Jim Radchiffe upgrades to a IIS

[pinholecam]

Came across Jim Radchiffe's blog again and seems like he's upgraded from K5 to K5IIs.

Check out his article here :
Pentax K5 IIs Photography by Jim Radcliffe



Interesting to note his observations regarding o/p from someone who has a X-pro1 and formerly used a 5DII.
(and I agree with his points regarding that fine balance of size/usability/performance/small lenses that a Pentax has)

 

[fengwei]

The real improvement is the better IQ of the photographs produced by the K5 IIs. They are sharper, they are better… for me. The lack of an AA filter on the K5 IIs works for me. I have not encountered a single instance where moiré has been apparent or ruined a shot for me. That is not to say that it will never happen but so far, so good.

Was the upgrade worth it? To me, yes. If you already own a K5 you will have to make that decision based on what and how you shoot.
In browsing many Pentax related forums the participants seem to be split. Some see no need to upgrade, claiming there is not enough improvement or reason to do so. Some, like myself, see a difference and are happy with the decision to upgrade. I have listed my original K5 for sale.

Agreed

I switched from Canon to Pentax in March of 2011. I really have no regrets. Do I miss the full frame of my Canon 5D MKII? Every now and then I do... but not enough to go back to the bulk and weight of that camera system, not to mention the cost. The K5 serves my needs and I am happy with my decision to upgrade to the K5 IIs.

Totally agreed

I'm sure many here can afford a fancy FF system (be it a 5DIII or D800E plus a few L or VR lenses), but I won't be happy with that kind of load on my shoulder or back when I'm out w/ the family or traveling.


You can't get a better set of WR kit like this ;p

 

[ashyra7]

I'm sure many here can afford a fancy FF system (be it a 5DIII or D800E plus a few L or VR lenses), but I won't be happy with that kind of load on my shoulder or back when I'm out w/ the family or traveling.


You can't get a better set of WR kit like this ;p

Great comment... 一针见血... :kok:

 

[creampuff]

The thing is, even when an accomplished photographer like Jim Radcliffe says that moire is not a problem with the K-5IIs, some "can't shoot for nuts armchair critic" on PF and other forums will keep insisting that moire is a problem. These are the same closed minded people who will pore over every detail of comparative photos posted on DP review and other sites and extrapolate that the K-5IIs is deficient and use every post processing trick to prove that the non-IIs output can match that of the IIs. Yet many of these folks are the very same lot who haven't even used a K-5IIs much less used it side by side with the K-5. So they will always be a section who can't accept that their K-5 cameras that they got cheap, at end of life prices somehow is bettered by the newer IIs. The improvement in image quality over the K-5 is real, at least for me and I'll never go back to a K-5, ever.

That the K-5IIs enjoys healthy sales over the K-5II is indication that increased sharpness is an important criteria. One thing I've noticed is if you're one who likes to dabble with cheap and cheerful, crappy legacy lenses, the IIs is gonna show up its whatever shortcomings pretty quick, which might actually be a good thing because there's no good reason to use "cannot make it glass" anyway in the first place

 

[fengwei]

You know Denis, some guys will always be like that It's called 阿Q精神 (Ah Q Spirit) in Chinese - The True Story of Ah Q - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It's just a 1.5k camera, FGS! Can't understand why those guys just get one to try try before they claim they knew better.

And agree, if you are using some cheapy kit or megazoom lens w/ the K5IIs, better just stick w/ K5 or K5II (if you want much improved lower focusing), even these two cameras deserve better quality lenses.

 

[pinholecam]

The thing is, even when an accomplished photographer like Jim Radcliffe says that moire is not a problem with the K-5IIs, some "can't shoot for nuts armchair critic" on PF and other forums will keep insisting that moire is a problem. These are the same closed minded people who will pore over every detail of comparative photos posted on DP review and other sites and extrapolate that the K-5IIs is deficient and use every post processing trick to prove that the non-IIs output can match that of the IIs. Yet many of these folks are the very same lot who haven't even used a K-5IIs much less used it side by side with the K-5. So they will always be a section who can't accept that their K-5 cameras that they got cheap, at end of life prices somehow is bettered by the newer IIs. The improvement in image quality over the K-5 is real, at least for me and I'll never go back to a K-5, ever.

Some of the PF guys are only interested in their self generated 'intriuges'.
Its pretty obvious too.
Those threads/post offering real info/review/samples often get fewer replies or relevant discussion than the 'make your own camera' ones.


Its always easy to pick studio samples off DPR/IR do PP and then scrutinize the results.
I've played with the so claimed deconvolution sharpening on AA-filtered o/p of my K30.
In a controlled shoot like portraits and landscapes, it can be fine.
But in more real world shooting where settings/conditions are more dynamic, this method is tedious if not impossible except for those with nothing better to do in a cold bleak winter.

 

[creampuff]

You know Denis, some guys will always be like that It's called 阿Q精神 (Ah Q Spirit) in Chinese - The True Story of Ah Q - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It's just a 1.5k camera, FGS! Can't understand why those guys just get one to try try before they claim they knew better.

And agree, if you are using some cheapy kit or megazoom lens w/ the K5IIs, better just stick w/ K5 or K5II (if you want much improved lower focusing), even these two cameras deserve better quality lenses.

Yeah, that's seems like a common issue with a segment of Pentax users on different forums. Wow, it's been awhile since I came across the tale of Ah Q. Perhaps it isn't coincidental that Pentax came out with the Pentax Q.

Some of the PF guys are only interested in their self generated 'intriuges'.
Its pretty obvious too.
Those threads/post offering real info/review/samples often get fewer replies or relevant discussion than the 'make your own camera' ones.


Its always easy to pick studio samples off DPR/IR do PP and then scrutinize the results.
I've played with the so claimed deconvolution sharpening on AA-filtered o/p of my K30.
In a controlled shoot like portraits and landscapes, it can be fine.
But in more real world shooting where settings/conditions are more dynamic, this method is tedious if not impossible except for those with nothing better to do in a cold bleak winter.

I agree 100%.
It's pretty funny but I do come across these kinda folks on occasion at work. These so called experts for example can rattle off the specifications of bikes at the back of their hand. They have so much head knowledge from internet research that if you didn't know, you'd think they worked for the bike manufacturer itself. Get them actually riding on the bike and all that internet knowledge is pretty useless because they can't tell the difference between one model to another much less ride a bike properly. Pathetic really.:think: