Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-23-2011, 12:47 AM   #31
Veteran Member
Christine Tham's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Sydney, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,269
QuoteOriginally posted by Gimbal Quote
Well I'm not convinced, it's an advanced camera and many doesn't understand how the AF work....
LOL

Since some claim I am a confirmed authority on this, can I be the first to say ...

It's obviously "user error" on Falk's part ...

02-23-2011, 01:08 AM   #32
Junior Member
markus9494's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 31
Who thinks it would be an appropriate gesture on Pentax's' part to reimburse Falk for his time and effort? Oh well, we can only dream. Perhaps we, as forum users can all kick in a few bucks to convince him to test the Kr as well? Just a thought. I am pretty sure most people would rather invest a few bucks in such a study rather than buy a camera for its low light capabilities only to find it lacking.
02-23-2011, 02:20 AM   #33
Pentaxian
RonHendriks1966's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2009
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,714
Great work. I will look in it this afternoon, but it is an amazing job!
02-23-2011, 03:55 AM   #34
Junior Member




Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: London
Posts: 26
Wow. Thank you for this hard work. I'm not scientifically minded in the least, so don't understand a lot (ok, almost all) of your essay, but I really appreciate the lengths you've gone to explain the issue to Pentax and I really hope this contributes to a solution (in my case, for the K-r).

02-23-2011, 04:10 AM   #35
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,311
Im really afraid they'll ditch us (past issues), but i really hope, and will not abandon this yet!

Please Pentax! Fix this!
02-23-2011, 05:20 AM   #36
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Middle of Everywhere
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,169
Just curious...

QuoteOriginally posted by jbinpg Quote
....Possible error in the summary:

2. Should probably read "in front of the sensor plane"?
Hmmmmm...

QuoteOriginally posted by Tommot1965 Quote
...Hmmm, perhaps we really do need a petition from this forum from all of us to ask Pentax...
Instead, assuming the OP is working independently and not a troll in sheep's clothing, it might be more appropriate for each reader who feels the report means something to contribute some money so he can keep his "Errors and Omissions" insurance policy current.

I'm NOT a lawyer, but it seems reasonable, if Hoya can find an error in the OP's methodology and can show that error produced damages (thank you all who have publicly declared they will not buy due to the OP's study results), he could be held liable for multiples of the damages.

BTW: Does anyone wonder why someone would want to insert themselves into a public discussion in such a conclusive way using an N=1? Based on other experiences, surely the OP is aware of the time and energy black-hole he's creating for himself, plus the self-inflicted headaches to follow?

Again, just curious... M
02-23-2011, 05:26 AM   #37
Junior Member




Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sofia
Posts: 35
QuoteOriginally posted by Michaelina2 Quote
Hmmmmm...



Instead, assuming the OP is working independently and not a troll in sheep's clothing, it might be more appropriate for each reader who feels the report means something to contribute some money so he can keep his "Errors and Omissions" insurance policy current.

I'm NOT a lawyer, but it seems reasonable, if Hoya can find an error in the OP's methodology and can show that error produced damages (thank you all who have publicly declared they will not buy due to the OP's study results), he could be held liable for multiples of the damages.

BTW: Does anyone wonder why someone would want to insert themselves into a public discussion in such a conclusive way using an N=1? Based on other experiences, surely the OP is aware of the time and energy black-hole he's creating for himself, plus the self-inflicted headaches to follow?

Again, just curious... M

Now this is one of the most terrible posts I have seen in a photo forum . Do not even want to comment it...
02-23-2011, 05:31 AM   #38
Junior Member




Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sofia
Posts: 35
Falconeye, I am an user of pentax K-r. I saw the problem of FF from the very first shot! Unfortunately, I bought also 15mm, 21mm, 40mm and 70mm limited lenses. At least it will be unfortunate if Pentax will not fix the FF of K-r and K-5 as I will have to sell my pentax system.
I find it absolutely unacceptable that an user will post such extensive info on the problem BEFORE Pentax. This is just wrong as Pentax should have addressed this issue themselves a long, long time ago in this very galaxy!!! I also think Pentax should know all that is in the OP report, but I find the report invaluable for the pentax community! Thank you for this as a pentax user!


Last edited by alffastar; 02-23-2011 at 05:36 AM.
02-23-2011, 06:06 AM   #39
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NC
Posts: 787
reminds me of my k10d's AF

this k5 low-light AF reminds me of my K10d's AF. although it wasn't a consistent issue, the AF would miss for no reason at all. Sometimes 2 shots one after the other (refocus after each shot0 would produce one in focus, one OOF.

since the AF module (SAFOX) has not really changed for ages (except for the addition of the color sensor), i'm inclined to think that it's a limitation of the AF module itself, IOW, hardware.

yes, some software work-arounds are indeed possible, but to get a real fix would mean updating the AF sensor itself which will have to wait for the next round of bodies. I was hoping that this round of bodies would use a new sensor, but it seems like it's the same SAFOX.
02-23-2011, 06:08 AM   #40
Pentaxian
thibs's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Belgium
Photos: Albums
Posts: 5,260
The fact the thing is called SAFOX doesn't mean nothing changed since SFX.

Canon lenses are called EOS, does that mean they did not change since EOS bore (not talking about the glass itself) ?
02-23-2011, 06:15 AM   #41
Veteran Member




Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,311
If Pentax had put a brand new SAFOX in there, they would be more than happy to announce that, even before the lauch of the K-5. They do it with everything new they come up with, so they would have done it.

only my very humble opinion though
02-23-2011, 06:15 AM   #42
Pentaxian
audiobomber's Avatar

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Sudbury, Ontario
Photos: Albums
Posts: 6,684
QuoteOriginally posted by Quicksand Quote
I shoot with a K20D so I know exactly what you're talking about -- but I think it's a color-temperature issue rather than a light-level issue. That's why the K-7 introduced the color sensor as part of the AF sensor module, and I believe many people have reported that the K-7 goes a LONG way toward fixing that problem.

But this is apparently a new problem in the K-5.
I agree with Quicksand. I tested my K20D and K100DS and found they FF in tungsten light and focussed properly in daylight, no matter if it was dim or bright. I didn't bother to test my K-x when I got it, but I know it does the same thing.
02-23-2011, 06:21 AM   #43
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: NC
Posts: 787
QuoteOriginally posted by thibs Quote
The fact the thing is called SAFOX doesn't mean nothing changed since SFX.

Canon lenses are called EOS, does that mean they did not change since EOS bore (not talking about the glass itself) ?
unless pentax marketing is sleeping, a truly NEW AF module should be advertised to the high heavens. (toot your horn, pentax)

but looking at the last 6 years of pentax bodies, the only time they really advertised their AF was when SAFOX got a +, and yes for the k5 and kr, some updates to the AF module's lens. how much of an update is that?

if it's truly a NEW AF module, new electronics, etc, TOOT it pentax!
02-23-2011, 06:24 AM - 1 Like   #44
Veteran Member
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by Christine Tham Quote
I don't think this issue is unique to the K-5, so perhaps we can rule out specific changes in the K-5 as the true cause of this problem?
[...]
Lastly, I have not done an exhaustive test of my lenses, but I do believe the problem varies depending on lens, but I don't necessarily believe it varies according to your hypothesis.
Yes, the hypothesis needs more data. There seems to be some lens dependency indeed. Which is strange enough in itself, actually. My hypothesis is compatible with the limited data I had. If anybody knows about a lens pair where the slower one jumps later (so to speak, meaning, doesn't have the focus shift while the faster already does), then this would be a very valuable contribution rejecting the max. aperture hypothesis. After all, it may be a false path...

Maybe, the AF assist light behaviour (single or multiple engagements) is lens dependent rather than camera dependent. Could be another important clue.

Moreover, I think that maybe the K10D struggles in low light as well. Unfortunately, I could not repeat the test for other cameras or brands. Nevertheless, I would be surprised to learn that focus for the K10D jumps in such a binary way when the light is dimmed.

QuoteOriginally posted by Kenn100D Quote
@Falk
Does the test come in at the latest firmware version? The old one i think is much better 1.01.
It is 1.01.00.05 (1.01). I heard that the 1.02 doesn't improve and so I didn't want to upgrade in the middle of my tests.

QuoteOriginally posted by Christine Tham Quote
It's obviously "user error" on Falk's part ...
I am sure (from experience), I can do user errors as much as anybody else. So, please watch out for the errors I make :ugh:

QuoteOriginally posted by Michaelina2 Quote
Does anyone wonder why someone would want to insert themselves into a public discussion in such a conclusive way
Yes, and it has been subject of philosophical debates.

To make a long story short: If all humans were like you and unlike me, it can be shown we all would still live in caves. Like all other animals actually. To spread sperm (or raise children) isn't all you can do for your species, assuming a minimal degree of organization. I think that's all I say about this. But good literature about the topic exists. Thanks for your question.
02-23-2011, 06:35 AM   #45
Loyal Site Supporter
dcmsox2004's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: rhode island
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,331
your efforts are greatly appreciated falk, your technical acumen is nonpareil..... why pentax hoya didn't thoroughly beta test the k-5 (and k-r) is a puzzlement...... regards and many thanks, dave m
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
copy, ev, focus, front, issue, k-5, light, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, plane, study
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Any tips for low light focus with K-5 designinme_1976 Pentax K-5 5 11-21-2010 08:38 PM
focus hunting in low light sorin Pentax DSLR Discussion 12 07-17-2010 02:20 PM
Low Light auto focus JohnKSA Troubleshooting and Beginner Help 6 03-10-2010 04:19 AM
Pentax Low Light Focus indy1984 Pentax DSLR Discussion 15 02-17-2010 09:42 AM
EV low light focus question tarsus Photographic Technique 3 06-26-2008 08:22 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:04 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top