Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-22-2017, 03:31 AM - 1 Like   #1351
bxf
Pentaxian
bxf's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Lisbon area
Posts: 1,254
QuoteOriginally posted by Chris Mak Quote
...Pentax ever seriously stepping up its long near hopeless AF game
This is a myth.

Although I could have largely agreed with this comment when using my K-5, it most certainly does not apply to my K-3. True, I do not find myself in frequent situations where I need to take action shots, but it is not fair to dismiss Pentax' very good static AF just because the Continuous AF is lacking.

It may not satisfy all users' requirements, but it definitely satisfies those of some, and does so very well.

11-22-2017, 03:48 AM - 2 Likes   #1352
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 18,564
QuoteOriginally posted by Ian Stuart Forsyth Quote
The above is not an implication

Itís a way out there attempt to rationalize the lack of keepers with and irrational implication.

The rational why to look at that 70%

I only have to take 300 images to ensure I have 200 keepers and not needing 500 images to cover the same success rate, that works better for me

Very seldom do I have the luxury to shoot 500 images, most of the time on a single subject 2-6 images are captured and for them I would like to have better odds that 50% . When image captures are time sensitive like action work in wildlife where I am only afforded the luxury of maybe 1 frame I will take the highest success I can get
The problem that I have with all of these discussions is that most of the folks who are talking about how terrible Pentax auto focus is aren't (and haven't) shot with current top end Pentax bodies combined with top end lenses -- particularly not long enough to learn the camera and know how it works. When folks have shot with a K-1 and DFA 70-200 or DFA 150-450 and still say that they can't make it work for whatever reason, at least they really know what the current state of affairs is with Pentax. If your last experience was with a K3 and DA *50-135, not so much.

I wouldn't get a K-1 to shoot wildlife, but that is as much due to lack of long and fast telephotos that are present in the Canon and Nikon lens line up. You have some beautiful shots, Ian, but you also clearly work hard to get close to wildlife and have some very nice (and quite expensive) lenses. But a lot of folks don't shoot wildlife and there I find Pentax to be more than adequate.
11-22-2017, 04:35 AM - 3 Likes   #1353
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 11,027
There's a tendency to validate your choice by attacking the others. That's what I'm reading when that guy on DPR named Pentax as hopelessly crippled (and got offended when some people failed to give applause).
The idea that there might be more than one correct choice seems alien to them.

Oh, yeah, one of the main complaints was about "ancient screw drive". Despite the fact that none of the Pentax digital long lenses are screw drive, and in-lens motors are supported since 2007.
Complainers aren't trying to be fair, but to do as much damage as possible. Pentax had wronged them, Pentax must pay!

Known quantity or not, we are not a fixed quantity. How many of us left because Pentax didn't had a FF? And it's the FF line, a clear change from the past strategy, that addressed this issue.
What if the next issue to be addressed is the high end? Every other brand is taking care of it (as Pentax did, in the film era - the D FA* 85mm f/1.4 fills a gap that was previously filled by A*/FA* lenses).

IMO to have a reasonable guess at where Pentax is doing we must eliminate personal wishes from the equation and take a good look only at the information available (that's not saying our personal wishes are unimportant). Will Pentax advance the K-mount toward a higher performance goal?
Well, what do we know? The D FA* lenses with ring-type SDM motors, for once. The full electric KAF4. PLM for light focusing groups. A new high-end APS-C lens (where a non-* DA was previously assumed).
That hints at good things happening. IMO.

Last edited by Kunzite; 11-22-2017 at 04:44 AM.
11-22-2017, 04:35 AM   #1354
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2013
Photos: Albums
Posts: 502
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
The problem that I have with all of these discussions is that most of the folks who are talking about how terrible Pentax auto focus is aren't (and haven't) shot with current top end Pentax bodies combined with top end lenses -- particularly not long enough to learn the camera and know how it works. When folks have shot with a K-1 and DFA 70-200 or DFA 150-450 and still say that they can't make it work for whatever reason, at least they really know what the current state of affairs is with Pentax. If your last experience was with a K3 and DA *50-135, not so much.
That is of course true, but the reality is, that there is no Pentax Apsc camera to replace the K3II yet (unless you are willing to settle for the compromises of the KP), and there are no tangible indications so far of a replacement on the way. Another reality is that Pentax has a lot of aging lenses that are in need of an update to enable faster, better and more responsive autofocus, like e.g. the 200 and 300 primes, and they lack a 400m prime, which seems of no priority either, perhaps because they feel that the dfa150-450 makes a 400mm prime redundant.
So when you are looking for better Apsc performance, what use is it really to rent a K1 + dfa 150-450 to see if it performs better? I'll take your word for it instead, but it doesn't help me much.
QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I wouldn't get a K-1 to shoot wildlife, but that is as much due to lack of long and fast telephotos that are present in the Canon and Nikon lens line up. You have some beautiful shots, Ian, but you also clearly work hard to get close to wildlife and have some very nice (and quite expensive) lenses. But a lot of folks don't shoot wildlife and there I find Pentax to be more than adequate.


11-22-2017, 04:46 AM   #1355
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 11,027
For any system, there will be individuals whose needs aren't met in a satisfactory manner.
11-22-2017, 06:12 AM   #1356
Pentaxian
Site Supporter
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 30,524
QuoteOriginally posted by Chris Mak Quote
Sorry, but that is nonsense, and nonsense used as an excuse on top of that. Ricoh is a modern professional company with proper resources and access to new technologies. You may believe that implementing proper auto focus hardware and software in their flagship camera will bankrupt them, but that is nonsense.
QuoteQuote:
And yet, I think what you post is nonsense. SO I guess what is nonsense and what isn't abased on your perspective. The simple fact is, you have n more reason for thinking what you think than I have for thinking whatI think.
Here I question your shooting experience. At 8 FPS it does not take hours to shoot 500 images. It can take a little as a half hour, But if you were a real shooter you'd know that. In fact out shooting the otters on Costello Creek last year, one of the 1Dx shooter, told me he clicked off 1300 images in a few hours. My perspective, from shooting with a lot of other wildlife shooters, is that we like a lot of images. When the animals are in a good pose it sounds like a bunch of mchaine guns firing out there. You're looking for the image that has something going for it, and that can come anywhere in your burst. I Find it really amusing that you think you can just pop in in15 minute or whatever, snap off a few images an leave. 90% of the time it doesn't work like that. You have to find a position that makes good use of available light, the longer you spend, the more chance of getting an image you want.

I'll be the first to admit, there's whole different way of shooting. I call them road warriors. They drive up and down the highway looking for good images, hop out of thier cars when they see something and have a very short time to snap off a few frames, because they've spoodked the animal and he's not going to be around long. It's possible a faster aAF might be better thnthat, but, I have my fair share of road warrior images as well, so I'm not even sure that's true.

In the image below it appears that the little bird is looking at the seed in the snow. There is one shot like that of the 500 I took and it's from the middle of a burst. The bird was hopping around looking for seed in the snow. So basically what i'm saying is. if you aren't shooting 500 frames, odds are you aren't getting this image.

From yestersday



I have at least 400 in focus images of this beaver. (The 40% keeper rate was for birds in flight. My keeper rate is well over 85% for stationary objects and most of the misses are motion blur because I'm shooting at a low ISO to reduce noise.) I was able to select this one based on the visibility of the paw, the visibility of the stick he's munching on, and was also selected for the reeds in the background. These are images from the last two weeks, I don't have to spend hours going back through my files and posting stuff from 5 years ago, like some do in this type of discussion. So my point is, this is my everyday shooting work flow, not a one off that happened once 5 years ago.



So this is what works for me, you can criticize all you want, but it works for me, period, end of discussion. maybe something else would work better, but that's complete speculation. And there are times when I end up posting better images than guys shooting 1DXs and D4s, So, really don't be telling me what Pentax has to do and to make me and others who shoot like me happy. You don't have a freakin clue. And because I shoot in Algonquin Park beside many other amateur and professional shooters. don't try and bully me into thinking it's your way or the highway, it isn't. I do just fine without advice like yours, thank you very much.

And I can crank off those 500 frames in 15 minute if circumstances are right. My burst must be a lot faster than yours. Figure it out, 24 images takes 3 seconds. The a 20-30 second wait while the buffer clears. Easily 50 frames a minute. 10 minutes is all I need to run off 500 frames. Although I'm usually a lot more selective but the longest I'm ever out is an hour and a half, unless I'm bundled up with my cold weather hunter's gear, sitting and waiting for something to appear.

You have to be using really bad technique if you have to have better AF, to do what I'm doing. As I said, I make Pentax AF work for me. I don't need a bunch of know it alls selling me it doesn't. I discuss these things all the time with guys,, hanging around waiting for the mossed to get his head up out of the swamp sow e can snap off a few shots, or a similar situations for other wild life.

Last edited by normhead; 11-22-2017 at 06:43 AM.
11-22-2017, 07:35 AM - 1 Like   #1357
Pentaxian
Dan Rentea's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Bucharest
Posts: 920
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
You have to be using really bad technique if you have to have better AF, to do what I'm doing.
Normhead, the Pentax af-s it's a totaly different story than the Pentax af-c. For stationary birds or animals there is no point in using af-c as long as you don't want to catch the bird in flight or at least when it takes off. From what you describe, you often use long shutter speed in order to keep ISO as low as posible so my understanding from this is that catching the bird in flight is not a priority for you. Please correct me if I'm wrong. In this situation, your technique is more than adequate.

For the below image I used af-s because I wasn't interested in catching the bird in flight because the bird was already on the shade and the ISO was already at 1600 with a 600mm lens and a shutter speed of 1/320s. The keeper rate for this kind of subjects has to be high because there is no action involved, other than the movement of the bird head.



QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
As I said, I make Pentax AF work for me. I don't need a bunch of know it alls selling me it doesn't. I discuss these things all the time with guys,, hanging around waiting for the mossed to get his head up out of the swamp sow e can snap off a few shots, or a similar situations for other wild life.
You have to agree that for action shots like these 2 images from below, af-s may not be the best option due to the small DOF area and due to the bird's super fast flight. I'm not saying that this kind of images can't be taken with Pentax (far by me this thought), but you have to work a little harder to get them, even with the newest lenses like 150-450mm. Sometimes you don't have the luxury to reshot a particular bird in that day and an interesting moment may be lost because the af-c hesitate or gets distracted by the background/foreground.

Anyway:
- a good technique
- the photographer's ability to keep the bird in the frame with long lenses
- a fast focus lens
can increase quite a lot the keeper rate with Pentax cameras.



As for the D-FA 85mm lens, it was about time for such a lens to come. Portrait or wedding photographers must be very happy. I know I would have bought it as soon as it became available. I hope I will have a chance to play with it if some of my friends with K1 will buy it.
11-22-2017, 08:50 AM - 1 Like   #1358
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2013
Photos: Albums
Posts: 502
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
Here I question your shooting experience. At 8 FPS it does not take hours to shoot 500 images. It can take a little as a half hour, But if you were a real shooter you'd know that. In fact out shooting the otters on Costello Creek last year, one of the 1Dx shooter, told me he clicked off 1300 images in a few hours. My perspective, from shooting with a lot of other wildlife shooters, is that we like a lot of images. When the animals are in a good pose it sounds like a bunch of mchaine guns firing out there. You're looking for the image that has something going for it, and that can come anywhere in your burst. I Find it really amusing that you think you can just pop in in15 minute or whatever, snap off a few images an leave. 90% of the time it doesn't work like that. You have to find a position that makes good use of available light, the longer you spend, the more chance of getting an image you want.

I'll be the first to admit, there's whole different way of shooting. I call them road warriors. They drive up and down the highway looking for good images, hop out of thier cars when they see something and have a very short time to snap off a few frames, because they've spoodked the animal and he's not going to be around long. It's possible a faster aAF might be better thnthat, but, I have my fair share of road warrior images as well, so I'm not even sure that's true.

In the image below it appears that the little bird is looking at the seed in the snow. There is one shot like that of the 500 I took and it's from the middle of a burst. The bird was hopping around looking for seed in the snow. So basically what i'm saying is. if you aren't shooting 500 frames, odds are you aren't getting this image.

From yestersday



I have at least 400 in focus images of this beaver. (The 40% keeper rate was for birds in flight. My keeper rate is well over 85% for stationary objects and most of the misses are motion blur because I'm shooting at a low ISO to reduce noise.) I was able to select this one based on the visibility of the paw, the visibility of the stick he's munching on, and was also selected for the reeds in the background. These are images from the last two weeks, I don't have to spend hours going back through my files and posting stuff from 5 years ago, like some do in this type of discussion. So my point is, this is my everyday shooting work flow, not a one off that happened once 5 years ago.



So this is what works for me, you can criticize all you want, but it works for me, period, end of discussion. maybe something else would work better, but that's complete speculation. And there are times when I end up posting better images than guys shooting 1DXs and D4s, So, really don't be telling me what Pentax has to do and to make me and others who shoot like me happy. You don't have a freakin clue. And because I shoot in Algonquin Park beside many other amateur and professional shooters. don't try and bully me into thinking it's your way or the highway, it isn't. I do just fine without advice like yours, thank you very much.

And I can crank off those 500 frames in 15 minute if circumstances are right. My burst must be a lot faster than yours. Figure it out, 24 images takes 3 seconds. The a 20-30 second wait while the buffer clears. Easily 50 frames a minute. 10 minutes is all I need to run off 500 frames. Although I'm usually a lot more selective but the longest I'm ever out is an hour and a half, unless I'm bundled up with my cold weather hunter's gear, sitting and waiting for something to appear.

You have to be using really bad technique if you have to have better AF, to do what I'm doing. As I said, I make Pentax AF work for me. I don't need a bunch of know it alls selling me it doesn't. I discuss these things all the time with guys,, hanging around waiting for the mossed to get his head up out of the swamp sow e can snap off a few shots, or a similar situations for other wild life.
You are taking all this far too personally. I use exaggerated descriptions of shooting situations and habits merely to counter your own exaggerated descriptions of why Pentax should basically not bother with seriously improving the auto focus capabilities off their cameras and lenses. You may have found a way to live and shoot contently and productively within these limitations, but that is beside the point. Almost all, if not all, who try out a current Canon/Nikon combo or modern mirrorless combo, will tell you that you are selling yourself short if you stay with a Pentax that sees no hurry in improving their AF speed, accuracy and responsiveness. That is a simple fact. No need to expect others to live forever with limitations that are simply something easily lifted with modern technology if given due priority. Pentax has been a cheapo brand far too long, and good on Ricoh for starting a change. I vote for a flagship Apsc body with proper processor, proper focus points amount and spreading, and new lenses with current motor technology, and I hope they don't try to keep it below 1500, at all cost. We have the KP for who does not want to spend on a flagship body.


Last edited by Chris Mak; 11-22-2017 at 08:58 AM.
11-22-2017, 09:05 AM - 2 Likes   #1359
Pentaxian
Site Supporter
normhead's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Near Algonquin Park
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 30,524
QuoteOriginally posted by Chris Mak Quote
You are taking all this far too personal. I use exaggerated descriptions of shooting situations and habits merely to counter your own exaggerated descriptions of why Pentax should basically not bother with seriously improving the auto focus capabilities off their cameras and lenses. You may have found a way to live and shoot contently and lroductively within these limitations, but that is beside the point. Almost all, if not all, who try out a current Canon/Nikon combo or modern mirrorless combo, will tell you that you are selling yourself short if you stay with a Pentax that sees no hurry in improving their AF speed, accuracy and responsiveness. That is a simple fact.
That's been true for about 10 years now. Thanks for restating the obvious. I myself often tell people if you need faster AF there are lot's of more expensive cameras than Pentax's that offer it. But the situation you describe, birds in flight is one of those areas where if you do that on a regular basis you probably want to switch. The inference that Pentax has to compete in that area is not in any way supported. There is no evidence they could compete in that market. Their market share is so low, their chances of making money on such cameras is next to nil, and even Pentax shooters like myself won't cough up the extra bucks to get it, even if it's offered in a Pentax body. Because the number of times I need it, despite being out at least 40-50 days a years shooting is next to nothing.

Pentax can continue along with it's incremental improvements as long as it wants, because really fast AF is only an issue for a very small number of shooters. So my counter to that last line is, a lot of folks delude themselves into thinking they will get much better images with a faster AF, but there are far more who spend a lot of money only to get the same images I do. Faster AF does not for 99.9% of photographers does not lead to better images. It's money wasted. Thinking Pentax can make money by catering to that .1% is crazy. You're recommending people buy camera abilities they are likely to never use. For established Pentax users, other features beside's fast AF is their main consideration. Pentax's model of incremental change over years works just fine for most of us. And those of us who truly need better, like Dan, have already gone somewhere else.

I am curious though Dan, how many of the shooters you know would switch to Pentax based on faster AF? Wouldn't it also take a stable of fast focusing lenses etc. Given the rate of Pentax lens releases, catching up with Sony, Canon and Nikon would likely be a10 year plan. Sony is committed to great line of fast focusing high resolution lenses for the A9. To make a difference Pentax would have to go for the the whole shebang. A whole complete line-up of fast focusing bodies and lenses. They'd be starting from scratch. Is that really a feasible solution, when there are already 3 camera companies with pretty amazing tech in that market, with at least a few years head start?

Compared to Sony. Canon and Nikon , Pentax is a small company with limited R&D resources. We know practically all the Pentax lens designers by name. Ricoh is a bigger company, but Pentax has been told there is not going to be a major in flux of cash to produce an A9 from scratch. Given those parameters, Pentax's approach of incremental improvements body to body and lens to lens makes more sense than a huge faster AF product line.

No one has a problem with folks who need it going else where for that. What we do have a problem with is people insisting Pentax has to go down that road.

It will be interesting to see how good the 85 1.4 will be. My guess is it won't be much better than existing Pentax gear because that's the way Pentax does it. Incremental improvements. Making a really fast AF lens makes no sense if the weak link is the AF system in the camera.

But if the incremental improvements aren't good enough for you, buy what you need. It's not my problem, and it's possible, it's hardly anyone's problem.

All of these Pentax AF arguments are based on the flawed logic, the Pentax has to do well everyone else does well. They don't. They only have to do what they do well. What Pentax does well is excellent value per dollar spent. People who want more have lot's of choice from other companies. People who make that argument never ask, why can't Sony, Nikon or Canon pack the same features Pentax does into a DSLR for the same price? I get tired of the criticism offered on the forum always going the same way, and so many people who think criticizing Pentax for what they don't do while ignoring what they are good at are in some way knowledgeable. They don't have to be good at everything, just some things.

Last edited by normhead; 11-22-2017 at 09:23 AM.
11-22-2017, 09:56 AM   #1360
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 18,564
QuoteOriginally posted by Chris Mak Quote
You are taking all this far too personally. I use exaggerated descriptions of shooting situations and habits merely to counter your own exaggerated descriptions of why Pentax should basically not bother with seriously improving the auto focus capabilities off their cameras and lenses. You may have found a way to live and shoot contently and productively within these limitations, but that is beside the point. Almost all, if not all, who try out a current Canon/Nikon combo or modern mirrorless combo, will tell you that you are selling yourself short if you stay with a Pentax that sees no hurry in improving their AF speed, accuracy and responsiveness. That is a simple fact. No need to expect others to live forever with limitations that are simply something easily lifted with modern technology if given due priority. Pentax has been a cheapo brand far too long, and good on Ricoh for starting a change. I vote for a flagship Apsc body with proper processor, proper focus points amount and spreading, and new lenses with current motor technology, and I hope they don't try to keep it below 1500, at all cost. We have the KP for who does not want to spend on a flagship body.
I really think you should get a D500. I really don't see Pentax releasing a camera like that and odds are that is the closest to what you need, probably with a 300mm f2.8 lens. Cost will be a bit more than with the K3 II sequel, but it will have better auto focus and that seems to be an important thing.

Pentax has made incremental improvements in both body and lens performance from an auto focus standpoint, but I really don't seem them going after the sports shooter market any time soon.
11-22-2017, 11:05 AM - 9 Likes   #1361
Pentaxian
photoptimist's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2016
Photos: Albums
Posts: 2,639
QuoteOriginally posted by Chris Mak Quote
You are taking all this far too personally. I use exaggerated descriptions of shooting situations and habits merely to counter your own exaggerated descriptions of why Pentax should basically not bother with seriously improving the auto focus capabilities off their cameras and lenses. You may have found a way to live and shoot contently and productively within these limitations, but that is beside the point. Almost all, if not all, who try out a current Canon/Nikon combo or modern mirrorless combo, will tell you that you are selling yourself short if you stay with a Pentax that sees no hurry in improving their AF speed, accuracy and responsiveness. That is a simple fact. No need to expect others to live forever with limitations that are simply something easily lifted with modern technology if given due priority. Pentax has been a cheapo brand far too long, and good on Ricoh for starting a change. I vote for a flagship Apsc body with proper processor, proper focus points amount and spreading, and new lenses with current motor technology, and I hope they don't try to keep it below 1500, at all cost. We have the KP for who does not want to spend on a flagship body.
The funny thing is I'd use your same arguments to say Canon and Nikon are pathetically behind on IBIS and Sony's lack of OVFs on their main system makes them unusable for many. It's the users of Canon, Nikon, and Sony who are living contented within the limitations of their brands and their brands' refusal to fix those limitations.

Every camera and camera system on the market has limitations. It's up to each photographer to decide which limitations are deal breakers, deal influencers, or irrelevant. In some cases, the exact same attribute (e.g., small/large size, or mirrorless/DSLR) that's a requirement for one photographer is a deal breaker for another.

For me and a bunch of others, Pentax AF is good enough and getting better. It's just not a limitation for us. And there are other features offered by Pentax that the other brands simply cannot or won't offer that make the other brands too limited for consideration.

To each, his own.
11-22-2017, 01:29 PM   #1362
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
ffking's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: Poole
Posts: 3,809
since we're happily off topic and talking about AF, I'd just like to say that I was really impressed today not by the K-1's AF-C or even focusing speed, but that in LV it managed to focus perfectly through a 10 stop ND filter PLUS a 3 stop ND grad Plus a polariser. Admittedly it was midday (though midday in late November in the UK with partial sun), but it was diving exposures of, for instance, 8 sec @ f/5.6 and nailing the focus. I also really like the fact that with the firmware update, you can dial in shutter speeds of many minutes and see the properly exposed image on the rear LCD I find that in daylight the fact that you don't have to take the 10-stop off the camera to compose, focus and expose, and don't have to calculate exposures, a really great feature - it's a pity the long exposure timer wasn't available on release so it's not included in reviews.
11-22-2017, 03:05 PM   #1363
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jan 2013
Photos: Albums
Posts: 502
QuoteOriginally posted by photoptimist Quote
For me and a bunch of others, Pentax AF is good enough and getting better. It's just not a limitation for us...
To each, his own.
That's perfectly fine. And if the AF is not a limitation, then you probably won't care very much for a large buffer, or a high frame rate. The KP is perfect for you and the others

Now give a little and also care for others, who may want a true Pentax flagship, unless your only solution is the road of system switch....
Anyway, this discussion is most likely irrelevant anyhow, chances are that Ricoh has Pentax working on a true update on the ageing K3 anyhow. One that won't get them populating last place in all the AF lists.... I still remember vividly how on this very forum, the possibility of a full frame was not very popular a few years ago, due to its development costs driving Pentax Apsc into the abyss.... wonder how they see it all now....

---------- Post added 11-22-17 at 11:16 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by Rondec Quote
I really think you should get a D500. I really don't see Pentax releasing a camera like that and odds are that is the closest to what you need, probably with a 300mm f2.8 lens. Cost will be a bit more than with the K3 II sequel, but it will have better auto focus and that seems to be an important thing.

Pentax has made incremental improvements in both body and lens performance from an auto focus standpoint, but I really don't seem them going after the sports shooter market any time soon.
Not neccessarily. I like the DA560 a lot, and the cost involved switching to Nikon and a 500mm super tele is considerable. But the gap has widened, and even if I don't ask for D500 level AF, I will surely not buy a new Pentax Apsc with Safox 11 and a slightly faster processor.
So I find myself contacting my camera store and asking for a price quotation on the D500 + Sigma 500/4. Because that would solve the waiting... I have enjoyed the DA560, but I think I have waited enough, plus the DA560 would never allow for decent tracking anyway.


Chris

Last edited by Chris Mak; 11-22-2017 at 03:46 PM.
11-22-2017, 05:01 PM - 1 Like   #1364
Pentaxian
Dan Rentea's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Bucharest
Posts: 920
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
I am curious though Dan, how many of the shooters you know would switch to Pentax based on faster AF? Wouldn't it also take a stable of fast focusing lenses etc.
None! Even if Pentax will release tomorow a K3 Mark III with the af at the D500 or 7D Mark II level, there are no lenses (except D-FA 150-450mm) for wildlife. D-FA 150-450mm is more expensive than Nikon 200-500mm and KP is more expensive than D7200. Because of this and because of the lack of any kind of support from our local dealer, there are fewer people that look for Pentax here, in Romania.

Sony and especially Fuji are the brands that people choose when they want to swich from Canon or Nikon. People want a safe investment rather than the best camera between K1 and Canon 6D Mark II, Fuji X-T2, Nikon D750, etc.

I don't know how many Pentax users own also a mirrorless camera, but more and more Canon and Nikon shooters added a mirrorless camera in their backpack. I see a lot of Sony A6500, Fuji X-Pro 2, E-M10 next to a big camera from Canon or Nikon.

Canon and Nikon seems to know this and that's why rumors say that we will be seing a full frame mirrorless from Canon and Nikon in 2018.

So, if you ask me, mirrorless cameras may hurt Pentax sales in the next 2-4 years rather than the lack of a fast af-c on the next Pentax flagship cameras. We will see... At least Pentax give us some signs with these 2 new lenses that they are trying to do something to make Pentax system more apealing.
11-22-2017, 05:02 PM - 2 Likes   #1365
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2017
Photos: Albums
Posts: 208
It's not that Pentax users wouldn't be happy with a D500 equivalent. But realistically Pentax wouldn't compete there without a massive amount of time and money. And maybe not even then. Nikon and particularly Canon have too big a user base.
If I'm in Pentax product strategy, first thing I'd want to do was make sure that I could continue to be at the top in markets where I'm already close or there. Weddings, landscape, studio. K-1 and 645Z are already near/at the top there. Pentax will want to do what they can to stay there. Thus DFA 50 and 85 (and hopefully an ultrawide prime).
But it would require a huge investment to get to be competitive with Canon in the sports and bird market. In bodies, lenses, and marketing. And even if Pentax got close, that's probably not good enough. They would need to be a lot better to get people to switch. That won't happen, so it's too big a risk for Pentax IMO.
Closed Thread

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!
camera, choice, company, d-fa* 85mm f1.4, day, designers, f1.4, f2.8, ff lens, filters, future, google, lens, lenses, light, macro, pentax, pentax news, pentax rumors, people, production, quality, release, roadmap, schedule, sign, thursday, wa
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
For Sale - Sold: FA* 85mm F1.4 SOLD!!! Cambo Sold Items 2 04-29-2016 01:11 PM
FA*85mm f1.4 and FA*28-70mm f2.8 on Gumtree Australia Des Pentax Price Watch 7 01-25-2016 04:27 PM
Lens Tournament: FA* 85mm F1.4 vs A* 85mm F1.4 Adam Pentax Forums Giveaways 5 10-23-2014 10:47 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:15 AM. | 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