[Poit]

OK, so maybe my issue is the use of AF-C?

I’m happy to accept advice, but how do you track and capture sharp images with a moving subject?

Even a bride walking slowly will have moved out of focus by the time the camera locks and is ready to fire

---------- Post added 02-20-18 at 03:51 PM ----------

Of course you can pre-focus, i’m Not that stupid. But you will miss golden moments like that

---------- Post added 02-20-18 at 03:55 PM ----------

Maybe your Sigma lens is part of the issue? Sigma lenses can be problematic in this aspect and it's something that has been reported across camera brands.

I do agree that a top Pentax body at least should have eye/face detection in this day and age in its AF system. Hopefully soon.

I agree totally. The sigma is a dog for accurate focus. I usually used the DA * 16-50, which was better.

But for a very dark chapel I had no choice. F1.4 lense was needed

[Kozlok]

Tracking a moving subject in the dark? I think no brand will do that. In any case, cameras are just tools. Sell yours and get a Canon or Nikon if they work better for what you need. I wish my Jeep handled like a sports car, but it doesn’t. And a sports car doesn’t work as well when the pavement ends. Different tools for different jobs.

For me, Pentax does what I need better than most. My subjects are stationary.

[Poit]

I tried to upload some samples, but file sizes are too big or something

---------- Post added 02-20-18 at 04:09 PM ----------

Tracking a moving subject in the dark? I think no brand will do that. In any case, cameras are just tools. Sell yours and get a Canon or Nikon if they work better for what you need. I wish my Jeep handled like a sports car, but it doesn’t. And a sports car doesn’t work as well when the pavement ends. Different tools for different jobs.

For me, Pentax does what I need better than most. My subjects are stationary.

Frankly I am tired of this “change brands” cop-out.

My point is, and has always been...Pentax have deficiencies that are limiting their sales.

So you’re happy? Wonderful. Others are happy? That’s wonderful too. I love Pentax as well.

But it MUST catch up with what serious photographers want (AF first on the list), or the doom of Pentax will be real.

I don’t want that to happen. I’m sure none of you do either.

---------- Post added 02-20-18 at 04:16 PM ----------

If you love someone, but they are hurting themselves, do you not say something to them?

[stevebrot]

My point is, in part, not about my own desires.

OK...so you are not planning on buying the features you strongly suggest are needed? Translation: No ROI for pursuing feature parity not supported by market research.
I expect that is why we are not seeing certain features despite almost a decade of their presence of on the competition's product.

I have not read or watched one review that recommends a Pentax over its competitors.

Broaden your scope? I don't give much credence to Consumer Reports' camera reviews (they down-marked the K-1 because the FA 77/1.8 Limited they tested it with was not a zoom), but they rated the K-70 above the D5600 and D7500 (!?).

Reputable camera review sites generally don't do head-to-head recommendations* if for no other reason that serious photographers most often buy the camera that meets their need and don't shop features. That being said, Imaging Resources was pretty jazzed about the KP and DPReview did not exactly pan it. The Camera Store liked the K-70...really liked... Tony says, "Best landscape camera ever" for the K-1. (I don't much care for Tony since he does head-to-head recommendations, but whatever. If you ignore his bang-for-the-buck talk, the review is good.)

...I have a near 100% keeper rate for autofocus.

Me too, though that may say more about how and when I use AF. In short, I used fixed AF point the same as I might use a manual focus aid such as split image or microprism. I explicitly define point of focus before taking the picture. I also don't use AF for critical focus...ever.


Steve

* If they do...walk swiftly away...don't look back...

[stevebrot]

OK so talk of cup holders and heaters etc gives me the message loud and clear.

Cup holders are best seen as a tripod feature.

The heater suggestion was serious, however. Canberra probably seldom sees low temperatures that might challenge the temperature specs for current model Pentax dSLRs. If were doing astro work tonight in the mountains east of me, the temps might be well dip below the -10 C operating range for the camera. External power supply and some option for chassis and/or lens heat (often just chemical handwarmers) are the norm under those conditions for working pros. I think it would be cool of the feature was offered as either an accessory or a built-in capability.

K-cup support was purely tongue-in-cheek, but I could not resist on a thread where the initial post suggests that the OP might be aiming to create a contentious thread or perhaps gain attention from the Ricoh marketing folk who don't monitor this site.


Steve

[biz-engineer]

I wonder how many wedding shooters have passed on a K-1 because of AF etc

The problem is, even Pentax camera such as K1 is an overkill. Recently upgraded to 4K OLED and the truth is, even Pentax K1 for which some people complain about not having 4K video is an overkill. Last but not least, saying that Pentax K1 AF isn't good enough for weddings is a big joke, I remember shooting weddings 20 year ago with auto-focus that was several order of magnitude slower than what Pentax offers today. So yeah, it's all about marketing gimmickry and customer non sense. About folks who say can't take wedding photographs with a Pentax K1, we should really question their capability...

[Poit]

K-cup support was purely tongue-in-cheek, but I could not resist on a thread where the initial post suggests that the OP might be aiming to create a contentious thread or perhaps gain attention from the Ricoh marketing folk who don't monitor this site.


Steve

Contentious? what's contentious about suggestion Pentax get back in the game...seriously that is.

[stevebrot]

It is using a K-3, in a chapel, shooting the bride walking down the aisle. And the shooting the couple leaving. AF-C. 30% keepers at best.

Singma 35mm f1.4

My K-3 is up to this task, but I don't own the Sigma 35/1.4 and would never use such in that setting for multiple reasons. That being said, it is a shame to miss shots solely because one was not aware ahead of time that the camera would not be able to track in a dim room with a backlit subject*. The Nikon product might have done a better job here and the advice to consider a different system might be very good advice, though I might want to try before buying.


Steve

* For daytime weddings, the brides are almost always backlit coming down the aisle and nobody gets salable results. For the trip back up the aisle, the K-3 should do fine.

[robjmitchell]

At iso 800, f2? Maybe I need some improvement in my own skills.

I sorta thought that putting the focus poit in the subject and using the AF button would do the trick...

The 3 central AF points are designed for f2.8. Trying to shoot a moving target at f2 in a poorly lit space is going to push any AF system, let alone with a sigma lens attached. Maybe the A9 might have a chance. What you primarily need is greater depth of field, so a high ISO performance camera. Best solution is to manage the bride so she start/stops long enough to get the photos. Things like flash are not always an option in churches, but that’s been the best way to capture images in low ambient light. Realistically Video is a much better way to document the ceremony stage of a wedding anyway. It even comes with sound, which captures the emotion and helps cover up how uptight and tense the couples always look till they take the vows.

[stevebrot]

It does. If you don't use AF.C.

Yep...wrong mode. Working the back button in AF-S works well and the AF is fast enough with the right lenses even in dim light (best low-light AF in the business).

I do agree that a top Pentax body at least should have eye/face detection in this day and age in its AF system. Hopefully soon.

Common in mirrorless systems where the full frame is available at high resolution for evaluation in real time, but such is generally not available in an SLR in other than live view.

To be honest, I am old enough to remember when photographers found their own eye focus, tracked focus manually with heavy medium format gear and slow lenses and managed without motorized drive modes. (Burst at a wedding? How gauche!) I know, it sounds amazing, but they were/are pros and were worth their fee.


Steve

[stevebrot]

how do you track and capture sharp images with a moving subject?

You track and capture. If the moving subject is a bride coming down the aisle, how much more predicable can it be? She is on a predictable path, has been coached by the wedding coordinator to go slow to give the photographer a chance at the shots and will stop at least once on the way down. That is almost as easy as working with a trained owl for BIF. You only need three or four tries and spray and pray is not the way to get them. If you have doubts, work with a partner for the critical shots. It helps too to be there for the practice and shoot the dry runs.

BTW...I shoot the occasional event (dramas, concerts, special programs) at my church, but not weddings. Those are best left to the pros and I can't imagine making a living in that sector. The most I will do is team with a pro if they need an additional shutter in the room.


Steve

[leekil]

Originally posted by ChristianRock
I do agree that a top Pentax body at least should have eye/face detection in this day and age in its AF system. Hopefully soon.
Common in mirrorless systems where the full frame is available at high resolution for evaluation in real time, but such is generally not available in an SLR in other than live view.

The top Nikon cameras have had this through the optical viewfinder since the D800; the large number of metering points allows them to be used as input for face-detection. Pentax at this point also has enough metering points to do the same thing.

[stevebrot]

Frankly I am tired of this “change brands” cop-out.

My point is, and has always been...Pentax have deficiencies that are limiting their sales.

Not a cop-out. IF one's gear is limiting one's vision and/or scope of subjects, getting the gear that works better is the obvious and essential solution.* IF not, what difference does it make if the features will not be enough for one to justify investment in the camera that has them.

Now perhaps the instincts regarding appropriate market features for enhanced penetration are spot on. If so, this forum is not the place to bleat out the repeated suggestions year after year. It is tedious. A reasonable idea might be to pitch Ricoh for employment in their market research and product development group.


Steve

* I live in a moist climate and if I were a Sony shooter, I would have wasted at least one A7-series body in the time I have owned my K-3. I could suggest on a Sony-centric forum that the lack of adequate seals is hurting sales and creating a bad product reputation among waterfall and winter landscape shooters like me and that this situation has been going on far too long.

[pinholecam]

I think whatever they are doing, they are keeping the cards close to their chest.

Anyone's guess is as good as another's.
We all know the possibilities :
1. Slow down and wind down the business
2. Think over what to do with the camera lines (ie. mirrorless? 645? bigger/smaller lenses, etc).
3. Be the leading brand in IQ and the DSLR experience while others move to mirrorless.
4. Leapfrog the competition with more experimental stuff (eg. Theta; HP camera colaborations; etc)
5. Be a "boutique" maker like Leica -more expensive, really well built, expensive and niche to avoid mass market madness and race to the bottom

Of course if AFC is improved, it will be great.
If the DR was like 18 stops in one shot, that would be candy.
Video 8k, wow! - fantastic so long as I don't have to pay for it due to a faster chip/ pipeline since my video use is '0'.


Personally, I feel myself being removed from all these over the years.
Its come to a point where lenses are lenses and I have plenty of them to play with and get the effect I want.
Cameras are well past the point where I need more MP and even DR is rather moot as I either get it within 2-3 bracketed shots layer blended or not need the DR at all and just expose for the important stuff.

If Pentax closes, I'd be disappointed, but I'd probably get their last FF camera and that should last me years, then I move on to whatever that can take the lenses with an adapter.
The "invested in XXX brand" argument is no longer as relevant as it used to be to me.
I shoot multiple genres both with AF/MF and on poorer AF and I have never found that my photography has been limited because of the tech.
Yes, that includes the fastest most erratic moving athletes in the world (called kids );
My skills have carried thru from camera to camera be it AF/MF and that has been the most important part of getting photos.
Its just so easy to get lead away with all the tech talk (camera vs camera ) that we forget the reason we shoot.
For the the things we love/like/family/friends/beauty/etc...

[stevebrot]

The top Nikon cameras have had this through the optical viewfinder since the D800; the large number of metering points allows them to be used as input for face-detection. Pentax at this point also has enough metering points to do the same thing.

The FF Nikon bodies will cluster PDAF focus points to faces in certain modes (auto-area and group-area) if they are detected, but there is no face-detection mode per se. As you noted, the K-3/K-3II, K-1, and KP have moderate resolution RGB metering that is capable of finding faces, but there is mixed evidence that the feature is being leveraged. I tested extensively with my K-3 to see if an trace was logged to the EXIF:MakerNotes locations associated with face detection, but was not able to reliably find evidence of detection.


Steve