[gatorguy]

People here worry too much about DPR.
The K-3iii will be good for Pentaxians, regardless of what DPR says.

The statement was made with regard to recent camera releases in general, The K3III was not specifically mentioned.

[reh321]

The statement was made with regard to recent camera releases in general, The K3III was not specifically mentioned.

but this thread is about the K-3iii, and remarks here should be relevant to that camera, not for random complaints about DPR.

[gatorguy]

but this thread is about the K-3iii, and remarks here should be relevant to that camera, not for random complaints about DPR.

It was. You were questioning why it might be delayed and I gave you another possible reason for it. I wasn't making any comment about DPR positive or negative. It's just where I think I saw the article.

Your guess for the delay is certainly as valid, while possibly also chip related.

[Class A]

Oh it will be reviewed.

You mean like the HD FA* 85/1.4?

[thibs]

You mean like the HD FA* 85/1.4?

No that one is a DFA* which means Tokina. Not even a real Pentax. Too good. Didn't know?

xD

[Mike.P®]

While I hope the K-3 (3) autofocus (and especially tracking) is groundbreaking for Pentax (As an ex D500 and current 7D MKII owner I can't see it being as good as these) i do have to wonder if we have the lenses capable of taking advantage of the increased speed promised. I'm not talking about the 55-300mm PLM which is far too short for the sort of stuff I like to photograph and far too basic to attract any serious wildlife shooter but the 150-450mm and 560mm which are all we now have in the long telephoto range.

I would buy the new body in a shot if it performed as expected and we had access to a 600mm (ish) prosumer zoom lens such as the Sigma/Sony/Tamron and would love Ricoh to team up with Tamron once again to bring us something like it. Don't think it will happen though.

[Mistral75]

(...)

I would buy the new body in a shot if it performed as expected and we had access to a 600mm (ish) prosumer zoom lens such as the Sigma/Sony/Tamron and would love Ricoh to team up with Tamron once again to bring us something like it. Don't think it will happen though.

You might be pleasantly surprised.

[biz-engineer]

While I hope the K-3 (3) autofocus (and especially tracking) is groundbreaking for Pentax (As an ex D500 and current 7D MKII owner I can't see it being as good as these) i do have to wonder if we have the lenses capable of taking advantage of the increased speed promised. I'm not talking about the 55-300mm PLM which is far too short for the sort of stuff I like to photograph and far too basic to attract any serious wildlife shooter but the 150-450mm and 560mm which are all we now have in the long telephoto range.

I don't think lens AF speed has been the main problem for Pentax AF. My 150-450 focus motor can bring focus from infinity to nearest focus in a fraction of a second, that's a lot faster than any bird can fly the distance coming from far away toward the camera. Even if Pentax lenses aren't fastest to focus (beside one or two lens models), the main problem has been the predictive tracking; Pentax prediction has been pretty bad outside certain subject speeds. When testing AF tracking with the K3 and K1, I could observe that the cameras were able to do a smooth subject tracking (continuous motion of focus lens group) only at certain speeds. When the subject speed was right, I can hear the lens AF motor continuous sweep zzzzzz. When the subject speed was too slow or too fast, the AF would lock focus in first frame, then stop, then realize the subject is OOF, then catch-up again, reach focus, take a shot, lose focus again etc etc, giving me at best 50% keeper. I guess with a much better AF sensor module, better predictive AF algorithm and faster processor, the same Pentax lenses will do just fine.

[reh321]

I don't think lens AF speed has been the main problem for Pentax AF. My 150-450 focus motor can bring focus from infinity to nearest focus in a fraction of a second, that's a lot faster than any bird can fly the distance coming from far away toward the camera. Even if Pentax lenses aren't fastest to focus (beside one or two lens models), the main problem has been the predictive tracking; Pentax prediction has been pretty bad outside certain subject speeds. When testing AF tracking with the K3 and K1, I could observe that the cameras were able to do a smooth subject tracking (continuous motion of focus lens group) only at certain speeds. When the subject speed was right, I can hear the lens AF motor continuous sweep zzzzzz. When the subject speed was too slow or too fast, the AF would lock focus in first frame, then stop, then realize the subject is OOF, then catch-up again, reach focus, take a shot, lose focus again etc etc, giving me at best 50% keeper. I guess with a much better AF sensor module, better predictive AF algorithm and faster processor, the same Pentax lenses will do just fine.

I do know that the 55-300mm PLM focuses much faster on my KP than it’s processor does. I do not know if PLM makes the difference, or in-lens motors in general make the difference, but something related to the lens - same body - is helping a lot.

[Larrymc]

I do know that the 55-300mm PLM focuses much faster on my KP than it’s processor does. I do not know if PLM makes the difference, or in-lens motor makes the difference, but something related to the lens - same body - is helping a lot.

RE, PLM and in-lens motor are one in the same, PLM is the name Pentax uses for the Pulse linear motor. The difference is dramatic on my K-3 when using the PLM.

[thibs]

I guess with a much better AF sensor module, better predictive AF algorithm and faster processor, the same Pentax lenses will do just fine.

Not the AF module fault IMO.

[biz-engineer]

Not the AF module fault IMO.

I do know that the 55-300mm PLM focuses much faster on my KP than it’s processor does. I do not know if PLM makes the difference, or in-lens motor makes the difference, but something related to the lens - same body - is helping a lot.

That's right. Lets imagine a perfect autofocus lens has a focus time = 0 (motor+lens group with infinite acceleration and zero delay between drive and response), then AF prediction isn't necessary at all, a AF phase directly command lens motor and since there is zero response time of the lens the focus is always on the subject. Now, take a non-ideal lens that has a non-zero response time, non-zero acceleration etc... the ability to reach target depends on how accurate is the prediction of where the subject will be before sending the focus command to the lens. Other example, you have to go to a meeting, you don't need to be very fast person if you know in advance when and where the meeting will be. In other words, the lens doesn't matter if the prediction can work with a slow focusing lens. If the AF prediction is bad, the only way to improve is to use a faster focusing lens. The better the AF module and prediction order, the more tolerance to lens AF speed.

[gatorguy]

I do know that the 55-300mm PLM focuses much faster on my KP than it’s processor does. I do not know if PLM makes the difference, or in-lens motor makes the difference, but something related to the lens - same body - is helping a lot.

PLM and the in-lens motor are one and the same. Pulse Linear Mrotor

EDIT: LarryMC in first a couple posts earlier.

[thibs]

RE, PLM and in-lens motor are one in the same, PLM is the name Pentax uses for the Pulse linear motor. The difference is dramatic on my K-3 when using the PLM.

PLM can only be used with a lens with a very light focussing group which means:

1. lens has to be designed to
2. some lens may not be possible to be designed so (big Teles).

Now, when it works, clearly it does very well

[thibs]

PLM and the in-lens motor are one and the same. Pulse Linear Motor

No. A lot of in-lens motors are not PLM, as per Pentax use of the acronym at least.