[snake]

It was not ignored since that is preciesly what i'm talking about but you don't seem to understood it that way.

The neutral glass and the weaker AA filters were already availble before the MKII come to the market.
So they could already replace the AA filter with neutral glass 2 years ago, if they actually did that is another question.
But it's well known that simply removing the AA filter does not work so well.

Wow..

[Anvh]

?????

[buris]

Hi
As one who actually have a modified K5, I think it would be appropiate to give some actual info.
First I got my mod made at Maxmax.com and the mod itself cost $550, meaning that the expenses of the conversion is quite substantial, at least compared to the cost of a K5IIs versus a K5II.
For my own part I bought a brand new modified K5 from the company meaning that I do not have the opportunity to compare focus shift before/after on this particular camera, but since I also own an unmodified K5 I have been able to make comparisons.
For the modifed K5 (and I admit it might be due to the camera itself) I have experienced quite a bit of back focus which did give some headaches in the beginning, however it wasnt more than could be adjusted using the focus adjust.

Regarding the functionality of the modified camera I would say that it actually works, I haven't experienced any impairment regarding IS or dust removal and, provided that focus is spot on, you will experience an increased resolution compared with a stock K5.

However colour reproduction/white balance will change, the pictures takes on a grenish hue which however is realtively easy to adjust in post - the caveat is that post in this case isn't optional - unless your preference is for the ghoulish/undead look.

For my own part I have bought a K5IIs which might answer any questions about how I look at post myself.





Buris Christiansen

[Clavius]

a. Why would Pentax answer anything about a discontinued camera being modified by aftermarket AA removal services?
b. What does a repair tech a pentax repair facility have anything to do with this, when the AA filter removals were being done by an independent AA removal service?

That depends on how you look at things. Lots (lots!) of K-5 owners felt stabbed in the back when the (in their eyes) finished K-5 finally hit the market in the form of a K-5II and K-5IIs. In their eyes, a free or reduced retrofit kit to get their standard K-5 up to standrads, would only be fair.

[Anvh]

The biggest differnce is not the sensor though but the AF of the mkII, the one in the K5 was simply faulty.

[Clavius]

The biggest differnce is not the sensor though but the AF of the mkII, the one in the K5 was simply faulty.

...Which makes understanding the feelings of the people that I described below even easier. Companies have the habit nowadays on beta-testing firmware on their customers, Pentax did that, but included the hardware-part as wel. A retrofit kit that turns their K-5 in a K-5s would releave that frustration.

Or better / more realistic, a rebate program where K-5 owners can hand in their old K-5 and buy a K-5IIs for a reduced price.

That depends on how you look at things. Lots (lots!) of K-5 owners felt stabbed in the back when the (in their eyes) finished K-5 finally hit the market in the form of a K-5II and K-5IIs. In their eyes, a free or reduced retrofit kit to get their standard K-5 up to standrads, would only be fair.

[Anvh]

I think you need to split two things here, the beta testing and the MKII issue.

K5 was due for an upgrade with the mkII version they simply make the life longer of that name. How much do you think changes are that we will see a K3 this year? The mkII is not the succersor of the K5, just an upgrade it's that simple. Happens in computer land all the time...

Now the beta testing, i actually wished they did that with the firmware since it's getting no where to be honest

[snake]

I really think, stepping back now, that Ricoh is now at a very undesireable crossroad, with regard to Pentax going further. It appears the strategy is not as long term as we might think-

One strong aspect here, which shouldn't be confused with my dissatisfaction (in fact, I have little dissatisfaction outside of the lack of fast, wide primes, particularly a fast 24) is that Pentax loyalty is waning for one reason or another. Olympus had severe issues with their d*cking around regarding the 4/3 future. Lots of these rumors, outright lies, and so on. We're years later and still no E-7, the E-5 is still junk, particularly when compared to more modern, cheaper, smaller offerings with larger sensors. Lots of people got burned on those very, very expensive SHG-level lenses, for instance and now even HG lenses are trading for pennies on the dollar, as are SHG lenses. They just don't move.

While that's another problem, which I can't imagine Ricoh would get into, based on the K-mount being at the center of any development (hopefully), loyalty is waning and in the case of Pentax owners, we aren't averse to using manual lenses, so that can make transitions to other brands easier.

In any event, it would be a nice gesture to offer an upgrade service for K-5 owners. It likely won't include the new AF sensor array, since related hardware is likely different, but at least an upgrade to a quasi-IIs model would be very satisfying. And no, not at 40-50% of the cost of a new body (which is what any aftermarket might charge). That would only make people feel even more burned.

[Barry Pearson]

In any event, it would be a nice gesture to offer an upgrade service for K-5 owners. It likely won't include the new AF sensor array, since related hardware is likely different, but at least an upgrade to a quasi-IIs model would be very satisfying. And no, not at 40-50% of the cost of a new body (which is what any aftermarket might charge). That would only make people feel even more burned.

I upgraded from K-7 to K-5 to K-5IIs. Each camera behaved pretty much as claimed and as I expected. I've got good photos from all of them.

I don't feel upset that Pentax brought out new models - of course they did! That was to be expected. If the K-5 had fallen short of Pentax's claims about it, having to buy a new camera to recover from that would be objectionable, perhaps even actionable. But I don't think that was the case.

And it is likely that my K-5IIs will be my main camera for less time than previous cameras, because of what may be coming along. But those are my personal choices. Some people are still happy with their K-7 (or earlier). Some are taking advantage of the launch of the K-5II(s) by buying a cheap K-5. It is the nature of the industry. The K-5 didn't become less of a camera when the K-5IIs appeared.

Personally, I think better auto-focus in the K-5IIs has made more difference to me than the removal of the AA filter, although that is good. And the better LCD display is useful too. Should each of those also be upgradable by Pentax? There is surely a limit to what upgrade options can be expected from Pentax?

[snake]

I upgraded from K-7 to K-5 to K-5IIs. Each camera behaved pretty much as claimed and as I expected. I've got good photos from all of them.

I don't feel upset that Pentax brought out new models - of course they did! That was to be expected. If the K-5 had fallen short of Pentax's claims about it, having to buy a new camera to recover from that would be objectionable, perhaps even actionable. But I don't think that was the case.

And it is likely that my K-5IIs will be my main camera for less time than previous cameras, because of what may be coming along. But those are my personal choices. Some people are still happy with their K-7 (or earlier). Some are taking advantage of the launch of the K-5II(s) by buying a cheap K-5. It is the nature of the industry. The K-5 didn't become less of a camera when the K-5IIs appeared.

Personally, I think better auto-focus in the K-5IIs has made more difference to me than the removal of the AA filter, although that is good. And the better LCD display is useful too. Should each of those also be upgradable by Pentax? There is surely a limit to what upgrade options can be expected from Pentax?

I think you're completely missing the point.

The IIs is not a new model. It's an evolution model that grew out of the beta testing with V.1 This is why many Pentax customers feel a bit burned. You also omitted that I said I'm satisfied, but I'd certainly want more performance from an evolutionary model. The K-5II is not a new camera model.

Your comparison of the K-7 to the K-5 is invalid, as it is very different, aside from elements of the body.

For whatever reason, you seem to be indicating, on team corporation, to not offer a service for consumers. Why consumers go the team corporation route, I never understand. It won't invalidate my point that Pentax will have difficulty because the loyalty is waning and v.1 buyers of the K-5 realize that they were the beta testers. Particularly the early models.

[Barry Pearson]

I think you're completely missing the point.

The IIs is not a new model. It's an evolution model that grew out of the beta testing with V.1 This is why many Pentax customers feel a bit burned. You also omitted that I said I'm satisfied, but I'd certainly want more performance from an evolutionary model. The K-5II is not a new camera model.

Your comparison of the K-7 to the K-5 is invalid, as it is very different, aside from elements of the body.

For whatever reason, you seem to be indicating, on team corporation, to not offer a service for consumers. Why consumers go the team corporation route, I never understand. It won't invalidate my point that Pentax will have difficulty because the loyalty is waning and v.1 buyers of the K-5 realize that they were the beta testers. Particularly the early models.

I consider the K-5IIs to be a new model! Many, perhaps most, new models are evolutions from previous models. It is very rare indeed for all aspects of camera to be new - we are just talking about about how much is old and how much is new. There is no contradiction in being both an evolutionary model and a new model.

I don't consider that I was a beta tester of the K-5 hardware. I don't feel burned, in fact I thought it to be a super camera then and still pretty good. I don't consider that it was faulty - limited and in some ways out of date, but not faulty. It suffered from problems with AF, but so does the K-5IIs (and so did the earlier K-7, and probably so will the next model). However, the AA filter on the K-5 cannot be considered a fault, and there is no plausible reason why anyone should expect a service from Pentax to remove it.

(I have no idea what you mean by "team corporation" and "the team corporation route". I've just Googled it without finding what you might mean).

[snake]

I consider the K-5IIs to be a new model!

You might, but it's the same camera with some minor updates made to extend a fine camera's usable sale life without investing massive development costs. Additionally, it likely encompasses fixes they discovered after users beta tested the v.1

I don't consider that I was a beta tester of the K-5 hardware.

Denial of the fact doesn't change reality.

I don't feel burned

Neither do I, but I'd love a retrofit service to enhance what I already have with what the update has (in part). There's nothing wrong with that, as a consumer, to want a realistic upgrade.

However, the AA filter on the K-5 cannot be considered a fault

You seem to be severely distorting things. The AA isn't a fault. It is what it is. It is certainly heavy, though. Mirror flop and the associated power issues WERE faults. Tungsten lighting is, severe flash limitations while bouncing is a huge problem.

Not to mention, another thing to denote the fact that the K-5II is only a leftover, slightly updated, evolutionary model is the video output. At least 30fps would be nice and it certainly can be done, unless, of course, the hardware still can't handle that type of data flow.

[Barry Pearson]

You might, but it's the same camera with some minor updates made to extend a fine camera's usable sale life without investing massive development costs. Additionally, it likely encompasses fixes they discovered after users beta tested the v.1

Denial of the fact doesn't change reality.

Neither do I, but I'd love a retrofit service to enhance what I already have with what the update has (in part). There's nothing wrong with that, as a consumer, to want a realistic upgrade.
You seem to be severely distorting things. The AA isn't a fault. It is what it is. It is certainly heavy, though. Mirror flop and the associated power issues WERE faults. Tungsten lighting is, severe flash limitations while bouncing is a huge problem.

Not to mention, another thing to denote the fact that the K-5II is only a leftover, slightly updated, evolutionary model is the video output. At least 30fps would be nice and it certainly can be done, unless, of course, the hardware still can't handle that type of data flow.

It wasn't a beta test of the hardware. Be aware that my career was in the computer industry, and I am familiar with beta testing and have been a beta tester in a number of cases. In case you don't know what beta testing is, here is a summary, and here is another:

"Beta testing comes after alpha testing and can be considered a form of external user acceptance testing. Versions of the software, known as beta versions, are released to a limited audience outside of the programming team. The software is released to groups of people so that further testing can ensure the product has few faults or bugs. Sometimes, beta versions are made available to the open public to increase the feedback field to a maximal number of future users."

You started this thread talking about removal of the AA filter, and later you said "In any event, it would be a nice gesture to offer an upgrade service for K-5 owners. It likely won't include the new AF sensor array, since related hardware is likely different, but at least an upgrade to a quasi-IIs model would be very satisfying. And no, not at 40-50% of the cost of a new body (which is what any aftermarket might charge). That would only make people feel even more burned.".

You appear to be asking for a Pentax service to upgrade aspects of the K-5 to K-5IIs level. But, of course, since the AA filter is not a fault in the K-5, you couldn't plausibly ask for an upgrade to the K-5IIs, only at most the K-5II. And you are not including the new AF sensor array, which is the same on both the K-5II and the K-5IIs.

So you are neither asking for removal of the AA filter (which isn't a fault), nor for upgrading the AA sensor array (since related gardware is different). That means what you are asking for is nothing like either the K-5II nor the K-5IIs!

What is the list of things you are asking for, then?

[fs999]

Snake, if you wanted to buy a new K-5 just before the K-5II came out, what would be the price ?
So why would you have the K-5II for less ?

[snake]

Snake, if you wanted to buy a new K-5 just before the K-5II came out, what would be the price ?
So why would you have the K-5II for less ?

I have a K-5. I don't understand these questions.