winder, you're reading the jpeg resolutions, so of course when take into the consideration the degradation of the image caused by coding and decoding a jpeg, the K-30 clearly suffers more than the others. In the raw files, which is what you use if you are serious about resolution, the K-30 comes out on top. Although, for me it's a one piece of the puzzle type of thing. I'd really like to know this isn't a typo, before I take it seriously. As I said, previous research indicated the base resolution of a k-5 was about 2100 lw/ph and with the best lens I've seen it rated for it had a lw/ph of 2900, so that would mean the K-30 out performed even the K-5 at it's best.
Also interesting that the Canon 6D can lw/ph over 2800 but not without colour artifacting and moire issues. It's really starting to look like a bit of a dud photographically.
I believe DPR tests with a 70 mm, lens which puts APS-c at a disadvantage in that they are shooting from further away. And as everyone knows, "if you don't like your pictures, get closer." IN many cases, light diffraction in the atmosphere over distance degrades images more than different lens characteristics. The closer you are, the better in terms of reproducing resolution.
ANother shocking note, talking about the D800 (not the E)
Quote: We should note, however, that we had to work quite hard to get this amount of resolution. We used flash to eliminate any risk of blurring due to vibration, we focus-bracketed in extremely fine increments, and we used an excellent lens (the Nikkor AF-S 50mm f/1.4 G) at an aperture optimal for central sharpness of F4.5. Even with the inevitable softening that results from using an anti-aliasing filter, this methodology allowed us to tease resolution out of the camera as high as 3200 LPH, which, for practical purposes is about the maximum we'd have expected to see.
(
Nikon D800 Review: Digital Photography Review )
WIth the anti-aliasing filter on, again based on these highly suspect numbers, the D800 produces only marginally better resolution than the K-30.
Compare this to the 800e
Quote: As you can see in the samples above, the resolution performance of the D800E is truly impressive. Individual lines can be distinguished nearer to our chart's 4000 LPH limit than with any other 35mm format DSLR we've yet tested in our studio. However this is accompanied by more-obvious false colour than we saw with the D800, especially in Raw - an inevitable side-effect of cancelling the anti-aliasing filter.
It would seem (again with the warning that I'm very suspicious of these numbers), that you can't get much better than a K-30 without false colour. It's disappointing IR doesn't have the tests for the K-5 II and K-5 IIs available, in fact i can't even find the test of the K-5 at this point.
If anyone else can find a K-5 review, I looked here.... I know I've seen it before. I tmust be on a part of the site I can't figure out how to access.
Here's where I'm looking.
Camera Reviews / Previews: Digital Photography Review