Visit MPB Visit MPB Visit MPB

JR K5 IIs review

Pentaxonian
Posted 24/01/2013 - 20:49 Link
Strangely no one has commented in this yet.

Review was posted at 11:45 today
K5iis and a couple of lenses.
Gwyn
Posted 24/01/2013 - 21:28 Link
I admit I saw it there but didn't read it. Having just taken up SRS on their offer and gone the ii without the s I didn't feel so inclined to read it.
I couldn't have justified the price difference for an extra letter and a filter less.

I have now read the article and it is interesting, but I'm happy with my decision tbh. Now I just have to wait for my new camera.
johnriley
Posted 24/01/2013 - 22:34 Link
Well at least I found out for myself how significant the difference was. It was very interesting and it was a pleasure to explore the potential.

Now I wish I could buy one straight away, but that isn't possible just now. Next time we upgrade we will be buying the IIs (or its replacement) but it has to be justified financially, so no whims I'm afraid.

I did go to some lengths to try and make the images shot with the II as identical as possible with those taken with the IIs, the intention being that anybody contemplating the choice could see for themselves. That way, they can makie their own informed decision.
Best regards, John
Blythman
Posted 24/01/2013 - 22:35 Link
So is the difference just noticeable on large prints John, or is it visibly better on standard web images?
Alan


PPG
Flickr
johnriley
Posted 24/01/2013 - 22:38 Link
Visibly better on standard web images, no doubt in my judgement. You can explore this by downloading the appropriate files and proving it to yourself by making some web images from them.
Best regards, John
Blythman
Posted 24/01/2013 - 22:41 Link
johnriley wrote:
Visibly better on standard web images, no doubt in my judgement. You can explore this by downloading the appropriate files and proving it to yourself by making some web images from them.

Don't tempt me I am not spending money
Alan


PPG
Flickr
puma
Posted 24/01/2013 - 22:43 Link
I hope you don't mind John i did show this before but if anyone didn't see it it was the very first test shot i did with mine

Comment Image
PPG link
johnriley
Posted 24/01/2013 - 23:58 Link
I don't mind in the slightest, it's a great shot.
Best regards, John
johnriley
Posted 25/01/2013 - 00:05 Link
Look to the right of the page under Latest News and Articles. The test is also on ePHOTOzine.
Best regards, John
Smeggypants
Posted 25/01/2013 - 06:27 Link
johnriley wrote:
Look to the right of the page under Latest News and Articles. The test is also on ePHOTOzine.

I've just checked out your review.

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/pentax-k-5-iis-digital-slr-review-21127

You say ...

Quote:
The result is amazing. Examining the images shot on both camera, especially impressive is how a fine tangled mass of branches suddenly becomes clear. How lovely hair texture becomes amazing hair texture. How the surfaces of decaying metalwork come alive with fine detail. This is perfect for detailed, texture-filled subject matter, such as landscapes and architecture, close-ups and macro, and, pleasingly, even portraiture.

Given I still have an open mind on the differences between the K-5II and the K-5IIs despite the irrelevant differences shown by previous comparisons , can you explain how you've been able to show such differences that imaging Resources and DPReview have not been able to show?
I cannot find one image that is attributed to the K-5II on the review at

http://www.ephotozine.com/article/pentax-k-5-iis-digital-slr-review-21127


as a comparison to the K-5IIs.

Quote:

So we look at the K-5 IIs and now find not only the II improvements, but a new, totally impressive level of detail in the images. A clarity. It is visible clearly on screen.

Please provide links to comparison images to support this claim of a "new, totally impressive level of detail" -


What you have found by personal experience should be easily supported by comparison images. Every link on your review points to K-5IIs images. Where are the comparison K-55II images?
[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
johnriley
Posted 25/01/2013 - 08:52 Link
As I mentioned in the review, possibly once, possibly a couple of times, is that I wen to considerable lengths to repeat as closely as possible all the images that were shot for the K-5 II review. This is one reason why it was important that I did both reviews. If you look at both reviews you will find that each and every shot in the first one is repeated in the second one.

So, all you have to do is to download a full res image or two from the K-5 II review and then download the same images from the K-5 IIs review. You are then free to process them as you wish in Photoshop or Lightroom, or whatever else, and see for yourself.

I purposely did not dwell on previous reviews so I only saw what I saw and was not influenced at all by what other people saw, so I don't know if the other reviewers took the same methodology. I can only say that there was something here I wanted to know and I set about finding out.

So, my conclusion was very positive, and there's now no doubt at all in my mind. Smeggypants, you now need to find out for yourself, and I've given you the material to work with. Have fun with it.
Best regards, John
Snootchies
Posted 25/01/2013 - 09:09 Link
Thanks for doing this John, If I can scrub together funds in a few months, I can certainly see myself getting a K5IIs.

Then the wife can have the K5 (she'll be happy!).
Bob

My website (Hadfield Photography)

Pentax Gallery Artist page:link

Flickr Photostream: link
Mike-P
Posted 25/01/2013 - 09:26 Link
Well I have to say after downloading and comparing the shots from both cameras I can see no difference whatsoever.

My K-5 is on it's way to Chris today for exchange with the MKII and I would of happily paid the extra £130 if I could see even the smallest improvement in detail (as a macro nut this is always a plus) but I really cannot see it.

Maybe it's time for a visit to the optician, not been since I was about 10.

Edit: shame there are no raw shots to download on the original review though.
Edited by Mike-P: 25/01/2013 - 09:28
johnriley
Posted 25/01/2013 - 09:29 Link
We would not presume to comment on your eyesight Mike!
Best regards, John
bettyswolloks
Posted 25/01/2013 - 09:33 Link
If smeggy had of unstuck his record I'd of sold mine
One day you'll find, 10yrs have got behind you.
Edited by bettyswolloks: 25/01/2013 - 09:34

Add Comment

To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.