On 24/10/2012 1:48 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
I leave it as an exercise for the reader to decide if that makes it
worth the price of an upgrade from your K-5. I believe that most
people will be putting more emphasis on its AF capabilities, as
compared to the K-5, before deciding. But I think I'm goi
It doesn't really prove much IMO. Without controlling for variables
such as lighting, distance, focus, microfocus adjustment, it's just
two pictures of a note.
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 5:19 PM, Darren Addy wrote:
> The size of the cropped image is irrelevant if it is an actual pixel
> size image
The size of the cropped image is irrelevant if it is an actual pixel
size image (which they are). The FA31 is not a macro lens.
: )
They've just saved you a lot of time and bandwidth over downloading
the full image (and also made it practical to put them side-by-side on
screen).
--
PDML Pentax-D
No pixel peeping there. The images are only 718 pixels on each side. Hard to
determine anything on the basis of such mall images, although I did compare the
two f4 images, and while the color varies greatly (no color space assigned),
one does appear to be somewhat sharper than the other.
Pul
On
Don't know if you've seen this already or not, but here is a
comparison of a Japanese Yen note photographed with the same lens (FA
31mm f1.8 AL Limited) on a K-5 and then with a K-5iis
K-5
http://pentax.briefing-paper.com/1121
Posted in May
K-5iis
http://pentax.briefing-paper.com/1864
Posted toda
5 matches
Mail list logo
