K5: What's the latest findings in Mixed lighting Front Focusing issue?

Katsura · 11-25-2011, 05:05 PM

wave length is as close as the test condition would allow - ie, on a cloudless day the near and far subjects are both illuminated by direct sun light, with no cast shadow on the testing side. Of course you have to allow whatever light variation there is between the 2 photos.
Try it for yourself, if you have a lens that BF close us, adjust it so it's spot on, and then see if it FF on a far object.

audiobomber · 11-25-2011, 06:29 PM

Originally posted by Katsura

wave length is as close as the test condition would allow - ie, on a cloudless day the near and far subjects are both illuminated by direct sun light, with no cast shadow on the testing side. Of course you have to allow whatever light variation there is between the 2 photos.
Try it for yourself, if you have a lens that BF close us, adjust it so it's spot on, and then see if it FF on a far object.

I returned the K-5 shortly after doing a series of test photos. The K-x and K20D both outperformed it significantly in low light (V1.03 firmware). As mentioned previously, I had no FF/BF issues with the K-5 in daylight, at any distance, with any lens. I just had FF in tungsten light.
https://picasaweb.google.com/100586096103361553535/TungstenLightTest?authkey...Lf74sWxotSUfA#

Shaarawy · 11-05-2012, 01:58 AM

I've posted this on the other thread, but thanks Katsura for your test here! .. So my questions again:

Can one conclude that the garanteed solution is using the micro focus adjustment (taking in consideration how far the subject is) ??!
Or LV.. or finally, maunual focusing ??!

Btw.. Is that Canon manual focusing screen the only one there ?
I haven't got a K-5 yet, still using films! .. Is the K-5 II really better regarding FF ?!

Thanks everybody for the valuable tests and photos, much appreciated!
Shaarawy
_______________
Super A / 50mm f1.4 / 28-135mm f4

audiobomber · 11-05-2012, 05:40 AM

Get the K-5 II (or IIs), and you won't have to worry about tungsten light, plus you will have much better AF in dim conditions, i.e. -3Ev for the K-5 II vs. hit or miss -1Ev for the original K-5.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
What's the latest on the K7 Veritcal Line issue.	dhodgeh	Pentax DSLR Discussion	4	05-26-2010 05:43 PM
POLL: Who has front-focusing in tungsten lighting?	soccerjoe5	Pentax DSLR Discussion	17	02-01-2010 05:06 AM
Front-back focusing issue	Mystic	Pentax DSLR Discussion	10	08-26-2009 08:15 PM
Quick portrait experiments with mixed studio lighting	hamidlmt	Post Your Photos!	12	03-20-2008 05:25 PM
Balancing mixed lighting (4 images)	hamidlmt	Post Your Photos!	3	03-02-2008 02:07 PM

11-25-2011, 05:05 PM	#46
Katsura Senior Member Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Noosa, Queesnland Photos: Albums Posts: 199 Original Poster	wave length is as close as the test condition would allow - ie, on a cloudless day the near and far subjects are both illuminated by direct sun light, with no cast shadow on the testing side. Of course you have to allow whatever light variation there is between the 2 photos. Try it for yourself, if you have a lens that BF close us, adjust it so it's spot on, and then see if it FF on a far object.

11-25-2011, 06:29 PM	#47
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Originally posted by Katsura wave length is as close as the test condition would allow - ie, on a cloudless day the near and far subjects are both illuminated by direct sun light, with no cast shadow on the testing side. Of course you have to allow whatever light variation there is between the 2 photos. Try it for yourself, if you have a lens that BF close us, adjust it so it's spot on, and then see if it FF on a far object. I returned the K-5 shortly after doing a series of test photos. The K-x and K20D both outperformed it significantly in low light (V1.03 firmware). As mentioned previously, I had no FF/BF issues with the K-5 in daylight, at any distance, with any lens. I just had FF in tungsten light. https://picasaweb.google.com/100586096103361553535/TungstenLightTest?authkey...Lf74sWxotSUfA#

11-05-2012, 01:58 AM	#48
Shaarawy New Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: Cairo Posts: 13	I've posted this on the other thread, but thanks Katsura for your test here! .. So my questions again: Can one conclude that the garanteed solution is using the micro focus adjustment (taking in consideration how far the subject is) ??! Or LV.. or finally, maunual focusing ??! Btw.. Is that Canon manual focusing screen the only one there ? I haven't got a K-5 yet, still using films! .. Is the K-5 II really better regarding FF ?! Thanks everybody for the valuable tests and photos, much appreciated! Shaarawy _______________ Super A / 50mm f1.4 / 28-135mm f4

11-05-2012, 05:40 AM	#49
audiobomber Veteran Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Sudbury, Ontario Photos: Albums Posts: 6,806	Get the K-5 II (or IIs), and you won't have to worry about tungsten light, plus you will have much better AF in dim conditions, i.e. -3Ev for the K-5 II vs. hit or miss -1Ev for the original K-5.