Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
04-25-2011, 05:51 AM   #16
Inactive Account




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Velence, Hungary
Posts: 664
QuoteOriginally posted by mel Quote
I'm finding something just kind of "off" about my K-5 and the focus when shooting indoors. It just doesn't seem to have the crispness I had been hoping for. I haven't done any conclusive tests or anything. It just doesn't look really good to me.
+1

same feeling here..

Andras

04-25-2011, 08:17 AM   #17
Site Supporter
jpzk's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Québec
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,232
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by garyk Quote
I shoot daily with the K-5 and I can say without a doubt. It is a big problem. The AF is definitely faulty. In the OP you nailed the problems I have with the camera. The K-20 and K-7 had more keepers for me. Rupert that shot is very good. But the K-5 will nail that shot very fast. In low contrast objects even with some light it misses more than it hits.

There are ways I try to deal with it. If the bird has any contrast lines or colors focus on them. If need be focus on an object it is sitting on and increase the DOF. It is really a problem for me with dark blue birds??? It will miss every time right in front of me. I was in a hide two days ago and shot a white tailed Robin and it missed every shot. Then I of course hit the white and dark blue contrast patch in the head and it hit.

The brown bird Rupert posted. Is the best color for AF on the K-5 I have found?

I don't want to make anyone mad but it really has problems and the 1.03 did nothing for my K-5.

I am really waiting for the next round of cameras from Pentax and expect to see this fixed then. But not holding my breath for a software fix.

I do not like to beat a dead horse but it is a problem that needs to be delt with in other ways other than Pentax fix.. It is not going to go away with the current K-5 in my opinion.

I shoot with other guys with high dollar cameras and they have similar problems.. But nowhere near what the K-5 has. I shoot with a guy that shoots a 7D and it will AF circles around the K-5 but if you know its limits you can usually get close to their keepers. For me anyway.

Others may have different views. This is with my current K-5 and lenses. I expect other copies may be better but really doubt it with all the hype about it already.

For me it is a hobby and all pro shooters shoot mostly canon in my neck of the woods. And would never own a camera with so many focus problems. But i kinda like it as a hobby camera. It is really a sweet camera most of the time.
Rupert:

A few more findings:

Far away "subjects", even in good light, are rather difficult to focus on, or even acquire the focus in the first place.
I very seldom had to resort to the Quick Shift feature (of the lens) with the K20D or the K7 when using the DA*300/4 lens. Now I do a lot of that and find it annoying.
Is this a sign that my lens is starting to misbehave? I will just have to take the other bodies out and test that, when I find the time to do it, perhaps later this afternoon.

Far away "subjects" against less-than-ideal backgrounds (contrast) make it more difficult to acquire and keep focus.
I can see the small hexagon lighting up along with the audible "beep" confirming the focus, as well as making sure the SR "hand" lights up ... hit and miss again.

There are also some misses with closer subjects ... 20-30 feet away only.

What really is a pain is that this is not consistently happening!?

Then again, maybe I am asking too much from the camera?

I am confident that I have acquired some good experience with photographying birds, BIF or static (see my PPG pics for reference), over the past three-four years and I will have to determine what exactly is the problem before reaching conclusions: the photographer's technique is not adequate "anymore"; the camera AF isn't quite up to par , i.e.: not consistent; a failing DA* lens; a combination of both the photographer's technique and the camera itself.

Back later with more reports.

JP
04-25-2011, 08:22 AM   #18
Site Supporter
jpzk's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Québec
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,232
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by planedriver Quote
+1

same feeling here..

Andras
Don't we already know that: poorly focused indoor shots in low Tungsten light or are you saying that all of your shots taken inside are OOF?

JP
04-25-2011, 08:45 AM   #19
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,255
QuoteOriginally posted by garyk Quote
I shoot with other guys with high dollar cameras and they have similar problems.. But nowhere near what the K-5 has. I shoot with a guy that shoots a 7D and it will AF circles around the K-5 but if you know its limits you can usually get close to their keepers. For me anyway.
Try a brighter lens (maybe, you can rent one if it's too expensive). At 500mm, your bigma is f/6.3. AF performance of any camera will improve with a brighter lens.


Last edited by asdf; 04-25-2011 at 09:11 AM.
04-25-2011, 09:14 AM   #20
Loyal Site Supporter
Rupert's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 24,848
Expecting too much?

I hear you guys, and don't question your disappointment, but I do wonder if we often just expect too much from our gear, no matter what that gear may be? I hear the same complaints from my Canon and Nikon friends, some with some very expensive merchandise.

After a little over a month with my K5 I find it less than perfect but better than anything else my friends use, and no I would not trade for an other camera in or near its class.

There are shots where I have disappointment, such as the one below where detail could be better, but given that it was shot at a good distance in not so good light and at 500mm with a standard Bigma50-500 lens, how much can I complain? It is also a heavy crop....so I would have to say I am expecting too much to want fine detail here. As for focus accuracy, I have been well pleased, but again, my expectations are in the range of an amateur, which is what I am. If I was a Pro, shooting with a D3X and the finest glass in the world, I expect I would have similar disappointments.....one of my friends has such gear and he complains as much as anyone else I know.
This is not math where numbers never lie.......there is always some luck involved, and factors we can't control. Bottom line for me is that with whatever flaws may be in the K5...or any camera....I continue to be thrilled with the results I get overall from my K5.
Best Regards!

[IMG] [/IMG]
No, it won't make Nat Geo, but it will make a great Card Front and make some little old lady smile on her Birthday or Mothers Day. It's not all about the IQ, is it?
04-25-2011, 09:27 AM   #21
Site Supporter




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: MT
Posts: 1,077
Sorry to hear of folks with focus issues...

For those reading this post as research note that my K5 focuses extremely spot on from near dark barely tungsten lit to outdoor cloudy or glaringly bright. No lenses needed focus adjustment (haven't shot through big tele yet).

Sort of sad because I virtually never use auto focus and mine works splendidly.

For those of you shooting tele's, if you aren't on a tripod you are kidding yourselves, shake reduction or not, a high res. camera will show your imperfections at hand holding with 300mm and longer lenses, especially when magnifying to view the pixels...sure, you'll get some nice images hand held, but you'll also have some misses...
04-25-2011, 09:34 AM   #22
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,255
QuoteOriginally posted by Ron Boggs Quote
For those of you shooting tele's, if you aren't on a tripod you are kidding yourselves, shake reduction or not, a high res. camera will show your imperfections at hand holding with 300mm and longer lenses, especially when magnifying to view the pixels...sure, you'll get some nice images hand held, but you'll also have some misses...
No doubt. Also, some kind of bird blind could help with getting closer to the animal.

I just looked at pixel-peeper.com and all shots with the bigma at 500mm looked like misses, without pixel peeping...

BTW, I don't have the k5, so I can't comment on the AF.
04-25-2011, 09:56 AM   #23
Loyal Site Supporter
Rupert's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 24,848
QuoteOriginally posted by asdf Quote
No doubt. Also, some kind of bird blind could help with getting closer to the animal.

I just looked at pixel-peeper.com and all shots with the bigma at 500mm looked like misses, without pixel peeping...

BTW, I don't have the k5, so I can't comment on the AF.
Maybe you are looking in the wrong place ....or it is time for a visit to the optometrist?

For what we get from the Bigma at a very reasonable price, what can beat it?
Sigma 50-500mm f/4-6.3 EX APO RF Lens Sample Photos and Specifications

Best Regards!

04-25-2011, 10:02 AM   #24
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,255
QuoteOriginally posted by Rupert Quote
Maybe you are looking in the wrong place ....or it is time for a visit to the optometrist?
I could also try my other (better) monitor.
04-25-2011, 06:20 PM   #25
Loyal Site Supporter
Rupert's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 24,848
QuoteOriginally posted by asdf Quote
I could also try my other (better) monitor.

You know, you did touch on something there that is not often addressed...I was at my Mom's on Friday and was showing her some photos on one of my sites using her computer and monitor.......I swear I was ashamed to view them they looked so bad. Poor resolution, poor color, just not anywhere close to my work monitor at home. Not that I have any really great shots, but even my best shots looked pathetic on her screen.

Thanks for mentioning this, it probably happens more often than we think?

Best Regards!
04-26-2011, 12:11 AM   #26
Inactive Account




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Velence, Hungary
Posts: 664
QuoteOriginally posted by jpzk Quote
Don't we already know that: poorly focused indoor shots in low Tungsten light or are you saying that all of your shots taken inside are OOF?

JP

this is one of my latest disappointment...simply I have no idea what was going on here.

iso1000 FA 50 f2.5 1/200:

indoors..NATURAL lights from the windows..strong FF as the focus was on his face..and look at the yellow paper..WB is completely off too.




a few weeks before I took some pictures during a family gathering in the garden..bright lighting..and I was astonished that my k200d even though being much slower to focus with my da55-300... almost all shots were spot on..which is not exactly the case with the K-5..

ooh I still like this camera

Andras
04-26-2011, 05:04 AM   #27
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Northern California
Posts: 475
Faces

QuoteOriginally posted by planedriver Quote
this is one of my latest disappointment...simply I have no idea what was going on here.

iso1000 FA 50 f2.5 1/200:

indoors..NATURAL lights from the windows..strong FF as the focus was on his face..and look at the yellow paper..WB is completely off too.




a few weeks before I took some pictures during a family gathering in the garden..bright lighting..and I was astonished that my k200d even though being much slower to focus with my da55-300... almost all shots were spot on..which is not exactly the case with the K-5..

ooh I still like this camera

Andras
Planedriver,

I have seen a number of shots like this from my K5, both before and after the firmware update, and the only common trait seems to be a frame that is mainly filled with a face, normally a light-colored one.

I cannot say that I understand why or that I have studied or tested this, but I have seen the same thing in many shots that you and others have posted here where the main subject is a light-colored face. Many of these shots seem to be slighty soft or OOF.

Shots like this of my Granddaughter were one of my first indications of AF issues with the K5. The more obvious indicator was shots taken indoors during a Christmas gathering (tungsten lighting).

I too like the K5, but fail to understand why it does odd things like this which should be easy to get right.

Ray
04-26-2011, 05:27 AM   #28
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 1,927
QuoteOriginally posted by Ray Pulley Quote
Planedriver,

I have seen a number of shots like this from my K5, both before and after the firmware update, and the only common trait seems to be a frame that is mainly filled with a face, normally a light-colored one.

Ray
But there was also someone here that had miss focused shots of a colored lady and some people tried to pin that on user error. She was to dark. This is one picky camera... maybe it can only focus on people from Japan?
04-26-2011, 06:08 AM   #29
Loyal Site Supporter
Rupert's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Texas
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 24,848
QuoteOriginally posted by Gimbal Quote
But there was also someone here that had miss focused shots of a colored lady and some people tried to pin that on user error. She was to dark. This is one picky camera... maybe it can only focus on people from Japan?
Anthony is a Cherokee Indian, so it can focus on Indians too.
[IMG] [/IMG]

Doesn't do too bad on old White women either......in particular if they are still pretty, like my Mom.
[IMG] [/IMG]

Best Regards!
04-26-2011, 06:37 AM   #30
Site Supporter
jpzk's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Québec
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,232
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Rupert Quote
Expecting too much?

I hear you guys, and don't question your disappointment, but I do wonder if we often just expect too much from our gear, no matter what that gear may be? I hear the same complaints from my Canon and Nikon friends, some with some very expensive merchandise.

After a little over a month with my K5 I find it less than perfect but better than anything else my friends use, and no I would not trade for an other camera in or near its class.

There are shots where I have disappointment, such as the one below where detail could be better, but given that it was shot at a good distance in not so good light and at 500mm with a standard Bigma50-500 lens, how much can I complain? It is also a heavy crop....so I would have to say I am expecting too much to want fine detail here. As for focus accuracy, I have been well pleased, but again, my expectations are in the range of an amateur, which is what I am. If I was a Pro, shooting with a D3X and the finest glass in the world, I expect I would have similar disappointments.....one of my friends has such gear and he complains as much as anyone else I know.
This is not math where numbers never lie.......there is always some luck involved, and factors we can't control. Bottom line for me is that with whatever flaws may be in the K5...or any camera....I continue to be thrilled with the results I get overall from my K5.
Best Regards!
No, it won't make Nat Geo, but it will make a great Card Front and make some little old lady smile on her Birthday or Mothers Day. It's not all about the IQ, is it?
Thanks Rupert.

I did go out and tested the combo again yesterday afternoon, after having updated the firmware, spotted a nice Kestrel which was busy feeding along the salt marsh, chasing "whatever" preys. She was also quite cooperative.

I would say that half of the shots, taken at roughly 50-100 feet away, were spot on, the others were obviously OOF because of my technique (hand held and moving the camera quite fast to follow the bird). OOF shots were nearly 100% with those while the bird was flying, so I am not really surprised considering the speed at which this small bird of prey moves!

However, the camera was struggling to acquire focus, even when the bird was resting on a tree top, not at all moving. The AF was actually "chasing" and at times would focus nowhere near the target.
Contrast was good yesterday.

But, as you suggest, no camera is perfect and the pros do beat the cons and if one considers that 50% "keepers" rate is acceptable, I will do with that.

By the way, this shot of the cardinal is very good, considering the distance at which you've taken it and with the lens set up you had.

Thanks again for the replies.

Cheers.

JP
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
camera, contrast, dslr, firmware, focus, infinity, k-5, k-5 ii, k-5 iis, k5, pentax k-5, version
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Wow! The K-5 has AMAZING focus accuracy in low yellowish light! Christine Tham Pentax K-5 62 03-21-2011 06:07 AM
Comparison of K-5 low light focus accuracy with v1.01 and v1.03 of firmware tram57 Pentax K-5 3 03-20-2011 08:13 PM
Focus Points and Accuracy montman Pentax DSLR Discussion 3 06-09-2010 09:48 PM
Focus accuracy krypticide Pentax DSLR Discussion 12 11-15-2009 12:19 PM
Focus Accuracy K 50 1.4 paulelescoces Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 15 09-07-2009 09:25 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:32 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top