How are 'you' getting on with the K-5 IIs?


JohnX

Link Posted 26/12/2012 - 10:22
I'm torn between the II and the IIs.

A question for those of you who have actually bought the IIs - any problems with moire, etc?
Last Edited by JohnX on 26/12/2012 - 10:23

beachboy2

Link Posted 27/12/2012 - 04:47
Moire hasn't been a problem so far.
cheers
bb2

K5, K20D, Bigma, Sigma EX 105, Sigma EX 10-20, Sigma EX 28-70 F2.8, Sigma Ex 1.4TC,
Pentax 135 F3.5, Pentax 30mm F2.8 , Pentax 50mm F1.7, Pentax 55mm F1.8,
Super Taks: 35mm F3.5, 50mm F1.4, 135mm F3.5, 200mm F4
Vivitar TX 200mm F3.5,Vivitar (Komine)135mm f2.8, Vivitar 2X TC, Vivitar T4 400mm F6.3
Tamron SP 35-80,80-210 F3.8, Helios 44M, Mir 1B 37mm F2.8, Jupiter 9 85mm F2, Chinon 28mm F2.8, 3M-5A 500mm F8 etc etc

JohnX

Link Posted 27/12/2012 - 08:46
Thanks bb2. Seems you also have the K5?

Notice any significant difference between it and the IIs, other than perhaps low light performance?

Suppose my question is, would you buy the IIs again if you hadn't already bought it?

beachboy2

Link Posted 27/12/2012 - 14:34
Yes JohnX. Don't regret buying it. Wanted a backup unit for an Antarctic trip. Having the K5 and K5iis means it's easy to switch between the two. My son will get the K20D.The AF is better in dark conditions at least.Subjectively I think the images are noticeably sharper.Bit of an extravagance but the Antarctic trip will be once in a lifetime I'm sure!
cheers
bb2

K5, K20D, Bigma, Sigma EX 105, Sigma EX 10-20, Sigma EX 28-70 F2.8, Sigma Ex 1.4TC,
Pentax 135 F3.5, Pentax 30mm F2.8 , Pentax 50mm F1.7, Pentax 55mm F1.8,
Super Taks: 35mm F3.5, 50mm F1.4, 135mm F3.5, 200mm F4
Vivitar TX 200mm F3.5,Vivitar (Komine)135mm f2.8, Vivitar 2X TC, Vivitar T4 400mm F6.3
Tamron SP 35-80,80-210 F3.8, Helios 44M, Mir 1B 37mm F2.8, Jupiter 9 85mm F2, Chinon 28mm F2.8, 3M-5A 500mm F8 etc etc

bettyswolloks

Link Posted 27/12/2012 - 16:25
Moiré isn't a problem, I tried to capture some just out of interest, found some while pixel peeping at 400% so I gave up looking any further
Buy it and love it, you wont look back Mate
I'm only 4fut3, but I look a lot bigger from a distance

Nikon D600, 18-55, 50 F1.8, Sigma 70-200 HSM,180macro.
MZ-7, K-10,K-7, all gripped.
Pentax 35 28-80
Sigma 50 EX Macro.
A sexy little Q with 8.5mm Prime.
And a cup with a gorrila on it, it's also chipped a little, but holds tea perfectly well.

Ranfog Flickr Group

Smeggypants

Link Posted 27/12/2012 - 16:51
beachboy2 wrote:
Yes JohnX. Don't regret buying it. Wanted a backup unit for an Antarctic trip. Having the K5 and K5iis means it's easy to switch between the two. My son will get the K20D.The AF is better in dark conditions at least.Subjectively I think the images are noticeably sharper.Bit of an extravagance but the Antarctic trip will be once in a lifetime I'm sure!
cheers
bb2

I wish someone would post some comparisons that actually show this. Even the sites dedicated to comparing cameras under controlled conditions haven't yet managed to show the K-5IIs is any sharper than the K-5II or K-5

Kings new clothes methinks
[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

bettyswolloks

Link Posted 27/12/2012 - 16:58
Smeggypants wrote:

I wish someone would post some comparisons that actually show this. Even the sites dedicated to comparing cameras under controlled conditions haven't yet managed to show the K-5IIs is any sharper than the K-5II or K-5
Kings new clothes methinks

I would love to see this myself, not having an original K5 I cant do a side by side, if anyone here is close to the OL13 area of Lancashire with a K5 and fancies doing just that send me a PM
I'm only 4fut3, but I look a lot bigger from a distance

Nikon D600, 18-55, 50 F1.8, Sigma 70-200 HSM,180macro.
MZ-7, K-10,K-7, all gripped.
Pentax 35 28-80
Sigma 50 EX Macro.
A sexy little Q with 8.5mm Prime.
And a cup with a gorrila on it, it's also chipped a little, but holds tea perfectly well.

Ranfog Flickr Group

SteveEveritt

Link Posted 27/12/2012 - 17:26
Smeggypants wrote:
beachboy2 wrote:
Yes JohnX. Don't regret buying it. Wanted a backup unit for an Antarctic trip. Having the K5 and K5iis means it's easy to switch between the two. My son will get the K20D.The AF is better in dark conditions at least.Subjectively I think the images are noticeably sharper.Bit of an extravagance but the Antarctic trip will be once in a lifetime I'm sure!
cheers
bb2

I wish someone would post some comparisons that actually show this. Even the sites dedicated to comparing cameras under controlled conditions haven't yet managed to show the K-5IIs is any sharper than the K-5II or K-5

Kings new clothes methinks

Have you looked at the comparometer on Imaging Resource? You can place the same image at the same ISO side by side and although there is very little difference between the 5 and the IIs but it is there.

5 on the left and IIs on the right, both at 80 ISO



My Flickr link

"Life is what happens to you while you're busy making other plans" (John Lennon)
Last Edited by SteveEveritt on 27/12/2012 - 17:27

Smeggypants

Link Posted 27/12/2012 - 17:56
SteveEveritt wrote:
Smeggypants wrote:
Quote:
Yes JohnX. Don't regret buying it. Wanted a backup unit for an Antarctic trip. Having the K5 and K5iis means it's easy to switch between the two. My son will get the K20D.The AF is better in dark conditions at least.Subjectively I think the images are noticeably sharper.Bit of an extravagance but the Antarctic trip will be once in a lifetime I'm sure!
cheers
bb2

I wish someone would post some comparisons that actually show this. Even the sites dedicated to comparing cameras under controlled conditions haven't yet managed to show the K-5IIs is any sharper than the K-5II or K-5

Kings new clothes methinks

Have you looked at the comparometer on Imaging Resource? You can place the same image at the same ISO side by side and although there is very little difference between the 5 and the IIs but it is there.


Yes, that was the first comparison I saw and you've only helped to prove my point by posting that.

This is another comparison that showed that any differences are only of use in the world of eyestrained pixel peeping and of no use to practical photography IMO.

Personally I would say if you don't trust your own eyesight and have money to burn then buy the K-5IIs, otherwise save the money to put towards another lens or something else that actually makes a difference to your photography and get the K-5II.
[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
Last Edited by Smeggypants on 27/12/2012 - 17:57

johnriley

Link Posted 27/12/2012 - 18:16
Quote:
Kings new clothes methinks

Or maybe just the limitations of reproduction on the web and on magazine pages.

One way or another, I am hopeful that I may be able to offer some insight in the near future.
Best regards, John

Smeggypants

Link Posted 27/12/2012 - 18:25
johnriley wrote:
Quote:
Kings new clothes methinks

Or maybe just the limitations of reproduction on the web and on magazine pages.

One way or another, I am hopeful that I may be able to offer some insight in the near future.

Well possibly, but they are showing 100% versions.

And if you can only see any real difference when blowing up further than 100% thus exposing pixels that were never there in the first place, it brings us back to 'no practical purpose for photography' doesn't it?

I still remain open to any future comparisons that may show differences that Imaging resources and DPReview havn't been able to muster though, but I'm not holding my breath
[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

Algernon

Link Posted 27/12/2012 - 18:38
All these 100% pixel peep tests are just nonsense,
you can get bigger differences from consecutive frames
off the same camera

Also it's impossible to focus on the same spot twice
without focus bracketing.

-
Half Man... Half Pentax ... Half Cucumber

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

Algi

bettyswolloks

Link Posted 27/12/2012 - 18:47
Smeggypants wrote:

Yes, that was the first comparison I saw and you've only helped to prove my point by posting that.
This is another comparison that showed that any differences are only of use in the world of eyestrained pixel peeping and of no use to practical photography IMO.

Personally I would say if you don't trust your own eyesight and have money to burn then buy the K-5IIs, otherwise save the money to put towards another lens or something else that actually makes a difference to your photography and get the K-5II.

Smeggypants wrote:

And if you can only see any real difference when blowing up further than 100% thus exposing pixels that were never there in the first place, it brings us back to 'no practical purpose for photography' doesn't it?

Odd how pentax would release a camera that has no practical purpose for photography You learn something new everyday
I'm only 4fut3, but I look a lot bigger from a distance

Nikon D600, 18-55, 50 F1.8, Sigma 70-200 HSM,180macro.
MZ-7, K-10,K-7, all gripped.
Pentax 35 28-80
Sigma 50 EX Macro.
A sexy little Q with 8.5mm Prime.
And a cup with a gorrila on it, it's also chipped a little, but holds tea perfectly well.

Ranfog Flickr Group

cabstar

Link Posted 27/12/2012 - 19:07
The problem with these comparisons is that they are done under perfect conditions and lighting. I imagine at extremes you will see a difference.i imagine the mkiis gives a little scope for misfocussing and making slightly soft images sharper than they would have been.

I still cannot decide, I have until New Year's Eve to decide before the £100 extra trade in offer ends at SRS...
PPG Wedding photography Flickr
Concert photography

Currently on a Pentax hiatus until an FF Pentax is released

JohnX

Link Posted 27/12/2012 - 19:23
cabstar wrote:

I still cannot decide, I have until New Year's Eve to decide before the £100 extra trade in offer ends at SRS...

And that's my problem too...

There's £130 difference between the II and IIs in the SRS sale, £330 between the K-5 'classic' and the IIs.

The various reports/comparisons seem to point towards the improved IQ in the IIs as being real.

Certainly I see a difference in the images posted by StveEveritt, but I don't take studio images and wonder whether I would see any improvement in my real-world images? I would espect to see some change over my K20D, but I would get that I'm sure with the K-5 'classic'.

Time to ponder some more...
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.