[jpzk]

Be careful about this, because this can come into play if you're taking pictures of people because their clothing can sometimes cause moire patterning.



The rumors state that the new AF system in the K-5 II will be more sensitive for better low-light performance, and that there will be an f/2.8 high-precision point.

--DragonLord

@ DragonLord: What exactly does this imply? Sorry, again I am no techie wiz !

JP

[jpzk]

If it were me, on a 16 MP camera, I'd be a bit hesistant. I'd probably still want to remove it. I'm not into fashion photography, though.

On a 24 MP camera I'd definitely want to remove it.

If Pentax ever decides to produce a 24 MP sensor camera, you would then opt for NOT having the AA filter? Wouldn't the Moiré pattern still be visible in some cases though?

Basically, without the filter its sharper, but can have some other problems in certain situations. From what I've heard, not all K-5II will be without filter, there will be a separate version, the K-5IIs that will be without filter. So it will be up to you to decide.
The main difference between the old and new K-5 will be the AF system, but possibly other things (we should wait for official specs and maybe reviews). Will it warrant an upgrade from a K-5? Not necessarily, depends on your usage, your experience with the current camera, and your budget

I had no idea that this could actually impact the AF performance. Is this what you are saying?

Thanks!

JP

[JinDesu]

If Pentax ever decides to produce a 24 MP sensor camera, you would then opt for NOT having the AA filter? Wouldn't the Moiré pattern still be visible in some cases though?



I had no idea that this could actually impact the AF performance. Is this what you are saying?

Thanks!

JP

I think the concept is that the smaller the pixels, the more effect an antialiasing filter will have on the details rendered by those pixels. So if you are going to cram pixels onto a sensor, might as well make sure it's as sharp as possible.

The AA filter does not affect AF. AF sensors are in a different location. I believe he is referring to the upgraded AF of the k-5ii being a factor in buying it.

[HSV]

I have modified a few bridge cameras by removing the AA and hot mirror...apart from changing exposure (and IR contamination), there's a significant difference in sharpness when shooting trees and nature stuff. I haven't found any specific need to post process for Moire...just your typical levels, curves, etc.

It would be nice if the K-5 II came without hot mirror...now were talking about a serious camera (like the IS Pro UVIR)!

I really don't care about FF. Full spectrum is a lot more useful than FF.

[jpzk]

A fair portion of my work is "dealing somewhat" in fashion photography - and working directly with some of the leaders in that field; in places like NYC, Paris, Milan, etc... I'm presently negotiating a deal with Buckle - and also already do contract work with eleven other clothing type lines.

I would even be willing to risk being an early adopter of the newer version of the K-5 -and then even use it in items like the above mentioned fashion pics; and even as a type of back-up camera for weddings, main line camera for senior portraits, even portfolios.

I've had very little need to actually "edit out" the effects of not having the AA. Although also noting it is not a complicated procedure under CSxx (whatever the version is - either or without plug-ins). But I also do not remember off hand IF the feature to edit such is actually included (or bundled) with items like the included SilkyPics (even as an option) or also if it's available on items like less costly versions of CSxx.

To conclude with my perspective... Yes I'll be upgrading - mostly because my budget would allow it. But I'll also be keeping the current K-5 as well. The only literal consideration is IF someone does have the post-processing that allows the AA to be adapted for. Btw, I also know a number of pro's who rarely even touch digital post-processing; even so far as having someone do it for them if that need ever comes about

Thanks for the input, MFP!

Of course, you seem to work with a totally different "breed" of subjects than I do.

As mentioned earlier, I do mostly wildlife stuff, using telephoto lenses. (birds, wild animals and occasional scenery).
Seldom do I dwelve into portrait unless it is to get some "souvenirs" of family events.

So, back to the AA filter business: if Moiré pattern shows on one's shots, you are saying that it can be taken care off with PP, suggestively in CSxx (Photoshop). This would seem to be an easy way to fix the pattern. I have yet to check if this is available in my CS5.
What I do wonder is: would Moiré show in a bird's details, for instance? The feathers being a real trick of nature as far as complexity is concerned. I am talking about real close ups of the bird when one can observe fine details ... not so of course when taken far away.

JP

[jpzk]

It's funny how they really try to convince the buyer to not get a D800E.

That was a good read about the Moiré pattern and the AA filter thing.

However, in spite of being one heck of a camera, I have held one (D800 ... I think it was the "E" type) in my hands just this past weekend (friend here who does studio work) and woah! ... this thing is huge!

JP

[jpzk]

I think the concept is that the smaller the pixels, the more effect an antialiasing filter will have on the details rendered by those pixels. So if you are going to cram pixels onto a sensor, might as well make sure it's as sharp as possible.

The AA filter does not affect AF. AF sensors are in a different location. I believe he is referring to the upgraded AF of the k-5ii being a factor in buying it.

Got that, and thanks for the info.

JP

[jpzk]

I have modified a few bridge cameras by removing the AA and hot mirror...apart from changing exposure (and IR contamination), there's a significant difference in sharpness when shooting trees and nature stuff. I haven't found any specific need to post process for Moire...just your typical levels, curves, etc.

It would be nice if the K-5 II came without hot mirror...now were talking about a serious camera (like the IS Pro UVIR)!

I really don't care about FF. Full spectrum is a lot more useful than FF.

Weird you are saying that the fact of removing the AA makes a significant difference in sharpness while when I read about the difference bewtween the D800 vs. the D800E ... they show and say :"slight difference".
But that could be a whole different story when you deal with bridge cameras.

JP

[ElJamoquio]

If Pentax ever decides to produce a 24 MP sensor camera, you would then opt for NOT having the AA filter? Wouldn't the Moiré pattern still be visible in some cases though?

Yes and yes. It's just that it would be a problem so rarely that I don't think I'd ever run into it.

[jpzk]

Yes and yes. It's just that it would be a problem so rarely that I don't think I'd ever run into it.

Good to know, at least to get some insight as to what to expect with/without the AA filters.

Cheers.

JP

[HSV]

Weird you are saying that the fact of removing the AA makes a significant difference in sharpness while when I read about the difference bewtween the D800 vs. the D800E ... they show and say :"slight difference".
But that could be a whole different story when you deal with bridge cameras.

JP

Probably has to do with the quality/specs of the AA filter and the sensor's pitch (size/resolution)...not to mention the camera and lens. To give you an idea, the last bridge that I modified was a Fuji s6500fd, has a tiny tiny 6.3 mp sensor.

According to theory, the more resolution the sensor is (with a corresponding higher frequency AA filter)...the less is going to be the effect to having or not the AA filter.

[GDRoth]

Ok, here's the dumbest question of the day. I have a current K5 and want to buy one of the new ones and keep my K5.

To cover all eventualities, which should I get: with or without AA?

[HSV]

I would buy without the AA!

If you're brave enough, remove the AA yourself and save 100 bucks.

[jpzk]

Ok, here's the dumbest question of the day. I have a current K5 and want to buy one of the new ones and keep my K5.

To cover all eventualities, which should I get: with or without AA?

Hey GD !!

Funny you asked this question as I was wondering what I will do with my K7 while I will of course keep my K5 for quite a while.
(As a side note: I have decided to get the Sony RX100 as a "compact" camera).

And for the AA filter business, and the way I understand it, because of the slight difference "only" in sharpness - some may claim more than "slight" - I would wager on the K5 II.
But that's MY opinion ... for what it's worth!
Edit: HSV just posted the opposite of "my opinon" ...

Cheers.

JP

[GDRoth]

Hi JP,
I still love my Fuji X100, but now drilling down learning more and more about the K5...........the K5 is a fine camera and now I want another body..........maybe even sell the X100............the K5 with either the 15mm LTD or 35mm LTD is a pretty small package that delivers again and again....congrats on deciding on the Sony
Dave

Hey GD !!

Funny you asked this question as I was wondering what I will do with my K7 while I will of course keep my K5 for quite a while.
(As a side note: I have decided to get the Sony RX100 as a "compact" camera).

And for the AA filter business, and the way I understand it, because of the slight difference "only" in sharpness - some may claim more than "slight" - I would wager on the K5 II.
But that's MY opinion ... for what it's worth!

Cheers.

JP