K3 Moon versus K5 iis moon

**pearsaab** · 11-14-2013, 06:57 PM

I took a lot of pictures tonight...more with the K3 using the Sigma 500mm but a few with the k5iis...all were shot at 160 shutter and f13...I have been dealing with focus issues with the K3 and the 500 so not sure if what I experienced tonight is because of that...you can see the 2...shot on the tripod and cropped the same ...look at them first ...at the bottom I will tell you which is which

IMGC7110
by pearsaab, on Flickr

IMGC7110 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

IMGD1112
by pearsaab, on FlickrIMGD1112 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

the first is
k5 iis
next k3

**Ex Finn.** · 11-14-2013, 07:15 PM

Originally posted by pearsaab

I took a lot of pictures tonight...more with the K3 using the Sigma 500mm but a few with the k5iis...all were shot at 160 shutter and f13...I have been dealing with focus issues with the K3 and the 500 so not sure if what I experienced tonight is because of that...you can see the 2...shot on the tripod and cropped the same ...look at them first ...at the bottom I will tell you which is which

IMGC7110
by pearsaab, on Flickr

IMGC7110 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

IMGD1112
by pearsaab, on FlickrIMGD1112 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

the first is
k5 iis
next k3

Not a good way to judge sharpness or focus. Atmospherics play way too much into it.
IMO both images look very good from a "non telescope".

**pearsaab** · 11-14-2013, 07:26 PM

interesting...so even though taken at about the same time it can change it slightly...ok I feel better

panoguy · 11-14-2013, 07:45 PM

#2 definitely has that "noisy K-3" look to it! (oh snap, did I write that out loud?)

calsan · 11-14-2013, 07:49 PM

OK, well I reckon I can get similar detail with my K-7 and 55-300 at f6.3 and 1/320 or 1/250. Try a faster shutter speed and wider aperture - I think your setup should be able to totally trounce mine! I have found ISO 200 to get the best results with my setup also.
As mentioned - atmosphere makes the most difference. It's best when the moon is as close to overhead as possible and later at night so heat from the ground is less.

**Ex Finn.** · 11-14-2013, 07:51 PM

Originally posted by pearsaab

interesting...so even though taken at about the same time it can change it slightly...ok I feel better

Absolutely. Not saying that the K3 might not have a problem but I normally shoot several dozen images of the moon and pick the best one from that session.

**Eric Auer** · 11-14-2013, 08:44 PM

Both look pretty good.

I honestly had a hard time telling the difference.

k5astro · 11-14-2013, 09:05 PM

I had a really hard time telling the difference but maybe after 10-20 comparisons I would say the K3 looks like a bit better resolution, as it should. But the difference would be more evident if you cropped it or printed a poster size print.

civiletti · 11-14-2013, 10:43 PM - **2 Likes**

Why use f13? You do not need much depth of field at 240,000 miles, and your lens is likely sharpest near f8.

**skid2964** · 11-14-2013, 11:58 PM

Which Sigma 500mm?

obscura · 11-15-2013, 01:21 AM

hi pearsaab, nice images and congrats on the k-3,
give it another try using wider aperture... f/8 - f/9 should be better
remember that difraction kicks in earlier with the k-3... one of the caveats of having 24mp on an aps-c sensor...

bossa · 11-15-2013, 01:42 AM

Forget about f/13. f/5.6 to f/8 for a large object should be enough. For stars however the larger the aperture the better.

aaalegre · 11-15-2013, 03:28 AM

Are you using the aa filters in these k3 photos ??

Sandy Hancock · 11-15-2013, 03:49 AM

The top image looks noisier, but sharper. I would guess that is the K-3, but there's really very little between them.
With moon shots it is very difficult to make comparisons, because precise focus is so critical.

Gimbal · 11-15-2013, 05:09 AM

With a K5 and a 500mm 1/160second is fast enough, no need to go faster. I suggest base iso if the lens sharpness allows a larger aperture. Shooting at ISO 80-100 makes a huge difference when hunting for details at 100% crop.

11-14-2013, 06:57 PM	#1
pearsaab Otis Memorial Pentaxian Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: May 2011 Location: Richmond, Virginia USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,900	K3 Moon versus K5 iis moon I took a lot of pictures tonight...more with the K3 using the Sigma 500mm but a few with the k5iis...all were shot at 160 shutter and f13...I have been dealing with focus issues with the K3 and the 500 so not sure if what I experienced tonight is because of that...you can see the 2...shot on the tripod and cropped the same ...look at them first ...at the bottom I will tell you which is which IMGC7110 by pearsaab, on Flickr IMGC7110 \| Flickr - Photo Sharing! IMGD1112 by pearsaab, on FlickrIMGD1112 \| Flickr - Photo Sharing! the first is k5 iis next k3

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
February Moon (feel free to post your moon shots)	GLThorne	Post Your Photos!	11	05-02-2016 12:00 PM
K3 auto WB on the K5 IIs...	Santoku	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	3	11-13-2013 07:05 AM
Moon-K5 vs K10	Boker	Pentax DSLR Discussion	10	12-01-2012 12:18 PM
Nature Moon shots (yop, one more thread on the moon)	Martin_Qc	Post Your Photos!	3	05-25-2010 10:01 PM
Nature Moon versus man	Naturenut	Post Your Photos!	5	03-27-2010 12:25 PM

11-14-2013, 07:15 PM	#2
Ex Finn. Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Southern Maryland. Espoo. Kouvola. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,975	Originally posted by pearsaab I took a lot of pictures tonight...more with the K3 using the Sigma 500mm but a few with the k5iis...all were shot at 160 shutter and f13...I have been dealing with focus issues with the K3 and the 500 so not sure if what I experienced tonight is because of that...you can see the 2...shot on the tripod and cropped the same ...look at them first ...at the bottom I will tell you which is which IMGC7110 by pearsaab, on Flickr IMGC7110 \| Flickr - Photo Sharing! IMGD1112 by pearsaab, on FlickrIMGD1112 \| Flickr - Photo Sharing! the first is k5 iis next k3 Not a good way to judge sharpness or focus. Atmospherics play way too much into it. IMO both images look very good from a "non telescope".

11-14-2013, 07:26 PM	#3
pearsaab Otis Memorial Pentaxian Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: May 2011 Location: Richmond, Virginia USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 2,900 Original Poster	interesting...so even though taken at about the same time it can change it slightly...ok I feel better

11-14-2013, 07:45 PM	#4
panoguy Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Washington, D.C. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 3,327	#2 definitely has that "noisy K-3" look to it! (oh snap, did I write that out loud?)

11-14-2013, 07:49 PM	#5
calsan Pentaxian Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Perth, Australia Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,548	OK, well I reckon I can get similar detail with my K-7 and 55-300 at f6.3 and 1/320 or 1/250. Try a faster shutter speed and wider aperture - I think your setup should be able to totally trounce mine! I have found ISO 200 to get the best results with my setup also. As mentioned - atmosphere makes the most difference. It's best when the moon is as close to overhead as possible and later at night so heat from the ground is less.

11-14-2013, 07:51 PM	#6
Ex Finn. Site Supporter Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Southern Maryland. Espoo. Kouvola. Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 7,975	Originally posted by pearsaab interesting...so even though taken at about the same time it can change it slightly...ok I feel better Absolutely. Not saying that the K3 might not have a problem but I normally shoot several dozen images of the moon and pick the best one from that session.

11-14-2013, 08:44 PM	#7
Eric Auer Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2012 Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,211	Both look pretty good. I honestly had a hard time telling the difference.

11-14-2013, 09:05 PM	#8
k5astro Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Photos: Albums Posts: 387	I had a really hard time telling the difference but maybe after 10-20 comparisons I would say the K3 looks like a bit better resolution, as it should. But the difference would be more evident if you cropped it or printed a poster size print.

11-14-2013, 10:43 PM - 2 Likes	#9
civiletti Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Oregon Photos: Albums Posts: 1,435	Why use f13? You do not need much depth of field at 240,000 miles, and your lens is likely sharpest near f8.

11-14-2013, 11:58 PM	#10
skid2964 Site Supporter Join Date: May 2008 Location: USA Posts: 614	Which Sigma 500mm?

11-15-2013, 01:21 AM	#11
obscura Senior Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 127	hi pearsaab, nice images and congrats on the k-3, give it another try using wider aperture... f/8 - f/9 should be better remember that difraction kicks in earlier with the k-3... one of the caveats of having 24mp on an aps-c sensor...

11-15-2013, 01:42 AM	#12
bossa Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Adelaide Posts: 4,546	Forget about f/13. f/5.6 to f/8 for a large object should be enough. For stars however the larger the aperture the better.

11-15-2013, 03:28 AM	#13
aaalegre Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: new jersey Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 112	Are you using the aa filters in these k3 photos ??

11-15-2013, 03:49 AM	#14
Sandy Hancock Moderator Site Supporter Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Adelaide Hills, South Australia Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 11,272	The top image looks noisier, but sharper. I would guess that is the K-3, but there's really very little between them. With moon shots it is very difficult to make comparisons, because precise focus is so critical.

11-15-2013, 05:09 AM	#15
Gimbal Pentaxian Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Sweden Posts: 2,106	With a K5 and a 500mm 1/160second is fast enough, no need to go faster. I suggest base iso if the lens sharpness allows a larger aperture. Shooting at ISO 80-100 makes a huge difference when hunting for details at 100% crop.