother me in the least. It's the output that counts... yeap, the output w/ the banding "The bands are introduced because uniform image noise becomes non-uniformly distributed upon image resampling (e.g., when spatially-varying optical corrections are applied). Ideally, one would redistribute the image scene values to make the rendered image rectilinear, without redistributing the noise (thereby keeping it uniform in appearance). Regrettably, that is not easy to do, since the noise is already "burned into" the image." (c) Eric Chan of Adobe Labs speaking about the software correction for Panasonic lenses

04-15-2011, 05:30 PM	#22
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361	Originally posted by deejjjaaaa yeap, the output w/ the banding "The bands are introduced because uniform image noise becomes non-uniformly distributed upon image resampling (e.g., when spatially-varying optical corrections are applied). Ideally, one would redistribute the image scene values to make the rendered image rectilinear, without redistributing the noise (thereby keeping it uniform in appearance). Regrettably, that is not easy to do, since the noise is already "burned into" the image." (c) Eric Chan of Adobe Labs speaking about the software correction for Panasonic lenses That's not a photograph so I don't care. Show me how that affects the IQ of an actual photo.

04-17-2011, 05:08 AM	#24
indy Senior Member Join Date: May 2010 Location: Indiana Photos: Gallery Posts: 274	Is thi the IR full review thread or is it the Weese K5 observations thread? :-)

04-17-2011, 07:24 AM	#26
johnmflores Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Somerville, NJ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 5,361	Originally posted by Fontan Is there a banding around the light, you think?? I am not sure. Don't know enough about these things . . . Looks more like lens flare to me. That effect will happen to most any camera and any lens in the same situation.

04-17-2011, 05:23 PM	#27
Fontan Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: 5th floor Posts: 1,610	Originally posted by johnmflores Looks more like lens flare to me. That effect will happen to most any camera and any lens in the same situation. It is very weird. If you keep starring at the background, especially around the light, you begin to see what appear to be, well, banding to me. Now when I look at the same picture on my NEC Multisync p221w, I don't see it as much. It is a pity because the lens was sort of you know a bit expensive for my taste.

04-18-2011, 06:19 PM	#28
djc737 Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2011 Location: South jersey outside of Philly Posts: 281	Originally posted by Fontan It is very weird. If you keep starring at the background, especially around the light, you begin to see what appear to be, well, banding to me. Now when I look at the same picture on my NEC Multisync p221w, I don't see it as much. It is a pity because the lens was sort of you know a bit expensive for my taste. I saw a pony and an elephant. ;-) Just joking, of course. Dave

04-20-2011, 12:58 PM	#29
Pentaxor Veteran Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: Vancouver, B.C. Photos: Gallery Posts: 6,513	Originally posted by Fontan The way k-5 is worshipped by some around here, I am utterly stunned that he is not being crucified on this forum. this is a Pentax Forum, not Canon. I'm sue if he said something about the 7D on the other forum, he'd be kicked around in the forum from the moment he published that article.

04-20-2011, 02:29 PM	#30
Fontan Site Supporter Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: 5th floor Posts: 1,610	Originally posted by Pentaxor this is a Pentax Forum, not Canon. I'm sue if he said something about the 7D on the other forum, he'd be kicked around in the forum from the moment he published that article. Well, what I meant was that I am surprised that this guy is NOT thrashed around more here, because he really put k-5 down in ways that I thought would upset lots of people around here. Where is all this restraints coming from?