going to buy a used K10D, because ... , is it a good decision ?

highyellow1 · 02-28-2012, 07:54 PM

Not to hijack but if you're interested I have one available.

kamisu · 02-28-2012, 09:10 PM

Thanks everyone for replies.

Sterretje, thanks for the link, it is really sharp (the eyes) on my screen and it is what I like to see from photos taken by K5.
Almost all imaged that I checked from flickr, were with the same size but I could seldom find such focus and sharpness.

Marc, I agree, and as I mentioned, I think instead ofsharpness, I should have mentioned “in focus”. The photo that Sterretje uploaded, has small DOF
but it is sharp (in focus) at least at some region, the eyes. Honestly I can not see such focus in most K5 macro photos that I checked from flickr.

VonBaloney, I download large sizes of images and then check them. It is a good point you mentioned about S95, yes, most of images are sharp (in focus) on my screen. I do not understand what is the relation between having good results on screen and the education that you mentioned. Of course education is helpful, but I do not think everyone prints all images that they take and nothing is wrong with having good results on screen.

Since this will be my first dslr, I have no bias toward any brand, but personally I prefer Pentax and Sony, since I think in body stabilizer is a plus. It looks that the same sony sensor is used in A580, D7000 and K5 and because of this, I have checked lots of reviews and photos for all. I do not know if something is wrong with files that I download or something else, but most close up (macro or high zoom) photos from a580 have better focus than those from K5 on my screen. Most of such photos from K5, look without any point of focus on my screen, while the landscape or portrait ones, which are not close up, look "very sharp and focused".

K5 is the one that I like the most, but I want to be sure I will not regret buying it in future. I have read many reviews regarding problems with focus in K5, here and in other forums.

On the other hand, I have read about the back focusing issue for all the three cameras which have the same sensor. Is it possible that this issue is from the sensor?

Thanks.

Philoslothical · 02-28-2012, 09:27 PM

If you're just looking at random photos on Flickr to base your opinions on, that could be a problem in itself. There is a vast range of quality on there, and people ranging from really terrible with their camera to semi-pro photographers. Could you link us to some of these soft K-5 images that you are concerned are representative of the camera?

vonBaloney · 02-28-2012, 09:30 PM

Originally posted by kamisu

I do not understand what is the relation between having good results on screen and the education that you mentioned. Of course education is helpful, but I do not think everyone prints all images that they take and nothing is wrong with having good results on screen.

What I am saying is that if you can't find pictures that are "in focus" out of any DSLRs, well that is plainly just nuts, so something is wrong with what you are doing or what you are looking at, and you need to figure that out before you go buying or not buying something on frankly crazy assumptions about the quality of the cameras, because I absolutely guarantee they can all produce sharp, in-focus images!

noblepa · 02-28-2012, 10:10 PM

Originally posted by kamisu

Thansk for the replies. As I mentioned the only reason I thought K10D can be better, is image sharpness on my screen. I have read that changing image size in camera, only changes the size of JPEG and
RAW file is still of the same size and will not affect sharpness on screen.

So regarding scaling photos to the screen resolution, is it something that can be done by softwares or using in camera settings?

Thanks.

Yes, the RAW file is always the full resolution from the sensor.

As for displaying the image on a screen, the K10D's images are 3872 x 2592 pixels. There are very few computer monitors with that kind of resolution. The old standard of 1024 x 768 screen pixels is less than 1MP. Even new, flat screen monitors can not normally display a 10MP image without downsizing. A few, high-end (expensive) monitors have max resolution on the order of 2560 x 1600 pixels, which is about 4MP.

So, virtually any full-resolution image from any good digital camera made in the last seven or eight years, will exceed the resolution of your monitor and will need to be downsized to display the entire image on the screen without resorting to scrolling.

And, yes, just about any decent photo viewing or editting software will have the option of automatically resizing the image to fit onto the screen. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen any software that couldn't do it. This is one of the most basic functions in photo software.

BTW, I am the proud owner of a K10D. I love it. Others have pointed out its limitations, but for me, those limitations have not been a problem. I have gotten good results from ISO 800, but I do prefer to stay at 400 or below. I couldn't care less about video; I don't miss live-view; AF is fast enough for me (I don't do sports photography).

kamisu · 02-28-2012, 10:21 PM

Philoslothical, good idea, since all of you are much better than me in photography, you can tell me if these pictures are really not focused well or something else. In each case I check the larger versions of files:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/41550103@N02/5920311176/

Red on Yellow | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Heart leaf - Cuor di foglia | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Leaf Studies (3).jpg | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Pentax 55-300mm Test #1 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Boris#1 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

2011_07_28_Session Macro_1 | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

White Flower | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

I think almost all of above photos are not in good focus. Do you agree ?

In my eyes, the followinga have better focus:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/craigjewell/401913046/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/lilcrabbygal/2269035624/

macros [28 apr 2011] | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Raindrops at Last | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

The Year of the Tree Frog? | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

I do not mean to compare different cameras, just wanted to say what do sharpness or focus mean to me, and know your opinion about it. I know that all sites say K5 is the best aps-c dslr, and I was about to order one, but then reading almost a lot of reviews regarding back focusing, sending back cameras, etc, made me worry about the focus issue.

One more question, regarding the back focusing in low light (and some say even in good light) in k5, is it only when phase detect is used, or in contrast detect using the live view it still exists? Thanks.

**TER-OR** · 02-29-2012, 07:24 AM

I shoot a K5 with an FA100mm macro. I'm in the yard or field trying to get good images of moving insects on breezy days. Are these images going to be the same as an inanimate object in the studio with diffused lighting? No, I'm not using a stage microscope, I'm using a hand-held camera - trying to balance ISO, shutter speed and aperture (shutter speed and aperture are priorities). It really depends on what you're going to do with the camera. I'm more of a documentarian - trying to identify species and contribute to the knowledge base. I'm also trying to get some great images, but sometimes you settle for what the day gives you. It's tricky - sometimes the whole subject isn't in the DOF.

There's a big difference between fast-moving bumblebees like the rare B. Affinis:

...and a big, slow-moving carpenter bee:

..and sometimes the images work better:

Last edited by TER-OR; 02-29-2012 at 07:31 AM.

**fs999** · 03-24-2012, 01:34 PM

Originally posted by kamisu

Philoslothical, good idea, since all of you are much better than me in photography, you can tell me if these pictures are really not focused well or something else. In each case I check the larger versions of files:

Red on Yellow | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

I do not mean to compare different cameras, just wanted to say what do sharpness or focus mean to me, and know your opinion about it. I know that all sites say K5 is the best aps-c dslr, and I was about to order one, but then reading almost a lot of reviews regarding back focusing, sending back cameras, etc, made me worry about the focus issue.

One more question, regarding the back focusing in low light (and some say even in good light) in k5, is it only when phase detect is used, or in contrast detect using the live view it still exists? Thanks.

My photo is not bad focused. It was not the purpose of this photo to have all the leaf focused, but only the bokeh and the flare.
So it is not an good example for your misjudgement of the K-5. 99% of my photos are correct focused.

ihemiola · 03-28-2012, 06:55 PM

Originally posted by TER-OR

I have both K10 and K5 and the difference is dramatic.

Great, good to hear this from you and Andy! Thanks for this thread and some comparisons. And for where I live, I think I really need to move to WR equipment (and glass). I haven't done my taxes yet but this takes priority

02-28-2012, 09:10 PM	#17
kamisu Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Iowa Posts: 130 Original Poster	Thanks everyone for replies. Sterretje, thanks for the link, it is really sharp (the eyes) on my screen and it is what I like to see from photos taken by K5. Almost all imaged that I checked from flickr, were with the same size but I could seldom find such focus and sharpness. Marc, I agree, and as I mentioned, I think instead ofsharpness, I should have mentioned “in focus”. The photo that Sterretje uploaded, has small DOF but it is sharp (in focus) at least at some region, the eyes. Honestly I can not see such focus in most K5 macro photos that I checked from flickr. VonBaloney, I download large sizes of images and then check them. It is a good point you mentioned about S95, yes, most of images are sharp (in focus) on my screen. I do not understand what is the relation between having good results on screen and the education that you mentioned. Of course education is helpful, but I do not think everyone prints all images that they take and nothing is wrong with having good results on screen. Since this will be my first dslr, I have no bias toward any brand, but personally I prefer Pentax and Sony, since I think in body stabilizer is a plus. It looks that the same sony sensor is used in A580, D7000 and K5 and because of this, I have checked lots of reviews and photos for all. I do not know if something is wrong with files that I download or something else, but most close up (macro or high zoom) photos from a580 have better focus than those from K5 on my screen. Most of such photos from K5, look without any point of focus on my screen, while the landscape or portrait ones, which are not close up, look "very sharp and focused". K5 is the one that I like the most, but I want to be sure I will not regret buying it in future. I have read many reviews regarding problems with focus in K5, here and in other forums. On the other hand, I have read about the back focusing issue for all the three cameras which have the same sensor. Is it possible that this issue is from the sensor? Thanks. Last edited by kamisu; 02-28-2012 at 09:21 PM.

02-28-2012, 10:21 PM	#21
kamisu Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: Iowa Posts: 130 Original Poster	Philoslothical, good idea, since all of you are much better than me in photography, you can tell me if these pictures are really not focused well or something else. In each case I check the larger versions of files: http://www.flickr.com/photos/41550103@N02/5920311176/ Red on Yellow \| Flickr - Photo Sharing! Heart leaf - Cuor di foglia \| Flickr - Photo Sharing! Leaf Studies (3).jpg \| Flickr - Photo Sharing! Pentax 55-300mm Test #1 \| Flickr - Photo Sharing! Boris#1 \| Flickr - Photo Sharing! 2011_07_28_Session Macro_1 \| Flickr - Photo Sharing! White Flower \| Flickr - Photo Sharing! I think almost all of above photos are not in good focus. Do you agree ? In my eyes, the followinga have better focus: http://www.flickr.com/photos/craigjewell/401913046/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/lilcrabbygal/2269035624/ macros [28 apr 2011] \| Flickr - Photo Sharing! Raindrops at Last \| Flickr - Photo Sharing! The Year of the Tree Frog? \| Flickr - Photo Sharing! I do not mean to compare different cameras, just wanted to say what do sharpness or focus mean to me, and know your opinion about it. I know that all sites say K5 is the best aps-c dslr, and I was about to order one, but then reading almost a lot of reviews regarding back focusing, sending back cameras, etc, made me worry about the focus issue. One more question, regarding the back focusing in low light (and some say even in good light) in k5, is it only when phase detect is used, or in contrast detect using the live view it still exists? Thanks. Last edited by kamisu; 02-29-2012 at 12:29 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Good Portrait Lens...need help in decision	twix23919	Pentax SLR Lens Discussion	41	12-16-2010 10:38 AM
Decision: Pentax K10D, K20D, or K7? Pros and cons?	Lulerfly	Pentax DSLR Discussion	32	11-04-2010 09:14 AM
What drives your decision to buy from a vendor	jmdeegan	Photographic Technique	21	08-05-2008 10:10 AM
Good time to buy the K10d?	jmbower	Pentax News and Rumors	7	11-29-2007 02:37 AM
Good place to buy K10D?	epicfish	Pentax DSLR Discussion	19	06-26-2007 08:35 PM

02-28-2012, 07:54 PM	#16
highyellow1 Forum Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 77	Not to hijack but if you're interested I have one available.

02-28-2012, 09:27 PM	#18
Philoslothical Veteran Member Join Date: May 2011 Posts: 1,889	If you're just looking at random photos on Flickr to base your opinions on, that could be a problem in itself. There is a vast range of quality on there, and people ranging from really terrible with their camera to semi-pro photographers. Could you link us to some of these soft K-5 images that you are concerned are representative of the camera?

02-28-2012, 09:30 PM	#19
vonBaloney Pentaxian Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Albuquerque, NM Posts: 6,029	Originally posted by kamisu I do not understand what is the relation between having good results on screen and the education that you mentioned. Of course education is helpful, but I do not think everyone prints all images that they take and nothing is wrong with having good results on screen. What I am saying is that if you can't find pictures that are "in focus" out of any DSLRs, well that is plainly just nuts, so something is wrong with what you are doing or what you are looking at, and you need to figure that out before you go buying or not buying something on frankly crazy assumptions about the quality of the cameras, because I absolutely guarantee they can all produce sharp, in-focus images!

02-28-2012, 10:10 PM	#20
noblepa Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Bay Village, Ohio USA Posts: 1,142	Originally posted by kamisu Thansk for the replies. As I mentioned the only reason I thought K10D can be better, is image sharpness on my screen. I have read that changing image size in camera, only changes the size of JPEG and RAW file is still of the same size and will not affect sharpness on screen. So regarding scaling photos to the screen resolution, is it something that can be done by softwares or using in camera settings? Thanks. Yes, the RAW file is always the full resolution from the sensor. As for displaying the image on a screen, the K10D's images are 3872 x 2592 pixels. There are very few computer monitors with that kind of resolution. The old standard of 1024 x 768 screen pixels is less than 1MP. Even new, flat screen monitors can not normally display a 10MP image without downsizing. A few, high-end (expensive) monitors have max resolution on the order of 2560 x 1600 pixels, which is about 4MP. So, virtually any full-resolution image from any good digital camera made in the last seven or eight years, will exceed the resolution of your monitor and will need to be downsized to display the entire image on the screen without resorting to scrolling. And, yes, just about any decent photo viewing or editting software will have the option of automatically resizing the image to fit onto the screen. In fact, I don't think I've ever seen any software that couldn't do it. This is one of the most basic functions in photo software. BTW, I am the proud owner of a K10D. I love it. Others have pointed out its limitations, but for me, those limitations have not been a problem. I have gotten good results from ISO 800, but I do prefer to stay at 400 or below. I couldn't care less about video; I don't miss live-view; AF is fast enough for me (I don't do sports photography).

02-29-2012, 07:24 AM	#22
TER-OR Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Dundee, IL Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 6,699	I shoot a K5 with an FA100mm macro. I'm in the yard or field trying to get good images of moving insects on breezy days. Are these images going to be the same as an inanimate object in the studio with diffused lighting? No, I'm not using a stage microscope, I'm using a hand-held camera - trying to balance ISO, shutter speed and aperture (shutter speed and aperture are priorities). It really depends on what you're going to do with the camera. I'm more of a documentarian - trying to identify species and contribute to the knowledge base. I'm also trying to get some great images, but sometimes you settle for what the day gives you. It's tricky - sometimes the whole subject isn't in the DOF. There's a big difference between fast-moving bumblebees like the rare B. Affinis: ...and a big, slow-moving carpenter bee: ..and sometimes the images work better: Last edited by TER-OR; 02-29-2012 at 07:31 AM.

03-24-2012, 01:34 PM	#23
fs999 Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Luxembourg Photos: Gallery Posts: 8,646	Originally posted by kamisu Philoslothical, good idea, since all of you are much better than me in photography, you can tell me if these pictures are really not focused well or something else. In each case I check the larger versions of files: Red on Yellow \| Flickr - Photo Sharing! I do not mean to compare different cameras, just wanted to say what do sharpness or focus mean to me, and know your opinion about it. I know that all sites say K5 is the best aps-c dslr, and I was about to order one, but then reading almost a lot of reviews regarding back focusing, sending back cameras, etc, made me worry about the focus issue. One more question, regarding the back focusing in low light (and some say even in good light) in k5, is it only when phase detect is used, or in contrast detect using the live view it still exists? Thanks. My photo is not bad focused. It was not the purpose of this photo to have all the leaf focused, but only the bokeh and the flare. So it is not an good example for your misjudgement of the K-5. 99% of my photos are correct focused.

03-28-2012, 06:55 PM	#24
ihemiola Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Texas Photos: Gallery Posts: 10	Originally posted by TER-OR I have both K10 and K5 and the difference is dramatic. Great, good to hear this from you and Andy! Thanks for this thread and some comparisons. And for where I live, I think I really need to move to WR equipment (and glass). I haven't done my taxes yet but this takes priority