[Bramela]

By sheer weight of numbers, I regret to say Smeg, your arguments are starting to look very lame, to me at least.

You can only push a fully laden wheelbarrow up hill for so long.

[FullertonImages]

I don't understand why you would not want to use the focus assist light in low light conditions.
Isn't this what makes it possible for the camera to focus properly in those situations. When would you not want to have the focus assist light come on. The OP seems to have demonstated that it does a fine job. It seems that until we know what lens he was using as compared to the lens used in the liscense plate photo it is hard to make a judgement. I am not sure that this is
a condition that would matter to me.
Jim

Well, sometimes it's just useless, like if you're shooting with a long lens and are a good distance from the subject. It only has an effect range of 10 feet or so. The other thing is when you're trying to take candid shots, you might as well yell, "Hey, I'm about to take your picture!", because it would have about the same effect as that bright green light has.

[Smeggypants]

By sheer weight of numbers, I regret to say Smeg, your arguments are starting to look very lame, to me at least.

You can only push a fully laden wheelbarrow up hill for so long.

Not quite sure what is meant by the above post?

What do you mean by lame?

I discovered my K-5 was severely front focussing within 2 hours of it arriving. I looked on this forum and noticed that others were complaining of the same.

Since then we've had numerous threads and several people reporting the same.

I have waited patiently for the rumoured FW update before sending my K-5 back. now 1.03 has been released with a specific addressing of the FF issue my K-5 has not been fixed by it. Therefore I conclude I that I have a duff copy of a K-5

The 'argument' that my K-5 front focusses in Low light is NOT lame, it is fact. A fact which I can demonstrate with certain repeatability.

It appears that 1.03 has fxed the FF issues in some other people's K-5. It hasn't done so in my case. That doesn't make my argument lame.

My wheelbarrow contains facts.

Another fact. I've never claimed everyone's K-5 is faulty.


Talking of 'sheer weight' of numbers ... Appeal to Popularity is a logical fallacy.

[Bramela]

Ineffectual/lacking substance/one off/ totally against all other opinion.

Either you have a VERY unique k5 camera, or you see things very differently to 99.9% of respondents re the last k5 upgrade.

Thing is, I think by now every k5 owner reading this, has clearly and very lucidly got the message you are pushing about failure of k5 and latest upgrade.

I think it about time it was given a rest off the Forums, and you take it to Pentax or whoever you choose and stop flogging the same thing over and and over again here.

Why not just go and get it attended to!

[qtopplings]

Ineffectual/lacking substance/one off/ totally against all other opinion.

Either you have a VERY unique k5 camera, or you see things very differently to 99.9% of respondents re the last k5 upgrade.

Thing is, I think by now every k5 owner reading this, has clearly and very lucidly got the message you are pushing about failure of k5 and latest upgrade.

I think it about time it was given a rest off the Forums, and you take it to Pentax or whoever you choose and stop flogging the same thing over and and over again here.

Why not just go and get it attended to!

I'm sorry, bramela, but aren't you doing the same thing you gave me an infraction for? You are baiting, engaging in back and forth, etc. I guess it's ok when a moderator acts this way, but not a lowly site supporter?

[campdog]

Instead of all these laboratory focus tests why dont people just get out there and use what is was meant. Id like to see some shots of these problems from out in the world instead of a set stage. Leave the white coats and clipboards to the experts at Pentax.
John

[Gimbal]

And his K5 is not unique, my got a lot better with the 1.03 version but still fails with wide lenses (17mm) at about ev2.

I tried to focus on a church lit up by some exterior floodlights yesterday, I was standing quite near so the church filled the frame (at 17mm focal length) but the camera set the focus at about 2m, and the real distance was more like 15-20m. The assist lamp did not engage, since the church was well lit by the floodlights.

So my question is, does this really work for other K5?

[Tommot1965]

And his K5 is not unique, my got a lot better with the 1.03 version but still fails with wide lenses (17mm) at about ev2.

I tried to focus on a church lit up by some exterior floodlights yesterday, I was standing quite near so the church filled the frame (at 17mm focal length) but the camera set the focus at about 2m, and the real distance was more like 15-20m. The assist lamp did not engage, since the church was well lit by the floodlights.

So my question is, does this really work for other K5?

the wider mine goes, the worse it gets....so I stay away from 17mm in low light with a sigma 17-50.....it come good at about 35 mm......

[creampuff]

And his K5 is not unique, my got a lot better with the 1.03 version but still fails with wide lenses (17mm) at about ev2.

I tried to focus on a church lit up by some exterior floodlights yesterday, I was standing quite near so the church filled the frame (at 17mm focal length) but the camera set the focus at about 2m, and the real distance was more like 15-20m. The assist lamp did not engage, since the church was well lit by the floodlights.

So my question is, does this really work for other K5?

I have no problems with focusing with my ultrawide and wide angle lenses on my K-5. One thing to note is the camera's AF point is always an general area within the red square. With a wide angle lens it is all too easy to get the camera focused on a different object within the spot due to the wide angle of view. You probably got your focus point off because that is too wide a disparity in focus distance.

[Gimbal]

I have no problems with focusing with my ultrawide and wide angle lenses on my K-5. One thing to note is the camera's AF point is always an general area within the red square. With a wide angle lens it is all too easy to get the camera focused on a different object within the spot due to the wide angle of view. You probably got your focus point off because that is too wide a disparity in focus distance.

It is good to hear that there are cameras that work even with wide angle lenses. And no, this is not user error. I might not be the greatest artistic photographer, but I am technical and learned everything I need to know about that trap on the K10d.

[Arbalist]

I really wonder if all K5's are affected as I've taken pictures in some pretty low light levels and not had a FF problem that I am aware of. Problem is I guess is that it may be hard to tell if you use a small aperture? I've loaded the latest firmware but must admit I've not been disappointed with focus on my K5 to date.

Vic.

[PhilippeG]

1.03 didn't totally solve the issue for me. I still have a big FF starting at EV 3-2, just like Smeggypants i think. I don't doubt the new firmware is perfect or good enough for most of the K-5 out there, but it's obvious not every camera is equal, whatever the reason.

[woof]

Not quite sure what is meant by the above post?

What do you mean by lame?

Please, allow me...

I discovered my K-5 was severely front focussing within 2 hours of it arriving. I looked on this forum and noticed that others were complaining of the same.

OK...

I have waited patiently for the rumoured FW update before sending my K-5 back.

mmm hmmmm

now 1.03 has been released with a specific addressing of the FF issue my K-5 has not been fixed by it. Therefore I conclude I that I have a duff copy of a K-5

Yes, so at this point, you start running around the board stating that 1.03 does not fix all K5s. Yet you seems always to leave off that it is a "duff" copy. So back up a second. Why have you NOT sent it in yet?

The 'argument' that my K-5 front focusses in Low light is NOT lame, it is fact. A fact which I can demonstrate with certain repeatability.

Yes it is. It is also a fact that your seems broken when taking into account the overall consensus. That is a very important fact here. It is not that 1.03 does not fix all K5s, it is that 1.03 does not fix all broken K5s.

It appears that 1.03 has fxed the FF issues in some other people's K-5. It hasn't done so in my case.

There you go AGAIN! I think everyone believes you. It's just that you keep leaving off the most important part.

That doesn't make my argument lame.
My wheelbarrow contains facts.

Where I come from they are called half-truths.

Another fact. I've never claimed everyone's K-5 is faulty.

Interesting. This is the closest you have come yet to actually admitting what I've just stated.

Talking of 'sheer weight' of numbers ... Appeal to Popularity is a logical fallacy.

So your admittedly broken K5 is to be the sole arbiter of truth? Lame. Sorry!

Now all of this said, and before you go off, I am going to say:

1. From what I can see there was a definite problem.
2. It was relatively minor for the average bell curve of cameras that were otherwise in-spec;
3. Though minor, it was enough out of round that Pentax decided to address it
4. 1.03 fixed it for the most part for cameras that are otherwise within spec
5. It probably is not a perfect fix; it may or may not be acceptable depending upon what type of shooting you do;
6. Smegmapantaloons has a real problem with his copy of the camera that has not and cannot be fixed by 1.03; this is not a too-common issue, and appears to be byond the norm; something in his copy is marginal
7. Falk is doing testing eventually that may help quantify how well 1.03 really did. Even there the sample will likely be one camera. Results may vary.

Smegma... send you camera in. Plenty of people have told you to do this. You yourself said you would. It seems you have not yet.

Your camera has a problem. So DO something about it. I for one would not want to hear about this from you every day between now and the end of your warranty period...

Please feel free to bash away at this thinking as much as you care to. I might or might not bother reading it.



Respectfully,

woof!

[bxf]

Woof, if you read the various relevant threads, you will see that Smeggy is not alone. Several people, myself included, have reported severe FF issues even after installing 1.03.

I can't help but wonder if the reason many users do not have a problem is at least partially explained by the possibility that they don't shoot much in the problematic lighting conditions. For all I know, perhaps the specific light bulbs I use may be responsible. Having said that, however, the discrepancies between LiveView and normal AF are a cause for concern.

[simico]

I can't help but wonder if the reason many users do not have a problem is at least partially explained by the possibility that they don't shoot much in the problematic lighting conditions.

Or those who still get serious FF probably have defective units.