[SeaRefractor]

Well, we know it can track dragonflies in flight, swallows in flight, race cars, motorbikes on track, airplanes - but it just doesn't work for really fast things like bikes and toddlers.

Agreed! I found that I can only focus on the bikes and toddlers (of the plastic variety for those concerned) when I launch them in a trebuche..

[tellwill]

If the K-1 AF is slow, then AF with any lens including the DFA*50 on the K-1 should be slow.

thats naive fallacy...

The K-1 actually is not THAT far behind the others, but (given the fact all is factory set, all is auto and the user has not got a clue)
A very critical mind may come to the conclusion, that ...its Autofocus has only 75% of precision, intelligence and speed of what a few other systems offer.

Thing is... the tech that drives the glass elements to the right position to focus in old SDM lenses... was made too cheap, because... PENTAX was treated like an ORPHAN(or more like a B...) by HOYA....
The old PENTAX SDM... showed serious problems and flaws, in some lenses and in some it did not... I once had a copy of the 50-135* lens.... and this one was focusing exactly and quite fast(not as fast as most canon lenses but still very fast...)

For APS-C lenses we are now holding onto PLM for the future... this is indeed lightning fast
and only the cameras (rather thin/..less AF points than 5 year old Nikon Consumer-DSLRs...) "Autofocus Sensor",
"Autofocus-AI" and "Autofocus-Triggering" may hold such a lens back from showing an "AF-Speed performance" like it is common on most M43 system lenses or in some Canon or Sony glass...

And the new DFA* 50 lens is really excellent and really fast focusing for moving such heavy glass elements like you would normally find them in mid-format glass...
The new ring-motor drive is something that really shows, that RICOH wants success for the PENTAX brand... one can see, for RICOH-Imaging its NOT just a short handed game, like it seemingly was for Hoya.


so i am sure we will see a great improvement in the next-gen PENTAXes when it comes to Autofocus.... and lenses like the 55-300 PLM and the DFA*50..., will perform even better on the next gen bodies than they already do on the actual ones.

Please fellow pentaxians, note that i want to plead for not keeping the name SDM, but call it SDMII or something alike so people can differentiate ...

[tellwill]

I wanted to drop one more note:

PLZ understand, that if everybody who moans about that oh-so bad dpreview, would rub his hands with sports-lotion and started typing
either:
email-requests to RICOH about other features or better AUTOFOCUS in the upcoming cameras(and not to step back with already introduced upgrades - compare K-3 and KP)...
email-requests to GODOX that they want a PENTAX specific(P-TTL) Godox X1T-P trigger

that would make more sense... and the worst thing that could happen would be:

more features and better autofocus in the upcoming DSLRs
or
finally having a bit cheaper studio-flash option with many features ..since already M43 specific GODOX triggers are on the market!

On the other hand:
If we go on with this thread... this just pours oil into the fire that dpreview started and makes happen exactly what they may have wanted to happen:
SPREAD a lot of DOUBTS...
since when a newbie visits pentaxforums.com... and sees: "oh 250 posts... 12.000 views.." this tiny little whimpering voice in their heads will start talking "whoops ... o.. oh.. soooo many.. it m.m.m.may be a thing that dpreview had a point with their negative words on that lens..."

There is a saying(of that i hope that says anything to you) which goes: "Don't feed the monkey!" Blowing up threads like this.... does exactly this... feeding IT.

[beholder3]

thats naive fallacy... ...

Please make sure to post some of your recent best photos with full metadata here now, so we know you are not one of the legion of teenage haters/trolls who just lie and make false claims.

[Kunzite]

Thing is... the tech that drives the glass elements to the right position to focus in old SDM lenses... was made too cheap, because... PENTAX was treated like an ORPHAN(or more like a B...) by HOYA....
The old PENTAX SDM... showed serious problems and flaws, in some lenses and in some it did not... I once had a copy of the 50-135* lens.... and this one was focusing exactly and quite fast(not as fast as most canon lenses but still very fast...)

Actually it was Pentax Corporation who made that decision - yes, it happened before Hoya. Back then Pentax made the mistake of competing on price - this should be a lesson for those complaining that the cheapest "first-party" modern 50mm-ish f/1.4 is too expensive.

OTOH Hoya was unwilling to fix such problems, unlike Ricoh.

[Rondec]

Actually it was Pentax Corporation who made that decision - yes, it happened before Hoya. Back then Pentax made the mistake of competing on price - this should be a lesson for those complaining that the cheapest "first-party" modern 50mm-ish f/1.4 is too expensive.

OTOH Hoya was unwilling to fix such problems, unlike Ricoh.

My feeling was that pre-Hoya Pentax was focused very much on making the smallest camera and lenses possible and just continued that after the Hoya purchase. This lead to using smaller (but slower) motors on the * lenses. Cost may have been an issue too, but the DA *16-50 and 50-135 weren't exactly cheap at the time of their release -- in the 800 to 850 range, as I recall.

[Caat]

I don't think it's a particularly negative review - especially considering the source. I'd agree that they don't spend much (any?) time on the most impressive aspects of the IQ, and - IMHO - spend way too long on the relatively-inconsequential longitudinal CA "issue". It's hardly a fanfare review, but overall I read it as quite positive... I don't think we can expect much better from those guys, in all honesty.

Your words "especially considering the source" and "I don't think we can expect much better from those guys" are the main problems here. A lot of new buyers go on the size and internet presence of a review source and so will trust DPReview to be balanced and evenhanded - which is totally naive (when dealing with any reviewer). For people who know DPReview's general disposition towards Pentax you can read between the lines, use the image comparison tools, or otherwise get what you need from the review. Everyone else has to wade through not just the occasional direct comment, but the constant sense you get that for DPReview for a Pentax product to be good and worth buying it has to be literally messianic. It doesn't have to be better than Canon, Nikon or Sony, it has to redefine photography. OK, maybe that's a bit strong, but you get my point.

DPReview is as much a technology site as it is a photography site. It tends to fixate not on the photographs but on the pixels.

[Kunzite]

My feeling was that pre-Hoya Pentax was focused very much on making the smallest camera and lenses possible and just continued that after the Hoya purchase. This lead to using smaller (but slower) motors on the * lenses. Cost may have been an issue too, but the DA *16-50 and 50-135 weren't exactly cheap at the time of their release -- in the 800 to 850 range, as I recall.

It's hard to know what the pre-Hoya Pentax wanted... as just they they started getting serious Hoya managed to kill their momentum.

In 2007, Pentax was "graduating" from the *istD era, moving upscale to the K10D. It's not unreasonable to believe that their top line would've been maintained and improved upon, if they were not required - by a hostile owner - to cut costs and protect the ever precious margins.
So while it was Pentax Corporation which decided on the SDM micromotors, it was likely Hoya that had them neglect the issue.

Yeah, small size was a major design criteria. Not sure if for the DA* lenses though... it looks rather as a cost-based decision.

[BigMackCam]

Your words "especially considering the source" and "I don't think we can expect much better from those guys" are the main problems here. A lot of new buyers go on the size and internet presence of a review source and so will trust DPReview to be balanced and evenhanded - which is totally naive (when dealing with any reviewer). For people who know DPReview's general disposition towards Pentax you can read between the lines, use the image comparison tools, or otherwise get what you need from the review. Everyone else has to wade through not just the occasional direct comment, but the constant sense you get that for DPReview for a Pentax product to be good and worth buying it has to be literally messianic. It doesn't have to be better than Canon, Nikon or Sony, it has to redefine photography. OK, maybe that's a bit strong, but you get my point.

DPReview is as much a technology site as it is a photography site. It tends to fixate not on the photographs but on the pixels.

You're absolutely right. I tend to automatically tune out repetitive bias from various sources when reading or watching reviews... For others who are new to Pentax, or less experienced with how brands are perceived on certain websites, it would be easy to believe the negativity.

[Jonathan Mac]

You're absolutely right. I tend to automatically tune out repetitive bias from various sources when reading or watching reviews... For others who are new to Pentax, or less experienced with how brands are perceived on certain websites, it would be easy to believe the negativity.

You get used to reading from a source which you know to be biased and you can filter it out to some degree and make educated guesses as to the reality of the situation, I do that on DPR but I also do it (in the opposite direction) when reading material which I know to be produced by Pentax fan-boys. I don't want to have my head filled with anything that's biased either way, I just want to know how things really are.

The result is that when I read something that isn't biased it makes it all the more refreshing.

[thibs]

Thank you Kunzite, and I'll add that PLM is very nice but only applicable in lenses with very light focussing groupe i.e. lenses designed to be used with PLM in mind.
Forget about glueing PLM onto existing lenses.