I have both cameras, so I thought I would help provide as clear a picture (hehe pun!) as possible as to what decision is best for you when it comes to sharpness.
I took a slightly different approach than the 100% crops from DPR type image tests. I took a series of 8 scenes. Unfortunately, I will post only three - I did not realize how much I missed focus at wide open apertures with the FA77 and the DA* 55, part because of BF/FF on the K-30, but moreso I was using curved beer steins and apparently the curve is too sharp and thus deeper than the focus plane on each lens even when closed down 1 stop, which, I was not expecting.
Each scene I will show you a resized version of the full image (resized from the original 16 mpx to 18% - 888x588px) and under it the 100% crops of the center where the focus point was. Where I differ is not only am I providing the 100% unedited crops, but I've also done what I feel is critically missing when it comes to K-5 IIs comparisons - it's
potential. So I've taken each image and processed them to their fullest potential (which, admittedly, is based on my own processing skills, so take that into account as well). But regardless, I think this provides a much clearer perspective as to the true potential of the K-5 II's and it's AA filter omition vs the AA competition.
Each each was processed in LR4 and when ISO was above the base ISO, I used Topaz DeNoise to remove the noise (which, this is my first time really using DeNoise as I just got it and I must say: holy crap - that program is
INCREDIBLE!). I also made the choice to use the base ISO of 80 on the K-5 IIs to see how that compares to the K-30's 100 as I felt that was applicable to asserting the potential of the K-5 IIs over the K-30 (and ISO 80 is definitely something to consider as a positive of the K-5 series).
Each shot was taken on a tripod in the same exact position (I didn't move the tripod between shots until I was complete with each scene) using a remote release and Shake Reduction turned off. Aside from the aforementioned ISO differentiation at base ISO, all the settings are exactly the same (shutter speed, aperture, ISO, focus point, framing, lens).
If you would like the RAW files for any of the comparisons below, pm me and I will get them to you - they are too large to embed/attach here.
SCENE ONE: DA* 16-50, 16mm, 1/60s, f/6.3, ISO 800, Distance Approx 1.5m Full Scene Comparison 100% Crop Comparison
--
SCENE TWO: DA* 16-50, 50mm, 1/60s, f/7.1, ISO 800, Distance Approx 1.5m Full Scene Comparison 100% Crop Comparison
--
SCENE THREE: FA 77 LTD, 77mm, 1/200s, f/8, ISO 80/100, Distance Approx 20m Full Scene Comparison 100% Comparison
I'm actually really upset that I didn't catch the FF/BF/focus plane issues until I got to my computer and imported the images in lightroom. I wish I could show the other 5 scenes, however it would be a waste. I would redo them however honestly I am exhausted from this testing project - all in all this has taken over 5 hours over several days' downtime. I had no idea it would take that long, however when I commit to something I will see it through.
Like I said, I wish the other 5 weren't a wash, however I think the verdict is pretty clear...
Hope this helps.
Very Respectfully,
Heie