Do your K5 shots need more sharpening?


simonkit

Link Posted 03/06/2011 - 22:26
Having owned the K5 for a couple of weeks I at last managed to get out walking today and take a few shots. I've just started processing them and it seems that I need to apply a little more "capture sharpening" in ACR than I did with the K20D - has anyone else thought this?

thanks

Simon
My website http://www.landscapephotographyuk.com

My Facebook page http://www.facebook.com/landscapephotographyuk

Find me on Google+ link

Smeggypants

Link Posted 03/06/2011 - 22:39
I'm not sure what you mean by "capture" sharpening, but I haven't found I need to apply anything different in Lightroom for the K-5 as I did for the K20D.
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283

i-Berg

Link Posted 04/06/2011 - 01:50
I haven't noticed any differences between the K10, K-x and K5 while in Lightroom that would need different sharpening amounts. When applying output sharpening, I also use one standard process for images from each body.
http://www.pbase.com/iberg

thoughton

Link Posted 04/06/2011 - 09:06
I've noticed that I apply more sharpening on the k5 that the k20d.
Tim
AF - Pentax K5, Sigma 10-20/4-5.6, Tamron 17-50/2.8, Sigma 30/1.4, Sigma 70-200/2.8, Tamron 70-300/4-5.6
MF - Vivitar CF 28/2.8, Tamron AD2 90/2.5, MTO 1000/11
Stuff - Metz 58 AF1, Cactus v4, Nikon SB24, Raynox 150, Sigma 1.4x TC, Sigma 2x TC, Kenko 2x macro TC, Redsnapper 283 tripod, iMac 27”, Macbook Pro 17”, iPad, iPhone 3G
Flickr • Fluidr • PPG • Street • Portfolio site
Feel free to edit any of my posted photos! If I post a photo for critique, I want brutal honesty. If you don't like it, please say so and tell me why!

simonkit

Link Posted 04/06/2011 - 09:10
I use the "Bruce Fraser" method for sharpening which involves 3 stages - explained in the link:

http://www.creativepro.com/article/out-of-gamut-thoughts-on-a-sharpening-workflo...

My initial impression is that images are slightly softer out of camera than they were with the K20D, having had a quick look around the web it seems a few people have mentioned this too...no problem either way as I'll just add a little extra in ACR

Simon
My website http://www.landscapephotographyuk.com

My Facebook page http://www.facebook.com/landscapephotographyuk

Find me on Google+ link

johnriley

Link Posted 04/06/2011 - 10:04
There's no harm in incresing the capture sharpening from 25% to whatever suits you. It is a different sensor so it won't look exactly the same as the previous K20D.

What is the actual final output for your images, print or web?
Best regards, John

royd63uk

Link Posted 04/06/2011 - 11:06
i have found that the K5 needs more post processing to bring out all the detail the excellent camera can capture...and of course the images can take it
regards
Roy

Pentax K3 gripped,and some lenses
https://www.flickr.com/photos/pentaxroy/

my pbase gallery

K10D

Link Posted 04/06/2011 - 14:15
royd63uk wrote:
i have found that the K5 needs more post processing to bring out all the detail the excellent camera can capture...and of course the images can take it

So is it fair to say that it's not a camera for those that are not proficient in post processing?

Best regards
Плутон идет

Pentaxophile

Link Posted 04/06/2011 - 14:28
As John said, you can turn up the in-camera sharpening. I am guessing this lack of 1:1 sharpness is not something you'd see in an A3 print anyway.
And I know some people avoid post processing if they can, but you are nuts if you are spending a grand on a DSLR without a basic knowledge of, or willingness to learn about, post processing. IMHO of course!
[link=https://500px.com/will_brealey/[/link]

womble

Link Posted 04/06/2011 - 14:29
K10D wrote:
royd63uk wrote:
i have found that the K5 needs more post processing to bring out all the detail the excellent camera can capture...and of course the images can take it

So is it fair to say that it's not a camera for those that are not proficient in post processing?

Best regards

My guess is you would get excellent jpegs out of it if you didn't want to do the RAW conversion yourself.

K.
Kris Lockyear
It is an illusion that photos are made with the camera… they are made with the eye, heart and head. Henri Cartier-Bresson
Lots of film bodies, a couple of digital ones, too many lenses (mainly older glass) and a Horseman LE 5x4.

My website

Algernon

Link Posted 04/06/2011 - 14:34
It only seems to like the "Top Lenses" My DA*300mm seems OK straight from the camera, but lesser lenses don't look too good and I'm not that sure that sharpening will improve matters.

It is good for shots in poor light etc. where the K20D could only manage very noisy shots. The K-5 with something like the DA*300mm f/4 produces good results.
Half Man... Half Pentax ... Half Cucumber

Pentax K-1 + K-5 and some other stuff

Algi

Gwyn

Link Posted 04/06/2011 - 14:44
I do a lot less PP, including sharpening (which I admit is not my strong point anyway), with the K-5 than I ever did with the K20D.

Mike-P

Link Posted 04/06/2011 - 15:25
Gwyn wrote:
I do a lot less PP, including sharpening (which I admit is not my strong point anyway), with the K-5 than I ever did with the K20D.

But to be fair you hated the K20D and would probably have left it at home 99% of the time anyway.
No equipment list here but thanks for taking an interest. My Flickr

johnwhit

Link Posted 04/06/2011 - 15:37
Algernon wrote:
It only seems to like the "Top Lenses" My DA*300mm seems OK straight from the camera, but lesser lenses don't look too good and I'm not that sure that sharpening will improve matters.

At 16Mp the censor is no longer the limit of resolution, it's the lens you have on the front of the camera. Even the FA 43 Ltd would struggle to outresolve the censor at it's optimum aperture. I found myself only buying primes after upgrading from K10D to K20D.

John
PPG link

In LBA hiatus.
Last Edited by johnwhit on 04/06/2011 - 15:44

Smeggypants

Link Posted 04/06/2011 - 19:04
johnwhit wrote:
Algernon wrote:
It only seems to like the "Top Lenses" My DA*300mm seems OK straight from the camera, but lesser lenses don't look too good and I'm not that sure that sharpening will improve matters.

At 16Mp the censor is no longer the limit of resolution, it's the lens you have on the front of the camera. Even the FA 43 Ltd would struggle to outresolve the censor at it's optimum aperture. I found myself only buying primes after upgrading from K10D to K20D.

John

What happens when the sensors have a much greater resolution than even the sharpest prime? Are you going to stop buying primes as well?
[i]Bodies: 1x K-5IIs, 2x K-5, Sony TX-5, Nokia 808
Lenses: Pentax DA 10-17mm ED(IF) Fish Eye, Pentax DA 14mm f/2.8, Sigma 17-70mm f/2.8, Pentax-A 28mm f/2.8, Sigma 30mm F1.4 EX DC, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.2, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-FA 50mm f/1.4, Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7, Pentax DA* 50-135mm f/2.8, Sigma 135-400mm APO DG, and more ..
Flash: AF-540FGZ, Vivitar 283
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.