K-5IIs - more discussion


davidstorm

Link Posted 28/02/2013 - 22:34
Today I received my lovely new K-5IIs and immediately set about taking a few shots inside the house tonight. The first thing I can say is that I CAN notice a subtle but significant difference in sharpness between the IIs and my original K-5. I took exactly the same shot with both cameras, using the same settings and the same lens (Sigma 105mm DG EX Macro) to test both focus speed/accuracy and image sharpness. Settings were 100ISO, F4.5, Centre Spot Autofocus, AV mode, 2 second self timer. Cameras were mounted on my Redsnapper tripod. I found as follows:

1. The IIs focusses significantly faster and in much lower light than the K-5 can manage (this will also apply to the K-5II I would imagine)

2. On the test images I took there was little or no difference in focus accuracy, both were exceptionally good

3. The image shot with IIs is sharper - this is clearly visible on my laptop screen with zero magnification and gets more noticeable the more magnification that is applied. It is also clearly discernible on an A4 size print of the uncropped images. To get the K-5 image to anything like the same sharpness requires Unsharp Mask at at least 102%, but this introduces other issues and makes the resulting image more 'harsh' than the un-sharpened version with the IIs.

The conclusion for me is that the IIs will suit my style of shooting down to the ground, i.e. landscapes, macro and wildlife in the main, with a bit of portraiture now and again.

I am not going to post the two comparison images referred to above as the compression / reduction process to upload them here will render the comparison fairly academic. However, here is one shot tonight with the IIs and a SMC K135mm F2.5 lens, set at F4. No sharpening has been applied to the image.




Discuss!!

Regards
David
Flickr

Nicola's Apartments, Kassiopi, Corfu

Some cameras, some lenses, some bits 'n' bobs
Last Edited by davidstorm on 28/02/2013 - 22:59

DrOrloff

Link Posted 28/02/2013 - 22:53
I would be interested in your views of comparitive high iso performance and also the autofocus tracking.
You can see some of my photos here if you are so inclined

davidstorm

Link Posted 28/02/2013 - 22:57
DrOrloff wrote:
I would be interested in your views of comparitive high iso performance and also the autofocus tracking.

Hi Adrian, I haven't had time to check this out yet, but I will do a test tomorrow and post the results. I have taken a few snaps at ISO 3200 and they look pretty darn clean to me. Autofocus tracking is a bit difficult to assess indoors at night but when I get the chance to go down to the local nature reserve I'll have a go at testing this too.

Regards
David
Flickr

Nicola's Apartments, Kassiopi, Corfu

Some cameras, some lenses, some bits 'n' bobs

DrOrloff

Link Posted 28/02/2013 - 22:59
No hurry whatsoever, I know you will deliver an honest appraisal.
You can see some of my photos here if you are so inclined

davidstorm

Link Posted 28/02/2013 - 23:22
For Adrian in particular and anyone else that is interested, I've just quickly shot a couple at ISO3200 with both the IIs and the original K-5, again both with exactly the same lens and settings. 3200ISO, SMC K135mm F2.5 set at F4, manually focussed using Live View on exactly the same spot at x10 magnification, manual exposure, 1/10 second shutter speed, 2 second self timer, mounted on Redsnapper tripod, no processing on either image except conversion to jpeg and size reduction.

K-5 Mk1



K-5IIs



The noise on the IIs image is marginally less than that on the K-5 Mk1 image, but there is very little in it. However, if the K-5 image were to be sharpened to make it as close to the IIs image as possible in sharpness terms, this would introduce additional noise / artefacts. This is not a scientific test, it's just a quick snap taken in a few minutes, but has a good range of tones and shadow areas which are good at revealing noise. I will do more tests at higher ISO's when time allows.

Edit: You may also wish to comment on the shadow detail from each image? IMHO, the IIs beats the Mk1 quite easily in this regard and I must stress that I have applied no processing to these shots except the RAW conversion then a size reduction.

Regards
David
Flickr

Nicola's Apartments, Kassiopi, Corfu

Some cameras, some lenses, some bits 'n' bobs
Last Edited by davidstorm on 28/02/2013 - 23:30

Smeggypants

Link Posted 01/03/2013 - 00:19
Could you upload full sized versions of those Teach Yourself Photoshop shots?
[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

Stridey

Link Posted 01/03/2013 - 09:09
Well done David on your new purchase. For me, your first image is remarkable - to get that level of sharpness without applying any processing sharpening is to mind incredible. I look forward to seeing your future landscape and wildlife shots where I am sure we will see this new beast used to it's full potential !

Regards
Nigel
Best regards
Nigel

www.nigelstridephotography.co.uk

cabstar

Link Posted 01/03/2013 - 09:55
Hasn't this all been excessively discussed in lots if detail in other threads already?

Comparing sharpness of mkiis to mki proves nothing as they are not the same in terms of improved focus and removal of the aa filter and slightly improved sensor and firmware.

I found the mkii sharper than the mki and put this down to improved focus accuracy, the mkiis sharpness must also significantly be improved via improved focussing than the removal if the aa filter alone.
PPG Wedding photography Flickr
Concert photography

Currently on a Pentax hiatus until an FF Pentax is released

Fletcher8

Link Posted 01/03/2013 - 10:03
I have only had a few trial efforts at focus tracking and can say there is a slight improvement, but if you are shooting sports or anything that is fast moving, the slight improvement is not ground breaking. I think you will still have to rely on technique and skill in this area.

However, as I stated I have not fully tested this focus tracking with all of my lenses that I would use for sports and action, so the jury is currently still out. Like David states the sharpness is clearly noticeable and from what I am seeing, the higher ISO images do look cleaner. The low light focus is without a doubt a big plus. If you are questioning the benefits of upgrading, my opinion is I personally think the additional cash outlay is justified. Pentax will no doubt introduce a more feature rich replacement for the K5ll, together with a K whatever full frame, but when and at what price? If you have a passion for photography and the funds to upgrade to a K5ll or K5lls you certainly won't be disappointed.
Fletcher8.
Last Edited by Fletcher8 on 01/03/2013 - 10:05

Sean282

Link Posted 01/03/2013 - 10:08
Would love to see a real step up in AF speed in the next iteration. Maybe with screw drive thats not possible?

I'm holding out at this stage

davidstorm

Link Posted 01/03/2013 - 18:44
cabstar wrote:
Hasn't this all been excessively discussed in lots if detail in other threads already?........I found the mkii sharper than the mki and put this down to improved focus accuracy, the mkiis sharpness must also significantly be improved via improved focussing than the removal if the aa filter alone.

Hi Gary, there are still a lot of people interested in the comparisons. Autofocus accuracy is not is not a factor in my tests as they were carried out with a manual focus lens to eliminate any AF issues, so this removes one of the 'non-filter' based improvements that you have referred to. I used Live View at x10 magnification to focus on a static subject; this is probably the most accurate way to ensure critical focus is achieved.

There are still a good few people who do not perceive any benefit to the K-5IIs over the standard K-5II; I happen to disagree based on what I've seen and I think the two comparison images I posted last night may be a bit of an eye-opener for some? The IIs image is brighter and sharper all over and has much less noise, particularly so in the areas of red colouring. It also has more shadow detail. If we can obtain sharper / better images without resorting to software sharpening, the results will be less noisy, less artificial looking and more pleasing to the eye. For me it's worth the extra cost to gain this and I would imagine many others will agree.

Regards
David
Flickr

Nicola's Apartments, Kassiopi, Corfu

Some cameras, some lenses, some bits 'n' bobs
Last Edited by davidstorm on 01/03/2013 - 18:50

DrOrloff

Link Posted 01/03/2013 - 18:49
Thanks for this David and to Fletcher 8 too. This is the most helpful comparison I have seen.
You can see some of my photos here if you are so inclined

davidstorm

Link Posted 01/03/2013 - 18:52
DrOrloff wrote:
Thanks for this David and to Fletcher 8 too. This is the most helpful comparison I have seen.

Thanks Dr. O, I will post some more tonight at higher ISO's and will also provide links to larger image sizes.

Regards
David
Flickr

Nicola's Apartments, Kassiopi, Corfu

Some cameras, some lenses, some bits 'n' bobs

Mike-P

Link Posted 01/03/2013 - 19:29
davidstorm wrote:

There are still a good few people who do not perceive any benefit to the K-5IIs over the standard K-5II; I happen to disagree based on what I've seen and I think the two comparison images I posted last night may be a bit of an eye-opener for some?

I'm lost here ... is this a comparison between the K-5IIs and K-5 MKI or MKII ?

From what I can see the second shot is sharper on the grey Pentax box but the first is sharper around the camera area (especially the on/off switch and Sigma EX lens) which to me means there is a focus difference somewhere.
. My Flickr
Last Edited by Mike-P on 01/03/2013 - 19:30

davidstorm

Link Posted 01/03/2013 - 20:26
The images are a comparison between the K-5IIs and the original K-5 Mk1. Confusion has probably crept in due to posts made since my original entries; I think I made it clear that the comparison was between IIs and the original K-5, in fact I've labelled the images very clearly above each one!

There is no significant focus difference between the shots, on this I can be categoric. Look at the white 'Pentax' word at the back of the larger box; if the focus on the first image was further back than it is on the second one, this word would be in sharper focus on the first, but it isn't!!

I think some people refuse to see what is actually there; I will shortly upload a couple at ISO 6400 to see how these compare; I can't pre-judge the outcome as I haven't looked at them yet.

Regards
David
Flickr

Nicola's Apartments, Kassiopi, Corfu

Some cameras, some lenses, some bits 'n' bobs
Add a Comment
You must be registered or logged-in to comment.