Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
12-18-2016, 08:51 PM   #316
JPT
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Tokyo
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,356
QuoteOriginally posted by mecrox Quote
I was very tempted by the K-70 but stopped when it became clear that it has 2012-era focusing system that isn't up to current standards. A pity because in other respects it is a very good camera indeed for its level of the market, highly likely the best of all in fact. I think you will find that sales of mid-range DSLRs are pretty down for all the camera-makers, not only Ricoh. I just don 't understand Ricoh continuing to issue stuff with such obvious weaknesses since these attract minus marks from everyone who reviews or comments on it and are such out-and-out sales-killers. For me, a K70 and a 16-85mm would be an extremely good combination, but only with at least reasonable AF up to a D5500 standard, say. If Ricoh continue this pattern into a mirrorless camera, then I just don't see much changing. The three things which let them down every time are AF, video and coms/apps. I find it soooo hard to understand how Ricoh are apparently unable to see it when about 99.9 per cent of their customers can, though I guess you can say the same of several of the others companies too.
Given that Pentax are the only remaining cameras that detect focus on a sensor that doesn't receive a stabilised image, they may be reaching the technical limits of what is feasible. This would imply that they need to move to sensor-based focusing to make progress.

This might explain why recent cameras (since the K-3) have not moved forward much in terms AF technology. In fact, I think the K-70 focuses just as well in live view as it does in OVF mode, which might indicate where Ricoh is putting their development effort recently.

It's also interesting that Ricoh has just come out with a PLM lens, which is supposed to be better for the small focusing adjustments required for CDAF. Combined with multiple patents for new AF systems about a year ago, I think we might be about to see a big shift in Pentax AF.

If it's true, perhaps this rumoured mirrorless camera is the shape of things to come.

12-19-2016, 12:15 AM   #317
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 10,238
I keep hearing this theory over and over again; but did anyone bothered to prove it? To test if there's such a significant impact, just by not having (or, on a test platform, disabling) OIS? Nope.
OTOH, Canon is recommending disabling IS for better AF performance:
"When shooting with an image stabilised lens, especially a long telephoto, if you don’t need to use the IS because your shutter speed is fast enough to avoid camera shake, try turning it off for even faster autofocus. This is especially useful for fast moving subjects where absolute AF speed is important."
Tips & Tricks - Canon Professional Network
12-19-2016, 01:32 AM   #318
JPT
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Tokyo
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,356
I don't know if it's actually true, but it has an air of truthiness about it.

What I can say are observations are:
- Pentax is now the only brand where the AF system has an unstabilised view of the scene.
- Pentax has an AF system that's perceived as the worst in the business.

Of course, there could be no connection between them, which is why my post was full of "might". But I think Ricoh has to do something about the AF system in Pentax cameras, and I think they have less to lose than Nikon or Canon by making a radical change.
12-19-2016, 02:04 AM   #319
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Zygonyx's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Ile de France
Posts: 3,175
QuoteOriginally posted by JPT Quote
I don't know if it's actually true, but it has an air of truthiness about it.

What I can say are observations are:
- Pentax is now the only brand where the AF system has an unstabilised view of the scene.
- Pentax has an AF system that's perceived as the worst in the business.

Of course, there could be no connection between them, which is why my post was full of "might".
I don't agree with this kind of short-cut : what about Nikon ?
Best AF tracking system, same mirror....

12-19-2016, 02:59 AM   #320
JPT
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Tokyo
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,356
QuoteOriginally posted by Zygonyx Quote
I don't agree with this kind of short-cut : what about Nikon ?
Best AF tracking system, same mirror....
There's a difference between the systems that Canikon use and Pentax. Their systems stabilise the image before it reaches the mirror, so the image deflected to the AF sensor and metering sensor are therefore stabilised. In Pentax cameras, that isn't the case.

If the AF system has to filter out the small movements caused by camera shake, it could be at a disadvantage to systems that don't.

It just seems to me that the Pentax system has to be at a disadvantage by its very design. It just depends whether it is very slight or something significant.
12-19-2016, 03:36 AM   #321
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,110
QuoteOriginally posted by JPT Quote
There's a difference between the systems that Canikon use and Pentax. Their systems stabilise the image before it reaches the mirror, so the image deflected to the AF sensor and metering sensor are therefore stabilised. In Pentax cameras, that isn't the case.

If the AF system has to filter out the small movements caused by camera shake, it could be at a disadvantage to systems that don't.

It just seems to me that the Pentax system has to be at a disadvantage by its very design. It just depends whether it is very slight or something significant.
There are many Canikon lenses that are not stabilized at all.

Pentax users like primes, and Canikon often lack IS in theirs.

12-19-2016, 03:40 AM   #322
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 10,238
QuoteOriginally posted by JPT Quote
I don't know if it's actually true, but it has an air of truthiness about it.

What I can say are observations are:
- Pentax is now the only brand where the AF system has an unstabilised view of the scene.
- Pentax has an AF system that's perceived as the worst in the business.

Of course, there could be no connection between them, which is why my post was full of "might". But I think Ricoh has to do something about the AF system in Pentax cameras, and I think they have less to lose than Nikon or Canon by making a radical change.
I don't know about that "air of truthiness"... I'd rather say, one could imagine an edge case where this would be true. But if there's an effect, is it relevant in practice?

The thing is, it's so easy to test it: just take a Canon/Nikon with a longer lens and use it with both IS enabled and disabled. Even more, Canon/Nikon users would definitely observe this effect - and Canon would not advise their users to disable IS for better AF performance. We'd see this posted on the internet, as we're talking about a supposedly huge difference.
MYTH BUSTED.

What's left, is to simply accept that the Pentax' SAFOX itself is not on the same level - AF-C wise - as the competition; we know their first AF with advanced tracking functions was introduced in 2013, with the K-3 (a mere 3 years ago). Perhaps it's the lack of processing power, perhaps it's the lenses, perhaps the obvious solutions are protected by patents, or who knows what else - a combination of factors, actually, instead of a single cause.
That's more plausible than a theory which would be easy to confirm in practice yet it never was

As a side note, at one point Pentax' AF was the most sensitive in low light (-3EV).
12-19-2016, 05:01 AM   #323
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,608
QuoteOriginally posted by clackers Quote
There are many Canikon lenses that are not stabilized at all.

Pentax users like primes, and Canikon often lack IS in theirs.
You still believe in Canikon fairytales...

I have a list of lenses here which is probaly 2-3 years old. In the whole Canon lineup (the largest ILC lineup there is) there were a mere 60 stabilized Canon lenses in total (Nikon F had 56) and 131 non-stabilized ones. This is counting lenses from more than 20 manufacturers for EF and EF-S mount.

Now compare this to the current (only) FF (only) lens offering for Pentax K: 59 stabilized lenses. Obviously there is a whole load of additional APSC lenses as well (I'd think probaly around 40 more; go count them).

There are 33% stabilized for Canon with 100% for Pentax.
There are 60 stabilized for Canon and about 100 for Pentax.

Canikon are not even playing in the same league here unless you go cherry picking. They are so behind.
But if someone goes cherry picking we have a stabilized F1.4 lens for every super telephoto somebody could bring up.

And then you can have the lemmings jump off cliffs when you ask them why somebody wants such stabilized super telehpotos. Don't we learn day-in-day-out that these are true BIF and wildlife lenses that cant be fast enough in aperture and autofocus. --> so you use them swinging around wildly and "tracking" subjects mainly. --> funny how important image stabilization is for moving subjects...I was told a hundred times SR is of no use because you can not take advantage of it when the subject moves

How many long telephotos see 90% of their use handheld? AND for static subjects? Nobody with tripods? Nobody using them for sports, wildlife, BIF?

Facts always get into the way of Canikon religion. Sorry.

12-19-2016, 05:07 AM   #324
Pentaxian
mecrox's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Oxford, UK
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,236
QuoteOriginally posted by JPT Quote
Given that Pentax are the only remaining cameras that detect focus on a sensor that doesn't receive a stabilised image, they may be reaching the technical limits of what is feasible. This would imply that they need to move to sensor-based focusing to make progress.

This might explain why recent cameras (since the K-3) have not moved forward much in terms AF technology. In fact, I think the K-70 focuses just as well in live view as it does in OVF mode, which might indicate where Ricoh is putting their development effort recently.

It's also interesting that Ricoh has just come out with a PLM lens, which is supposed to be better for the small focusing adjustments required for CDAF. Combined with multiple patents for new AF systems about a year ago, I think we might be about to see a big shift in Pentax AF.

If it's true, perhaps this rumoured mirrorless camera is the shape of things to come.
Many thanks for these interesting ideas, which I hadn't picked up on.

I'd imagine that IBIS can really interfere when the camera is moving, e.g. panning, a classic BIF scenario. So it is better switched off at such moments for fully accurate focus. When the camera is static but still handheld, it is hard to think IBIS interferes all that much, though it may. When the camera is in a tripod, you want iIBIS switched off again. The issue here is probably smearing due to low shutter speeds impacting a slightly moving sensor and not to focusing accuracy.

However, the real issue is tracking AF. Crack tracking AF and you are in the game. This is a very hard problem but I suspect it is vital for the future happiness and profitability of the Ricoh stable. Without it, you aren't offering much more than a cheap compact or a cam from yesteryear. Even if Ricoh were to issue a new camera with fully on-sensor focusing (which would mean dumping the mirror and including an EVF) but without more than basic tracking then they would only have arrived at the same station as Fuji and Olympus in around 2013 or so (X-T1 and E-M1). So, imho, the way forward is clear.

Of course some folks would say that good tracking AF is only needed for some subjects and that in many cases it is not needed and would not be missed. Landscape photography is a classic example. However, my argument is that the photography market has shrunk and concentrated down so much that these days manufacturers cannot afford to issue new products with obvious weaknesses. It was one thing when cams were iterated with improvements every year and cost not very much. Now all the companies are moving to three or four year upgrade cycles across a smaller range of models and are raising prices dramatically. Spending north of 1000 bucks and then being stuck with something which doesn't work properly for four years is a different ballgame.

In other words, the pressure now on a DSLR to be a highly competent jack of all trades is greater than ever.

So I suspect that Ricoh must get this right or pay a heavy penalty.

Last edited by mecrox; 12-19-2016 at 05:53 AM.
12-19-2016, 05:19 AM   #325
Veteran Member
panonski's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: Zagreb
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 335
QuoteOriginally posted by RonHendriks1966 Quote
Maybe it is better that people buy camera's that are being used. Why wouldn't they?
Agree on that.
And, without any doubt , decision to let others to make Pentax camera marketing photos with other brands, and not Pentax - is a very stupid, at least for me.
...
It's almost like admiting, their cameras are don't even in use by profesional photographers in agencies ,
or even worse,
that they don't match standards for making marketing photo.
...
and, yayx, it sound really bed. So is it smart, or stupid ?
STUPID AS HELL
...
Imagine Mercedes with BMW vehicles driven by employes ? You cannot ?
Because it's stupid thing to do.
12-19-2016, 05:26 AM   #326
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 1,608
QuoteOriginally posted by panonski Quote
Agree on that.
And, without any doubt , decision to let others to make ... marketing photos with other brands, and not ... - is a very stupid, at least for me.
...
It's almost like admiting, their cameras are don't even in use by profesional photographers in agencies ,
or even worse,
that they don't match standards for making marketing photo.
...
and, yayx, it sound really bed. So is it smart, or stupid ?
STUPID AS HELL
...
You cannot ?
Because it's stupid thing to do.
Nikon is all that what you wrote:
https://www.dpreview.com/files/p/articles/4455533041/DSC09568-1180px.jpeg
Nikon Management photo shot using SONY ILCE-7RM2

Well it is not an image that was posted for pure marketing. It is an image supporting an article that due to Nikon management incompetency they now had to fire 1,000 employees: Nikon reportedly eliminating 1000 jobs in Japan: Digital Photography Review

Probably they had a good excuse: all Nikon cameras were in their repair centers.
12-19-2016, 05:42 AM   #327
Pentaxian
D1N0's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: ---
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,727
QuoteOriginally posted by JPT Quote
Given that Pentax are the only remaining cameras that detect focus on a sensor that doesn't receive a stabilised image, they may be reaching the technical limits of what is feasible. This would imply that they need to move to sensor-based focusing to make progress.

This might explain why recent cameras (since the K-3) have not moved forward much in terms AF technology. In fact, I think the K-70 focuses just as well in live view as it does in OVF mode, which might indicate where Ricoh is putting their development effort recently.

It's also interesting that Ricoh has just come out with a PLM lens, which is supposed to be better for the small focusing adjustments required for CDAF. Combined with multiple patents for new AF systems about a year ago, I think we might be about to see a big shift in Pentax AF.

If it's true, perhaps this rumoured mirrorless camera is the shape of things to come.
You can't have image sensor based AF in a dslr because of the mirror and shutter being in the image path. It only works in live view. That doesn't do a traditional OVF shooter any good. (Just like dual pixel AF in canon is only really good for video). Put in an EVF and you are a mirrorless camera. Maybe they can replace the AF sensor with a hybrid pdaf/cdaf cmos sensor, but that would have to be very well calibrated to the main sensor.
12-19-2016, 05:43 AM   #328
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
Zygonyx's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Ile de France
Posts: 3,175
QuoteOriginally posted by beholder3 Quote
You still believe in Canikon fairytales...
....
How many long telephotos see 90% of their use handheld? AND for static subjects? Nobody with tripods? Nobody using them for sports, wildlife, BIF?

Facts always get into the way of Canikon religion. Sorry.
So true... yet pick another argument given by Canikonist to justify their religion re. telelenses :
"Optical stabilisation is much more comfortable, and is the only one allowing you to pan moving subjects."
Which probably is their other way of merit, with top of the range autofocus
12-19-2016, 05:51 AM   #329
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 10,238
What is stupid is to waste time nitpicking on details the customers don't care about. I never heard about anyone saying, "I won't buy brand X because they're not using their own camera for every ad out there".
What is stupid is to tell Ricoh Imaging they are acting stupid, but without being able to prove how by using their own cameras their sales would increase at least enough to offset the cost. Wait, is anyone surprised that there should be an added cost by doing it in house instead of using stock images?
And even ignoring that people would have to look at EXIFs to see the camera brand/model.

Ignoring the purpose of those images, though, is not stupid; it's intentional.
12-19-2016, 06:09 AM   #330
Veteran Member
panonski's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: Zagreb
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 335
I would not ever ever consider some brand authentic to hear fact that their tool is useless,
I for a fact know it's not that relevant practice for what and with which tool work outsourced marketing agencies hired by Pentax heads, but once you hear they - Photographic Company - can not make their own marketing photos - hm - it sounds not quite right, it sounds rather odd.
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!
body, camera, display, engineering, evf, fuji, grip, hoodman, illumination, k-01, k-30, k1000, lcd, lenses, light, mirror, mirrorless, mode, ovf, pentax, pentax mirrorless camera, pentax news, pentax rumors, press, release, ricoh, sensor, success
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Lens Size Comparison between Mirrorless and dSLRs interested_observer Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 16 09-28-2016 05:03 AM
For Sale - Sold: Pentax K-01 Mirrorless Camera Fat Albert Sold Items 3 07-03-2015 06:45 PM
Some Thoughts on the K-01 and Mirrorless From Pentax Biro Pentax Mirrorless Cameras 108 06-25-2014 03:20 PM
New K-01 mirrorless camera coming Mister Horrible Pentax News and Rumors 2067 02-21-2012 09:09 PM
Pentax k-x and Pentax k1000 (old camera) question huskies4ever Pentax DSLR Discussion 14 08-23-2010 08:48 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:30 PM. | 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