Disappointing Discovery

Tycn · 03-14-2012, 01:14 AM

Originally posted by Adam

I don't think the K-01 is a flawed concept. The only flaw it has is that an AF system that's just as good as PDAF and can be used with mirrorless cameras hasn't been invented yet, but I'm sure it will be soon enough! It's really hard to get a CDAF system to work just as well with DSLR lenses as other manufacturers' systems do with dedicated mirrorless lenses that have shorter throw.

The Nikon V1/J1 route seems like it would have been ideal here, with a lineup of legacy lenses designed for PDAF.

Clavius · 03-14-2012, 02:29 AM

I've asked this n00b question a couple of times without responses:

The CDAF is slower because it doesn't know which way to turn to focus... Couldn't the PDAF electronics tell CDAF which way to go then?

pingflood · 03-14-2012, 04:30 AM

Originally posted by Clavius

I've asked this n00b question a couple of times without responses:

The CDAF is slower because it doesn't know which way to turn to focus... Couldn't the PDAF electronics tell CDAF which way to go then?

What PDAF electronics are you refering to?

ibkc · 03-14-2012, 04:37 AM

Originally posted by luftfluss

OK, I'll confess...

I have a beige cat. I am one of those (gulp) people who loves to take pics of his kitties. I particularly like to take kitty pics in low-light because the cats' pupils get large, and I think its a cute look. My mother's cat is also beige, although lighter.

Yep, I'm a cat-nerd.

Based on this real-world criteria, and from what I've read here about the K-01, I think that the K-01 is not the camera for me. That doesn't make it a bad camera, though.

Hello fellow beige-cat-owning nerd!

These were taken with the little kit 40mm XS lens in autofocus and although the light isn't particularly low, you'll note in both that there isn't much contrast between cat and surroundings.

However, my 18-55 zoom definitely couldn't handle the same situations in autofocus.

jmg257 · 03-14-2012, 05:06 AM

Originally posted by Clavius

I've asked this n00b question a couple of times without responses:

The CDAF is slower because it doesn't know which way to turn to focus... Couldn't the PDAF electronics tell CDAF which way to go then?

PDAF electronics (in a DSLR) include a separate AF module that needs a way for subject light to get to it. A sub-mirror in front of the image sensor helps take care of that by reflecting some light down into the AF module. The mirrors flip up out of the way in SLR LV, while there are none in a mirrorless camera...only AF sensors there are CDAF built into the image sensor.

Parallax · 03-14-2012, 05:10 AM

Originally posted by Rupert

However, once the hounds are on the trail and running, howling for blood, there is no turning back.

Yep. Remember how it went with some of the K5 issues?

Quote:

So far they have not been set free on the K-01 but you can see them around here sniffing at the edges.
Regards!

True, and as with the K5, only some of information is coming from people who have actually used a K-01.

Clavius · 03-14-2012, 05:37 AM

Originally posted by jmg257

PDAF electronics (in a DSLR) include a separate AF module that needs a way for subject light to get to it. A sub-mirror in front of the image sensor helps take care of that by reflecting some light down into the AF module. The mirrors flip up out of the way in SLR LV, while there are none in a mirrorless camera...only AF sensors there are CDAF built into the image sensor.

That makes sense. Thanks!

It's a pity though, a combo would make the contrast AF both accurate & fast.

GeneV · 03-14-2012, 05:59 AM

Originally posted by monochrome

I am just amazed that the first thing someone tries out is shooting a vase in a dim, tungsten-lit living room at night with a kit lens and it is a reason to return a camera.

In all fairness, this is a very common use for a camera. I shoot a lot at parties and concerts, and finding a point to lock focus is always an issue in Tungsten light, especially with ~F4 zooms. It is more so with LV, so I can see why the OP is having an issue.

jogiba · 03-14-2012, 06:01 AM

Originally posted by Tycn

The Nikon V1/J1 route seems like it would have been ideal here, with a lineup of legacy lenses designed for PDAF.

You need a $235 adapter with the V1 /J1 to use Nikon DSLR lenses.

Nikon FT1 Mount Adapter 3613 B&H Photo Video

Docrwm · 03-14-2012, 06:14 AM

Originally posted by jogiba

You need a $235 adapter with the V1 /J1 to use Nikon DSLR lenses.

Nikon FT1 Mount Adapter 3613 B&H Photo Video

Now that's funny! I've got a GF2 and picked up a $10 adapter to use my K mount lenses with it.

krebsy75 · 03-14-2012, 06:14 AM

We captured over 200 images in every imaginable lighting condition with the K-01 before using the 18-55 in our living room.

I purchased the K-01 with the understanding that it would offer acceptable auto-focus compatibility with every AF Pentax lens ever made. This proved to not be the case. Perhaps improved firmware will resolve this.

Originally posted by monochrome

I am just amazed that the first thing someone tries out is shooting a vase in a dim, tungsten-lit living room at night with a kit lens and it is a reason to return a camera.

Wheatfield · 03-14-2012, 06:33 AM

Originally posted by mervis

6. I never said Pentax wouldn't let 'a single fault' out the door. I stated (perhaps with some hyperbole) that they would certainly test to make sure the autofocus worked according to the system it chose within the parameters of the body design prior to release. Do you have evidence that they didn't do this?

I'll answer this point, since it is the only one you've made that is anything other than pointless argumentativeness or attempted deflection.
Both the K5 and K-r were released with auto focus that didn't work within it's specified parameters. You should probably go back and read some of the early threads about the K5 where this was much discussed.

krebsy75 · 03-14-2012, 06:33 AM

Hallelujah!

Originally posted by Adam

The main issue with the K-01 AF accuracy is that it can sometimes fail to lock focus even when there IS plenty of contrast.

For example, at site one in the photo below:

Pentax K-01 Review - Autofocus Performance - PentaxForums.com

**monochrome** · 03-14-2012, 06:40 AM

Originally posted by krebsy97

We captured over 200 images in every imaginable lighting condition with the K-01 before using the 18-55 in our living room.

I purchased the K-01 with the understanding that it would offer acceptable auto-focus compatibility with every AF Pentax lens ever made. This proved to not be the case. Perhaps improved firmware will resolve this.

Early adopters like you and me always suffer from disappointments when we first use our new products. Part of the cause is expecation inflation (we imagine that it will be better than was ever real;ly claimed by the manufacturer) part of the Cause is manufacturer business practice (they use the early adopters as Beta testers; then they use the cash flow from early sales to correct identified issues to attract the early followers) and sometimes part of the cause is plain product design flaws.

The critical business exercise for amanufacturer is to properly weight the 3 issues and make add-on investments accordingly.

krebsy75 · 03-14-2012, 07:02 AM

We actually had really low expectations for the K-01. When we started getting shots with the DA 40mm XS in our house the night the camera came we got really excited. The AF was acceptable and the image quality was K5-like. My wife really enjoyed using the cam and loved how it looked. The camera's clear interface and manual controls also won her over.

Last Sunday we hit the The Turkey Hill Experience | Home Page in Lancaster, Pa. This place is a photographer's dream! Abundant natural light with colorful objects to shoot. Again, with the 40mm XS the K-01 performed admirably. We got lots of keepers and our excitement grew for the camera.

Later that day we hit the playground and attached the 17-70. I bought this lens for my wife last Christmas to use as a walkaround lens. The K-01 had a real difficult time locking focus with this lens even in broad daylight. North of 50-55mm performance was especially dreadful. Having read about the 17-70's reputation for AF fussiness I didn't get too concerned. I was dissapointed but chalked up the issue to the 17-70 having some sort of inherent design flaw that the K-01 couldn't overcome. Keep in mind that we also had problems with the 35mm macro. This was now the second lens in our bag that didn't play nice with the K-01.

My wife was hoping to use the 18-55mm as a crutch lens with the K-01 when travelling light. We captured a few images using this lens in our house to see how it performed. Our experience (with this lens) has been well documented. To make a long story short the K5 in LV mode was able to achieve focus lock more frequently than the K-01.

Originally posted by monochrome

Early adopters like you and me always suffer from disappointments when we first use our new products. Part of the cause is expecation inflation (we imagine that it will be better than was ever real;ly claimed by the manufacturer) part of the Cause is manufacturer business practice (they use the early adopters as Beta testers; then they use the cash flow from early sales to correct identified issues to attract the early followers) and sometimes part of the cause is plain product design flaws.

The critical business exercise for amanufacturer is to properly weight the 3 issues and make add-on investments accordingly.

03-14-2012, 06:14 AM	#115
Docrwm Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Somewhere in the Southern US Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,285	Originally posted by jogiba You need a $235 adapter with the V1 /J1 to use Nikon DSLR lenses. Nikon FT1 Mount Adapter 3613 B&H Photo Video Now that's funny! I've got a GF2 and picked up a $10 adapter to use my K mount lenses with it. Last edited by Docrwm; 03-14-2012 at 06:54 AM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
my most disappointing thing about Pentax	slip	Pentax DSLR Discussion	16	01-06-2012 10:22 PM
K10D iso 100 noise - bit disappointing	Spock	Pentax DSLR Discussion	9	01-07-2011 10:22 AM
Pentax disappointing Sensor cleaning.	coljung	Pentax DSLR Discussion	74	12-02-2010 01:04 PM
Nature A disappointing night...	Adam	Post Your Photos!	3	11-22-2010 08:00 PM
Nature Discovery	Matjazz	Post Your Photos!	8	08-08-2010 08:41 PM

03-14-2012, 01:14 AM	#106
Tycn Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Sydney Posts: 29	Originally posted by Adam I don't think the K-01 is a flawed concept. The only flaw it has is that an AF system that's just as good as PDAF and can be used with mirrorless cameras hasn't been invented yet, but I'm sure it will be soon enough! It's really hard to get a CDAF system to work just as well with DSLR lenses as other manufacturers' systems do with dedicated mirrorless lenses that have shorter throw. The Nikon V1/J1 route seems like it would have been ideal here, with a lineup of legacy lenses designed for PDAF.

03-14-2012, 02:29 AM	#107
Clavius Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: De Klundert Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,150	I've asked this n00b question a couple of times without responses: The CDAF is slower because it doesn't know which way to turn to focus... Couldn't the PDAF electronics tell CDAF which way to go then?

03-14-2012, 04:30 AM	#108
pingflood Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Borås, Sweden Photos: Gallery Posts: 3,169	Originally posted by Clavius I've asked this n00b question a couple of times without responses: The CDAF is slower because it doesn't know which way to turn to focus... Couldn't the PDAF electronics tell CDAF which way to go then? What PDAF electronics are you refering to?

03-14-2012, 04:37 AM	#109
ibkc Senior Member Join Date: Feb 2012 Location: southeastern US Photos: Gallery Posts: 203	Originally posted by luftfluss OK, I'll confess... I have a beige cat. I am one of those (gulp) people who loves to take pics of his kitties. I particularly like to take kitty pics in low-light because the cats' pupils get large, and I think its a cute look. My mother's cat is also beige, although lighter. Yep, I'm a cat-nerd. Based on this real-world criteria, and from what I've read here about the K-01, I think that the K-01 is not the camera for me. That doesn't make it a bad camera, though. Hello fellow beige-cat-owning nerd! These were taken with the little kit 40mm XS lens in autofocus and although the light isn't particularly low, you'll note in both that there isn't much contrast between cat and surroundings. However, my 18-55 zoom definitely couldn't handle the same situations in autofocus.

03-14-2012, 05:06 AM	#110
jmg257 Inactive Account Join Date: Jan 2012 Posts: 202	Originally posted by Clavius I've asked this n00b question a couple of times without responses: The CDAF is slower because it doesn't know which way to turn to focus... Couldn't the PDAF electronics tell CDAF which way to go then? PDAF electronics (in a DSLR) include a separate AF module that needs a way for subject light to get to it. A sub-mirror in front of the image sensor helps take care of that by reflecting some light down into the AF module. The mirrors flip up out of the way in SLR LV, while there are none in a mirrorless camera...only AF sensors there are CDAF built into the image sensor.

03-14-2012, 05:10 AM	#111
Parallax Senior Moderator Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Dakota Photos: Gallery Posts: 19,332	Originally posted by Rupert However, once the hounds are on the trail and running, howling for blood, there is no turning back. Yep. Remember how it went with some of the K5 issues? Quote: So far they have not been set free on the K-01 but you can see them around here sniffing at the edges. Regards! True, and as with the K5, only some of information is coming from people who have actually used a K-01.

03-14-2012, 05:37 AM	#112
Clavius Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2011 Location: De Klundert Photos: Gallery Posts: 4,150	Originally posted by jmg257 PDAF electronics (in a DSLR) include a separate AF module that needs a way for subject light to get to it. A sub-mirror in front of the image sensor helps take care of that by reflecting some light down into the AF module. The mirrors flip up out of the way in SLR LV, while there are none in a mirrorless camera...only AF sensors there are CDAF built into the image sensor. That makes sense. Thanks! It's a pity though, a combo would make the contrast AF both accurate & fast.

03-14-2012, 05:59 AM	#113
GeneV Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Albuquerque NM Photos: Albums Posts: 9,830	Originally posted by monochrome I am just amazed that the first thing someone tries out is shooting a vase in a dim, tungsten-lit living room at night with a kit lens and it is a reason to return a camera. In all fairness, this is a very common use for a camera. I shoot a lot at parties and concerts, and finding a point to lock focus is always an issue in Tungsten light, especially with ~F4 zooms. It is more so with LV, so I can see why the OP is having an issue.

03-14-2012, 06:01 AM	#114
jogiba Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Millstone,NJ Posts: 6,491	Originally posted by Tycn The Nikon V1/J1 route seems like it would have been ideal here, with a lineup of legacy lenses designed for PDAF. You need a $235 adapter with the V1 /J1 to use Nikon DSLR lenses. Nikon FT1 Mount Adapter 3613 B&H Photo Video

03-14-2012, 06:14 AM	#116
krebsy75 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Chester County, Pa. Posts: 804 Original Poster	We captured over 200 images in every imaginable lighting condition with the K-01 before using the 18-55 in our living room. I purchased the K-01 with the understanding that it would offer acceptable auto-focus compatibility with every AF Pentax lens ever made. This proved to not be the case. Perhaps improved firmware will resolve this. Originally posted by monochrome I am just amazed that the first thing someone tries out is shooting a vase in a dim, tungsten-lit living room at night with a kit lens and it is a reason to return a camera.

03-14-2012, 06:33 AM	#117
Wheatfield Moderator Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: The wheatfields of Canada Posts: 15,981	Originally posted by mervis 6. I never said Pentax wouldn't let 'a single fault' out the door. I stated (perhaps with some hyperbole) that they would certainly test to make sure the autofocus worked according to the system it chose within the parameters of the body design prior to release. Do you have evidence that they didn't do this? I'll answer this point, since it is the only one you've made that is anything other than pointless argumentativeness or attempted deflection. Both the K5 and K-r were released with auto focus that didn't work within it's specified parameters. You should probably go back and read some of the early threads about the K5 where this was much discussed.

03-14-2012, 06:33 AM	#118
krebsy75 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Chester County, Pa. Posts: 804 Original Poster	Hallelujah! Originally posted by Adam The main issue with the K-01 AF accuracy is that it can sometimes fail to lock focus even when there IS plenty of contrast. For example, at site one in the photo below: Pentax K-01 Review - Autofocus Performance - PentaxForums.com

03-14-2012, 06:40 AM	#119
monochrome Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Working From Home Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 26,276	Originally posted by krebsy97 We captured over 200 images in every imaginable lighting condition with the K-01 before using the 18-55 in our living room. I purchased the K-01 with the understanding that it would offer acceptable auto-focus compatibility with every AF Pentax lens ever made. This proved to not be the case. Perhaps improved firmware will resolve this. Early adopters like you and me always suffer from disappointments when we first use our new products. Part of the cause is expecation inflation (we imagine that it will be better than was ever real;ly claimed by the manufacturer) part of the Cause is manufacturer business practice (they use the early adopters as Beta testers; then they use the cash flow from early sales to correct identified issues to attract the early followers) and sometimes part of the cause is plain product design flaws. The critical business exercise for amanufacturer is to properly weight the 3 issues and make add-on investments accordingly.

03-14-2012, 07:02 AM	#120
krebsy75 Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: Chester County, Pa. Posts: 804 Original Poster	We actually had really low expectations for the K-01. When we started getting shots with the DA 40mm XS in our house the night the camera came we got really excited. The AF was acceptable and the image quality was K5-like. My wife really enjoyed using the cam and loved how it looked. The camera's clear interface and manual controls also won her over. Last Sunday we hit the The Turkey Hill Experience \| Home Page in Lancaster, Pa. This place is a photographer's dream! Abundant natural light with colorful objects to shoot. Again, with the 40mm XS the K-01 performed admirably. We got lots of keepers and our excitement grew for the camera. Later that day we hit the playground and attached the 17-70. I bought this lens for my wife last Christmas to use as a walkaround lens. The K-01 had a real difficult time locking focus with this lens even in broad daylight. North of 50-55mm performance was especially dreadful. Having read about the 17-70's reputation for AF fussiness I didn't get too concerned. I was dissapointed but chalked up the issue to the 17-70 having some sort of inherent design flaw that the K-01 couldn't overcome. Keep in mind that we also had problems with the 35mm macro. This was now the second lens in our bag that didn't play nice with the K-01. My wife was hoping to use the 18-55mm as a crutch lens with the K-01 when travelling light. We captured a few images using this lens in our house to see how it performed. Our experience (with this lens) has been well documented. To make a long story short the K5 in LV mode was able to achieve focus lock more frequently than the K-01. Originally posted by monochrome Early adopters like you and me always suffer from disappointments when we first use our new products. Part of the cause is expecation inflation (we imagine that it will be better than was ever real;ly claimed by the manufacturer) part of the Cause is manufacturer business practice (they use the early adopters as Beta testers; then they use the cash flow from early sales to correct identified issues to attract the early followers) and sometimes part of the cause is plain product design flaws. The critical business exercise for amanufacturer is to properly weight the 3 issues and make add-on investments accordingly.