[BruceBanner]

User error of course. I can show you a sharp picture of a flying jet fighter to prove it. As we all know they are much faster than walking toddlers.

Wouldn't that actually be an easier thing for the camera to lock onto tho? Like a plane in the sky, its the plane or infinity, whereas a toddler walking in frame might have lots of other things nearby etc to throw off focus?

[Ian Stuart Forsyth]

Wouldn't that actually be an easier thing for the camera to lock onto tho? Like a plane in the sky, its the plane or infinity, whereas a toddler walking in frame might have lots of other things nearby etc to throw off focus?

There are many things that will play in AF performance.

One of the hardest to overcome is how long it takes the subject to past thru the DOF, shallower DOF and the camera needs to correct the movement.
The speed at which the subject moves in relation to the accuracy, the DOF and how often the camera needs to correct for the movements all play role. When objects are further away those correction are greatly reduced and also the accuracy needed as the DOF if greater.

If we only think of speed as being a factor then it should be more difficult for someone to focus on an object that is traveling at 1 km per second but then anyone can focus on the moon manually.
Whereas someone trying to track a toddler with only 4-3 inchs of DOF that toddler can easily travel thru that DOF in a fraction of a second

[monochrome]

There are many things that will play in AF performance.

One of the hardest to overcome is how long it takes the subject to past thru the DOF, shallower DOF and the camera needs to correct the movement.
The speed at which the subject moves in relation to the accuracy, the DOF and how often the camera needs to correct for the movements all play role. When objects are further away those correction are greatly reduced and also the accuracy needed as the DOF if greater.

If we only think of speed as being a factor then it should be more difficult for someone to focus on an object that is traveling at 1 km per second but then anyone can focus on the moon manually.
Whereas someone trying to track a toddler with only 4-3 inchs of DOF that toddler can easily travel thru that DOF in a fraction of a second

I honestly don’t believe it was user error. Light was good. The only subject in FoV was the child. Background subjects were 2x distance to main subject and white. Subject was wearing high contrast, colorful clothing.

Per DoF Calculator, DoF @f/3.2, 43mm lens, K-1, 6’ distance to subject = 1.12’. My 15 month old grandson has been walking for a week and is not confident yet, so he wasn’t moving even 1’ / sec. Settings were optimized for tracking per many threads here.

Actually, the problem is the lens, and slow fps. FA43 is slow focusing, then zips and locks. Camera would think and adjust, think and adjust. @4fps I could have had more in focus with a different lens. 7D is +8fps, so it stands to reason there would be 2x captures vs. K-1 for each AF adjustment. 28~105 might have done better on AF speed but slower aperture would have been limiting. 24~70 would have worked, I think.

I was actually making an ironic reference to the DPR CON in their K-1 Review that it isn’t suitable for shooting small children (but I was partly serious). My son shoots publication grade college lacrosse with his 7D. He’s impressed by FA43 files

Just observation - not starting an AF thing here. K-1 wasn’t built to do what I was trying to do. I should have had the KP.

[jatrax]

whether that was speculation or something confirmed from Pentax

There was a comment by Pentax that if you read it right could be construed to mean the chip would improve tracking. Now whether that was what the person intended to say or if it got mangled in translation is another issue.

[biz-engineer]

Just observation - not starting an AF thing here. K-1 wasn’t built to do what I was trying to do.

Would that be a user error? Have you consulted beholder3 for checking your AF-C settings?

[Gimbal]

Wouldn't that actually be an easier thing for the camera to lock onto tho? Like a plane in the sky, its the plane or infinity, whereas a toddler walking in frame might have lots of other things nearby etc to throw off focus?

Indeed, I was being ironic. Similar answers with pictures of other fast moving objects in the distance are often showcased when someone complains about the AF.

[BruceBanner]

Indeed, I was being ironic. Similar answers with pictures of other fast moving objects in the distance are often showcased when someone complains about the AF.

See... i missed that irony... damn i feel silly now

[monochrome]

Would that be a user error? Have you consulted beholder3 for checking your AF-C settings?

Likely
Yes

[HoustonBob]

To me the biggest deficiency of the K-1 is the very long time it takes to write to the memory cards. Supposedly the K-1 II improves on that, and that would open up many gigs that the K-1 is not suitable for currently.

[Adam]

To me the biggest deficiency of the K-1 is the very long time it takes to write to the memory cards. Supposedly the K-1 II improves on that, and that would open up many gigs that the K-1 is not suitable for currently.

There are no changes to this that I know of.

To maximize the write speed of your K-1, use single-card mode, RAW or JPEG rather than RAW+, and UHS-I SD cards.

If you disable in-camera JPEG processing, most notably distortion correction, then the camera won't lock up while it's writing, leading to a much more enjoyable shooting experience.

[mee]

There are no changes to this that I know of.

To maximize the write speed of your K-1, use single-card mode, RAW or JPEG rather than RAW+, and UHS-I SD cards.

If you disable in-camera JPEG processing, most notably distortion correction, then the camera won't lock up while it's writing, leading to a much more enjoyable shooting experience.

This is key.

Disabling all the corrections (distortion, highlight, shadows, umpty fratz) are some of the first things I do with any new camera. It speeds the performance notably. If you're concerned about blowing highlights, set the exposure compensation down half a stop. The K-1 can pull deep shadows in post (if you're shooting raw DNG output).

I'd rather correct distortion and the like later on the PC when I have time... spend time crunch time getting the shot recorded in the field... at least in bursty scenarios.

Not that this ever made the K-1 a super performer.. but it improves it.. and using fast cards too.

[kooks]

To me the biggest deficiency of the K-1 is the very long time it takes to write to the memory cards.

Dont know if writing is the problem.. or buffer size.. but I hate that the buffer fills so fast and is way to slow to clear it. That was the one thing i wished Ricoh could fix.. and they didn't.

[jatrax]

buffer size.. but I hate that the buffer fills so fast and is way to slow to clear it.

This is simple to fix: Shoot Slower

I did a studio shoot a couple years ago with models, it was so easy when shooting and the models posing to just keep snapping. The studio tech guy kept shouting "don't out shoot the lights", and got mad if we did not slow down. In his case shooting too fast overheated his strobes. But it was a valuable lesson. You do not have to hold the burst button down, just pick and choose your shots, and guess what? You will end up with just as many good ones.

[BruceBanner]

This is simple to fix: Shoot Slower

I did a studio shoot a couple years ago with models, it was so easy when shooting and the models posing to just keep snapping. The studio tech guy kept shouting "don't out shoot the lights", and got mad if we did not slow down. In his case shooting too fast overheated his strobes. But it was a valuable lesson. You do not have to hold the burst button down, just pick and choose your shots, and guess what? You will end up with just as many good ones.

Yes and no. It depends on the scenario and event, what example you're giving yes, that applies. Concert pit (frantic, limited time) and some moments in wedding photography (group shots especially), no. When you're faced with taking a shot of 5-6 people you tend to shoot more than once, you want a good handful of shots (if not more) so that when you get back home can choose the best one (the shot where everyone is looking good, not compromising on a shot where 5/6 are good and one has their eyes shut etc). Now imagine that x10 combinations in quick succession (it gets ridiculous, so many group shots with different combination of people in quick succession). I know from experience that within 40 secs or so you can run into buffering issues, especially when being precious and writing to two cards at once (which is the general advice given for such important work).
Buffering is a valid complaint, and something I would like to see improved in successive Pentax releases. But considering the other advantages that Pentax gives (value, price point etc) I'm not complaining.

I have not heard the K-1II improves upon this however.

[rawr]

Daily reminder: K-1 can shoot in crop mode too... where it can do 6.5 fps and buffer about 50 RAWs.

So if you need big buffer performance under high fps, it's there.