[Sandy Hancock]

What an egregious interview. Very unprofessional on both sides.

[JHfwp]

Well that was quite a ripping. And I agree, that was unprofessional of him to do so after being sponsored by Pentax.

Shame he quit coming around though. I still remember the shots he shared here of an Italian actress. They were quite beautiful to my untrained eyes. I vaguely remember an alien themed shoot he did, that I also felt was really interesting to look at (unlike most fashion photography, I have to admit). I miss the behind-the-scenes info he shared and the stories behind the creative work he was doing at the time, even though most of it went right over my head.

C'est la vie.

(I would have multi-quoted and responded to your posts one by one, but I'm having trouble with the multi-quote feature. Thank each of you for your responses to my question.)

[Winder]

Ricoh has to improve AF significantly. Yes, the K-1 is much better for AF-S work that any other camera, but most professionals I know use back button AF with AF-C mode active 99.9% of the time. Look where Sony was with the A7 just a few years ago compared to where they are today with the A9. Ricoh needs to make that kind of improvement. The more they hear that from professionals like Ben, the more likely they are to improve upon their weaknesses. Ricoh really needs to put an upgraded AF system into the 645z replacement. Cameras like the GFX are going to be tough competition, but the GFX also has crap AF because it is using older, slower sensor technology. Hopefully we see a 645 body with a full sized 645 sensor, IBIS (even if its just 2-3 stops), & a significantly improved AF system. The 645 body is large enough for a dedicated AF processor.

[Sandy Hancock]

I don't have a problem with Ben criticising Pentax's AF, but the delighted fangirl giggling and deliberate ridicule was unprofessional.

It is also important to understand that Ben left Pentax before the K-1 was released, so his objections are to a degree historical.

[biz-engineer]

Go to the 19:50 mark he starts talking about Pentax. Basically he left because the AF was bad.

Important is to think about who are the real persons behind the cameras...

[captureit]

I'm wondering why he used AF instead of manually focusing. I'm new at portrait shooting, all I've heard on a particular professional photo FB group is always use manual focus for sharpness - most members have Canon or Nikon cameras.

Thought more about it, possibly the top-of-the-line professional full frame AF in other manufacturers is that good?

[Winder]

I'm wondering why he used AF instead of manually focusing. I'm new at portrait shooting, all I've heard on a particular professional photo FB group is always use manual focus for sharpness - most members have Canon or Nikon cameras.

Thought more about it, possibly the top-of-the-line professional full frame AF in other manufacturers is that good?

I don't know of anyone who is recommending using MF for portrait work. For most manufactures AF is faster and more accurate than you can get with the OVF and most people work at a speed that makes MF impractical. Now if I had a 20"x24" Polaroid, that would be a different story.

[captureit]

Interesting, manual is recommended especially for a still subject to capture and focus on eyes in family/wedding photography. Maybe some fashion photography the model is moving which is not typical except for children in the former and where the subject is moving.

[Winder]

Interesting, manual is recommended especially for a still subject to capture and focus on eyes in family/wedding photography. Maybe some fashion photography the model is moving which is not typical except for children in the former and where the subject is moving.

The Sony A7II and the Fuji X-T2 both have really good AF that automatically locks onto the eyes the A9 AF is exceptional. With modeling lights on my K-1 nails AF on the eyes. The only time I use MF is when I'm using my Pentax glass on my A7II.
Demo: The Sony a9's Eye-Tracking Autofocus is Crazy Accurate

[captureit]

You've hit the nail on the head, natural lighting is far different than ideal studio lighting with a paid model that moves on command with everything calculated ahead of time. I question the glowing review in a brightly lit space photographed by highly motivated reviewers using cameras provided by the manufacturers. Camera improvements are incremental. A new camera effect that works in ideal situations doesn't function as well in less than ideal situations. Sony DSLRs have a reputation of batteries having a shorter life - not ideal for longer photography sessions. Most family portraits now use natural lighting and not studio lighting. Lighting in these situations are more often than not, uneven. Turning a camera even slightly in these situations can greatly effect the light coming in a lens. In less than ideal situations sometimes the AF will try to "hunt down" it subject but never find it or taking too long to lock in. Or finding out after the event in editing the AF failed. No one wants to deal with a failed AF. Consistency is important that is why manual is still used most of the time with photographers who do this type of work day in and day out. If the professional studio photographer in the beginning of this article was complaining about Pentax AF in near perfect conditions and AF being what it is, I don't doubt his need for the best one out there! If he was having problems then I question any manufacturer's AF ability being as efficient as manual in less than ideal or low light situations.

[Winder]

I question the glowing review in a brightly lit space photographed by highly motivated reviewers using cameras provided by the manufacturers.

Review: The Sony a9 is the Camera of a Wedding Photographer's Dreams
Maybe you should try it for yourself or read more reviews. I have the A7II and the eye-AF is very good. The A9 eye AF is simply amazing.

"The best time to test the Sony a9’s Eye-AF capabilities. Just before they started I locked focus on the bride’s eyes and held the button down. They came through the confetti, I ran backward ensuring I kept a reasonable composition and that Eye-AF stayed as it should. It did. Camera’s frame rate set on M so 10fps, I held the shutter down and let the camera do the work. 150 photos over 20 seconds (a couple of mini shutter breaks mid-run). The camera missed focus on ONE photo only. There should be a keeper or two in there."

You could look at the work for portrait photographers Brian Smith. Yes Brian is a Sony Artisan Photographer, but he is also one of the top portrait photographers in the country.
Miami Florida Celebrity Portrait Photographer Brian Smith

Maybe you can post the links to some of these top portrait photographers who only shoot with manual focus. Are these large format photographers?

Ben Kanarek http://benjaminkanarek.com/ is one of the top portrait and fashion photographers in the world and left Pentax because of AF. He now shoots Nikon as the video on the previous page says.
Peter Hurley shoots Canon
Joe McNally is a Nikon guy
Annie Leibovitz was shooting Canon and I assume still is.

I'm not saying you can't get great photos with MF, just that I don't know of any working professionals who aren't using AF for the majority of their work. Obviously people using the Zeiss Otus lens or the Sony 135mm STF or a dozen other specialty lenses are using MF when they go to those lenses. But the vast majority are not using that type of glass. I know a guy who still shoots with a Pentax 67II, but guys like him are in the minority.

[pathdoc]

"The best time to test the Sony a9’s Eye-AF capabilities. Just before they started I locked focus on the bride’s eyes and held the button down. They came through the confetti, I ran backward ensuring I kept a reasonable composition and that Eye-AF stayed as it should. It did. Camera’s frame rate set on M so 10fps, I held the shutter down and let the camera do the work. 150 photos over 20 seconds (a couple of mini shutter breaks mid-run). The camera missed focus on ONE photo only. There should be a keeper or two in there."

You've got to wonder how wedding photographers ever coped with manual-winding manual-focus cameras in the days before even motor drive. /sarc

[Winder]

You've got to wonder how wedding photographers ever coped with manual-winding manual-focus cameras in the days before even motor drive. /sarc

I know you are being sarcastic, but the answer is that customer expectations have changed. I shot with a Contax 645 film camera for years and the types of photographs that my clients wanted and requested was totally different than they are today. Yes, you have the posed group shots where manual focus works great, but those are actually a small percentage of what goes into a printed photobook. Not long ago I was giving people a album of maybe 100 pictures. Today I have printed photobooks with 300-500 images. The clients expectations have changed significantly over the last 10 years and photographers have to change what they deliver.

[pathdoc]

The clients expectations have changed significantly over the last 10 years

If you ask me, the clients have gone mad. If your wedding is all about the five hundred (bleep)ing 8x10 glossies you get in a book, YOU ARE DOING MARRIAGE WRONG.