K-5 IIs vs K-5 II - can you tell the difference?

Yea this thread is getting rediculous. I am starting to question the maturity of some of these guys. Look, a LPF has to do something to the image, or it would not work (to prevent moire ect), so it is illogical to say there is no difference. I think some people are just trying to justify not buying it, and nobody really cares. The IIs is indeed meant for pixel peeping, in practice it is no different than a higher MP camera. When printing small or viewing full size, you won't see any difference. The IIs allows us to crop or print massive without losing as much sharpness, period.

Here's my last contribution to this thread (I hope). We can tell focusing is not a factor in DPR samples because the results are the same whether you look at the closest objects or the farthest. The queen playing card is pinned to the wall, while the little grey box supporting mickey and pluto is obviously closer. The first crop is of the measuring tape on top of the box, the second of the card. If the IIs was sharper on one because of focusing, then the other should be sharper on the II. As you can see, the IIs is definitely sharper on both. Can you use PP to make the II equal to the IIs? Yes, but I can do that with a D3100 too, advantage still lies with the IIs.

Reading the word "trade" it's easy to see a difference in sharpness.

The eyes and hair lines show the difference.

There are countless other comparisons to be made here, all over the scene. The watch shows this, the designs on both wine bottles. It appears both cameras are equally focused, and the IIs is always sharper. If  you print small or never crop, I'm glad you saved $100 or more. If you can sharpen up a II image, good. But lets not be dishonest here, the IIs has a clear advantage at the expense of occasional moire.