Blind test: K-3 vs K-5 IIs

awaldram · 11-04-2013, 05:23 AM

Originally posted by Col

All comparison threads eventually degrade into APSc v's FF. This is independent of the initial test subject.

I did not see a hose featured in either the first two images.

You need a higher resolution monitor you can clearly see it by the boat on the grass, Obviously you can't see this in the k5iis images due to resolution deficiencies

**Catscradle** · 11-04-2013, 05:26 AM

I found them almost identical, but maybe I don't have a good eye. I zoomed in pretty close and didn't see a lot of difference. File 1 I thought was less saturated which is a look I like better.
When will the results be revealed?

jaad75 · 11-04-2013, 05:40 AM

Originally posted by Catscradle

When will the results be revealed?

They've been revealed many times in this thread.

**reytor** · 11-04-2013, 05:44 AM

File #2 is from K-3
(based on better detail on the car behind the bushes).

awaldram · 11-04-2013, 05:52 AM

Originally posted by reytor

File #2 is from K-3
(based on better detail on the car behind the bushes).

That's it my K3 is going back

or maybe I just need a better monitor

Class A · 11-04-2013, 06:00 AM

There is one thing that this test shows in no uncertain terms: There is moiré galore from both cameras!

So much for the standard statement "In practice there is never any moiré on a K-5 IIs"...

Even the 24MP K-3 (predictably) creates a colour moiré festival.
All it takes is a scene with sufficient detail and a steady shot.

bossa · 11-04-2013, 06:10 AM

Originally posted by Col

All comparison threads eventually degrade into APSc v's FF. This is independent of the initial test subject.

I did not see a hose featured in either the first two images.

Scaling the K-3 down to K-5 territory, effectively throwing away 8 million pixels, isn't a fair comparison. When I posted my "hose" shots, I was merely pointing out that a D800E can also look close to a K-5 depending on how you process things. There's no doubt that the original K-3 shot would have been very obvious had it's output not been handicapped after being reduced by 8 million pixels.

You can't judge something by what it's not but you can get some perspective.

bossa · 11-04-2013, 06:15 AM

Originally posted by bedo

well now there seems to be teeny weeny more detail in Nikon picture. But that's only fair to those lugging bigger cameras around. As they say "no pain, no gain!"

Did you click on the pictures to see them at full resolution on Flickr? There's quite a large difference in the output but you need to see it properly. Remember these side-by-side shots are only screen grabs but the viewing medium and resolution does make a difference as well.

bedo · 11-04-2013, 06:18 AM

Originally posted by Class A

There is one thing that this test shows in no uncertain terms: There is moiré galore from both cameras!

So much for the standard statement "In practice there is never any moiré on a K-5 IIs"...

Even the 24MP K-3 (predictably) creates a colour moiré festival.
All it takes is a scene with sufficient detail and a steady shot.

on a more positive note:
1. K-3 does have a "moiré tamer"
2. DA35Ltd is a great performer as it outresolved 24MP sensor just fine (happy to own one

)

jaad75 · 11-04-2013, 06:21 AM

Originally posted by Class A

So much for the standard statement "In practice there is never any moiré on a K-5 IIs"...

So what? It's pretty easy to remove. I've done some commercial architectural shoots lately and finally got some moire on real pictures - all easy removable in Lightroom. Definitely detail was more than worth it.

bedo · 11-04-2013, 06:23 AM

Originally posted by bossa

Did you click on the pictures to see them at full resolution on Flickr? There's quite a large difference in the output but you need to see it properly. And remember these side-by-side shots are only screen grabs but they seem to work well for this purpose. Obviously the viewing medium/resolution does make a difference as well.

I hear you, bossa, and sure, your arguments are valid. It's just personally I have no need for more than, say, 12 quality megapixels or so, even 16MP is an overkill for my purposes. Please take my replies with a grain of salt or two.

derekkite · 11-04-2013, 07:34 AM

File one is K3.

My pixel is better than yours even if it is smaller.

lightbulb · 11-04-2013, 08:14 AM

You guys missed Adam point. The difference is too little if any to qualify the upgrade. My money is safe; )

kh1234567890 · 11-04-2013, 08:48 AM - **2 Likes**

Originally posted by Class A

There is one thing that this test shows in no uncertain terms: There is moiré galore from both cameras!

So much for the standard statement "In practice there is never any moiré on a K-5 IIs"...

Even the 24MP K-3 (predictably) creates a colour moiré festival.
All it takes is a scene with sufficient detail and a steady shot.

That is heresy. It says on the Internet that you don't need this anti-alicing filter 'cause it is only put there by the manufacturers as a conspiracy to make your pictures less sharp. So it must be true. And a bit of psychedelic colour on distant water ripples looks really cool.

**monochrome** · 11-04-2013, 08:50 AM

I voted chopice #1 - File 1 is K-3. I have no real technical idea why I made that conclusion since I viewed both images on a cheap 10-year-old 19" HP flat monitor at work and I have no photo tools here. After flipping back and forth magnified on the house in the distance I just thought, "Second image looks like a K5IIs image." I think it was the saturation. Based on the spoiler post I guess I guessed right.

Pay up for the new features or save money for (that which shall not be named) coming next Christmas.

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

11-04-2013, 06:15 AM	#113
bossa Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Adelaide Posts: 4,546	Originally posted by bedo well now there seems to be teeny weeny more detail in Nikon picture. But that's only fair to those lugging bigger cameras around. As they say "no pain, no gain!" Did you click on the pictures to see them at full resolution on Flickr? There's quite a large difference in the output but you need to see it properly. Remember these side-by-side shots are only screen grabs but the viewing medium and resolution does make a difference as well. Last edited by bossa; 11-04-2013 at 06:21 AM.

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

11-04-2013, 05:23 AM	#106
awaldram Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Hampshire Photos: Gallery Posts: 732	Originally posted by Col All comparison threads eventually degrade into APSc v's FF. This is independent of the initial test subject. I did not see a hose featured in either the first two images. You need a higher resolution monitor you can clearly see it by the boat on the grass, Obviously you can't see this in the k5iis images due to resolution deficiencies

11-04-2013, 05:26 AM	#107
Catscradle Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2013 Location: Weymouth, MA Photos: Gallery Posts: 220	I found them almost identical, but maybe I don't have a good eye. I zoomed in pretty close and didn't see a lot of difference. File 1 I thought was less saturated which is a look I like better. When will the results be revealed?

11-04-2013, 05:40 AM	#108
jaad75 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Cracow Posts: 457	Originally posted by Catscradle When will the results be revealed? They've been revealed many times in this thread.

11-04-2013, 05:44 AM	#109
reytor Site Supporter Join Date: Aug 2009 Location: Santiago Photos: Gallery Posts: 220	File #2 is from K-3 (based on better detail on the car behind the bushes).

11-04-2013, 05:52 AM	#110
awaldram Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Hampshire Photos: Gallery Posts: 732	Originally posted by reytor File #2 is from K-3 (based on better detail on the car behind the bushes). That's it my K3 is going back or maybe I just need a better monitor

11-04-2013, 06:00 AM	#111
Class A Pentaxian Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Wellington, New Zealand Posts: 11,251	There is one thing that this test shows in no uncertain terms: There is moiré galore from both cameras! So much for the standard statement "In practice there is never any moiré on a K-5 IIs"... Even the 24MP K-3 (predictably) creates a colour moiré festival. All it takes is a scene with sufficient detail and a steady shot.

11-04-2013, 06:10 AM	#112
bossa Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2011 Location: Adelaide Posts: 4,546	Originally posted by Col All comparison threads eventually degrade into APSc v's FF. This is independent of the initial test subject. I did not see a hose featured in either the first two images. Scaling the K-3 down to K-5 territory, effectively throwing away 8 million pixels, isn't a fair comparison. When I posted my "hose" shots, I was merely pointing out that a D800E can also look close to a K-5 depending on how you process things. There's no doubt that the original K-3 shot would have been very obvious had it's output not been handicapped after being reduced by 8 million pixels. You can't judge something by what it's not but you can get some perspective.

11-04-2013, 06:18 AM	#114
bedo New Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Posts: 20	Originally posted by Class A There is one thing that this test shows in no uncertain terms: There is moiré galore from both cameras! So much for the standard statement "In practice there is never any moiré on a K-5 IIs"... Even the 24MP K-3 (predictably) creates a colour moiré festival. All it takes is a scene with sufficient detail and a steady shot. on a more positive note: 1. K-3 does have a "moiré tamer" 2. DA35Ltd is a great performer as it outresolved 24MP sensor just fine (happy to own one )

11-04-2013, 06:21 AM	#115
jaad75 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Cracow Posts: 457	Originally posted by Class A So much for the standard statement "In practice there is never any moiré on a K-5 IIs"... So what? It's pretty easy to remove. I've done some commercial architectural shoots lately and finally got some moire on real pictures - all easy removable in Lightroom. Definitely detail was more than worth it.

11-04-2013, 06:23 AM	#116
bedo New Member Join Date: Feb 2013 Posts: 20	Originally posted by bossa Did you click on the pictures to see them at full resolution on Flickr? There's quite a large difference in the output but you need to see it properly. And remember these side-by-side shots are only screen grabs but they seem to work well for this purpose. Obviously the viewing medium/resolution does make a difference as well. I hear you, bossa, and sure, your arguments are valid. It's just personally I have no need for more than, say, 12 quality megapixels or so, even 16MP is an overkill for my purposes. Please take my replies with a grain of salt or two.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

11-04-2013, 07:34 AM	#117
derekkite Pentaxian Join Date: Sep 2011 Location: Nelson B.C. Posts: 3,782	File one is K3. My pixel is better than yours even if it is smaller.

11-04-2013, 08:14 AM	#118
lightbulb Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 691	You guys missed Adam point. The difference is too little if any to qualify the upgrade. My money is safe; )

11-04-2013, 08:48 AM - 2 Likes	#119
kh1234567890 Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Manchester, UK Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,653	Originally posted by Class A There is one thing that this test shows in no uncertain terms: There is moiré galore from both cameras! So much for the standard statement "In practice there is never any moiré on a K-5 IIs"... Even the 24MP K-3 (predictably) creates a colour moiré festival. All it takes is a scene with sufficient detail and a steady shot. That is heresy. It says on the Internet that you don't need this anti-alicing filter 'cause it is only put there by the manufacturers as a conspiracy to make your pictures less sharp. So it must be true. And a bit of psychedelic colour on distant water ripples looks really cool.

11-04-2013, 08:50 AM	#120
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	I voted chopice #1 - File 1 is K-3. I have no real technical idea why I made that conclusion since I viewed both images on a cheap 10-year-old 19" HP flat monitor at work and I have no photo tools here. After flipping back and forth magnified on the house in the distance I just thought, "Second image looks like a K5IIs image." I think it was the saturation. Based on the spoiler post I guess I guessed right. Pay up for the new features or save money for (that which shall not be named) coming next Christmas.