Re: K5 II vs K5 IIs vs K5 vs K3
On Jul 14, 2014, at 5:22 PM, Larry Colen wrote: . . . > > I had the opportunity to briefly play with a K-3 a few weeks back. > Completely aside from any performance advantages, the button layout on the > back would be nearly enough to tempt me to buy one rather than a K-5. The > button arrangement on the back of the K-5 is such that I’m often hitting live > view rather than the green button or the focus point select. From what I > hear the autofocus has also been improved as well. > > The K-5II still seems to have a slight edge in low light/high ISO situations, > so if like me you do a lot of shooting in stupid low light, the K-5 has some > performance advantages over the K-3. > . . . I totally endorse Larry's comments above. - The button arrangement on the K-3 has cut down, actually eliminated, the instances when I reset the shooting mode while trying to activate the AF. - I have held on to one of my K-5ii bodies because of the low-light high-ISO difference between the K-5ii and the K-3. It is fixable in post-processing, not a fatal flaw, but I am still surprised when I look at the K-3 images, surprised to see more noise than I have come to expect. stan -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
K5 II vs K5 IIs vs K5 vs K3
Hi Larry, not all Canon "L" lenses are fast like f 1.4 or 2.8, but I have seen this young girl use 35 & 50 mm f 1.4, 24-70 mm f 2.8 & 70-200 mm f 4 "L" Lenses for Maternity / Baby shoots with her Canon 5D Mark III. Not that I am amused with Canon "L" lenses as these too have their controversies. They are huge and heavy too. She charges USD 2000 for one sitting in Mumbai & Bangalore. I think she can afford the costliest Full Frame Camera money can buy - born with a silver spoon in her mouth and a post grad from Canada's top university. But she is very modest, pragmatic and a kindly soul too. Any way I am arranging a loner Pentax 645 from the Ricoh Manager in India. She was quite impressed with my "ancient" K-5 and liked the Tamron 17-50 f2.8 on it. Here is her wbsite: http://www.shreyasenphotography.com/ Images for shreya sen photography (copy & paste in browser) Regards. Bipin. camp: Thornhill, Ontario. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K5 II vs K5 IIs vs K5 vs K3
On Jul 11, 2014, at 4:19 PM, Bipin Gupta wrote: > We have a small group in India called ipen...@googlegroups.com. Most > of us have the K-30, K-50, K-5 / K-5 II / K-5 IIs and a few K-3. > I have the later Ricoh model of the K-5 bought from Henry's Toronto > with the 18-135 as a kit. > > The K-5 II and K-5 IIs are definitely better manufactured with tighter > Quality Assurance than the K-5. Also Auto Focus is much faster in > low light than the K-5. There are other claims for superiority, but I > am not convinced as a Techie and a Master Mechanic. > > The K-5 II is absolutely identical to the K-5 IIs except that it does > not have the Low Pass Filter and hence produces sharper photos. > > I would not give Moire much prominence as it also appears on certain > dresses or patterned clothing even with my K-5 - easily removed in PP. > So I would go for the K-5 IIs because of the rare instances of Moire > that you "might encounter" - note might. I had the opportunity to briefly play with a K-3 a few weeks back. Completely aside from any performance advantages, the button layout on the back would be nearly enough to tempt me to buy one rather than a K-5. The button arrangement on the back of the K-5 is such that I’m often hitting live view rather than the green button or the focus point select. From what I hear the autofocus has also been improved as well. The K-5II still seems to have a slight edge in low light/high ISO situations, so if like me you do a lot of shooting in stupid low light, the K-5 has some performance advantages over the K-3. > > Every camera generation is an improvement just like new generation of > human beings. Evolution doesn’t select specifically for improvement, it just selects for passing on your DNA. For example evolution will select for people who are not intelligent enough to understand the benefits of contraceptions over those that actually do the math on the relative costs of contraception and unplanned pregnancies. > > You will be mighty pleased with the K-5 IIs. And if you have the > moolah, jump on the K-3. > > Now a Pro friend of mine says - Lenses are more important than camera > bodies - she buys only "L" lenses for her Canon 5D Mark III. And everybody says that the photographer is more important than the gear, but that doesn’t stop even the best photographers for spending money to get better gear. You have to look at your whole system and see what component can make the biggest improvement. If you already have a decent selection of good lenses, a body that gets the same performance at a two stop higher ISO can do more for your money to improve the quality of your photos than buying a bunch of quality lenses that are one or two stops faster. If you do most of your photography in good light, sensor performance won’t be such an issue. Likewise for some people autofocus speed and accuracy are critical and for others they are irrelevant. I suppose in your friend’s case, that’s why she only spends $5,000 for the 5D rather than $8,000 for the 1D. Of course, if she had bought the 6D, she would have had enough money to spare to buy yet another L lens. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K5 II vs K5 IIs vs K5 vs K3
On 13/07/2014 1:15 AM, Bob W-PDML wrote: Furthermore, the idea that all societies can keep everyone alive long enough is just nonsense. Look back over the last 100 years and count the war dead, the people who've died in famines, and the people, the children, who are dying now from preventable causes. Go into any old cemetery and look at the percentage of grave markers where the person died very young, and compare that to today. The reason why our average age before we die has increased from 50 to 80 in the past couple of hundred years is because we have done a very good job in western societies of suppressing infant and child mortality, not because we are necessarily living a lot longer. Humans have always placed a higher importance on the lives of their own tribe and less importance on the lives of other tribes, which is why western countries (North America in particular) will throw almost half of it's food in the trash, but allow million to die in famines in other parts of the world. As long as we are well fed, we aren't so concerned about people starving in far away places. bill -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K5 II vs K5 IIs vs K5 vs K3
On 13 Jul 2014, at 01:47, "P.J. Alling" wrote: > > Actually it seems that Human's haven't evolved in about 10,000 years. Actual > evolution requires death before reproduction, and even the most primitive > societies can keep all but the most sickly of their members alive long enough > to reproduce. If that were true it would just mean that it's selecting for things other than the ability to survive long enough to reproduce. It's an obvious fact that not all people who are physically to reproduce do so, so selection is working on something other than the mere fact of survival to breeding age. However, I'm not convinced that your statements are true - why do you think we haven't evolved? http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/10/david-attenborough-humans-still-evolving Furthermore, the idea that all societies can keep everyone alive long enough is just nonsense. Look back over the last 100 years and count the war dead, the people who've died in famines, and the people, the children, who are dying now from preventable causes. B > >> On 7/12/2014 6:02 PM, steve harley wrote: >> on 2014-07-11 17:19 Bipin Gupta wrote >>> Every camera generation is an improvement just like new generation of >>> human beings. >> >> quite an optimist you are; evolution in humans has been superseded by >> societal transmission and it's not clear to me that at this point we are >> passing on our best to the next generations >> >> on topic: when i had to replace my K-5, i bought … another K-5; a >> low-mileage used one in beautiful shape with a few extras, $400 shipped >> >> if i had thought it worth the money i could have afforded a K-5II or IIs, or >> even a K-3, but the more i tossed it around i realized the incremental value >> was not there (for me) for the cost; the IQ of the II should be the same, >> period, the IIs, only a tiny bit better in sharpness, but otherwise same; >> this tiny bit is probably dwarfed by my own faults and practices, though it >> might make a difference on macro shots; auto-focus improvements aren't a >> major value for me as i am most often using manual focus >> >> the K-3, as i understand it, gives a larger amount of raw picture data, >> which might help when cropping, but does not improve significantly in >> dynamic range or low light; it may be a better build and nicer to operate, >> but at a price >> >> so i decided (for me) there was a significant opportunity cost to paying >> more for just a little bit better camera > > > -- > A newspaper is a device for making the ignorant more ignorant, and the crazy, > crazier. > > - H.L.Mencken > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > 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 PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K5 II vs K5 IIs vs K5 vs K3
Actually it seems that Human's haven't evolved in about 10,000 years. Actual evolution requires death before reproduction, and even the most primitive societies can keep all but the most sickly of their members alive long enough to reproduce. On 7/12/2014 6:02 PM, steve harley wrote: on 2014-07-11 17:19 Bipin Gupta wrote Every camera generation is an improvement just like new generation of human beings. quite an optimist you are; evolution in humans has been superseded by societal transmission and it's not clear to me that at this point we are passing on our best to the next generations on topic: when i had to replace my K-5, i bought … another K-5; a low-mileage used one in beautiful shape with a few extras, $400 shipped if i had thought it worth the money i could have afforded a K-5II or IIs, or even a K-3, but the more i tossed it around i realized the incremental value was not there (for me) for the cost; the IQ of the II should be the same, period, the IIs, only a tiny bit better in sharpness, but otherwise same; this tiny bit is probably dwarfed by my own faults and practices, though it might make a difference on macro shots; auto-focus improvements aren't a major value for me as i am most often using manual focus the K-3, as i understand it, gives a larger amount of raw picture data, which might help when cropping, but does not improve significantly in dynamic range or low light; it may be a better build and nicer to operate, but at a price so i decided (for me) there was a significant opportunity cost to paying more for just a little bit better camera -- A newspaper is a device for making the ignorant more ignorant, and the crazy, crazier. - H.L.Mencken -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K5 II vs K5 IIs vs K5 vs K3
on 2014-07-11 17:19 Bipin Gupta wrote Every camera generation is an improvement just like new generation of human beings. quite an optimist you are; evolution in humans has been superseded by societal transmission and it's not clear to me that at this point we are passing on our best to the next generations on topic: when i had to replace my K-5, i bought … another K-5; a low-mileage used one in beautiful shape with a few extras, $400 shipped if i had thought it worth the money i could have afforded a K-5II or IIs, or even a K-3, but the more i tossed it around i realized the incremental value was not there (for me) for the cost; the IQ of the II should be the same, period, the IIs, only a tiny bit better in sharpness, but otherwise same; this tiny bit is probably dwarfed by my own faults and practices, though it might make a difference on macro shots; auto-focus improvements aren't a major value for me as i am most often using manual focus the K-3, as i understand it, gives a larger amount of raw picture data, which might help when cropping, but does not improve significantly in dynamic range or low light; it may be a better build and nicer to operate, but at a price so i decided (for me) there was a significant opportunity cost to paying more for just a little bit better camera -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K5 II vs K5 IIs vs K5 vs K3
I have never handled a 3, 5, or 5II, but the 5IIs has exceeded all my expectations. Dan Matyola http://www.pentaxphotogallery.com/danieljmatyola On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 4:47 AM, Zos Xavius wrote: > The high ISO is better on the K-5 IIs IMO. Jpegs out of the camera are > decidedly cleaner. I don't regret my decision one bit at all. > > On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Rob Studdert wrote: >> I just bought a K5IIs to replace my remaining K5 as the second camera >> in my kit, it's more than adequate for my needs and better than the K3 >> in some respects. The K5 will now be my remote camera, triggered via >> wireless sync to one of my main cameras. >> >> Buying L-lenses certainly doesn't mean buying best in class, a very >> limited investigation will now confirm that. >> >> >> On 12 July 2014 09:19, Bipin Gupta wrote: >>> We have a small group in India called ipen...@googlegroups.com. Most >>> of us have the K-30, K-50, K-5 / K-5 II / K-5 IIs and a few K-3. >>> I have the later Ricoh model of the K-5 bought from Henry's Toronto >>> with the 18-135 as a kit. >>> >>> The K-5 II and K-5 IIs are definitely better manufactured with tighter >>> Quality Assurance than the K-5. Also Auto Focus is much faster in >>> low light than the K-5. There are other claims for superiority, but I >>> am not convinced as a Techie and a Master Mechanic. >>> >>> The K-5 II is absolutely identical to the K-5 IIs except that it does >>> not have the Low Pass Filter and hence produces sharper photos. >>> >>> I would not give Moire much prominence as it also appears on certain >>> dresses or patterned clothing even with my K-5 - easily removed in PP. >>> So I would go for the K-5 IIs because of the rare instances of Moire >>> that you "might encounter" - note might. >>> >>> Every camera generation is an improvement just like new generation of >>> human beings. >>> >>> You will be mighty pleased with the K-5 IIs. And if you have the >>> moolah, jump on the K-3. >>> >>> Now a Pro friend of mine says - Lenses are more important than camera >>> bodies - she buys only "L" lenses for her Canon 5D Mark III. >>> >>> Regards. >>> Bipin. >>> camp: Thornhill, Ontario. >>> >>> -- >>> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >>> PDML@pdml.net >>> 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 >> PDML@pdml.net >> 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 > PDML@pdml.net > 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 PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K5 II vs K5 IIs vs K5 vs K3
The high ISO is better on the K-5 IIs IMO. Jpegs out of the camera are decidedly cleaner. I don't regret my decision one bit at all. On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 9:01 PM, Rob Studdert wrote: > I just bought a K5IIs to replace my remaining K5 as the second camera > in my kit, it's more than adequate for my needs and better than the K3 > in some respects. The K5 will now be my remote camera, triggered via > wireless sync to one of my main cameras. > > Buying L-lenses certainly doesn't mean buying best in class, a very > limited investigation will now confirm that. > > > On 12 July 2014 09:19, Bipin Gupta wrote: >> We have a small group in India called ipen...@googlegroups.com. Most >> of us have the K-30, K-50, K-5 / K-5 II / K-5 IIs and a few K-3. >> I have the later Ricoh model of the K-5 bought from Henry's Toronto >> with the 18-135 as a kit. >> >> The K-5 II and K-5 IIs are definitely better manufactured with tighter >> Quality Assurance than the K-5. Also Auto Focus is much faster in >> low light than the K-5. There are other claims for superiority, but I >> am not convinced as a Techie and a Master Mechanic. >> >> The K-5 II is absolutely identical to the K-5 IIs except that it does >> not have the Low Pass Filter and hence produces sharper photos. >> >> I would not give Moire much prominence as it also appears on certain >> dresses or patterned clothing even with my K-5 - easily removed in PP. >> So I would go for the K-5 IIs because of the rare instances of Moire >> that you "might encounter" - note might. >> >> Every camera generation is an improvement just like new generation of >> human beings. >> >> You will be mighty pleased with the K-5 IIs. And if you have the >> moolah, jump on the K-3. >> >> Now a Pro friend of mine says - Lenses are more important than camera >> bodies - she buys only "L" lenses for her Canon 5D Mark III. >> >> Regards. >> Bipin. >> camp: Thornhill, Ontario. >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> 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 > PDML@pdml.net > 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 PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K5 II vs K5 IIs vs K5 vs K3
I just bought a K5IIs to replace my remaining K5 as the second camera in my kit, it's more than adequate for my needs and better than the K3 in some respects. The K5 will now be my remote camera, triggered via wireless sync to one of my main cameras. Buying L-lenses certainly doesn't mean buying best in class, a very limited investigation will now confirm that. On 12 July 2014 09:19, Bipin Gupta wrote: > We have a small group in India called ipen...@googlegroups.com. Most > of us have the K-30, K-50, K-5 / K-5 II / K-5 IIs and a few K-3. > I have the later Ricoh model of the K-5 bought from Henry's Toronto > with the 18-135 as a kit. > > The K-5 II and K-5 IIs are definitely better manufactured with tighter > Quality Assurance than the K-5. Also Auto Focus is much faster in > low light than the K-5. There are other claims for superiority, but I > am not convinced as a Techie and a Master Mechanic. > > The K-5 II is absolutely identical to the K-5 IIs except that it does > not have the Low Pass Filter and hence produces sharper photos. > > I would not give Moire much prominence as it also appears on certain > dresses or patterned clothing even with my K-5 - easily removed in PP. > So I would go for the K-5 IIs because of the rare instances of Moire > that you "might encounter" - note might. > > Every camera generation is an improvement just like new generation of > human beings. > > You will be mighty pleased with the K-5 IIs. And if you have the > moolah, jump on the K-3. > > Now a Pro friend of mine says - Lenses are more important than camera > bodies - she buys only "L" lenses for her Canon 5D Mark III. > > Regards. > Bipin. > camp: Thornhill, Ontario. > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > 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 PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
K5 II vs K5 IIs vs K5 vs K3
We have a small group in India called ipen...@googlegroups.com. Most of us have the K-30, K-50, K-5 / K-5 II / K-5 IIs and a few K-3. I have the later Ricoh model of the K-5 bought from Henry's Toronto with the 18-135 as a kit. The K-5 II and K-5 IIs are definitely better manufactured with tighter Quality Assurance than the K-5. Also Auto Focus is much faster in low light than the K-5. There are other claims for superiority, but I am not convinced as a Techie and a Master Mechanic. The K-5 II is absolutely identical to the K-5 IIs except that it does not have the Low Pass Filter and hence produces sharper photos. I would not give Moire much prominence as it also appears on certain dresses or patterned clothing even with my K-5 - easily removed in PP. So I would go for the K-5 IIs because of the rare instances of Moire that you "might encounter" - note might. Every camera generation is an improvement just like new generation of human beings. You will be mighty pleased with the K-5 IIs. And if you have the moolah, jump on the K-3. Now a Pro friend of mine says - Lenses are more important than camera bodies - she buys only "L" lenses for her Canon 5D Mark III. Regards. Bipin. camp: Thornhill, Ontario. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K5 II vs K5 IIs (vs K5) VS K3
Like my opinion matters anyways. ;) On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 3:46 PM, Bryan Jacoby wrote: > I am silly IYO. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K5 II vs K5 IIs (vs K5) VS K3
I am silly IYO. On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 3:42 PM, Zos Xavius wrote: > The K-5 II is discontinued, so prices are rising now. The K-5 IIs is > not discontinued officially yet. A few months ago, prices on the K-5 > II were much better. Some people want the AA filter because they have > concerns about moire. Those people are silly IMO. > > On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 3:31 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: >> On 7/11/2014 3:00 PM, Darren Addy wrote: >>> >>> I believe that J.C. is using very sound reasoning, economically. The >>> K-5 iis is considered by many to be one of the very special cameras >>> that Pentax has ever produced. I have a Pentax K-5 ii, which I am very >>> happy with but if I could trade it straight across for a iis I >>> certainly would. The K-5ii was $925 when I bought it and the s was >>> another $200 or so, at the time. Getting a new one for $700 now is a >>> Good Buy, IMHO. >> >> >> Today, I did an ebay search and found I can get brand new in box bodies for >> approx inc. shipping : >> >> K5 - $650 >> K5II - $700 >> K5IIs- $700 >> >> so it seems the premium for K5IIs has disappeared. is this a fluke? or is >> there a real advantage >> to the K5II that some are willing to pay as much for one as a K5IIs? >> >> >> >>> >>> On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Bruce wrote: That is what I did. I could not afford or justify the K3, but as my old K5 was worn beyond rated life expectancy, I picked up the K5iis. At that time the K3 was $1300 and I got the K5iis for $700. -- Bruce Sent from my iPad > On Jul 11, 2014, at 10:40 AM, "J.C. O'Connell" > wrote: > > well the main reason Im considering the K5 IIs is they are still > available new in box and cost only $700 compared to around $1100 for a K3. > The K5 IIs seems to have gotten good reviews and is significantly > cheaper than a K3. Of course, its not the same as a K3, but it should be > worth $700. >> >> On 7/11/2014 1:26 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: >> Objective testing by various web sites and magazines have come to the >> consensus that there is a small but noticeable difference in sharpness, >> at >> the pixel level with a greater chance of noticeable moire. Since most >> of us >> don't print at the pixel level, I wouldn't worry about it either way. >> The >> K5II has much improved auto focus at lower light levels. There's also >> some >> possibility that Ricoh put more effort into sourcing better components >> than >> Hoya so K-5(( cameras may have longer trouble free lifetimes than K-5 >> cameras. That last is conjecture, and may or may not be important given >> the >> shortened life cycle of digital photo equipment, as the K-5 series is >> already obsolete as a product. >> >>> On 7/11/2014 11:53 AM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: >>> Im considering selling one of my lenses and buying a K5 II or IIs with >>> the funds but I am undecided because I dont know a couple of things >>> about >>> these two bodies. >>> 1. How much real sharpness difference do you really see between the II >>> and IIs when using a really sharp lens? >>> 2. How often and how much of a problem is moire with the IIs body >>> using really sharp lenses? >>> Any guidance would be appreciated, and thanks in advance. >>> P.S. 3. Could someone remind me what is the difference between a K5 >>> and a K5II? >>> -- >>> J.C. O'Connell >>> hifis...@gate.net >>> -- > > > -- > J.C. O'Connell > hifis...@gate.net > -- > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > 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 PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> J.C. O'Connell >> hifis...@gate.net >> -- >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> 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 > PDML@pdml.net > 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 PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K5 II vs K5 IIs (vs K5) VS K3
The K-5 II is discontinued, so prices are rising now. The K-5 IIs is not discontinued officially yet. A few months ago, prices on the K-5 II were much better. Some people want the AA filter because they have concerns about moire. Those people are silly IMO. On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 3:31 PM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: > On 7/11/2014 3:00 PM, Darren Addy wrote: >> >> I believe that J.C. is using very sound reasoning, economically. The >> K-5 iis is considered by many to be one of the very special cameras >> that Pentax has ever produced. I have a Pentax K-5 ii, which I am very >> happy with but if I could trade it straight across for a iis I >> certainly would. The K-5ii was $925 when I bought it and the s was >> another $200 or so, at the time. Getting a new one for $700 now is a >> Good Buy, IMHO. > > > Today, I did an ebay search and found I can get brand new in box bodies for > approx inc. shipping : > > K5 - $650 > K5II - $700 > K5IIs- $700 > > so it seems the premium for K5IIs has disappeared. is this a fluke? or is > there a real advantage > to the K5II that some are willing to pay as much for one as a K5IIs? > > > >> >> On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Bruce wrote: >>> >>> That is what I did. I could not afford or justify the K3, but as my old >>> K5 was worn beyond rated life expectancy, I picked up the K5iis. At that >>> time the K3 was $1300 and I got the K5iis for $700. >>> >>> -- >>> Bruce >>> >>> Sent from my iPad >>> On Jul 11, 2014, at 10:40 AM, "J.C. O'Connell" wrote: well the main reason Im considering the K5 IIs is they are still available new in box and cost only $700 compared to around $1100 for a K3. The K5 IIs seems to have gotten good reviews and is significantly cheaper than a K3. Of course, its not the same as a K3, but it should be worth $700. > > On 7/11/2014 1:26 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: > Objective testing by various web sites and magazines have come to the > consensus that there is a small but noticeable difference in sharpness, at > the pixel level with a greater chance of noticeable moire. Since most of > us > don't print at the pixel level, I wouldn't worry about it either way. The > K5II has much improved auto focus at lower light levels. There's also > some > possibility that Ricoh put more effort into sourcing better components > than > Hoya so K-5(( cameras may have longer trouble free lifetimes than K-5 > cameras. That last is conjecture, and may or may not be important given > the > shortened life cycle of digital photo equipment, as the K-5 series is > already obsolete as a product. > >> On 7/11/2014 11:53 AM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: >> Im considering selling one of my lenses and buying a K5 II or IIs with >> the funds but I am undecided because I dont know a couple of things about >> these two bodies. >> 1. How much real sharpness difference do you really see between the II >> and IIs when using a really sharp lens? >> 2. How often and how much of a problem is moire with the IIs body >> using really sharp lenses? >> Any guidance would be appreciated, and thanks in advance. >> P.S. 3. Could someone remind me what is the difference between a K5 >> and a K5II? >> -- >> J.C. O'Connell >> hifis...@gate.net >> -- -- J.C. O'Connell hifis...@gate.net -- -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net 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 >>> PDML@pdml.net >>> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net >>> to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and >>> follow the directions. >> >> >> > > > -- > J.C. O'Connell > hifis...@gate.net > -- > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > 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 PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K5 II vs K5 IIs (vs K5) VS K3
On 7/11/2014 3:00 PM, Darren Addy wrote: I believe that J.C. is using very sound reasoning, economically. The K-5 iis is considered by many to be one of the very special cameras that Pentax has ever produced. I have a Pentax K-5 ii, which I am very happy with but if I could trade it straight across for a iis I certainly would. The K-5ii was $925 when I bought it and the s was another $200 or so, at the time. Getting a new one for $700 now is a Good Buy, IMHO. Today, I did an ebay search and found I can get brand new in box bodies for approx inc. shipping : K5 - $650 K5II - $700 K5IIs- $700 so it seems the premium for K5IIs has disappeared. is this a fluke? or is there a real advantage to the K5II that some are willing to pay as much for one as a K5IIs? On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Bruce wrote: That is what I did. I could not afford or justify the K3, but as my old K5 was worn beyond rated life expectancy, I picked up the K5iis. At that time the K3 was $1300 and I got the K5iis for $700. -- Bruce Sent from my iPad On Jul 11, 2014, at 10:40 AM, "J.C. O'Connell" wrote: well the main reason Im considering the K5 IIs is they are still available new in box and cost only $700 compared to around $1100 for a K3. The K5 IIs seems to have gotten good reviews and is significantly cheaper than a K3. Of course, its not the same as a K3, but it should be worth $700. On 7/11/2014 1:26 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: Objective testing by various web sites and magazines have come to the consensus that there is a small but noticeable difference in sharpness, at the pixel level with a greater chance of noticeable moire. Since most of us don't print at the pixel level, I wouldn't worry about it either way. The K5II has much improved auto focus at lower light levels. There's also some possibility that Ricoh put more effort into sourcing better components than Hoya so K-5(( cameras may have longer trouble free lifetimes than K-5 cameras. That last is conjecture, and may or may not be important given the shortened life cycle of digital photo equipment, as the K-5 series is already obsolete as a product. On 7/11/2014 11:53 AM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: Im considering selling one of my lenses and buying a K5 II or IIs with the funds but I am undecided because I dont know a couple of things about these two bodies. 1. How much real sharpness difference do you really see between the II and IIs when using a really sharp lens? 2. How often and how much of a problem is moire with the IIs body using really sharp lenses? Any guidance would be appreciated, and thanks in advance. P.S. 3. Could someone remind me what is the difference between a K5 and a K5II? -- J.C. O'Connell hifis...@gate.net -- -- J.C. O'Connell hifis...@gate.net -- -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net 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 PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions. -- J.C. O'Connell hifis...@gate.net -- -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K5 II vs K5 IIs (vs K5) VS K3
I believe that J.C. is using very sound reasoning, economically. The K-5 iis is considered by many to be one of the very special cameras that Pentax has ever produced. I have a Pentax K-5 ii, which I am very happy with but if I could trade it straight across for a iis I certainly would. The K-5ii was $925 when I bought it and the s was another $200 or so, at the time. Getting a new one for $700 now is a Good Buy, IMHO. On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 1:36 PM, Bruce wrote: > That is what I did. I could not afford or justify the K3, but as my old K5 > was worn beyond rated life expectancy, I picked up the K5iis. At that time > the K3 was $1300 and I got the K5iis for $700. > > -- > Bruce > > Sent from my iPad > >> On Jul 11, 2014, at 10:40 AM, "J.C. O'Connell" wrote: >> >> well the main reason Im considering the K5 IIs is they are still available >> new in box and cost only $700 compared to around $1100 for a K3. >> The K5 IIs seems to have gotten good reviews and is significantly cheaper >> than a K3. Of course, its not the same as a K3, but it should be worth $700. >>> On 7/11/2014 1:26 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: >>> Objective testing by various web sites and magazines have come to the >>> consensus that there is a small but noticeable difference in sharpness, at >>> the pixel level with a greater chance of noticeable moire. Since most of >>> us don't print at the pixel level, I wouldn't worry about it either way. >>> The K5II has much improved auto focus at lower light levels. There's also >>> some possibility that Ricoh put more effort into sourcing better components >>> than Hoya so K-5(( cameras may have longer trouble free lifetimes than K-5 >>> cameras. That last is conjecture, and may or may not be important given the >>> shortened life cycle of digital photo equipment, as the K-5 series is >>> already obsolete as a product. >>> On 7/11/2014 11:53 AM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: Im considering selling one of my lenses and buying a K5 II or IIs with the funds but I am undecided because I dont know a couple of things about these two bodies. 1. How much real sharpness difference do you really see between the II and IIs when using a really sharp lens? 2. How often and how much of a problem is moire with the IIs body using really sharp lenses? Any guidance would be appreciated, and thanks in advance. P.S. 3. Could someone remind me what is the difference between a K5 and a K5II? -- J.C. O'Connell hifis...@gate.net -- >> >> >> -- >> J.C. O'Connell >> hifis...@gate.net >> -- >> >> >> -- >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List >> PDML@pdml.net >> 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 > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. -- Photographers must learn not to be ashamed to have their photographs look like photographs. ~ Alfred Stieglitz -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K5 II vs K5 IIs (vs K5) VS K3
That is what I did. I could not afford or justify the K3, but as my old K5 was worn beyond rated life expectancy, I picked up the K5iis. At that time the K3 was $1300 and I got the K5iis for $700. -- Bruce Sent from my iPad > On Jul 11, 2014, at 10:40 AM, "J.C. O'Connell" wrote: > > well the main reason Im considering the K5 IIs is they are still available > new in box and cost only $700 compared to around $1100 for a K3. > The K5 IIs seems to have gotten good reviews and is significantly cheaper > than a K3. Of course, its not the same as a K3, but it should be worth $700. >> On 7/11/2014 1:26 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: >> Objective testing by various web sites and magazines have come to the >> consensus that there is a small but noticeable difference in sharpness, at >> the pixel level with a greater chance of noticeable moire. Since most of us >> don't print at the pixel level, I wouldn't worry about it either way. The >> K5II has much improved auto focus at lower light levels. There's also some >> possibility that Ricoh put more effort into sourcing better components than >> Hoya so K-5(( cameras may have longer trouble free lifetimes than K-5 >> cameras. That last is conjecture, and may or may not be important given the >> shortened life cycle of digital photo equipment, as the K-5 series is >> already obsolete as a product. >> >>> On 7/11/2014 11:53 AM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: >>> Im considering selling one of my lenses and buying a K5 II or IIs with the >>> funds but I am undecided because I dont know a couple of things about these >>> two bodies. >>> 1. How much real sharpness difference do you really see between the II and >>> IIs when using a really sharp lens? >>> 2. How often and how much of a problem is moire with the IIs body using >>> really sharp lenses? >>> Any guidance would be appreciated, and thanks in advance. >>> P.S. 3. Could someone remind me what is the difference between a K5 and a >>> K5II? >>> -- >>> J.C. O'Connell >>> hifis...@gate.net >>> -- > > > -- > J.C. O'Connell > hifis...@gate.net > -- > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > 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 PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
Re: K5 II vs K5 IIs (vs K5) VS K3
well the main reason Im considering the K5 IIs is they are still available new in box and cost only $700 compared to around $1100 for a K3. The K5 IIs seems to have gotten good reviews and is significantly cheaper than a K3. Of course, its not the same as a K3, but it should be worth $700. On 7/11/2014 1:26 PM, P.J. Alling wrote: Objective testing by various web sites and magazines have come to the consensus that there is a small but noticeable difference in sharpness, at the pixel level with a greater chance of noticeable moire. Since most of us don't print at the pixel level, I wouldn't worry about it either way. The K5II has much improved auto focus at lower light levels. There's also some possibility that Ricoh put more effort into sourcing better components than Hoya so K-5(( cameras may have longer trouble free lifetimes than K-5 cameras. That last is conjecture, and may or may not be important given the shortened life cycle of digital photo equipment, as the K-5 series is already obsolete as a product. On 7/11/2014 11:53 AM, J.C. O'Connell wrote: Im considering selling one of my lenses and buying a K5 II or IIs with the funds but I am undecided because I dont know a couple of things about these two bodies. 1. How much real sharpness difference do you really see between the II and IIs when using a really sharp lens? 2. How often and how much of a problem is moire with the IIs body using really sharp lenses? Any guidance would be appreciated, and thanks in advance. P.S. 3. Could someone remind me what is the difference between a K5 and a K5II? -- J.C. O'Connell hifis...@gate.net -- -- J.C. O'Connell hifis...@gate.net -- -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
