[boriscleto]

I'm happy to send you a PM predicting what they'll say.

"It failed our dry drunk on a Segway test"

[MossyRocks]

High end does need no tilting screen.

For those of us doing astrophotography a tilt screen would be nice.

[Chris Mak]

... but if they actually say that the AF is finally on par with the rest of the field, I imagine that this camera is going to sell quite well.

With which lenses is the new APS-C top end camera supposed to reach such Nikon D500 heights though? Are they on any roadmap? You will need in-lens motors such as Nikon silent wave motor, Canon USM, or Sigma HSM to allow for fast, accurate tracking and near instantaneous focus lock... I have never used the DFA70-200, so perhaps this lens might come close, but otherwise... the DFA 150-450 has a DC motor, reliable but fast..? The DA560 has an even older, simpler DC motor, and is certainly anything but fast... The DA300, well......

[biz-engineer]

which lenses is the new APS-C top end camera supposed to reach such Nikon D500 heights though?...the DFA 150-450 has a DC motor, reliable but fast..?

As fast as the Nikon 200-500 that goes with 90% of the D500 users . You are confusing fast and fastest. No everyone need a Ferrari to go to work. If you need a Ferrari to go to work, maybe speed isn't the problem.
But the question is: when Ricoh are going to release that new camera, are you going to come and deny it because you kinda need to be self reassured to have made the right decision to switch mount? At this level, that's not a camera problem, that's an ego problem.

---

Last edited by biz-engineer; 09-23-2019 at 10:59 AM.

[repaap]

With which lenses is the new APS-C top end camera supposed to reach such Nikon D500 heights though? Are they on any roadmap? You will need in-lens motors such as Nikon silent wave motor, Canon USM, or Sigma HSM to allow for fast, accurate tracking and near instantaneous focus lock... I have never used the DFA70-200, so perhaps this lens might come close, but otherwise... the DFA 150-450 has a DC motor, reliable but fast..? The DA560 has an even older, simpler DC motor, and is certainly anything but fast... The DA300, well......

I can say that DFA*70-200 is really fast. What I have read is 55-300PLM is even faster(fastest so far with Pentax) and it's quality has been also praised on aps-c. 150-450 is perhaps slower, but even better IQ.

[c.a.m]

With which lenses is the new APS-C top end camera supposed to reach such Nikon D500 heights though? Are they on any roadmap? You will need in-lens motors such as Nikon silent wave motor, Canon USM, or Sigma HSM to allow for fast, accurate tracking and near instantaneous focus lock... I have never used the DFA70-200, so perhaps this lens might come close, but otherwise... the DFA 150-450 has a DC motor, reliable but fast..? The DA560 has an even older, simpler DC motor, and is certainly anything but fast... The DA300, well......

Whenever I read comments about the AF performance of Pentax gear compared to other brands, I wonder whether the commentator is basing their impression on anecdotal experience with modern gear, or has performed careful comparative tests to measure AF speed and accuracy and tracking ability, or is regurgitating outdated internet impressions.

Several months ago, there were several threads here about the subject of AF performance, and the assumed 'poor' Pentax AF performance was not backed up with any credible test data or documented experience.

I don't have sufficient experience personally to be able to compare Pentax AF to other brands, and my shooting style doesn't require close tracking and high keeper rates of moving subjects. However, I would certainly be interested in more details from those folks who have such experience and claim the Pentax brand is AF-deficient or that other camera/lens combinations provide "near instantaneous focus lock" (presumably accurate and precise focus lock?). Where is the evidence?

- Craig

[reh321]

Whenever I read comments about the AF performance of Pentax gear compared to other brands, I always wonder whether the commentator is basing their impression on anecdotal experience with modern gear, or has performed careful tests to measure AF speed and accuracy and tracking ability, or is regurgitating outdated internet impressions.

Several months ago, there were several threads here about the subject of AF performance, and the assumed 'poor' Pentax AF performance was not backed up with any credible test data or documented experience.

I don't have sufficient experience personally to be able to compare Pentax AF to other brands, and my shooting style doesn't require close tracking and high keeper rates of moving subjects. However, I would certainly appreciate more details from those folks who have such experience and claim the Pentax brand is AF-deficient. Where is the evidence?

With my K-30, I had to give up on several photos of squirrels or birds traveling too fast for me to keep up.
My KP + new PLM lens has never failed me yet in the ten months I've had it.

[luftfluss]

With which lenses is the new APS-C top end camera supposed to reach such Nikon D500 heights though? Are they on any roadmap? You will need in-lens motors such as Nikon silent wave motor, Canon USM, or Sigma HSM to allow for fast, accurate tracking and near instantaneous focus lock... I have never used the DFA70-200, so perhaps this lens might come close, but otherwise... the DFA 150-450 has a DC motor, reliable but fast..? The DA560 has an even older, simpler DC motor, and is certainly anything but fast... The DA300, well......

It will be interesting to see how the long lenses (outside of the 55-300 PLM) perform on the new APS-C in terms of AF acquisition and tracking. If this camera really does have top-tier AF performance, it will be the lens performance and selection (currently lacking) that will determine if Pentax can improve thier standing among wildlife enthusiasts.

Perhaps they'll surprise us with a long tele prime next year... as we've seen with Fuji's 33/1.0 lens fiasco, sometimes it pays to keep things close to the vest.

[luftfluss]

However, I would certainly be interested in more details from those folks who have such experience and claim the Pentax brand is AF-deficient or that other camera/lens combinations provide "near instantaneous focus lock" (presumably accurate and precise focus lock?). Where is the evidence?

- Craig

The problem is that person would get hammered on this forum. Heck, just a few posts earlier in this same, @Chris_Mak questioned the lens availability to take advantage of "new and improved" AF and in the very next post he was insulted for his views.

[biz-engineer]

The problem is that person would get hammered on this forum. Heck, just a few posts earlier in this same, @Chris_Mak questioned the lens availability to take advantage of "new and improved" AF and in the very next post he was insulted for his views.

Depends what the agenda of that person is.

Compared side by side, from fastest to slowest lens AF speed (my own tests):
Canon 100-400 => Sigma 150-600 Sport => Nikon 200-500 => Pentax 150-450 => Tamron 150-600 G2 => Sigma 150-600 C
The Canon 100-400 AF motor is faster than Nikon, but the Nikon tracking is more sticky than the Canon.

So, before suggesting that the Pentax will be slower because Pentax doesn't have a fast enough lens, wait for seeing it working.

[HawaiianOnline]

"BUT NO TILT SCREEN!!!!!!!" :deadhorse:

PENTAX IS DOOMED!!!

Seriously, I hope that this stuff about the new camera is all true!

[biz-engineer]

The problem is that person would get hammered on this forum.

The problem is the huge confusion between photography and owning of a brand of equipment. Huge confusion between photography and owning of a brand of equipment. I've often seen Canon users shooting hundreds of the same dull landscape in full mid-day sun image, in burst mode. I'm afraid that photography isn't like using a machine gun in a battle field.

[TwoUptons]

That said, the observation made is based on fact and the possible significance is a reasonable conclusion. Inclusion of snips from Nikon promos is a bit tangential, but they lend color, I suppose.


Steve

This started reading like a wine review

I keep thinking of things like “The review began colorfully, with a few fruity notes, but had a bitter finish...”

-Eric

[c.a.m]

The problem is that person would get hammered on this forum. Heck, just a few posts earlier in this same, @Chris_Mak questioned the lens availability to take advantage of "new and improved" AF and in the very next post he was insulted for his views.

Well, I'm not in a position to account for or predict the replies from other members.

I simply think that additional details on AF performance would enhance this type of discussion -- and the credibility of the commentators who make claims or implications. Those members who have lots of experience with Pentax and other brands should be in good positions to support their impressions with such detail. Otherwise, I would tend to discount their brief claims, suggestions, or implications. And I wouldn't expect anything as serious as an engineering thesis!

The post #18 by @Chris Mak; led me to infer that he thinks the D500 AF is superlative, and provides "fast, accurate tracking and near instantaneous focus lock" when using appropriate lenses. The post suggests to me that Pentax AF is inferior, in part because of weak lenses. This may be the case or not -- and I think Chris has a lot more experience than I do in this area -- but I have never seen any credible data published by anyone that supports such a suggestion.

- Craig

[biz-engineer]

The post #18 by @Chris Mak;

To me , those kind of comment from Chris , sounds like the kind of comments politicians used to discreditably their opponent: expressing a doubt over what might be a good working proposition before it actually happens.
And what if Ricoh engineers are working on the new camera AF system to perform at its best with the current K mount lenses such as the D-FA 70-200 and D-FA150-450?