The photographs depicted clearly show that the people being photographed are more than happy to cooperate. They aren't sneaky shots of a Tog leaping out from behind a gravestone and for all the web site author knows these could be paid models.

John

No they shouldn't be using the photographs without the express permission of the photographer. Strange choice of colours for their web site - dark grey on black. Simulated invisible ink!

John

Both the DA 35mm f2.8 limited and DA 35mm f2.4 (oddly not designated DA-L even though it is that style of lens) perform well. The reason so many are being re-sold is down to people who stockpiled several each during a recent bargain discount on Amazon selling them on. It's nothing to do with the quality of the optics.

John

Exactly right. But for the Q, K-01 and most compacts being able to see the screen is far more important. If it is too bright to see the screen on a DSLR it doesn't really matter unless one is trying to change a menu setting - then it can be frustrating. It can normally be left turned off to save power.

I normally keep the brightness on normal as if it is turned up it can give the impression of over exposure when reviewing shots (given conditions where one can view the screen OK.)

John

May I suggest that contributors include if they have overridden the default screen brightness setting by turning it up or down.

I've yet to find a camera screen I can see in bright sunshine (so I avoid cameras like that now - no point in buying one and then having to guess what it is I'm taking!) However I have no trouble seeing the screen on my SatNav, so it seems it can be done.

John

If the 40mm is that good a price, buy it and try it and then decide.
It is close to the 35mm and 50mm though so maybe not worth it if you might loose value on it.

I always preferred the 40mm on the ME to the 50mm.

John

Well there's just four seconds between the shots, the light doesn't appear to have changed. Speed, aperture and ISO are identical. I too could only suggest that the lens has failed close the aperture fully for the second exposure.

John

Well I've just got back in and see there have been no updates to this thread. I'll try to suggest why the D90 pictures may look better than those of the K-5 to the OP.

While one would need to use the same lens on both cameras and the photos taken at about the same time for a true comparison (given that different lenses have different characteristics and the light would be unlikely to be exactly the same on two different days.) But ignoring that, the D90 has, I understand, a 12.3MP sensor whereas the K-5 has a 16.3MP sensor, therefore the image at full pixel resolution will be more magnified on the K-5 compared to that on the D90. (Similar comments to this have also been made about earlier Pentax cameras when compared to the K-5 too.) It is more than likely that the lens on the D90 will out perform the sensor whereas the sensor could out perform the lens on the K-5.

Printing the two similar images at say A3 size should put things back into a way of being able to compare them directly. The K-5 image should show a subtle amount more detail as it will have been magnified less than the D90 image. So while at full pixel resolution the K-5 image may look worse but making the images the same size the K-5 should bring out more detail. But as I said, everything else needs to have been equal for the comparison. Some days are more hazy, foggy even! Light levels change. And of course the quality and characteristics of the lenses being used in the comparison. Ideally something like a Vivitar or Tamron interchangeable mount lens could allow use of the same lens on both bodies with both photos taken at about the same time of the same subject. Only then could a true subjective comparison be made.

Still curious to see the images that caused the comment to be made though.

Have you tried a quick blow into the lens mount yet, any luck?

John

If it is just a bit of dust it will probably disappear as quickly as it appeared.

Perhaps not the best way but possibly the quickest - a quick blow into the camera lens mount may just be enough clear it. Are you still going to show how "the image quality of D90 simply kills pics from K5?"

John

Well done Chris for finding it. I can't see it at all on my reductions.

It would be unusual for dust inside a lens to cause something like that. Something on a filter in front of a lens might but then it would only normally show up on a wide angle shot where the depth of field is large. Could it be a filter issue? Failing that some dirt on the sensor.

You initially said that, "both images are not really sharp not to mention that colors are bit off." Do you still feels that, or are you having second thoughts about the lens?

Not sure about that, wouldn't have thought so though.

John