You all think this is exciting ? Just wait until I launch the first ever Great Battery Grip Shootout !!

Just an update - I am currently working on the two RAW files from DPreview, comparing them at the input stage and looking at their recorded camera metadata. Then I will run them through the workflow to Capture Sharpening stage, eliminating any variables.

I will be ready to report on this first stage tonight, so watch this space... I can already promise some good stuff is coming!

The AA filter has been standard for many years, across most digital camera ranges, as without it sensors are at risk of recording visable defects when shooting certain subjects with closely woven fine repeating patterns - often on clothing materials. This defect is known as moire.

But the AA filter applies a blur effect,'unsharpening' the image. This breaks up the patterns somewhat and restricts the moire. But we start out with more blurred image. This is conpensated for by sharpening either at capture point in camera, or in PP in RAW conversion.

Sensor technologies have been improving, and also larger sensors may be less at risk of recording moire. So some makers have now offered a camera model without the AA filter, so no blurring at capture point. This eliminates the Capture Sharpening stage of any workflow. The debate and testing here is about the significance of this in relation to how we translate this into quality terms at output stage.

For now the cost difference is quite big. Along with the image defects that an AA filter is designed to limit, it means there is some serious weighing up to do. This is not the same as the more common choice of simply deciding between the 'top of range' model and the one just beneath it. These two cameras do not stack up against each other in that manner. Its a whole new ball-game in terms of the issues we need to to think about, and so I'm saying it needs a whole new way of thinking about it

Apologies for those who are waiting for some conclusions on the '2nd' part of the workflow chain I've outlined above - that is the output results of my particular workflow. Tonight I'm out and I don't have the network capacity to download the RAW files from the DPreview website. But I'll get them tomorrow and start to work with them.

If anyone has identical images from the K5 & K5IIs and would like me to try and make a comparison, you are welcome to send a PM.

I am hoping that if people take on board the 'New Take' on it that I have articulated on the new thread, we will start to get somewhere. It is absolutely essential that we clarify the distinction between the Input stage and the effect of capture sharpening at that stage, and how that process (or lack of) can affect the Output potentials. Remember, we only get out what goes in.

I ask people to take a look at my reasoning in the new thread and see if it might help in terms of how you consider the options.

https://www.pentaxuser.com/forum/topic/k5ii-choice-considerations---a-new-take-4...#comm_465325

I absolutely have not said that

I know its a long post - but please read it fully. I have not said there is 'no benefit' full stop. I have made a reasonable 'pre-test' assumption only on the starting point files - that is the input - not the output potentials -please try and understand that - based on the facts of what we're starting with in technology terms.

If I make any conclusions on the output potential after I try out my own personal workflow, I am yet to report on that.

I think it too individual a choice to simply rely on the experiences of the odd user. Nor can you realistically expect to go into a camera shop, take a few snaps and be able to judge. I believe it is fair to say that this is a new way to consider it - 'A New Take'. Thats why I have not just continued it on from previous discussions. No, of course I don't have a K5 - that is irrelevant in this context, as has been pointed out by others elsewhere, we can get test images from the web to work with.

If those who have already made the choice no longer see there is any point to it, that's OK - you don't have to participate. This is for those of us who have an interest in this new choice, a division of technologies, which will continue to be offered I expect well beyond the K5 series.

David, your personal experiences and opinions on the output of your cameras continues to be informative, if coupled with info on your particular processing. But workflow and what we want from our shots is entirely personal. Throwing these considerations into the mix is absolutely serving a useful purpose I think.

Hi Rob, thanks for your interest again. Yup, I'm keen on no 2 also - the Samyang is just great when you get it tucked in close to foreground interest - focussing well can be a challenge though. No 5 is interesting - the light was dying down quickly, and I took many exposures. With processing I could end up with so many differing brightness's and depths of colour - the possibilities are endless with that one!

I've been offered some help by Smeggy, with links to review images for testing, so I'll grasp this opportunity to carry out some testing. I won't be buying a K5II, but I'll be looking in future for a new Pentax DSLR, and I guess it may have the same options - AA filter or not.

So.... here's how I see this issue, as much as I can place it into some logical context :

We have two choices, which provide a different initial input at capture - one (K5II) deliberately blurs the image by means of an AA filter, the other (K5IIs) does not.

With a blurred input (K5II) a compensatory action is applied in processing - this could be in-camera processing or a default deblur algorithm applied in a RAW converter program through the default camera profile for that program. (Then the user has the option to fine tune this in the software). This process is known in workflow terms as 'Capture Sharpening'. So for the K5IIs you can eliminate this sharpening stage.

How significant is eliminating capture sharpening? As far as the actual work involved is concerned, not at all. The default profile for RAW conversion can simply remove it, or the user can simply reduce the amount applied directly. We should get basically the same initial capture result with no effort, so no gain there.

The important question is how this small difference in reaching a default capture sharpening state will affect the potential of the image to absorb additional defining, detailing or sharpening processes later on in the workflow - call it 'output sharpening'. This could have added value in two ways - 1) to produce a final output with detail and clarity qualities that exceed that (at any given size) of an equivalent image shot with the standard K5II and DeBlurred with Capture Sharpening, or 2) to produce a larger output (say a print) without any further loss of quality beyond the maximum achievable from the equivalent image shot with the K5II.

If we can answer that question then we have a basis to decide on the value for money equation, and / or the 'risk of moire' equation, all depending on our own personal output needs, or desires!

Considering all the above, looking at this up front, I'm going to throw caution to the wind and claim that in my view, unless you are going to be pushing the boundaries of output (my No1 & 2 above), then the differences at capture stage between the two (allowing for the default compensating DeBlur algorithms applied at Capture Sharpening stage to the AA filtered image) will not be significant to the majority of users.

As far as the second part goes - what is the potential for increased clarity / size and quality at the output stage - then we have to run shots through our own individual workflow, using our standard tools, and attempt to compare the results with identical settings, and then push the boundaries to see if you can get further with the K5IIs files without quality loss.

I'll try and do this to some examples and get back with the results! In the meantime let me know what you think of all this reasoning

This can has been opened for some time, you're not responsible for that! I am interested in us all having some clearer thoughts and evidence for any future buying decisions - for me, I'm won't be in the market for a K5IIs, but I might be buying a future Pentax DSLR where the choice exists for AA filter or not - and if I'm lucky it'll be bigger as well

I'm up for some testing, and Smeggy has been so very kind to offer his helping hands, so I'll grasp them and get on with some comparisons.

I'm starting a new thread on this . Look out for it, 'K5II vs s considerations - a new take'