[john5100]

Shows absolutely nothing for me. Any camera can do these.

One thing that is starting to irritate me about this site are stupid comments like this. Nearly every thread has these fanboy comments.

The photographer is just saying that he had success at a sporting event. Be happy for him that he's enjoying his new camera. I like reading the reviews but it is becoming so negative and difficult to come back.

[jlstrawman]

Well said. I notice that those spewing the most negativity, usually contribute little or nothing to the group.

[SteveB]

Well, I have the k100dS and I can almost guarantee that I would not be able to get anywhere near this quality with my camera. To the great extent, the AF alone would likely result in a shot not even being taken, so most of those shots you see posted here would not even exist. If I were able to get a shot, the IQ would be far less than you see here.

By the way, in that first photo above, there is probably a foul being committed! Was one called?

I have found some extremely good value in this post, as I've wondered about the relative progress for sports shooting through the Pentax dslr generations. This helps me plan my upgrade path. Thanks. Glenn

Agreed, I would have to pre-focus at a certain distance and shoot in MF with my K100D with any lens I've got or tried. Pre-focus and switch to MF is often the best way anyway with non-pro gear, but it would be nice to be able to trust AF on a mid-range DSLR with below top of the line lenses.

I'm still looking for THE definitive proof that the K-30 can do this as good (or better?) as C&N mid-range bodies before I buy a K-30 but it does look promising.

[rawr]

Shows absolutely nothing for me. Any camera can do these.

Always the glass half empty...

The results here are a combination of shooter, lens and camera, as the OP makes clear in his outline.

He isn't claiming any miracles for the K-30, just reporting that it had some strengths in this shooting scenario, as did the Sigma lens.

[john5100]

SteveB

I'm encouraged too. I shoot concerts in all sorts of lighting situations and good af is important. I guess in my case, I could MF with that 100% view finder. It seems like everyone is having focusing issues.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1034&message=40115885

[GlennG]

Agreed, I would have to pre-focus at a certain distance and shoot in MF with my K100D with any lens I've got or tried. Pre-focus and switch to MF is often the best way anyway with non-pro gear, but it would be nice to be able to trust AF on a mid-range DSLR with below top of the line lenses. I'm still looking for THE definitive proof that the K-30 can do this as good (or better?) as C&N mid-range bodies before I buy a K-30 but it does look promising.

That sums it up well both my experience with sports and where I am right now regarding an upgrade. The AF/sports issue aside, I am happy with almost all other aspects of my k100dS, so much so that I'm continuing to question my upgrade want. With the growing and very good indications for the K-30 such as in this thread it is likely that I'll upgrade to the K-30 later this year - maybe Black Friday? Regarding C&N, any upgrade does not have to beat those, or any other brand, spec for spec. But the upgrade model does have to be "fast enough" for amateur sports, and do better in low light/high iso than my current model. Here, I've received a good indication that the K-30 plus good glass would be sufficiently good.

[goldenarrow]

Always the glass half empty...

The results here are a combination of shooter, lens and camera, as the OP makes clear in his outline.

He isn't claiming any miracles for the K-30, just reporting that it had some strengths in this shooting scenario, as did the Sigma lens.

Well said, I like the way you summarized it. And good job to the OP for sharing the results with us. Fast/accurate AF with fast/accurate motor seems to help immensely (with certain AF settings which seem to be new to Pentax). Now if Pentax could create a reliable HSM-like motor, could then have an all-Pentax combo (my way of suggesting to Pentax to scrap SDM and do a complete redesign). Of course, he did use the DA* lens, so it certainly seems better than older models. I wonder what performance is like with the 60-250 compared to the Sigma?

---

Last edited by goldenarrow; 07-29-2012 at 05:14 PM. Reason: .

[Urkeldaedalus]

Thanks for the feedback everyone. I wanted to post a link to my Flickr so people can check out more photos from the shoot at larger sizes: Flickr: urkeldaedalus' Photostream

Here is a link to some of my previous sports shots, including some shots from the K-7, K-x, and K-5. Sports - a set on Flickr

That sums it up well both my experience with sports and where I am right now regarding an upgrade. The AF/sports issue aside, I am happy with almost all other aspects of my k100dS, so much so that I'm continuing to question my upgrade want. With the growing and very good indications for the K-30 such as in this thread it is likely that I'll upgrade to the K-30 later this year - maybe Black Friday? Regarding C&N, any upgrade does not have to beat those, or any other brand, spec for spec. But the upgrade model does have to be "fast enough" for amateur sports, and do better in low light/high iso than my current model. Here, I've received a good indication that the K-30 plus good glass would be sufficiently good.

I believe you would be satisfied with the K-30s performance based on what you describe you're looking for. And as a former user of the K100D Super (I bought it for my sister, very nice image quality at low ISO, even today) I am excited for you to experience the upgrade in performance in virtually every area. As a manual focus fan you'll probably also enjoy the focus peaking.

Of course, he did use the DA* lens, so it certainly seems better than older models. I wonder what performance is like with the 60-250 compared to the Sigma?

I actually am really pleased with the focusing speed of my DA*16-50 and DA*200 (rivals the Sigma 70-200 imo). Also, believe it or not, I have yet to have an SDM motor problem (knock on wood). If Pentax came out with an updated DA* 50-135 with a fast and more reliable motor that I could use for both events and sports I would be willing to shell out the extra money for the improvements. If they don't bring out a full frame camera (or maybe even if they do) they're going to need to come out with some new lenses to compete. I don't see the point of them releasing a king of the hill APS-C camera like I think the K-3 may be and not having the lenses to go with it.

If you have any other questions let me know.

[altopiet]

If anybody who upgraded from a K-x to the K-30, using old slowpoke DA55-300 for sports can tell me if they get better results, I would appreciate it.

[HockeyDad]

Thanks so much for posting your thoughts! How much do you feel the Expanded AF contributed to your keeper-rate? I have a K-r and shoot a lot of hockey and usually use center-point continuous AF. In theory, the Expanded AF should really help with fast moving sports like this. Since you have used the K-x, K-5 and K-30, I'm curious how much you think it helped?

[liukaitc]

yeah.I think 50-135 on aps-c is more useful for basketball than 70-200
but pentax 50-135 is not good for sports. sigh...

[Urkeldaedalus]

yeah.I think 50-135 on aps-c is more useful for basketball than 70-200
but pentax 50-135 is not good for sports. sigh...

Agreed, the 70-200 mm is just a little bit too long on the short end. The 50-135 or Sigma 50-150 f/2.8 would likely be right about perfect for it. I'll probably try one of those two out the next time I shoot basketball.

[Urkeldaedalus]

Thanks so much for posting your thoughts! How much do you feel the Expanded AF contributed to your keeper-rate? I have a K-r and shoot a lot of hockey and usually use center-point continuous AF. In theory, the Expanded AF should really help with fast moving sports like this. Since you have used the K-x, K-5 and K-30, I'm curious how much you think it helped?

That's a good question since I think it does speak to how the Pentax cameras have evolved in sports shooting situations.

With the K-7 and K-x I would use primarily the middle square, too. With the K-5 I use the auto AF 5 mode that lets you autofocus but limits the points the camera picks to the center point plus the four points that make up the center box instead of using all 11 points. This allows you to use the middle point as the main tracking point but also gives you some leeway for the camera to help you out.

With the expanded points in the K-30 it takes it that one step further. When you have it on selectable AF point you can move the clusters of AF points to whatever part of the frame you'll be shooting in, which gives the benefit of the AF5 while giving you more framing options. Most of the time I used the center point in expanded mode, though, which is pretty close to what I described with the K-5 and its AF5 option.

I think the next step for this will be for Pentax to hopefully add more focus points in a future camera so we will be able to use the clusters to zero into very specific regions. But for now the K-30 option is a nice improvement.

[treebeard]

Shows absolutely nothing for me. Any camera can do these.

Not really. Ever try to shoot basketball with a Canon MkIII that had the supposed "AF fix"?

[crossmr]

I'm shooting sports with my K-M and a tamron 28-70 f2.8 from the boards. ice hockey.
It's not bad, but I would like a better AF and be able to shoot at higher ISO, thanks for these pictures.