K5 or K5II?

I'm still a bit unclear on exactly the nature of the of IQ improvements that we should be seeing on the 's' model (without the filter). There were some examples posted on another thread which looked to me, what I would describe as 'sharp', like they had been well sharpened in post processing - very nice quality sharpening I must say.

It was referred to by other posters as 'Higher Resolution' than the standard K5 - but I understood that this would imply a higher number of pixels - and this is not the case in sensor spec terms is it?

Am I right in thinking that the resolution would be the same, but that the lack of 'AA' filter would eliminate some blurring that we currently accept as normal, and so images would be sharp out of the camera - therefore the key advantage is not needing to sharpen at all (or as much) in PP - so less artifact etc, equals higher quality?

Higher resolution would imply bigger prints possible at same quality - but we're not saying we could make bigger prints from K5iis are we?

I wonder if we're looking at the same thing? Take a look here;

link

Seems they'll be publishing an article later to-day.

link

Well, that seems to be saying 'Get the 's' model, unless you shoot lots of textiles, fabrics etc with repeating patterns - and try and avoid shooting close ups of test charts as well!'

Interestingly, they sum up by saying that the benefits are increased 'clarity and resolution' - brings me back to my point / question above about how exactly to describe and quantify the IQ benefits. I can understand 'clarity', but 'resolution'??

Also, looking down some post on that thread, some are saying there's no point if you can just 'crank up the sharpening in PP' on the K5ii to match the level of sharpness that the 's' output.

But won't the 'cranking up' introduce artifacts - if you don't need as much in PP then that would be an obvious quality improvement I'm guessing.

Resolution is a technical term used in lens testing, so Wikipedia will be your friend there no doubt. Basically, it is a measure of how much fine detail can be clearly seen. This can be measured pretty exactly and is the stuff of MTF measurements.

Cranking up the sharpness is an extreme phrase that implies "a lot" but increasing sharpness is necessary with all digital images, to offset the effect of the AA filter. If done appropriately it will improve an image and not detract from it. Moderation is the key.

I went to the K-5 sub-forum and found this thread. Assumed that's what you meant

http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-k-5/203377-pentax-k-5-iis-first-impressions-sample-comparative-photos.html

I went to the K-5 sub-forum and found this thread. Assumed that's what you meant

http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-k-5/203377-pentax-k-5-iis-first-impressions-sample-comparative-photos.html[/quote]Thanks Smeggypants. Hadn't seen the one you linked to, but still looks good to me. As to different times of day, yes you're technically correct, but actually just 2 minutes apart according to the OP, with the sun going in (or coming out). The cameras were set to two different US time zones - MST and EST.

Now the IIs is out there I'm looking forward to some decent tests, plus I need to understand more about moire especially (a) when is it most likely to occur in my photography, and (b) can I get rid of it if it does?

It's a difficult comparison because K-5 images will need sharpening, like all digital cameras with an AA filter. That's the way it works.

The K-5 IIs may or may not need sharpening, but it's going to be a different beast anyway.

I would prefer to work with both doing a series of experiments, getting to know them as well as doing a resolution test in the usual way.

I went to the K-5 sub-forum and found this thread. Assumed that's what you meant

http://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-k-5/203377-pentax-k-5-iis-first-impressions-sample-comparative-photos.html[/quote]Thanks Smeggypants. Hadn't seen the one you linked to, but still looks good to me. As to different times of day, yes you're technically correct, but actually just 2 minutes apart according to the OP, with the sun going in (or coming out). The cameras were set to two different US time zones - MST and EST.

Now the IIs is out there I'm looking forward to some decent tests, plus I need to understand more about moire especially (a) when is it most likely to occur in my photography, and (b) can I get rid of it is it does?[/quote]All the other comparisons i've seen, including the pic of the yellow digger you linked to, the children's plastic sign on the page I linked to abovem and comparisons on other sites, such as here ... http://www.imaging-resource.com/IMCOMP/COMPS01.HTM have shown the detail on the K-5IIs as being slightly better was we'd expect.

The comparison of the building is far too different to be a useful benchmark. It should never have been offered up in the first place IMO

Direct and valid comparisons will always be difficult for an individual photographer - I mean, once we get it sorted in our minds on what exactly we need to be looking for, we're going to have to rely on trustworthy technical reviews on the web - I doubt there will be much use in going into Jessops in order to try out both models and see which you prefer

And the idea of thinking in resolution terms, such as MTF data for lenses, in relation to sensors is quite new I think? The traditional idea of resolution in sensor terms is pixel dimensions and numbers, related to the overall sensor size - so it is now necessary to consider how the various sensor specs and filters interact to produce a single comparative measure, if indeed any such measure yet exists?