[clackers]

. If the lens firmware is imperfect, the lens won't interface optimally [responsively, precisely] with the signals passed from the camera body. Seems straight forward to me.

Sigma attempts reverse engineering, and this is an intrinsic problem:

https://photographylife.com/zeiss-make-autofocus-dslr-lenses

[Tan68]

addition to the manual:

Well, thanks. I am pretty sure I wouldn't have been able to figure this out without hunting instructions.

[Class A]

Sigma attempts reverse engineering, and this is an intrinsic problem:

https://photographylife.com/zeiss-make-autofocus-dslr-lenses

Sigh. A blogger writes a page and it becomes the truth. Alternatively, a small number of forum users being of the same opinion is also sufficient to establish truth.

The "reverse engineering"-theory does not explain why a large number of Sigma lenses work just fine.

Let us focus on the V1.40 firmware please. It would be great if people could check whether the firmware upgrade impacts on AF. There could be

• no impact.
• a positive impact.
• a negative impact.
• an immaterial impact (e.g., adjustment values change but everything else remains the same).

It would be great if we knew which of the above it is, wouldn't it?

[Class A]

I love it,I have my military night light again

@asahi man

Is it at all possible that V1.40 has an adverse effect on AF accuracy?
There are two members that report that after the upgrade to V1.40 their lenses backfocus compared to V1.30.

Can you confirm that the AF code was not touched?

Is it possible that a further power-cycle is needed, the AF adjustment values have to be explicitly reset, or some further action is required to reset micro AF-adjustment?

While my own quick and dirty test seems to support what the other two users have reported, it was not systematic and comprehensive enough to provide a reliably further data point. Unfortunately, I'm so busy at the moment, that I cannot run any extensive tests myself now.

I'd love to get the new V1.40 features, but if it is a toss up between these new features and a negative impact on AF, I'd choose V1.30 without hesitation.

I still consider it a possibility that V1.40 is fine with respect to AF, but at the moment I'm unsure and it would be awesome to get any kind of information from you.

[rawr]

Your idea of a deep problem is not compatible with this observation, is it?

I merely refer to 'deep' in the context of service hierarchy, like the '7 layer OSI model' stratification. Not making a value judgement.

[geomez]

As a Pentax hand-held shooter for 10 years that only recently started long exposures with the K-1, this update is everything.

[lithedreamer]

Got a few concert shots with low brightness + night vision. It was awesome!

[clackers]

Got a few concert shots with low brightness + night vision. It was awesome!

Pics or it didn't happen, Lithedreamer!

[lithedreamer]

Pics or it didn't happen, Lithedreamer!

Sure thing.

Here's an example of what I was seeing behind the camera (it actually looks much better in-person):

Example of Pentax Night Vision + Event Shooting

nat



I probably should've bumped the shutter speed up, as you can see the motion blur in Lauren's hand at 1/80s, wide-open and ISO 200,000, but I'm still pretty happy with the results, considering how casually I shot them.

[lennyl]

Did anyone other than lennyl observe a shift in AF adjustment values after the update to V1.40? It is not the first time someone reports that AF adjustment values have to be changed after a firmware update. Often, I think, such observations can be chalked up to changing conditions (e.g., changing the distance to the focus chart) when performing the AF adjustments, but lennyl seemed to have been rather systematic about this and even reported more AF hesitation ("hunting") with V1.40. I'm still sceptical that V1.40 brought any changes to the AF system, but it is of course possible.

yes, member Zoltan from pentaxfriends.eu reported the need a little bit of change settings in microadjustment with fw1.40 (but he has only f2,8 lenses - tamron 70-200/2,8, DFA100/2,8macro...).

in my case with the F1.8 lens I did not get proper focus, even after setting new values checked on Reikan Target. I Flash back fw.1.30 and it is look OK now.

[Garry Conway]

I like the new features and I expect I'll use them a lot, especially the timer function. For the next update I'd like the remote to have a 10 second delay as well as the 2 second. There have been a number of times that would have been useful for me. K1 is a great camera very pleased with it.

[clackers]

I probably should've bumped the shutter speed up, as you can see the motion blur in Lauren's hand at 1/80s, wide-open and ISO 200,000, but I'm still pretty happy with the results, considering how casually I shot them.

Yeah, #3 is a great "I wuz there!", shot, Jess.


Hats off to Kenspo and others who specialize in this kind of photography.


I find because the overall metering is dark, it's very easy to overexpose faces, and AF can be dodgy when using fast lenses - I sometimes flick everything over to manual just to get a handle on everything, but of course then end up missing some shots.

[lithedreamer]

Yeah, #3 is a great "I wuz there!", shot, Jess.

[manishved]

Nice pics. I will upgrade mine tomorrow and test the FA trio

[ffking]

considering how casually I shot them.

3kg is not casual,in my world! - must be getting old ;D