[Ray Pulley]

LOL - thanks for pointing that out (didn't see the post, since that user is on my ignore list).

I have no idea which photos are supposedly "OOF" since the ones I posted in the Macro Club thread are focused at the areas I wanted to be in focus (confirmed by pixel peeping).

Of course, they are not infinite DOF photos - if I wanted those I would have used a compact camera!

Try reading my post again. My point was that from looking at your posted images, it appears to me that you are perfectly happy with images that do not look well focused to me, which seems to me might also be why you continue to assume that others are making errors when their cameras do not focus properly.

You can make excuses, or try to deflect, but that is my observation from looking at the images you posted and nothing you have said has changed my mind.

Ray

[jolepp]

Looking at this makes Holga look kind of tempting, at least everyone would probably agree that the camera sucks and that someone able to turn out a decent image must be clever?

[Rupert]

I knew a Holga once, I didn't mind that she..........better not go there!

Regards!

[Smeggypants]

Try reading my post again. My point was that from looking at your posted images, it appears to me that you are perfectly happy with images that do not look well focused to me, which seems to me might also be why you continue to assume that others are making errors when their cameras do not focus properly.

You can make excuses, or try to deflect, but that is my observation from looking at the images you posted and nothing you have said has changed my mind.

Ray

Ray would these set of images confirm your observations in the macro shots thread ...

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-k-5-forum/132811-chinese-new-year-...low-light.html

??

btw Ray, regarding 'personal attacks' after feeling insulted by the continued suggestions that it could 'user error' that is cuasing our K-5 low images to be OOF rather than a faulty camera I posted a message that was considered insulting to another member. I have received a 'forum rules reminder' which I have noted and apologise to the moderators for causing them extra work. The post in question was removed.

[Christine Tham]

Try reading my post again. My point was that from looking at your posted images, it appears to me that you are perfectly happy with images that do not look well focused to me, which seems to me might also be why you continue to assume that others are making errors when their cameras do not focus properly.

Ray, I am not sure how you can tell whether a photo is focused or not by looking at a downsized screen version of it.

All I can say is that if I pixel peep, the photos are focused exactly where I want them to be. For example, zooming into the spider legs will reveal the tiny "hooks" they have running down their legs. Obviously these are not visible on the downsized version.

If you like looking at overly sharpened images, then these photos may look soft to you because I have not applied any sharpening at all to the raw captures.

As for me making assumptions - if you read my post carefully I made none - I simply raised the possibility and was not directing that possibility at anyone - and definitely not yourself in particular.

[Tommot1965]

I must admit that when Ive posted perfectly focused images, that once the Jpeg {under 1 meg} has been applied the images do look soft, even if while on my PC they still look ok, but once uploaded to PF a rather disconcerting softness appears..Id say that CT images may have been through the same downgrade....

[falconeye]

Anybody who has in interest in my measurements regarding this issue please go here:

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-news-rumors/134215-lumolabs-pentax...published.html

Thanks everybody for their motivation. I probably wouldn't have done it without. Again it turned out to be more work than anticipated

[Smeggypants]

Much thanks Falc. I was getting fed up with the people who kept blaming it on 'user error'. I found this AF problem within a couple of hours of deceiving my K-5. It's a wonderful camera bar this fault.

Thanks again!

[Catalana]

I found this AF problem within a couple of hours of deceiving my K-5.

You shouldn't be deceiving your K-5. No wonder its biting you back

[Rupert]

Falk......
I've have followed your fine information ever since your Photokina reports, with much interest. I am no technician, electrical engineer, or scientist, but I can follow the basics of your report. I certainly appreciate your efforts here, you spent a lot of your time for our benefit, and it is greatly appreciated. Here is hoping that your input will help lead to a quick repair of this problem, and we can all soon get a K5 with great confidence.
Best Regards
Rupert

[Ray Pulley]

Ray, I am not sure how you can tell whether a photo is focused or not by looking at a downsized screen version of it.

Christine, in many or even most cases images look sharper when viewed at a smaller size, so if they look generally soft at the size you posted, It is hard for me to imagine that they are indeed sharp.

All I can say is that if I pixel peep, the photos are focused exactly where I want them to be. For example, zooming into the spider legs will reveal the tiny "hooks" they have running down their legs. Obviously these are not visible on the downsized version.

I will take your word for it.

If you like looking at overly sharpened images, then these photos may look soft to you because I have not applied any sharpening at all to the raw captures.

Overly sharpened is a subjective term that means nothing. I do know that applying no sharpening might be a personal choice, but given the nature of the AA filters in most DSLRs, it is generally accepted that some level of sharpening is required. The level is dependent upon the intended use of the image.

No sharpening would result in an overall softness to the image, however.

As for me making assumptions - if you read my post carefully I made none - I simply raised the possibility and was not directing that possibility at anyone - and definitely not yourself in particular.

Ok, I accept that, and also was not intending any sort of personal attack, but let's break down some of the things that you seem to keep repeating (I am not going to go back and get quotes, so please correct me if I am way off base on my recollections here):

1. A few cm FF isn't a big deal -

You seem to mis-understand the nature of the problem here. First of all, a few cm FF in a macro will almost certainly ruin the shot. Secondly, the FF is proportional to the distance, so a few cm grows to many cms or inches as you move a bit further away given the same conditions. It does not remain a few cm.

2.A few K5s might have this problem -

Ok, Falk's findings today notwithstanding, let's talk about just your K5 and my K5 experiences. Let's also just agree that your camera is as perfect as you say, and the 3 that I used are as bad as I say. Between us we have used 4 K5 cameras 75% of which would not focus properly.

Furthermore, and perhaps you are unaware of this information, but many users have posted here about the issue, and many with solid images showing the problem. There are also many reports of the issue on a Spanish forum. There are many reports of this issue on a German forum. There are many reports of this issue on DPReview. There are reports of this problem out of the U.K., and finally a member here who is a dealer of Pentax products (Pentaxeros) reports that he has tested (50?) K5s and that they all behave the same way. He also reports that Pentax has confirmed the issue to him.

So, I think it is clear that the issue is widespread and that it either affects all cameras, or a great many of them, not a few. All would be best in terms of getting a fix, btw.

3. User error - This is where folks start to take umbrage with you continuing to say this in light of fairly over-whelming evidence that there is something wrong with the camera.

It is hardly likely that so many people all over the world are making the same error and only you and a handful of others are not.

There are many experienced Pentax photographers that post here and elsewhere, and many of them have been posting in this or the other forums, or on the old Pentax mailing list for many years. I trust them to know a focus problem when they see it. In my case, I have shot with no less than 11 Pentax DSLRs (counting 3 K5s that I tested and shot extensively with 14 lenses from 3 makers) and I can tell you the following about them:

All 8 Pentax DSLRs I owned before the K5 FF as the light is reduced (many have speculated this is a tunsgten light issue, but that has never been proven).

The earlier models I owned (istds, K100D, K10) pretty much gave up in reasonably low light, but also remained within the DOF (just barely depending on the body and lens combo) until that point.

The 2 K20Ds I own(ed) also FF in the same conditions, but at EV2 or 3 are also still acceptably focused. I suspect that the K20 would not lock much lower than this, but I would have been happy with a K5 that focused this well as it clearly has been good enough for me for several years now.

The K20 has the same AF spec as the K5, btw, EV-1 to EV18, and I am sure that it would not meet spec at the low end. The difference is that the 3 K5s I tried just dropped off a cliff between EV 2-4. The K20 just gradually moves a bit more FF as the light is reduced, and a touch of BF adjustment in higher light will often make for good focus all round. With the K5 it took all of the AF adjust to focus even close at EV3 or 4, and then they would BF in higher light, but still drop OOF at EV1.

Anyway, I think that perhaps Falk's report will finally convince everyone that there is a problem with the camera, which is no surprise to me. Falk's report is good work in putting some more objective data together on the issue, but this issue has been painfully obvious to me from almost the first few shots from my first K5.

Ray

[Ray Pulley]

Ray would these set of images confirm your observations in the macro shots thread ...

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/pentax-k-5-forum/132811-chinese-new-year-...low-light.html

??

btw Ray, regarding 'personal attacks' after feeling insulted by the continued suggestions that it could 'user error' that is cuasing our K-5 low images to be OOF rather than a faulty camera I posted a message that was considered insulting to another member. I have received a 'forum rules reminder' which I have noted and apologise to the moderators for causing them extra work. The post in question was removed.

So, almost nothing is in focus in that series of shots with the following exceptions:

The Jade Dragon shot looks to be in acceptable focus on it's front-most features.

The Martial arts display image #1 looks like the white lettering on the back ot the participant closest to the camera might just barely be at the back of the DOF, but I would not call that sharp.

The martial arts image #5 is similar to #1, but perhaps a tiny bit better.

So, all in all, most everything in all but one of those images looks to be very OOF to me, and even had she focused on the white lettering on the back of the shirt in martial arts #1 and #5, the image is still clearly FF as nothing beyond that point is sharp. This tells me that she with a very wide aperture like 2.8 or below, or that the camera front focused, or both.

These images look just like some of the early lower light images from my first K5 that sent me to the focus chart to calibrate all of my lenses. Much to my dismay, calibration was not the issue or the resolution.

I have had no intention of insulting anyone, but if anyone was offended, c'est la vie, as the saying goes.

I hope Pentax lights a fire under some Engineer's behind and gets this sorted as I am fast approaching the point of no return and will need to make some hard decisions soon.

Ray

[Christine Tham]

let's break down some of the things that you seem to keep repeating (I am not going to go back and get quotes, so please correct me if I am way off base on my recollections here):

Actually, Ray, I will take you up on this. I don't recall having said any of the things that you seem to think I have said.

1. A few cm FF isn't a big deal -

Never said that. I said that the only time I get FF on my K-5 is at around EV1-2 (actually the LV value is probably lower than that since the photo is underexposed) doing jolepp's three batteries test, and only one 1 lens. And it's a few mm of FF, not cm.

I said I did not think this was a big deal, since under these same conditions the EOS 1D refuses to focus.

Yes, I would agree a few cm of FF would be a big deal. But I don't think FF is proportional to distance - depth of field actually increases with focus distance so the further away the subject the less likely FF will be noticeable. So I am not sure who is misunderstanding the nature of the problem here.

2.A few K5s might have this problem -

I said I can only speak for my camera, not others that I have not seen. I made this very clear in one of my earliest posts in this thread.

I have no idea how many K-5 have "this problem" since I am not even clear from the posts here whether it's the same problem or everyone jumping in reporting their own unique problem.

So far we have every variation from a few mm of FF to completely blurred photos. I struggle to accept that people are describing the same problem, especially since I am not even clear looking at some of the photos where it is an FF problem or some other problem.

We also have wildly varying descriptions about the problem ranging from significant at EV4 to people who say they simply cannot reproduce the problem. Also whether it's on specific lenses or all lenses.

And varying descriptions of whether AF assist helps or not. Falk and I seem to get different behaviour even though we have the same firmware version.

Hence I raise the "possibility" that some of what we are seeing could be user error or people misinterpreting what images coming out of the camera implies. This possibility exists both for people reporting the problem and people reporting no problem.


Ok, Falk's findings today notwithstanding, let's talk about just your K5 and my K5 experiences. Let's also just agree that your camera is as perfect as you say, and the 3 that I used are as bad as I say. Between us we have used 4 K5 cameras 75% of which would not focus properly.

Again I would not agree with that. As I've said, I can see consistent slight FF at around EV1 on my camera, so if there is a problem then my camera would appear to suffer from it. My point was that I don't believe the "problem", if there is one, is something that would significantly affect me. My K10D appears to have a very similar problem, and if I had not run jolepp's 3 batteries test I would not have realised it too has the "problem" since I have never encountered it even after taking x0000 of shots. Taking shots at EV1 with the lens wide open at f1.9 is not something I will ever consciously want to do.

So please don't accuse me of saying things I have never said.

I do believe that there is a "silent" majority of people who are perfectly happy with their camera. Complaints on this forum, and German or Spanish forums or whatever, are not statistically relevant, because they represent a biased sample. Even if there are hundreds of users reporting the problem (and as I have mentioned, I am not convinced that everyone is reporting the "same" problem) it still means thousands of happy users out there. Happy users don't spend time posting over and over again that they've taken yet another picture, and look, there is no problem.

This is an open forum, and everyone is entitled to their opinion. If you think there is a problem, fine - I never said that your opinion was not valid. However, don't try and discredit me just because you don't like my opinion, or claim that I said things which I didn't.

[Christine Tham]

I have had no intention of insulting anyone, but if anyone was offended, c'est la vie, as the saying goes.

LOL, if you want to comment on "out of focus" pictures learn how to distinguish between out of focus and motion blur.

Despite what you may think, all those pictures were shot at high DOF (f5.6 to f8) so any "blurriness" you see is motion blur, not OOF.

And I intentionally selected pictures with motion blur, because I like motion blur. I had lots of perfectly sharp pictures with no motion blur that I discarded.

Can I suggest - stop trying to discredit me - if you don't like my pictures or motion blur, move on. But trying to call out photos that are not OOF as OOF doesn't do your reputation any favours. You don't have the raw images, I do. Can I suggest you are in no position to be able to accurately determine whether any specific photo is in focus or not.

[jsherman999]

...

...
I have no idea how many K-5 have "this problem" since I am not even clear from the posts here whether it's the same problem or everyone jumping in reporting their own unique problem.

So far we have every variation from a few mm of FF to completely blurred photos. I struggle to accept that people are describing the same problem, especially since I am not even clear looking at some of the photos where it is an FF problem or some other problem.

We also have wildly varying descriptions about the problem ranging from significant at EV4 to people who say they simply cannot reproduce the problem. Also whether it's on specific lenses or all lenses.

And varying descriptions of whether AF assist helps or not. Falk and I seem to get different behaviour even though we have the same firmware version.

Hence I raise the "possibility" that some of what we are seeing could be user error or people misinterpreting what images coming out of the camera implies. This possibility exists both for people reporting the problem and people reporting no problem.

I think it's time for.....


Hysteria Hysteria!



1) Someone at some point posts "hey, I don't know if it's just me, but my cam/lens seems to be doing X."

2) Couple other people post "Hey, me too!"

3) Fanboys: "user error."

4) Problem-havers: "No, I know what I'm doing."

5) Hysteria-havers: "I've got it too! Look!" (shows something exhibiting probable problem "Y")

6) Fanboys: "See? That's problem 'Y'. Obviously, no-one can thus have problem 'X'!"

7) Problem-havers: "Ummm... I don't think I'm talking about the same thing."

8) Enter, Trolls: "Heee! Problem X/Y is an obvious indictment of your equipment choice, and thus yourselves!"

9) Fanboys: "&^%&%$(())%^$$#$%"

10) Problem-Havers: "Sigh. Look. I'm having problem X here."

11) Fanboys: "You're all trolls! This forum sucks now, it used to be all about the photography!"

12) Trolls: "Hee!"

13) Hysteria is declared. Some Hysteria-havers join the ranks of trolls at this point, some Fanboys gain a hardened stance, some Fanboys recognize the possibility of X and soften. Some Problem-havers quietly leave the forum, others remain, feeling jittery and jilted for a while.


Trolls retreat under the bridge, watching.... (as always.)




Coda:
6 months later, Big Cam Co quietly releases an update that mitigates problem 'X'.




.