[luftfluss]

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

Unfortunately, I know from first hand experience, and led me to leaving this forum for over a year. Anyway, that's not important to this thread.

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

The mention of the D500 brings up another aspect of "wildlife performance": how large of a buffer, and how fast will it empty? As someone who shoots manual focus exclusively for wildlife, I'm not as interested in buffer depth as I am with how fast it clears.

---

Last edited by luftfluss; 09-23-2019 at 12:28 PM. Reason: typo

[ThorSanchez]

I know more AF points is one of the big requests from Pentax users over the years......but......

am I the only one whose first action on getting a new camera is to change the focus points from "whatever they are" to central 9 ?

Central 9? Heck I set it to one and recompose.

That's because setting it to anything but center point while shooting action on a Pentax doesn't really work. Or it hasn't for me and my K-3ii and K-30. For action like shooting soccer I get far better results just making sure my subject is dead in the center of the frame and I follow it. Anything else and the results are poor. 9-point or more ends up with the spectators or trees or goals being in focus a lot more than the players or the ball.

I'm hoping the new camera allows me to pick a subject and the camera makes sure it stays in focus without rapid-fire back button focus and keeping everything on the center point.

[biz-engineer]

That's because setting it to anything but center point while shooting action on a Pentax doesn't really work.

That's because you are the kind of user who needs more assistance from technology.

[alfa75ts]

Hey! I'm famous.

New K-series DSLR under development to be exhibited - Page 42 - PentaxForums.com

[ThorSanchez]

That's because you are the kind of user who needs more assistance from technology.

We all can't be blessed with your skills.

[stevebrot]

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.

User @Chris_Mak shoots birds and has posted photos here taken with a DA 560mm. He may well have perspective on the subject.


Steve

[Larrymc]

Isn't it nice how deftly @Chris_Mak hijacked this thread into a discussion of how inadequated Pentax lens are? Way to go Chris you haven't lost your disrupters' touch.

[gaweidert]

That's because you are the kind of user who needs more assistance from technology.

As I get older I am facing certain realities that will require exactly this. That is why this camera will determine if I stay with Pentax. It will show me where Pentax is heading. Nothing wrong with any of their cameras but there are some things that are wrong with me. If another brand can help me enjoy my hobby a bit longer then I have to make my own personal roadmap. In any event, what I have now is meeting my needs. It's the path forward that is a bit out of focus.

[stevebrot]

The Canon 100-400 AF motor is faster than Nikon, but the Nikon tracking is more sticky than the Canon.

This is a very telling statement. There are a lot of variables and characteristics that affect the ability of a lens/camera pair to acquire focus at will on a moving object. One may consider too that some of those factors are beyond the scope of an engineered solution.


Steve

[stevebrot]

Isn't it nice how deftly @Chris_Mak hijacked this thread into a discussion of how inadequated Pentax lens are? Way to go Chris you haven't lost your disrupters' touch.

Hey, we have to chat about something and it might as well be off-topic. Aside from an edge-on peak under the mirror and a reflection of what might be the AF area outline on the focus screen, there is nothing to talk about. It is a little like speculating about engine size by the length of the hood and the size of the rear tires.


Steve

[luftfluss]

Isn't it nice how deftly @Chris_Mak hijacked this thread into a discussion of how inadequated Pentax lens are? Way to go Chris you haven't lost your disrupters' touch.

In all fairness, if we are talking about Pentax AF then lenses need to be mentioned. For years, when Pentax AF was slammed, folks defended the AF by saying that Pentax didn't have lenses suitable for fast AF (screwdrive and early-gen SDM). Then the 55-300 PLM was released with its blazing AF performance and some folks felt vindicated. And now we have a new camera coming out where the engineers have had the opportunity to revamp the camera AF and match it to lenses like the DFA 70-200 and 150-450.

When all the hubbub about the new APS-C began I was certain that there would be an incremental increase in AF performance (specifically AF-C) and now the information at the beginning of this thread is possibly indicating that I was very much shortchanging the Ricoh engineers and we are going to see a leap forward. It would be nice to shutup the yammering "Pentax AF sux" crowd.

[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?

Now wait a minute, my post was a direct reaction to the expressed desire that Dpreview should finally test a Pentax body and declare it's AF on par with the "Big Boys".

And i.m.o. and also (limited) experience, it isn't that simple. A mythical body cannot all of a sudden perform like the best of Nikon with lenses that are simply not of that level. I have waited and hoped for a better APS-C body for a few years to match my DA560, but I was never under the impression that the DA560 on that new "high end APS-C flagship" would suddenly perform like a 500mm f5.6PF on the Nikon D500, and never hoped for that. I simply wanted a more stable, reliable body with more consistent and accurate AF. I am sure that that is just what Pentax users will get with the coming K? flagship, and perhaps even some real speed with the DFA70-200. But to fully take advantage of a +1500,- high end body, you simply need lenses with ultrasonic motors that can make numerous very small adjustments within a 1sec 10 frame burst. I know, because I tried to do BIF with the DA560 on the K3II, and I have now also done it with a Canon 7DII and the 400DOII +1.4TC. There is simply no comparison, not even close, not even distantly close. DC motors will do fine for accuracy, but are, as far as I know, speed limited.

[bretth]

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

The image shows recessed ares bottom right of screen which indicates otherwise.

[The Squirrel Mafia]

Now wait a minute, my post was a direct reaction to the expressed desire that Dpreview should finally test a Pentax body and declare it's AF on par with the "Big Boys".

Whoa there! You need to re-read my post. I never mentioned a desire for them to say that. Just mentioned that 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. If is the key word there.

Like already stated in this thread, just having the name Pentax on it will almost guarantee a bad review from them.

[Larrymc]

In all fairness, if we are talking about Pentax AF then lenses need to be mentioned. For years, when Pentax AF was slammed, folks defended the AF by saying that Pentax didn't have lenses suitable for fast AF (screwdrive and early-gen SDM). Then the 55-300 PLM was released with its blazing AF performance and some folks felt vindicated. And now we have a new camera coming out where the engineers have had the opportunity to revamp the camera AF and match it to lenses like the DFA 70-200 and 150-450.

When all the hubbub about the new APS-C began I was certain that there would be an incremental increase in AF performance (specifically AF-C) and now the information at the beginning of this thread is possibly indicating that I was very much shortchanging the Ricoh engineers and we are going to see a leap forward. It would be nice to shutup the yammering "Pentax AF sux" crowd.

Lets hope the A/F information was correct, if so, then I will be very pleased with my next purchase. However, I was pointing out that many posts I have read made by said poster always deteriorates into a Pentax SUX discussion and that has gone on every so often for a couple of years now. That truly gets OLD. I think everyone knows by now that Pentax has "sub-par A/F tracking with a few of its older lens. I hope everyone can wait till there is evidence one way or the other of how effective the changes Ricoh/Pentax is making to the new APS-C Flagship and not go through the litany again and again.