[Pål Jensen]

I know swifts ARE a challenging task for any camera, but I definitely hope that the next upgade of my house would make something like swifts-in-flight less mind-numbingly impossible. Fast AF is definitely of practical use in my situation.

I have two telephoto lenses the FA* 200/4 Macro and the FA* 600/4. BIF is no problem with either of these lenses with all Pentax cameras (I've used) from the MZ-S and onwards.
The problem with BIF shots is to keep the correct part of the bird in the correct AF sensor. This is very difficult, particulary with a 600mm lens, but this has nothing to do with AF performance.

In my opinion, AF is now like metering. Good enough; it is a matter of working with it or around it. And what is correct exposure of a digital image anyway?

Of course AF should be as fast and accurate as possible, but in my opinion based on the shots I actually do, it is now a purely accademic matter...

[MetteHHH]

Pål: You could be right, at least some of my problem might be lack of skill and training. However, my experience was that before _obtaining_ focus in the first place, I would lose the swift (swoops out above my head, removes itself in a long curve... aaaand gone! All before the focus was ever able to lock onto my target at all). So my experience wasn't about panning and losing focus, but about rarely obtaining it in the first place, because the AF isn't fast. I almost exclusively use the center spot AF point.

Could be the Sigma lens too, I suppose, but I read posts in here about how much faster AF this lens has on K5.

I'm just saying that "faster AF" sounds like a selling point to me, as it is.

[Winder]

Pål: You could be right, at least some of my problem might be lack of skill and training. However, my experience was that before _obtaining_ focus in the first place, I would lose the swift (swoops out above my head, removes itself in a long curve... aaaand gone! All before the focus was ever able to lock onto my target at all). So my experience wasn't about panning and losing focus, but about rarely obtaining it in the first place, because the AF isn't fast. I almost exclusively use the center spot AF point.

Could be the Sigma lens too, I suppose, but I read posts in here about how much faster AF this lens has on K5.

I'm just saying that "faster AF" sounds like a selling point to me, as it is.

Faster & more accurate AF is alway better. Photographers who cover sporting event actually make up a pretty large percentage of professional photographers.

[eddie1960]

Photographers who cover sporting event actually make up a pretty large percentage of professional photographers.

Where did you get that, I know probably 30 different Pro Photographers and none of them cover sports per se (some occasionally cover it)
I would say the single biggest pro job is probably Wedding Photographer
Next is likely journalist in general (may cover sports but also covers a wide variety of subjects)
Until the arrival of the D300 and 5D a lot of wedding guys were still shooting MF Medium format, some still do in addition to digital (one I know has assistants shoot the bulk of the digital and he is split between MF and digital and focuses on the more artistic stuff leaving the basics to his assistant(s)

[Winder]

Where did you get that, I know probably 30 different Pro Photographers and none of them cover sports per se (some occasionally cover it)
I would say the single biggest pro job is probably Wedding Photographer
Next is likely journalist in general (may cover sports but also covers a wide variety of subjects)
Until the arrival of the D300 and 5D a lot of wedding guys were still shooting MF Medium format, some still do in addition to digital (one I know has assistants shoot the bulk of the digital and he is split between MF and digital and focuses on the more artistic stuff leaving the basics to his assistant(s)

I actually know several who cover sports, and I did not say it was the largest group of professional photographers. I know two who cover college athletics exclusively. The number for free lance sports photographers is pretty large.

Football
Baseball
Basketball
Olympics
Soccer
horse racing
car racing
motor cycles
bicycles
boats
snowmobiles
extreme sports
Tennis
Golf

If people are competing then someone it taking pictures and there is a magazine or website that is covering it. Professional sports, Collegiate sports, Amateur sports. It is a huge industry and since every year is new and every competition unique it is hard to recycle images.

Wedding is probably the largest single segment for professional photography, but sports is a pretty large pool. Even if you are only a part-time sports photographer you still need a system with AF that can get the job done.

[eddie1960]

I actually know several who cover sports, and I did not say it was the largest group of professional photographers. I know two who cover college athletics exclusively. The number for free lance sports photographers is pretty large.

Football
Baseball
Basketball
Olympics
Soccer
horse racing
car racing
motor cycles
bicycles
boats
snowmobiles
extreme sports
Tennis
Golf

If people are competing then someone it taking pictures and there is a magazine or website that is covering it. Professional sports, Collegiate sports, Amateur sports. It is a huge industry and since every year is new and every competition unique it is hard to recycle images.

Wedding is probably the largest single segment for professional photography, but sports is a pretty large pool. Even if you are only a part-time sports photographer you still need a system with AF that can get the job done.

of course the AF speed isn't the only issue (given there are some pretty amazing images from the past shot with MF) knowledge of the game predicting the play and long fast lenses are just as important. In Reality Pentax has pretty much chosen not to compee in that arena. they don't have the Glass, and though much improved the AF still lags behind Canikon. If you are a sports shooter then in reality that is where you should look not Pentax. it's a fact of life for us that they have more limited funds for the system than canikon and have to choose a market segment. I think they've done that very well. the entry level products (kx and kr) along with their very good kits are winners and have been doing well, the enthusiast end with the unique to Pentax limited primes and excellent WR product has benefits no canon or nikon in their class has, and the 645d makes great studio/landscape and if you are at the high end of the market wedding cam. As time goes on and if profitability stays there will be movements towards other markets, i'm not sure the comparatively small pro market which is served by the canikon systems is going to be the area they would chase first.
If I personally needed the fast AF/Fast Long Lens/Better Flash/FF I would move on to Nikon myself. Glad I don't because functionally I really like My K7 (and K10 and ist ds) and know a K5 is in my future at some point. For me they fit my needs and functionally i like the layout and design. Nikon comes closest from what I have tried
If it was between the K5 and the Nikon 7000 the k5 wins hands down for me, AF may not be as quick but build is better and with recent price drops i've seen it's not a huge difference in price (Henrys has had it on sale for $1299 lately)
Aside from that, the lense selection is far more affordable as well with SR on all lenses, Nikons Fast VR stuff is also quite pricey (and optical systems degrade the image sharpness as well)

[Balog]

And how did you objectively measured "crappy"?

The K5 AF is worse than the D7000: objectively proven fact. I think it's overall performance is crappy: subjective opinion, backed up by objective fact. Still confused, or are you just trolling?

[DogLover]

The K5 AF is worse than the D7000: objectively proven fact. I think it's overall performance is crappy: subjective opinion, backed up by objective fact. Still confused, or are you just trolling?

What a pleasant person you must be.

[Winder]

of course the AF speed isn't the only issue (given there are some pretty amazing images from the past shot with MF) knowledge of the game predicting the play and long fast lenses are just as important. In Reality Pentax has pretty much chosen not to compee in that arena. they don't have the Glass, and though much improved the AF still lags behind Canikon. If you are a sports shooter then in reality that is where you should look not Pentax. it's a fact of life for us that they have more limited funds for the system than canikon and have to choose a market segment. I think they've done that very well. the entry level products (kx and kr) along with their very good kits are winners and have been doing well, the enthusiast end with the unique to Pentax limited primes and excellent WR product has benefits no canon or nikon in their class has, and the 645d makes great studio/landscape and if you are at the high end of the market wedding cam. As time goes on and if profitability stays there will be movements towards other markets, i'm not sure the comparatively small pro market which is served by the canikon systems is going to be the area they would chase first.
If I personally needed the fast AF/Fast Long Lens/Better Flash/FF I would move on to Nikon myself. Glad I don't because functionally I really like My K7 (and K10 and ist ds) and know a K5 is in my future at some point. For me they fit my needs and functionally i like the layout and design. Nikon comes closest from what I have tried
If it was between the K5 and the Nikon 7000 the k5 wins hands down for me, AF may not be as quick but build is better and with recent price drops i've seen it's not a huge difference in price (Henrys has had it on sale for $1299 lately)
Aside from that, the lense selection is far more affordable as well with SR on all lenses, Nikons Fast VR stuff is also quite pricey (and optical systems degrade the image sharpness as well)

MF camera of the past had really big viewfinders and were much easier to use. AF has changed a lot of the expectations for sports photographers. The technique for shooting sports with MF is different.

Pentax does not want to compare the K-5 to the D7000. Pentax is targeting the D300 as the primary competition of the K-5.

[eddie1960]

MF camera of the past had really big viewfinders and were much easier to use. AF has changed a lot of the expectations for sports photographers. The technique for shooting sports with MF is different.

Pentax does not want to compare the K-5 to the D7000. Pentax is targeting the D300 as the primary competition of the K-5.

d300 s may have better AF, so will the canon 7 D. Both cost more than the K5. both are outperformed on image by the K5 by a huge chunk
If AF is your number one priority get a canikon, if image quality and performance/price get a k5

DxOMark - Compare sensors

[Kunzite]

The K5 AF is worse than the D7000: objectively proven fact. I think it's overall performance is crappy: subjective opinion, backed up by objective fact. Still confused, or are you just trolling?

I am trolling? You are amusing.
Aggressively trying to convince us that our camera's AF is "crappy" just because you say so, that' trolling, FYI.

By the way, I strongly disagree with your "subjective opinion" and I don't consider it backed up by anything. Yes, I have a K-5 and yes, I was able to compare it with a D7000.

[Pentauser]

D7000 AF compared to K-5 isn't better, we made some tests with friends.

[Kunzite]

I believe that, at least in AF-S, the result will be mostly lens-dependant.

I was amazed how the D7000 would lit it's AF lamp in light levels where the K-5 would focus - quite fast and accurate - without it's own.

[RonHendriks1966]

Well I'm a bit tired of this AF discussion by now.

Get a room somewhere.

[eddie1960]

Well I'm a bit tired of this AF discussion by now.

Get a room somewhere.

Agreed, and if history is anything to go by next generation will have improved AF, it seems to be one of the standard improvements

lets talk crappy flash control and the need for ttl instead