Hello Philip, please don't think I was criticising you as this is not the case. I was simply putting my point of view on what has been a very long thread, preceded by several other very long threads, all of which have been going round in circles and getting nowhere!

Regards
David

Very good Peter! I'm not sure which is best from these images, but I can I can confirm the M 50mm F1.4 is excellent reversed too.

Regards
David

We are all wasting our time on this, please see my last post on the previous (9 page:shock thread.

Most people on here have already made their minds up, the odd(?) thing is that virtually all of the people saying there is 'no benefit' don't actually own a K-5iis and most of the people convinced there is a benefit do own and use one regularly! I know which set of people I would listen to. Nigel (McGregNi) doesn't even have a K-5!

I appreciate the time and trouble being taken here in an attempt to provide useful information, but it is actually serving no useful purpose and is probably causing confusion. if you want a K-5iis, buy one, if you don't want one, don't buy one! If I were buying another body it would be a K-5iis (in the current model line up).

I won't add any further comment.

Best wishes
David

I really think we are all wasting our time on these comparisons; as has been said many times already, comparing images on the web does not and can not indicate any 'real world' benefits. I also think that the statement quoted by Gary (Cabstar) above is a load of rubbish when it comes to the K-5IIs versus the K-5II. Please don't misinterpret what I'm saying here; I am not meaning to infer that Gary talks rubbish as he clearly does not, I am only referring to the quote he has provided and putting this into context with the K-5IIs and K-5II discussion. Both cameras are 'for making pictures' regardless of anyone pixel peeping or not.

For what it's worth, I'm absolutely sure that most K-5IIs owners don't spend their time pixel peeping their images; I certainly don't do this; I simply haven't got the time to waste. What I do is look at my images on my (very good) full HD screen, both as I'm processing them and afterwards, and also occasionally make prints on my high resolution Epson printer. I can categorically say (without any pixel peeping) that the resulting images look better from the K-5IIs than they do from the K-5 Mk1 in real world use (I don't have a K-5II). When I say they look better, I mean they just look sharper, crisper, more vibrant and these are fair comparisons because I shoot with the same lenses on both cameras so I have the ability to judge this. BTW all settings are identical on both bodies, so there is no possibility of any processing differences, unless Pentax have introduced something automatic we are not aware of. I also have 6 months of heavy usage, thousands of images shot, processed and reviewed to base this upon.

This is the last I will say about it as I think the subject is now completely worn out and before anyone asks, the answer is 'no I will not be providing any comparison images'!

Best wishes
David

Sorry Richard (and JR), no intention on my part to hijack your thread. I was merely seeking clarification on why you wanted a longer lens, I hope that Peter has answered your query.

Regards
David

A K-x was my first DSLR. My first film SLR was a sort of pseudo-Pentax, an old Petri that had a Pentax K-mount. This led me to buy a few K-mount lenses, the only one of which I still have is a Chinon 50mm F1.9.

Regards
David

OK, sorry Nuri I misunderstood. I don't know the answer, it's a good question though if it isn't based on views and maybe it should have been made clear when the articles were published?

Regards
David

I think the selections are based on 'highest number of views' Nuri and not on personal opinions. When my landscape appeared at the top of the list, I checked this and they seem to be ranked in descending order of views.

I'm sure JR or one of the other PU mods can confirm this or put me straight if I'm wrong?

Regards
David

Thanks for that sharp observation Mike, you should be on the telly as you clearly have telepathic powers to read my mind

If I say 'I'm not sure of the reason', I think that means what it says, i.e. 'I'm not sure'. In other words I would like clarification, or put another way I'm asking a question. There you go, I've explained it as much as I can but I would really appreciate you telling me I'm wrong

Cheers
David

I wasn't questioning his reasoning Mike, I just wanted to know why, so I asked a question; that's why there's a question mark in the sentence.

There's no law against that is there? I usually find that the only way to get answers is to ask questions.

Cheers
David