Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-21-2019, 02:48 AM   #46
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Lancaster
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,292
QuoteOriginally posted by psoo Quote
I'd like to thank everybody for your invaluable advice. I'm still mulling some of your comments.I think that the current K50 and lenses that I have are generally very adequate for my personal needs.. If can improve my skills that will also help in my goal for improved image quality. I have decided that a good plan for me is to not rush into purchasing a new camera but to wait a while to see if the cost of a KP will drop. At that time I will buy one. Thanks again.
Good plan. In the meanwhile have a look at used limited lenses. There are some bargains out there and those lenses are stellar

12-21-2019, 04:59 AM - 1 Like   #47
dlh
F.O.G. (fat old geezer)
Loyal Site Supporter
dlh's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Northern Piedmont of Virginia
Posts: 1,447
I think the k-50's a great camera. I recently gave mine to one of my "kids" (all of whom are now taller than I am), when I "upgraded" to a KP. The KP is a great improvement, but I'd be reluctant to ditch a working k-50.
12-21-2019, 07:28 AM - 1 Like   #48
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 384
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by dlh Quote
I think the k-50's a great camera. I recently gave mine to one of my "kids" (all of whom are now taller than I am), when I "upgraded" to a KP. The KP is a great improvement, but I'd be reluctant to ditch a working k-50.
Hi Dlh, I love my K50 (and Kx) also. They are great no nonsense cameras capable of great shots in skilled hands. I'm a camera collector so I won't willingly sell my K50 when I upgrade to a KP.
12-22-2019, 01:59 AM   #49
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Lancaster
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,292
I would have kept my K30 if I could, and my Olympus stylus 1s but the KP deal was too good. Selling was the right thing to do, the KP has supplanted everything, but I do miss them

12-28-2019, 02:46 PM   #50
Senior Member
-JW-'s Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Eindhoven
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 133
Like others said, if you want a serious upgrade, skip the K5 and look for K3/Kp/K70.
What lenses are you using? A higher resolution sensor won't help you if the lenses can't match it.
12-28-2019, 03:41 PM   #51
dbs
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Clare Valley S A
Photos: Albums
Posts: 4,163
Your camera is fine, your lenses are fine..but..hand holding well ....a tripod...and a good one..yes your current upgrade budget for one.
I didn't and any wind I may aswell use a fence post or something.. Theres plenty of good advice here for that

Dave
01-10-2020, 04:33 AM - 1 Like   #52
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 384
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by luftfluss Quote
Yes, but the caveat is you need to use good technique to ensure you are getting maximum sharpness. For example, with my K-5 II, I could usually be not careful about my technique and get sharp photos @ 400mm with a shutter speed of 1/500s. But when I upgraded to my K-3 II, I found I needed either increase my shutter to 1/750s, or be more mindful and deliberate when shooting at a slower speed.

For me, I found going from the K-5 II's 16MP w/AA filter to the K-3 II's filterless 24MP a bit of a revelation in resolving power.
Hi Luftfluss, I just re-read your comment to my post. Can you explain the difference between lens "resolving power" and "sharpness". Aren't they the same thing. For example, if I took a photo of, say, a hair with my usual camera and lens and it looked "sharp" I might be happy with the result. However, if I changed the lens to a super-dooper expensivel lens and took another shot I could find that the image showed two hairs almost stuck together. The lens had greater resolving power and gave a "sharper" image. Aren't sharpness and resolving power the same, or am I just splitting hairs?
01-10-2020, 04:41 AM   #53
dlh
F.O.G. (fat old geezer)
Loyal Site Supporter
dlh's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Northern Piedmont of Virginia
Posts: 1,447
QuoteOriginally posted by stevebrot Quote
As noted above, more megapickles will provide greater challenge to your technique than anything else. ...
I wonder if B&H, located in Manhattan, operates a deli. That must be where you get them megapickles, right?

01-10-2020, 07:54 AM - 1 Like   #54
Pentaxian
swanlefitte's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: New Orleans
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,708
QuoteOriginally posted by psoo Quote
Aren't sharpness and resolving power the same, or am I just splitting hairs?
I see what you did there. 😂
But here is from a recent write up at lensrentals.
"However, even among these really good lenses, you canít assume how a lens will perform at ultra-high resolutions based on its results at normal resolutions."
Lens Rentals | Blog
01-10-2020, 10:14 AM - 1 Like   #55
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
luftfluss's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NJ
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 6,804
QuoteOriginally posted by psoo Quote
Hi Luftfluss, I just re-read your comment to my post. Can you explain the difference between lens "resolving power" and "sharpness". Aren't they the same thing. For example, if I took a photo of, say, a hair with my usual camera and lens and it looked "sharp" I might be happy with the result. However, if I changed the lens to a super-dooper expensivel lens and took another shot I could find that the image showed two hairs almost stuck together. The lens had greater resolving power and gave a "sharper" image. Aren't sharpness and resolving power the same, or am I just splitting hairs?
Sometimes I feel like being very careful with how I phrase things...

I shoot with a mix of both modern "digital" lenses and legacy glass, and while the newer lenses often at first glance appear "sharper" - that is, having more crisply defined and apparent detail - when I more closely scrutinize similar photos made with a modern lens and an old lens, sometimes I find they resolve about the same amount of detail, but the older lens is less "in your face" about it.

Edit: I think I found my post that you are referring to, where I compared the K-3 II and K-5 II in terms of resolving power. "Resolving power" - the amount of detail that is resolved in an image - is a function of both the lens and the camera's sensor, while "sharpness" is an attribute I ascribe primarily to a lens. If you photograph a scene that contains much detail - like a leafy landscape - and you attach a great lens to a 16MP camera and the same lens to a 24MP camera, the resultant photos would appear to be similarly "sharp", but the photo made with the 24MP camera would contain more detail simply because there are more pixels available to create the image.

I think the link posted by @swanlefitte is a good one.

Last edited by luftfluss; 01-10-2020 at 10:22 AM.
01-10-2020, 11:05 AM   #56
Journeyman Cat Wrangler
Loyal Site Supporter
SSGGeezer's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2017
Location: Maine, U.S.
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,377
As @Mikesbike pointed out, the lack of an Anti-aliasing filter adds sharpness to fine details while increasing the chances of Moire. I love the KP over my original Pentax (K-50) because of the improved dust removal, the lack of AA filter and the battery grip,being my major reasons. The added megapickles do help a bit though.
01-10-2020, 02:45 PM   #57
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 384
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by luftfluss Quote
Sometimes I feel like being very careful with how I phrase things...

I shoot with a mix of both modern "digital" lenses and legacy glass, and while the newer lenses often at first glance appear "sharper" - that is, having more crisply defined and apparent detail - when I more closely scrutinize similar photos made with a modern lens and an old lens, sometimes I find they resolve about the same amount of detail, but the older lens is less "in your face" about it.

Edit: I think I found my post that you are referring to, where I compared the K-3 II and K-5 II in terms of resolving power. "Resolving power" - the amount of detail that is resolved in an image - is a function of both the lens and the camera's sensor, while "sharpness" is an attribute I ascribe primarily to a lens. If you photograph a scene that contains much detail - like a leafy landscape - and you attach a great lens to a 16MP camera and the same lens to a 24MP camera, the resultant photos would appear to be similarly "sharp", but the photo made with the 24MP camera would contain more detail simply because there are more pixels available to create the image.

I think the link posted by @swanlefitte is a good one.
Thanks for the clarification, Luftfluss. Makes sense now.
01-10-2020, 03:10 PM   #58
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2008
Location: London, UK
Posts: 1,089
I certainly found that images from the K-3 to be "sharper", or should I say "more detailed", than those from the K-30 when I did a fairly stringent back-to-back test with my "generation one" Sigma 17-70 (a pretty good lens IMHO) in the garden a couple of years ago.

PS: that test was done with both bodies on the same tripod, focused on the same 1m rule about 10m from the tripod and using Liveview to focus "accurately".

Last edited by jeallen01; 01-10-2020 at 03:17 PM.
01-10-2020, 03:32 PM   #59
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 384
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by luftfluss Quote
Sometimes I feel like being very careful with how I phrase things...

I shoot with a mix of both modern "digital" lenses and legacy glass, and while the newer lenses often at first glance appear "sharper" - that is, having more crisply defined and apparent detail - when I more closely scrutinize similar photos made with a modern lens and an old lens, sometimes I find they resolve about the same amount of detail, but the older lens is less "in your face" about it.

Edit: I think I found my post that you are referring to, where I compared the K-3 II and K-5 II in terms of resolving power. "Resolving power" - the amount of detail that is resolved in an image - is a function of both the lens and the camera's sensor, while "sharpness" is an attribute I ascribe primarily to a lens. If you photograph a scene that contains much detail - like a leafy landscape - and you attach a great lens to a 16MP camera and the same lens to a 24MP camera, the resultant photos would appear to be similarly "sharp", but the photo made with the 24MP camera would contain more detail simply because there are more pixels available to create the image.

I think the link posted by @swanlefitte is a good one.
Thanks Luftfluss for the extra info. Your comment makes me think back to the old days when some of us used 35mm film. We were told that you should use Tri-X which is a fast film but it will give a relatively grainy image because the silver particles in the film are large. To get a more detailed shot use Pan F because of the smaller silver particles. I guess the particle size is analogous to pixel density.
01-11-2020, 07:46 AM   #60
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 384
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by luftfluss Quote
Sometimes I feel like being very careful with how I phrase things...

I shoot with a mix of both modern "digital" lenses and legacy glass, and while the newer lenses often at first glance appear "sharper" - that is, having more crisply defined and apparent detail - when I more closely scrutinize similar photos made with a modern lens and an old lens, sometimes I find they resolve about the same amount of detail, but the older lens is less "in your face" about it.

Edit: I think I found my post that you are referring to, where I compared the K-3 II and K-5 II in terms of resolving power. "Resolving power" - the amount of detail that is resolved in an image - is a function of both the lens and the camera's sensor, while "sharpness" is an attribute I ascribe primarily to a lens. If you photograph a scene that contains much detail - like a leafy landscape - and you attach a great lens to a 16MP camera and the same lens to a 24MP camera, the resultant photos would appear to be similarly "sharp", but the photo made with the 24MP camera would contain more detail simply because there are more pixels available to create the image.

I think the link posted by @swanlefitte is a good one.
Thanks for your comment Luftflusst, I now understand. Let me summarize what you are saying:

1. Great lens + Great sensor/camera + Great technique = Great pictures (Expensive)
2. Great lens + Good sensor/camera + Great technique = Very good pictures (Affordable)
3. Good lens + Great sensor/camera + Great technique = Very good pictures (Affordable)
4. Good lens + Good sensor/camera + Great technique = Good pictures (Very affordable)
5. Poor lens + Poor sensor/camera + Poor technique = Just forget it! (Worthless)
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
aperture, camera, cameras, da, da12-24, detail, dslr, f/4, image, images, k-5iis, k3, k3ii, k50, kp, lens, lenses, m300mm, megapixels, pentax, photography, prices, quality, screen, sensor, sharpness, tamron
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
K50 aperture block failure -> upgrade boraclicks Pentax DSLR Discussion 13 01-03-2018 07:53 AM
Need a Nudge to upgrade from K50 to K70. Thanks for any input1 Setter Dog Pentax K-70 16 09-26-2016 07:25 AM
Do I need to upgrade? dreamfall Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 19 11-09-2011 04:00 PM
After upgrade firmware for K5, Should I need to re-do focus adjustement ?? jacpat Pentax K-5 4 10-18-2011 09:15 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:48 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top