Blind test: K-3 vs K-5 IIs

bxf · 12-29-2013, 06:47 PM

Originally posted by slip

If people have that much trouble choosing between the two, then that tells me that the k3 isn't worth an upgrade from the k5iis

maybe next generation.....

thanks

randy

I believe this to be a valid line of thought, but:

1. Just because IQ is not clearly better under one particular set of conditions, doesn't mean that benefits would not be more easily discernible under other conditions.
2. One camera can have a better feature set than another. This MAY result in better IQ and/or convenience.
3. I doubt that at this stage of the game we can expect IQ improvements in gigantic steps.

derekkite · 12-30-2013, 04:37 PM

The biggest IQ gain that I get from my K3 over the K5 is that almost everything is in focus. The ones in focus between the two are pretty close, but there are far more on the K3 than the K5.

tittermary · 12-31-2013, 09:40 AM

Originally posted by slip

If people have that much trouble choosing between the two, then that tells me that the k3 isn't worth an upgrade from the k5iis

maybe next generation.....

thanks

randy

and with the lack of understanding the advantages of the k3 your right the k5 will suit you fine

tittermary · 12-31-2013, 09:45 AM

Originally posted by bxf

I believe this to be a valid line of thought, but:

1. Just because IQ is not clearly better under one particular set of conditions, doesn't mean that benefits would not be more easily discernible under other conditions.
2. One camera can have a better feature set than another. This MAY result in better IQ and/or convenience.
3. I doubt that at this stage of the game we can expect IQ improvements in gigantic steps.

yeah, well shoot a pic with a k5 then k3, resize the k3 to the k5 make print then sell k5. Or make a bill board print from each. Lol

bxf · 12-31-2013, 12:44 PM

Originally posted by derekkite

The biggest IQ gain that I get from my K3 over the K5 is that almost everything is in focus. The ones in focus between the two are pretty close, but there are far more on the K3 than the K5.

This alone would be enough for me to trade my K-5 for a K-3.

PALADIN85020 · 12-31-2013, 03:10 PM

I've been thinking about the noise situation with the K-3, and have some conclusions. Some have stated that they think the K-5 has better noise control. Try this. Take two identical shots, one with the K-3 and one with the K-5, both at ISO 3200.

Now - downsize the the much larger K-3 picture with software to the same dimensions as the K-5 shot. What you will do in the process is reduce the noise, because you are making the aberrations smaller. I'm betting that the result will be two nearly identical pictures with the noise essentially equal. The more you upsize a picture, either through the native megapixel count or with software, the more noise will be apparent, so if you expanded the 16 MP size picture of the K-5 to approximate the size of the 24 MP K-3 shot, conversely you will probably see more noise, roughly equivalent a K-3 picture, but with an attendant loss of IQ in the process.

Although more noise would probably be apparent with the K-3 at 24 MP vs, the 16 MP of the K-5, you will undoubtedly see a sharper image with more detail and more room to creatively crop the picture. Noise can also be controlled with post processing software. The more efficient focusing of the K-3 is an additional boon.

I haven't tried all of this, but it seems logical. Am I in any way in error here? More MP = more APPARENT noise, because the noise is magnified, in a nutshell, given the identical dimensions of the APSC sensor. Right or wrong?

John

vonBaloney · 12-31-2013, 03:15 PM

Originally posted by PALADIN85020

I've been thinking about the noise situation with the K-3, and have some conclusions. Some have stated that they think the K-5 has better noise control. Try this. Take two identical shots, one with the K-3 and one with the K-5, both at ISO 3200.

Now - downsize the the much larger K-3 picture with software to the same dimensions as the K-5 shot. What you will do in the process is reduce the noise, because you are making the aberrations smaller. I'm betting that the result will be two nearly identical pictures with the noise essentially equal. The more you upsize a picture, either through the native megapixel count or with software, the more noise will be apparent, so if you expanded the 16 MP size picture of the K-5 to approximate the size of the 24 MP K-3 shot, conversely you will probably see more noise, roughly equivalent a K-3 picture, but with an attendant loss of IQ in the process.

Although more noise would probably be apparent with the K-3 at 24 MP vs, the 16 MP of the K-5, you will undoubtedly see a sharper image with more detail and more room to creatively crop the picture. Noise can also be controlled with post processing software. The more efficient focusing of the K-3 is an additional boon.

I haven't tried all of this, but it seems logical. Am I in any way in error here? More MP = more APPARENT noise, because the noise is magnified, in a nutshell, given the identical dimensions of the APSC sensor. Right or wrong?

John

From what I've read but not tested myself. In practical terms, i.e. making prints at particular sizes, the greater resolution MORE than makes up for the additional noise for superior prints. Where you might notice the extra noise is very large prints, but that's where you notice the extra resolution also (where the 16mp image is getting soft from being too big). So trade-offs all in favor of the K-3....

Last edited by vonBaloney; 01-01-2014 at 11:18 AM.

ElJamoquio · 12-31-2013, 08:59 PM

Originally posted by PALADIN85020

I've been thinking about the noise situation with the K-3, and have some conclusions. Some have stated that they think the K-5 has better noise control. Try this. Take two identical shots, one with the K-3 and one with the K-5, both at ISO 3200.

Now - downsize the the much larger K-3 picture with software to the same dimensions as the K-5 shot. What you will do in the process is reduce the noise, because you are making the aberrations smaller. I'm betting that the result will be two nearly identical pictures with the noise essentially equal. The more you upsize a picture, either through the native megapixel count or with software, the more noise will be apparent, so if you expanded the 16 MP size picture of the K-5 to approximate the size of the 24 MP K-3 shot, conversely you will probably see more noise, roughly equivalent a K-3 picture, but with an attendant loss of IQ in the process.

Although more noise would probably be apparent with the K-3 at 24 MP vs, the 16 MP of the K-5, you will undoubtedly see a sharper image with more detail and more room to creatively crop the picture. Noise can also be controlled with post processing software. The more efficient focusing of the K-3 is an additional boon.

I haven't tried all of this, but it seems logical. Am I in any way in error here? More MP = more APPARENT noise, because the noise is magnified, in a nutshell, given the identical dimensions of the APSC sensor. Right or wrong?

John

You're correct. FYI, DXOmark takes the 'extra' megapixels into account in their (standard) plots/comparisons.

Class A · 01-01-2014, 02:02 AM

Originally posted by PALADIN85020

Right or wrong?

Just another confirmation that you are right in both your thought processes and your assumption that after establishing the same magnification the K-3 and K-5 (II) have extremely similar noise performance (as measured by DxOMark).

GlennG · 01-01-2014, 12:22 PM

Originally posted by vonBaloney

From what I've read but not tested myself. In practical terms, i.e. making prints at particular sizes, the greater resolution MORE than makes up for the additional noise for superior prints. Where you might notice the extra noise is very large prints, but that's where you notice the extra resolution also (where the 16mp image is getting soft from being too big). So trade-offs all in favor of the K-3....

I agree with this. I also have not done tests, but this is my firm conclusion from my extensive reading and looking at results and tests on imaging resource.

Transit · 05-23-2014, 01:26 AM

was there ever an answer to this poll ?
read a few pages of certainty it was one or the other

mactrash · 05-23-2014, 01:34 AM

1 - k3

disco_owner · 05-23-2014, 01:37 AM

K5IIs #1
K3 #2

Transit · 05-23-2014, 04:06 AM

I rest my case

adwb · 08-09-2014, 11:52 PM

So which image is which the poll is closed and no posted answer?

View Poll Results: Which is which?
File one = K-3, File two = K-5 IIs	272	64.00%
File one = K-5 IIs, File two = K-3	153	36.00%
Voters: 425. You may not vote on this poll

12-31-2013, 03:10 PM	#201
PALADIN85020 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Arizona Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 442	Apples and oranges - I've been thinking about the noise situation with the K-3, and have some conclusions. Some have stated that they think the K-5 has better noise control. Try this. Take two identical shots, one with the K-3 and one with the K-5, both at ISO 3200. Now - downsize the the much larger K-3 picture with software to the same dimensions as the K-5 shot. What you will do in the process is reduce the noise, because you are making the aberrations smaller. I'm betting that the result will be two nearly identical pictures with the noise essentially equal. The more you upsize a picture, either through the native megapixel count or with software, the more noise will be apparent, so if you expanded the 16 MP size picture of the K-5 to approximate the size of the 24 MP K-3 shot, conversely you will probably see more noise, roughly equivalent a K-3 picture, but with an attendant loss of IQ in the process. Although more noise would probably be apparent with the K-3 at 24 MP vs, the 16 MP of the K-5, you will undoubtedly see a sharper image with more detail and more room to creatively crop the picture. Noise can also be controlled with post processing software. The more efficient focusing of the K-3 is an additional boon. I haven't tried all of this, but it seems logical. Am I in any way in error here? More MP = more APPARENT noise, because the noise is magnified, in a nutshell, given the identical dimensions of the APSC sensor. Right or wrong? John

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
New Firmware for K-500, K-50, K-5 II, K-5 IIs, K-5, K-30, K-01, K-r, and 645D is out	Adam	Pentax News and Rumors	60	09-16-2013 05:46 AM
K-5 ii vs K-5 iis comparison with higher sharpness in K-5 ii	kataria0	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	62	12-22-2012 10:12 PM
Pentax K-5 IIs vs K-5 II (take two...)	JohnBee	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	9	12-06-2012 04:10 AM
K-5 IIs vs K-5 II - can you tell the difference?	JohnBee	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	85	11-19-2012 10:48 PM
Stop Sign: K-5 vs K-5 IIs Comparison Shots	Adam	Pentax K-5 & K-5 II	14	10-28-2012 06:10 AM

12-29-2013, 06:47 PM	#196
bxf Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Lisbon area Posts: 1,660	Originally posted by slip If people have that much trouble choosing between the two, then that tells me that the k3 isn't worth an upgrade from the k5iis maybe next generation..... thanks randy I believe this to be a valid line of thought, but: 1. Just because IQ is not clearly better under one particular set of conditions, doesn't mean that benefits would not be more easily discernible under other conditions. 2. One camera can have a better feature set than another. This MAY result in better IQ and/or convenience. 3. I doubt that at this stage of the game we can expect IQ improvements in gigantic steps.

12-30-2013, 04:37 PM	#197
derekkite Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Nelson B.C. Posts: 3,782	The biggest IQ gain that I get from my K3 over the K5 is that almost everything is in focus. The ones in focus between the two are pretty close, but there are far more on the K3 than the K5.

12-31-2013, 09:40 AM	#198
tittermary Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Posts: 35	Originally posted by slip If people have that much trouble choosing between the two, then that tells me that the k3 isn't worth an upgrade from the k5iis maybe next generation..... thanks randy and with the lack of understanding the advantages of the k3 your right the k5 will suit you fine

12-31-2013, 09:45 AM	#199
tittermary Junior Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Posts: 35	Originally posted by bxf I believe this to be a valid line of thought, but: 1. Just because IQ is not clearly better under one particular set of conditions, doesn't mean that benefits would not be more easily discernible under other conditions. 2. One camera can have a better feature set than another. This MAY result in better IQ and/or convenience. 3. I doubt that at this stage of the game we can expect IQ improvements in gigantic steps. yeah, well shoot a pic with a k5 then k3, resize the k3 to the k5 make print then sell k5. Or make a bill board print from each. Lol

12-31-2013, 12:44 PM	#200
bxf Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: Lisbon area Posts: 1,660	Originally posted by derekkite The biggest IQ gain that I get from my K3 over the K5 is that almost everything is in focus. The ones in focus between the two are pretty close, but there are far more on the K3 than the K5. This alone would be enough for me to trade my K-5 for a K-3.

12-31-2013, 03:15 PM	#202
vonBaloney Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Albuquerque, NM Posts: 6,029	Originally posted by PALADIN85020 I've been thinking about the noise situation with the K-3, and have some conclusions. Some have stated that they think the K-5 has better noise control. Try this. Take two identical shots, one with the K-3 and one with the K-5, both at ISO 3200. Now - downsize the the much larger K-3 picture with software to the same dimensions as the K-5 shot. What you will do in the process is reduce the noise, because you are making the aberrations smaller. I'm betting that the result will be two nearly identical pictures with the noise essentially equal. The more you upsize a picture, either through the native megapixel count or with software, the more noise will be apparent, so if you expanded the 16 MP size picture of the K-5 to approximate the size of the 24 MP K-3 shot, conversely you will probably see more noise, roughly equivalent a K-3 picture, but with an attendant loss of IQ in the process. Although more noise would probably be apparent with the K-3 at 24 MP vs, the 16 MP of the K-5, you will undoubtedly see a sharper image with more detail and more room to creatively crop the picture. Noise can also be controlled with post processing software. The more efficient focusing of the K-3 is an additional boon. I haven't tried all of this, but it seems logical. Am I in any way in error here? More MP = more APPARENT noise, because the noise is magnified, in a nutshell, given the identical dimensions of the APSC sensor. Right or wrong? John From what I've read but not tested myself. In practical terms, i.e. making prints at particular sizes, the greater resolution MORE than makes up for the additional noise for superior prints. Where you might notice the extra noise is very large prints, but that's where you notice the extra resolution also (where the 16mp image is getting soft from being too big). So trade-offs all in favor of the K-3.... Last edited by vonBaloney; 01-01-2014 at 11:18 AM.

12-31-2013, 08:59 PM	#203
ElJamoquio Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Posts: 4,873	Originally posted by PALADIN85020 I've been thinking about the noise situation with the K-3, and have some conclusions. Some have stated that they think the K-5 has better noise control. Try this. Take two identical shots, one with the K-3 and one with the K-5, both at ISO 3200. Now - downsize the the much larger K-3 picture with software to the same dimensions as the K-5 shot. What you will do in the process is reduce the noise, because you are making the aberrations smaller. I'm betting that the result will be two nearly identical pictures with the noise essentially equal. The more you upsize a picture, either through the native megapixel count or with software, the more noise will be apparent, so if you expanded the 16 MP size picture of the K-5 to approximate the size of the 24 MP K-3 shot, conversely you will probably see more noise, roughly equivalent a K-3 picture, but with an attendant loss of IQ in the process. Although more noise would probably be apparent with the K-3 at 24 MP vs, the 16 MP of the K-5, you will undoubtedly see a sharper image with more detail and more room to creatively crop the picture. Noise can also be controlled with post processing software. The more efficient focusing of the K-3 is an additional boon. I haven't tried all of this, but it seems logical. Am I in any way in error here? More MP = more APPARENT noise, because the noise is magnified, in a nutshell, given the identical dimensions of the APSC sensor. Right or wrong? John You're correct. FYI, DXOmark takes the 'extra' megapixels into account in their (standard) plots/comparisons.

01-01-2014, 02:02 AM	#204
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	Originally posted by PALADIN85020 Right or wrong? Just another confirmation that you are right in both your thought processes and your assumption that after establishing the same magnification the K-3 and K-5 (II) have extremely similar noise performance (as measured by DxOMark).

01-01-2014, 12:22 PM	#205
GlennG Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Houston, Texas Posts: 824	Originally posted by vonBaloney From what I've read but not tested myself. In practical terms, i.e. making prints at particular sizes, the greater resolution MORE than makes up for the additional noise for superior prints. Where you might notice the extra noise is very large prints, but that's where you notice the extra resolution also (where the 16mp image is getting soft from being too big). So trade-offs all in favor of the K-3.... I agree with this. I also have not done tests, but this is my firm conclusion from my extensive reading and looking at results and tests on imaging resource.

05-23-2014, 01:26 AM	#206
Transit Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Whanganui NZ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,624	was there ever an answer to this poll ? read a few pages of certainty it was one or the other

05-23-2014, 01:34 AM	#207
mactrash Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: China Posts: 117	1 - k3

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-23-2014, 01:37 AM	#208
disco_owner Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: Sydney Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,629	K5IIs #1 K3 #2

05-23-2014, 04:06 AM	#209
Transit Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Whanganui NZ Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 4,624	I rest my case

08-09-2014, 11:52 PM	#210
adwb Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2009 Location: Bristol UK Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,636	So which image is which the poll is closed and no posted answer?