Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
02-10-2017, 08:21 AM - 1 Like   #271
Forum Member




Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Chicago
Posts: 91
QuoteOriginally posted by clackers Quote
Well, I think that's it, Jon, and reviewers like Tony Northrup and the DPR crew trivialized or botched their attempts on this topic. I even told the DPR guy when he joined this forum and posted about it.

Actual togs here demonstrated how wrong they were, but the public of course never saw those threads - I posted full sequences of pics, including using the old K-x with the slow 55-300 kit lens. See here:

Pentax K-1: continuous sequences of subjects moving towards the photographer - AF.C - Page 3 - PentaxForums.com

Is it possible to autofocus correctly with a Pentax? - PentaxForums.com

Pentax AF for Sports and Action - PentaxForums.com

Ricoh seem to have chosen not to spend thousands on marketing countering perception probably because their modelling shows the revenue that comes back (in Western markets, at any rate) wouldn't equal the expenditure.

So scuttlebutt about the brand will be allowed to pass, even if damaging.

C'est la vie. If I'm shooting Pentax, I'm clearly not worried about running with the herd.
Clearly Pentax can AF, but all of these threads either show unpublishable results (the runner is softish in a lot of frames in the first sequence - would immediately get trashed) or don't demonstrate the true AF test that sports photogs need it to pass - a single, well lit runner on a beach with a 70-200 (and even looks soft in a few frames) is a whole different scenario than using a 300 or 400 picking out and following a sprinting football, soccer or hockey player (indoors). Having shot on the sidelines of many professional sports games - from football, hockey, soccer, baseball and more and having used Pentax gear (though no way on the sports sidelines!) I can tell you that it's not entirely a perception issue - if Pentax AF was good enough, you would see it on the sidelines to some extent. A lot of newspaper, sport and wire photogs are gear tinkerers too and love using new and different stuff and if it got the job done and done well you would see it. But not to the extent that they'll lose their job and piss off their editor for bringing a quirky and not quite suitable tool to get the job done. There's a lot of griping about Canon and Nikon but there's a reason the griping doesn't often end with replacement. Pentax cameras are good at a lot of things, but I wouldn't ever trust one for action while working for a client, heck no. Portraits, sure, do it all the time.

02-10-2017, 08:25 AM - 3 Likes   #272
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 11,471
I'm sorry, but the only true AF test is a bearded DPReviewer on a bicycle
02-10-2017, 08:35 AM - 1 Like   #273
Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Aug 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 162
QuoteOriginally posted by beholder3 Quote
Nobody feeling miserable to be part of a thing where "The blogger Joe Plumber farted and now is sure the next winter will be very cold" makes it into a thread title?

Must be really the low end of "speculation".
Joe farted? Pentax is doomed!
02-10-2017, 09:36 AM   #274
Pentaxian
The Squirrel Mafia's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 1,294
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
I'm sorry, but the only true AF test is a bearded DPReviewer on a bicycle
This is the TRUEFFFFF!!!!

02-10-2017, 09:54 AM   #275
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,129
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
I'm sorry, but the only true AF test is a bearded DPReviewer on a bicycle
Which makes it clear that "alternative facts" were no invention of politics, but of some underwhelmingly intelligent & skilled bloggers long before.
02-10-2017, 01:23 PM - 1 Like   #276
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,857
QuoteOriginally posted by mee Quote
Well the issue I have with this is I've purposely picked out lenses with qualities I value for different tasks. And, to recreate that lineup, would be rather expensive due to loss of value at second hand sale and rebuying (often new).

I would buy a knife set with different types of knives for different tasks in the kitchen. I would not switch to another brand of knives, and settle for half the knives, just because someone told me I had too many knives initially.
Well this give us more insights on your character rather than your cooking or photographic skills .
02-10-2017, 01:27 PM - 1 Like   #277
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2013
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,735
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
Well this give us more insights on your character rather than your cooking or photographic skills .
What?
02-10-2017, 02:20 PM - 2 Likes   #278
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 12,365
QuoteOriginally posted by petrakka Quote
Clearly Pentax can AF, but all of these threads either show unpublishable results (the runner is softish in a lot of frames in the first sequence - would immediately get trashed) or don't demonstrate the true AF test that sports photogs need it to pass - a single, well lit runner on a beach with a 70-200 (and even looks soft in a few frames) is a whole different scenario than using a 300 or 400 picking out and following a sprinting football, soccer or hockey player (indoors).
Then you know that the point of Continuous shooting is not that you submit fifty frames of the same baseballer or duck flying to your editor, Petrakka, you spray, pray, and choose *one*. You track your target, rotate your hips, begin shooting before they have reached where you actually want them to go, and keep shooting when they go past it - you must do this in your sleep now.

The post production means you can see clearly the handheld 'keeper' frame of my runner on the beach, selected because of her facial expression ... I could have chosen others, I simply show the complete sequence, cluttering up your loading web page, for transparency of evidence, a sequence which Northrup and DPR say is impossible (@Beholder3 points out that DPR even lied in their own sequence based on the EXIF of pictures they later removed from readers' access).

I have no problem using Pentax for both action and portraiture. For the aircraft pictures you saw, the Nikon guy right beside me shook his head reviewing his own, for the lack of keepers!

Let's pick some individuals out amongst other participants, shall we? And I will point out again, I'm an amateur like virtually everyone else on this forum - I'm a systems engineer.

Anyone who does photography for a living has no excuse for not doing better.

The top two are shot with the K-30, a consumer camera many forum members own, with the Tamron 70-200, the cheapest on the market as it was. The cyclists are approaching on the Z axis at somewhere between 40-50kmh, the galloping horse and steer, faster. I've stood beyond the end of an international airport runway with that same setup shooting aircraft landing at nearly 300kmh.

And yes, that's Terrell Owens in the middle picture, monstering the ladies.













QuoteOriginally posted by petrakka Quote
. A lot of newspaper, sport and wire photogs are gear tinkerers too and love using new and different stuff and if it got the job done and done well you would see it.
Well, talking to a sports photographer here who has shot tennis Grand Slams, the Tour de France and the Hawaiian Ironman for agencies, press photographers are risk averse ... they'll stick with Canon or Nikon because it's traditional with their colleagues and the professional support is available for gear redundancy. Whatever Fuji or Sony come up with in technical advances, for example (name your trendy choice), they're unlikely to change.

He also confirmed these old school photographers with their traditions are a dying species, unfortunately. Plenty of journalists sent out now with their iPhones and m43 gear are expected to come back with the pics to their story, too.


Last edited by clackers; 02-10-2017 at 05:08 PM.
02-10-2017, 03:20 PM - 1 Like   #279
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
bobbotron's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Ottawa, ON
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,432
QuoteOriginally posted by clackers Quote
Then you know that the point of Continuous shooting is not that you submit fifty frames of the same baseballer or duck flying to your editor, Petrakka, you spray, pray, and choose *one*. You track your target, rotate your hips, begin shooting before they have reached where you want them to go, and keep shooting when they go past it - you must do this in your sleep now.

The post production means you can see clearly the 'keeper' frame of my runner on the beach, chosen because of her facial expression ... I could have chosen others, I simply show the complete sequence, cluttering up your loading web page, for transparency of evidence, a sequence which Northrup and DPR say is impossible (Beholder points out that DPR even lied in their own sequence based on the EXIF of pictures they later removed from readers' access).

I have no problem using Pentax for both action and portraiture. For the aircraft pictures you saw, the Nikon guy right beside me shook his head reviewing his own, for the lack of keepers!

Let's pick some individuals out amongst other participants, shall we? And I will point out again, I'm an amateur like virtually everyone else on this forum, I'm a systems engineer.

Anyone who does photography for a living has no excuse for not doing better!

The top two are shot with the K-30, a consumer camera many forum members own, with the Tamron 70-200, the cheapest on the market as it was.

And yes, that's Terrell Owens in the middle picture, monstering the ladies.















Well, talking to a sports photographer here who has shot tennis Grand Slams, the Tour de France and the Hawaiian Ironman for agencies, press photographers are risk averse ... they'll stick with Canon or Nikon because it's traditional with their colleagues and the professional support is available for gear redundancy. Whatever Fuji or Sony come up with in technical advances, for example (name your trendy choice), they're unlikely to change.

He also confirmed these old school photographers with their traditions are a dying species, unfortunately. Plenty of journalists sent out now with their iPhones and m43 gear are expected to come back with the pics to their story, too.
Derailing here, but that second photo is just great!
02-10-2017, 03:32 PM   #280
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 12,365
QuoteOriginally posted by bobbotron Quote
Derailing here, but that second photo is just great!
Thanks, Bobbotron. I had to track him as he cut to right then doubled back to the left.

It was only touch, but the defenders were of course rattled by having to face him. He even threw a long completed pass late in the game - he might try to dine out on that when the topic of how much money quarterbacks earn comes up!

Last edited by clackers; 02-10-2017 at 03:56 PM.
02-11-2017, 06:46 AM   #281
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,857
QuoteOriginally posted by lithedreamer Quote
What?
Some people (me included to some extent) think they always need high quality, potentially latest/greatest and also quite specialized tools to achieve the most basic task. Reality is indeed quite different. A good cooker is one that make a delicious diner with what available in the fridge and that doesn't need 20 different knife to achieve it. I got better shots with my 55-300 on K3 than many on their Canon L lenses and I see everyday there and on the net fantastic shots with incredibly basic gear and terrible one with the "best tool for the job".

Reality is there almost no link between gear and the result. We have something for this were I live: bad worker make for bad tools. Photographer eye, lighting, subject etc are what give you great photos. Not having a specific prime or zoom or advanced camera.

Having great gear help a bit, is conveniant and satisfying. For some it help on confidence or to get approval from others. It can be even an escuse to criticize others like the often heard remark on all theses dump canon shooters with their reversed hood. But that's about it.

Last edited by Nicolas06; 02-11-2017 at 06:53 AM.
02-11-2017, 08:07 AM - 2 Likes   #282
Forum Member




Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Chicago
Posts: 91
QuoteOriginally posted by clackers Quote
Then you know that the point of Continuous shooting is not that you submit fifty frames of the same baseballer or duck flying to your editor, Petrakka, you spray, pray, and choose *one*. You track your target, rotate your hips, begin shooting before they have reached where you actually want them to go, and keep shooting when they go past it - you must do this in your sleep now.

The post production means you can see clearly the handheld 'keeper' frame of my runner on the beach, selected because of her facial expression ... I could have chosen others, I simply show the complete sequence, cluttering up your loading web page, for transparency of evidence, a sequence which Northrup and DPR say is impossible (@Beholder3 points out that DPR even lied in their own sequence based on the EXIF of pictures they later removed from readers' access).

I have no problem using Pentax for both action and portraiture. For the aircraft pictures you saw, the Nikon guy right beside me shook his head reviewing his own, for the lack of keepers!

Let's pick some individuals out amongst other participants, shall we? And I will point out again, I'm an amateur like virtually everyone else on this forum - I'm a systems engineer.

Anyone who does photography for a living has no excuse for not doing better.

The top two are shot with the K-30, a consumer camera many forum members own, with the Tamron 70-200, the cheapest on the market as it was. The cyclists are approaching on the Z axis at somewhere between 40-50kmh, the galloping horse and steer, faster. I've stood beyond the end of an international airport runway with that same setup shooting aircraft landing at nearly 300kmh.

And yes, that's Terrell Owens in the middle picture, monstering the ladies.

Well, talking to a sports photographer here who has shot tennis Grand Slams, the Tour de France and the Hawaiian Ironman for agencies, press photographers are risk averse ... they'll stick with Canon or Nikon because it's traditional with their colleagues and the professional support is available for gear redundancy. Whatever Fuji or Sony come up with in technical advances, for example (name your trendy choice), they're unlikely to change.

He also confirmed these old school photographers with their traditions are a dying species, unfortunately. Plenty of journalists sent out now with their iPhones and m43 gear are expected to come back with the pics to their story, too.
Your first statement, to me, misses the mark when considering the demands on sports/action photographers. The keeper frame is not chosen by the one that is in focus generally. If you're generally limited only by what's in focus on a sequence you're already working at a handicap.

Your statement about press photographers being risk averse of course makes sense. Why would you use a camera that puts your job at greater risk!
For those who's job doesn't depend on it and it's fun, of course it doesn't matter.

I don't know Northrup etc and I have no doubt that you can of course shoot sports with a Pentax as you show, and I'm not saying Pentax AF is bad, but it's just not on the level of the other tools out there for that specific task and I don't think should be conflated this way. Neither are a lot of great cameras. Right tool for the right job, if the job is important and you have the requisite skill level (if you don't then it's hard to exploit the gear to it's specific potential and is less important). It's nice that it works for you for your purposes! FWIW I wasn't trying to pick on you, I just thought that there was some info there that would maybe be useful to straighten out because people use these forums for research. Your status as amateur doesn't matter, we both know that has little to no bearing on how good pictures are (plenty of pros w bad photos plenty of ams with better ones), it's the fact that Pentax is not, if you're interested in pursuing serious sports work, the best way to set yourself up for success. Sure you can make it work, but if you don't have to operate at that handicap there are reasons not to. I think even Pentax/Ricoh execs would probably admit that over a beer.

Of course journalism is changing - lots of journalists like to complain about that, which is not a new tradition btw (one reason that I struck out on my own and am no longer a photojournalist myself), but I don't see how that's relevant to the discussion.
02-11-2017, 12:54 PM - 3 Likes   #283
Veteran Member
cali92rs's Avatar

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 3,347
I agree that for 99% of people, the AF on Pentax is more than adequate.
But sticking with the cooking theme....if you are a world class chef, you can make a absolutely delicious dinner with just a fork and and a stove. But there is no point in intentionally limiting yourself either if you have the means to buy the best tool for the job.
Btw, the same is true if you are a landscape shooter and you are shooting a D5 and not shooting a K-1 (or 645Z).

Last edited by cali92rs; 02-11-2017 at 12:59 PM.
02-12-2017, 04:20 PM - 1 Like   #284
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
clackers's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Melbourne
Photos: Albums
Posts: 12,365
QuoteOriginally posted by petrakka Quote
and I'm not saying Pentax AF is bad.
Then we're in agreement, Petrakka.

But there are people who say it is, including people who actually don't shoot action, or don't understand the camera and its settings. This is clearly not you.

If I was doing wildlife for a living and someone was paying for my gear, I'd have a $7000 Nikon D5 and a $12000 600mm f4 to go with it.

I can't match that with a $1900 K-1, and neither can somebody with a Nikon d810 or a Canon 5D Mk III, for that matter.

Last edited by clackers; 02-12-2017 at 09:11 PM.
02-12-2017, 07:01 PM   #285
retired sw engineer
Loyal Site Supporter
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 11,999
This past week I was on a college campus photographing squirrels, and for the first time my K-30 + 55-300 became totally confused with respect to focusing. I did recover
Got Squirrel Shots? - Page 82 - PentaxForums.com
but it was a momentarily unnerving event.
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!
adapter, aperture, camera, cameras, choices, demise, design, drive, hand, issue, knives, lenses, mirrorless, mounts, option, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, photography, screw, sony, system, term, thom, time, type, value
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Thom Hogan's 7 Reason's Shooting a DSLR fwbigd General Photography 31 07-16-2016 06:35 AM
Thom Hogan - 4/3 Camera Manufacturers interested_observer Photographic Industry and Professionals 14 08-04-2013 02:18 PM
Nobody expects the PENNSYLVANIA INQUISITION! boriscleto General Talk 6 03-06-2012 07:40 PM
Thom Hogan likes Pentax lens lineup Kammerer Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 6 03-02-2011 07:41 AM
Need a new Pentax Camera smack1019 Photographic Technique 6 07-10-2009 11:32 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:11 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