I've NEVER bought a camera based on pixel-peeping (in fact, I've even
done the opposite and bought a camera that was pretty bad when
pixel-peeped), and I agree with you, Rob, that I would only choose the
K-5II(s) if its AF were better than the K-5's, given the great price
of the K-5 right now.
I still suspect Pentax have a new flagship up their sleeve that will
be released shortly for $1,600 - 1,800. Releasing the K-5II was easy,
involved minimal R&D, and they could say "look, we did release a new
camera at Photokina...TWO new cameras, in fact."
Cheers,
—M.
\/\/o/\/\ --> http://WorldOfMiserere.com
http://EnticingTheLight.com
A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment
On 11 November 2012 15:09, Rob Studdert <[email protected]> wrote:
> Based on the pixel peeping and considering the price differential I
> would buy a K-5II or IIs solely if they showed an appreciable
> improvement in AF under low light as compared with an original K-5.
> Practically I feel that there is no other advantage in moving from the
> K-5 but that just me ;)
>
> On 12 November 2012 02:13, Miserere <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I can see clear differences between the K-5, K-5II and K-5IIs in both
>> noise management and detail preservation/resolution.
>>
>> But "clear" doesn't necessarily mean "large" or "useful on a practical
>> basis". That said, based on pixel-peeping, I'd choose the K-5IIs.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>>
>> —M.
>>
>> \/\/o/\/\ --> http://WorldOfMiserere.com
>>
>> http://EnticingTheLight.com
>> A Quest for Photographic Enlightenment
>>
>>
>>
>> On 10 November 2012 07:16, Rob Studdert <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> I can see a marked difference if I select a D800 as one of the cameras
>>> under compare otherwise the differences between the K5 variants are
>>> academic at best IMO.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 10 November 2012 22:04, Bruce Walker <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> The resolution advantage is there in plain view. Focus on any fine
>>>> text. Eg: examine the red square area below the globe, with the poem.
>>>> Try it at ISO 100 first then switch back to 6400. The K-5IIs degrades
>>>> the least of al the samples.
>>>>
>>>> I added the Canon 5DMkII in to the samples and was interested to note
>>>> that the K-5IIs actually beats it for fine rez, and looks cleaner at
>>>> 6400 ISO.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 3:46 AM, Rob Studdert <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> I sure as hell can't see any glaring advantage to the K-5 IIs, nor do
>>>>> I see any significant issue in red saturated areas of the test image.
>>>>> However what remains impressive is how little image quality
>>>>> degradation there is switching from ISO80 to ISO 800 ;)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10 November 2012 14:53, Tim Bray <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>> DPR has samples so you can do close-in comparison... here are the K-5,
>>>>>> the K-5 II, and K-5 IIs doing ISO6400 RAW.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The IIs may have big advantages, but they're sure not on display here.
>>>>>> Zero in on anything that has intense red saturation; I was surprised
>>>>>> by what I saw.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Having said that, I totally disapprove of pixel-peeping. Anyhow,
>>>>>> that's my story and I’m sticking to it. -T
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>>>>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
>>>>>> follow the directions.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio)
>>>>> Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours
>>>>> Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>>>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
>>>>> follow the directions.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> -bmw
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>>> [email protected]
>>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
>>>> follow the directions.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio)
>>> Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours
>>> Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio
>>>
>>> --
>>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
>>> follow the directions.
>>
>> --
>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
>> [email protected]
>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and
>> follow the directions.
>
>
>
> --
> Rob Studdert (Digital Image Studio)
> Tel: +61-418-166-870 UTC +10 Hours
> Gmail, eBay, Skype, Twitter, Facebook, Picasa: distudio
>
> --
> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
> [email protected]
> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
> the directions.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
