[fs999]

Obviously you're content with the AF of the K-5 because you have no idea how much better Nikon is. Try shooting some fast action with D90 and then try to get the same type of shots with your K-5.

My best friend has a D3, he's often complaining of AF hunting in studio shots, not with my K-5. It depends which lenses you use.
Typicaly on 20 photos in a sequence made with the D3 in low light, 10 are out of focus...
So I know what I'm talking about.

[Class A]

it's always the same old story : people who don't own a K-5, say it has a poor AF.

People who have the K-5 and put it through its paces also say there is room for improvement. Have you seen the Lumolabs low-light study? The K-5 clearly does not meet its specs.

The K-5 is far from handicapped in AF performance.

Well, I've seen shots where faces were out of focus because the subjects had the wrong skin colour or the K-5 was fooled by the ambient light temperature.

People reported to get OOF shots with the K-5 in the studio because the modeling lights weren't bright enough or had the wrong colour temperature.

I've seen samples where the K-5 couldn't focus on a license plate because it had the wrong colour and the light wasn't bright enough.

And so on, and so on.

The firmware upgrade 1.03 brought some improvement for some but for instance Lumolabs couldn't find any significant improvement. Falk's rigorous tests still end with the conclusion that the K-5's AF is faulty.

Furthermore, those reported that V1.03 brought an improvement also reported that it introduced AF inconsistencies which they didn't experience before.

While the K-5's AF is an improvement over the K-7's in some aspects, its current shortcomings clearly cannot be considered to be satisfactory for a camera in this price bracket. Finally, I understand there is still a huge gap between the AF-C performance of a K-5 and a Canon 7D.

I personally don't mind the AF-C performance that much, but if the K-5 didn't have the low-light (sometimes not so low-light, depending on the lens) issues it has, I would have bought a copy already. For the current performance -- one can always hope that a further firmware update will bring further improvements -- I'm not prepared to spend that much money.

I appreciate that the K-5 is a great camera in many ways and that its AF works fine for many users, but I don't think that there can be any debate about the fact that it doesn't work as one could expect from a camera in its price bracket in certain situations.

[fs999]

You are right, there is always room for improvement. But I cannot let say the K-5 has a poor AF.
Comparing a 1000 € camera with a 2000 € camera is not fair too.
I made a lot of indoor football shots in AF-C and I could mostly follow the ball coming to me. I used the DA* 50-135mm and the focus was fast and accurate.

[garyk]

I personally side with Edvinas on this one. Very good and accurate post. I stop down my 328 to at least F4.0 or more to hit focus most of the time. Just all over the place. It really sucks for this much money. It just cannot handle my 328 period. Even in poor ambient light it just gets lost 50% of the time.
I need a back up but i refuse to buy another K-5. I am going with a 60D and a good lens to start with. If it is good improvement in AF. I will head over to the Canon camp.

---

Last edited by garyk; 05-25-2011 at 06:41 AM.

[Winder]

Pentax needs to improve AF with its bodies and the SDM. Go use a Canon 7D with a USM lens and then come back to a K-5. The K-5 is close and for most types of photography it is fast enough.

Of course they need to speed up the SR as well. Right now SR is not as fast as the AF so you end up waiting on SR long after AF has locked.

[RonHendriks1966]

Well I think we all should get used to align our lenses for FF/BF in future as a standerd procedure. A few years from now that is simply normal.

What I want? Well I want 3D tracking AF. I want instant SR. I want my camera to work in hispeed modus with 30 fps using AF-C following a launched bullit from a gun and have it spot-on in focus every shot! That's what I want!

Are Canikon already at that point? Or is there still something to improve?

So I have a black and a Silver K-5 and I want my next camera to blow away my K-5's as my K-5 did with K-7. Is that normal? Yes I think so.

[Rondec]

People who have the K-5 and put it through its paces also say there is room for improvement. Have you seen the Lumolabs low-light study? The K-5 clearly does not meet its specs.


Well, I've seen shots where faces were out of focus because the subjects had the wrong skin colour or the K-5 was fooled by the ambient light temperature.

People reported to get OOF shots with the K-5 in the studio because the modeling lights weren't bright enough or had the wrong colour temperature.

I've seen samples where the K-5 couldn't focus on a license plate because it had the wrong colour and the light wasn't bright enough.

And so on, and so on.

The firmware upgrade 1.03 brought some improvement for some but for instance Lumolabs couldn't find any significant improvement. Falk's rigorous tests still end with the conclusion that the K-5's AF is faulty.

Furthermore, those reported that V1.03 brought an improvement also reported that it introduced AF inconsistencies which they didn't experience before.

While the K-5's AF is an improvement over the K-7's in some aspects, its current shortcomings clearly cannot be considered to be satisfactory for a camera in this price bracket. Finally, I understand there is still a huge gap between the AF-C performance of a K-5 and a Canon 7D.

I personally don't mind the AF-C performance that much, but if the K-5 didn't have the low-light (sometimes not so low-light, depending on the lens) issues it has, I would have bought a copy already. For the current performance -- one can always hope that a further firmware update will bring further improvements -- I'm not prepared to spend that much money.

I appreciate that the K-5 is a great camera in many ways and that its AF works fine for many users, but I don't think that there can be any debate about the fact that it doesn't work as one could expect from a camera in its price bracket in certain situations.

I'm convinced that this is more an example of poor Pentax QC. Falk's study evaluated just one camera as I recall. I have just one camera as well and have had no issues with it. It is problematic when some cameras come off the assembly line that function perfectly and some have issues in one area or another. I have not seen any focus issues in either low or good light and none of my lenses require focus adjustment on the K5 (they did on the K20 and K7).

[Rondec]

Pentax needs to improve AF with its bodies and the SDM. Go use a Canon 7D with a USM lens and then come back to a K-5. The K-5 is close and for most types of photography it is fast enough.

Of course they need to speed up the SR as well. Right now SR is not as fast as the AF so you end up waiting on SR long after AF has locked.

But this is an issue with regard to the lenses, not the camera bodies (which I think is what is being discussed here).

There is no doubt that Sigma HSM lenses focus faster than SDM lenses.

[eddie1960]

The 7DII is expected to be over 20MP.

Both Sony and Canon FF are expected to be over 30MP.

Sony has made no secret that it is going after Canon. Don't expect Sony to let Canon take the lead in resolution.

Sony is a disaster as a company right now, they've completely lost their ability to innovate and corporate bureaucracy and politics are doing nothing to help. When they were at their best they let engineers run with what seemed like wild ideas, and invented markets (like Apple has done with i pod and i pad)
it's pretty sad actually.
I hope they manage it, but nothing i've seen out of the camera division leads me to believe they can take on Canon (or Nikon) and come out on top
There was a really good article on them in the paper yesterday addressing this very problem (I sold a ton of Sony in my 25 years in CE and it's been sad to watch them for the last 5-8 years or so)
they made this years financial by cost cutting, not through innovation and product demand - like they have for several years

[Winder]

But this is an issue with regard to the lenses, not the camera bodies (which I think is what is being discussed here).

There is no doubt that Sigma HSM lenses focus faster than SDM lenses.

I think they need to improve both.

[DogLover]

Sony is a disaster as a company right now, they've completely lost their ability to innovate and corporate bureaucracy and politics are doing nothing to help. When they were at their best they let engineers run with what seemed like wild ideas, and invented markets (like Apple has done with i pod and i pad)
it's pretty sad actually.
I hope they manage it, but nothing i've seen out of the camera division leads me to believe they can take on Canon (or Nikon) and come out on top
There was a really good article on them in the paper yesterday addressing this very problem (I sold a ton of Sony in my 25 years in CE and it's been sad to watch them for the last 5-8 years or so)
they made this years financial by cost cutting, not through innovation and product demand - like they have for several years

I don't doubt what you say, but I don't think that most people have the perception that Sony is a disaster. I still buy Sony stuff all the time and I'm still quite satisfied with all of it. Of course, that doesn't include anything photographic.

I honestly think Sony should have used the Minolta name on their photo products, or come up with a new name altogether. I know this sounds superficial, but I just don't want a camera that says Sony on the front. Makes it seem like you're a sheep. Kinda like, "well, they make a good tv, they probably make a good camera, too." All other DSLR makers are known for being primarily photo-oriented companies.

Of course, it also doesn't help that every time I pick up a Sony DSLR I am compelled to put it back down ASAP. Do they not have any ergonomic engineers on the photo products staff?

[Winder]

Sony is a disaster as a company right now, they've completely lost their ability to innovate and corporate bureaucracy and politics are doing nothing to help. When they were at their best they let engineers run with what seemed like wild ideas, and invented markets (like Apple has done with i pod and i pad)
it's pretty sad actually.
I hope they manage it, but nothing i've seen out of the camera division leads me to believe they can take on Canon (or Nikon) and come out on top
There was a really good article on them in the paper yesterday addressing this very problem (I sold a ton of Sony in my 25 years in CE and it's been sad to watch them for the last 5-8 years or so)
they made this years financial by cost cutting, not through innovation and product demand - like they have for several years

I expect every Japanese company to big losses this year. After the disaster they have been given some nice tax incentives by the government. Everyone will write down every possible loss they can.

I don't view Sony as a disaster right now. They are doing very well with the NEX system and while I think SLT still has some maturing to do, I think it has a bright future. EVF is the future. They are on their second generation of DSLRs and still have some work to do, but that is why they are turning out so many models so fast. They are learning and evolving. Sony is trying new things and working outside the box.

Sony is fighting off Samsung, Panasonic, & Canon and doing pretty well in some areas. They need to show more consistency with their cameras, but they are still evolving.

Sony is no more of a disaster than Panasonic or Canon, and financially they are doing a good bit better than Pentax, Olympus, Fuji, Kodak.

[eddie1960]

I expect every Japanese company to big losses this year. After the disaster they have been given some nice tax incentives by the government. Everyone will write down every possible loss they can.

I don't view Sony as a disaster right now. They are doing very well with the NEX system and while I think SLT still has some maturing to do, I think it has a bright future. EVF is the future. They are on their second generation of DSLRs and still have some work to do, but that is why they are turning out so many models so fast. They are learning and evolving. Sony is trying new things and working outside the box.

Sony is fighting off Samsung, Panasonic, & Canon and doing pretty well in some areas. They need to show more consistency with their cameras, but they are still evolving.

Sony is no more of a disaster than Panasonic or Canon, and financially they are doing a good bit better than Pentax, Olympus, Fuji, Kodak.

You are looking at Sony as a camera company, it's a tiny portion of the business for them
Sony has made their name and built the company through innovation and new product development. This is no longer so. If you want the best TV, it's not necessarily a Sony any more, at one point it was only Sony, then everyone else
Same for Camcorders and industry they pretty much invented and revolutionized
Portable Audio players - same, now almost dead and gone for them
Playstation took a massive hit recently and response was ridiculously slow to the issue
the phone part of the business just took the same hit
the movie business near bankrupted them at one point
Blu ray is still a marginal product despite a massive push
And yes they have done ok in the camera business, but mainly in the low margin arena
I spent 25 years in the business and they were huge for most of it, new products that built markets, fast response to changing paradigms, willingness to go out on a limb and develop ideas. Like Apple now (which recently became the most valuable brand in the world, a position Sony once occupied)

here's a link to the article, didn't tell me anything i didn't see or suspect already (Quite a number of people I knew at Sony left the company for other companies in the last 10 years)

Has Sony?s makeover failed? - thestar.com

they aren't going to go down the tubes by any means but i no longer view them as an industry leader, and am not sure given the sound of things there will be someone who gives the camera division the budget to win the battle with Canon (or that they have the design and engineering team in place that would help them win it)
for certain there are some nice products in the lineup (NEX is not one IMHO) and the high end glass is amazing. We'll see what happens, I'm glad they are there doing the R/D on Sensors anyway because it benefits us

[Balog]

it's always the same old story : people who don't own a K-5, say it has a poor AF.
Don't listen Pentax, they don't want to buy a new camera, they are only whining...

I have a K5, the autofocus is crap both in comparison to my wife's D7000 and just trying to use it in the conditions I need it.

The K-5 is far from handicapped in AF performance.
Under some low lighting conditions, it may need a refocus, but it hits the mark perfectly for me.
You must try it first, and under different conditions, before claiming it has poor AF.

I have, and so I do. Claiming that valid criticism of your favored system must be based on ignorance just because it is critical of your favorite system is the sign of a fanboy, not an objective observer.

I don't doubt what you say, but I don't think that most people have the perception that Sony is a disaster. I still buy Sony stuff all the time and I'm still quite satisfied with all of it. Of course, that doesn't include anything photographic.

I honestly think Sony should have used the Minolta name on their photo products, or come up with a new name altogether. I know this sounds superficial, but I just don't want a camera that says Sony on the front. Makes it seem like you're a sheep. Kinda like, "well, they make a good tv, they probably make a good camera, too." All other DSLR makers are known for being primarily photo-oriented companies.

Of course, it also doesn't help that every time I pick up a Sony DSLR I am compelled to put it back down ASAP. Do they not have any ergonomic engineers on the photo products staff?

You think Canon is a "primarily photo oriented company"? Out of the three dslr makers with the largest market share, only one is primarily a photo company.

[eddie1960]

You think Canon is a "primarily photo oriented company"? Out of the three dslr makers with the largest market share, only one is primarily a photo company.

Agree, and it's the only one that makes a camera i would like besides Pentax (at least in the traditional SLR arena)