[opiedog]

11 or 18....makes little difference to me, just get some good results at higher ISO settings, a little better AF than my K20D, and the same body and other features of the K7 and I will be well satisfied....and I think most others will be also. No camera is going to please everyone........just won't happen!

Still, Squirrels prefer Pentax 99 to 1....the one being Otis, and he prefers corn or fresh apple slices......


Best Regards!

BTW- My new Sigma HSM lenses focus fast and accurate on my K20D......amazingly faster, and more accurate than my DA*50-135. It is not all in the body....lenses do make a difference too.

hey, rupert,

how's festus doing? is otis the new king of the squirrels?
hope all is well with you.

i know festus would probably prefer 19 AF points so the k5 will be able to track him when he jumps on the feeder and back out

regards,

jordan

[snostorm]

51 is hilarious.
Maybe some specialized sports photographers need this.
I don't.
I use MF 50% of the time, should use it more.
And, it's not the number, it's the position. It doesn't help to squeeze 51 points into the middle 30% of the frame.

I disagree, and I focus with the center point 99% of the time. More points = smaller, more discrete AF sensor areas, and this would greatly improve critical focus accuracy for my purposes (I shoot birds, and am now venturing into small critter macros).

You can't get smaller AF sensor areas without more focus points unless you can accept larger blind spots in the overall coverage, and that would be unacceptable for multipoint mode use. which doesn't matter to me, but I'm not a majority of users. For my use, even though I wouldn't often use the greater number of points, I'd gain a significant advantage from the more discriminating size of the center point caused by "crowding" more sensors into the same area.

With all the AF user errors due to relatively large areas covered by the current AF sensors, I'd think that there would be more appreciation for the concept of smaller (and therefore more) AF point areas.

Personally, I have been able to make the variants to Pentax's SAFOX VIII system work well for me, but any improvements would still be a nice step up in convenience.


Scott

[turbosaturn]

AF points are important when doing headshots. I almost always frame in such a way that the eyes are above the top 1/3 of the image. Using the center spot would not make much sense because if I had to focus using the center and recompose, then the eyes/eyelashes would no longer be in focus. This is very noticeable when using a 100mm focal length at f/2.8. In the photography that I do, if the eyes aren't the things that are the sharpest in the shot, it's essentially worthless.

[Fl_Gulfer]

I really don't understand why you need so many focus points when the camera can only focus on one at a time. The 11 point system is perfect for the 3rds system, so I can't figure out why more is better.
I'm also happy the grip will work from my K-7 since the wife gets my camera and she dosen't like the grip on it. The AF system will be the same one thats on the 645d and I've heard it works great in dark or low light areas.
Just some thought's from a idiot.

[Christopher M.W.T]

Beautiful shot you've got there!

Ditto!

[Class A]

An anonymous source today informed me that the K-5 will in fact be using an 11-point AF system.

So why did/does it say on the pentaxforums front page "So far, here is all the credible information that we have for the K-5 specifications...18 AF points..."?
That news item really didn't read like a rumour at all.


The email that went around had the subject "Exciting Pentax K-5 Information" not "New Pentax K-5 speculations" and frankly I don't think rumours should be sent around via email.

Exaggerated rumours will just lead to disappointment later on...

[glanglois]

I just thought I should point out that Pentax has the whole "irritant in the tukus problem" covered with the handy kit below.

Don't know how many focus points it has, but I hear it's a very flexible system.

I, too, have been the victim/beneficiary of a Pentax system. The local university tell me that Pentax is the only manufacturer used in the proctology lab.

I failed to ask if it came in 120 color combinations as I was rapidly losing interest owing to some fuzzy-making medicine.

For the first time ever, I was pleased to learn that my Pentax images contained absolutely nothing of interest.

[Class A]

I really don't understand why you need so many focus points when the camera can only focus on one at a time.

The camera can only focus on one AF point at a time but it is nice to have many spots to choose from for manual AF point selection.

1. It is nice to be able to focus on a particular spot in the frame to avoid recomposition (for dynamic sitations or tripod work or ...)
2. The more AF points, the smaller they are and the more accurately you can focus on a particular part in the frame. The current AF areas are rather large.
3. Action shooters appreciate cameras that can hand a moving subjection from on AF point to another. The more AF points available, the better this works.

I'm not particularity interested in the third point but very much in the first two.

[kevinschoenmakers]

A rumour overruling a rumour?!?
Well, anyway - I made the prediction earlier, and if the above rumour is now more accurate, then I was right

11 AF points, fine. As long as AF is zippier, it's all good.
As for fps, I'm tipping 7 - in line with the A580, which has the same sensor.
ISO? 80 is a weird starting point. I reckon 100.

Forget these speculations - I wanna know about the battery grip, now.

How is 80 weird? It's perhaps as far they could go. It's 1/2EV under ISO100 - so a round number.

[Eruditass]

Me to! Especially when I'm up in a bugs face.

Yeah, my type of photography is the most important, too!

[Eruditass]

Maybe, but I'm wondering if it could get better, and if so, why not?

Does anyone know, could it?

Unfortunately, companies like selling new products, even to old customers.

[kevinschoenmakers]

Yeah, my type of photography is the most important, too!

[janneman]

[*]Action shooters appreciate cameras that can hand a moving subjection from on AF point to another. The more AF points available, the better this works.

Finally I get it and at the same thim I think more AF points will incerase the possibility of the AF points pointing to something in the back- or foreground to take over...

[kalison]

Yeah, my type of photography is the most important, too!

LOL

[pingflood]

11 or 18....makes little difference to me, just get some good results at higher ISO settings, a little better AF than my K20D, and the same body and other features of the K7 and I will be well satisfied....and I think most others will be also. No camera is going to please everyone........just won't happen!

Still, Squirrels prefer Pentax 99 to 1....the one being Otis, and he prefers corn or fresh apple slices......


Best Regards!

BTW- My new Sigma HSM lenses focus fast and accurate on my K20D......amazingly faster, and more accurate than my DA*50-135. It is not all in the body....lenses do make a difference too.

My Squirrels prefer brand C.



...and to those who like to bitch and moan, I think *some* of us are trying to make the point that just because someone does not use other than center point, or does not need high ISO etc, does not mean it is a ridiculous feature and useless. Cameras are made to sell to a group of people with varying needs, y'know.