[Jodokast96]

Just so you know, yes it beat the D300, but by a very, very small margin. Something like .02 sec. on average. That is until you hit about EV4....it's all downhill for Pentax from there. Times are then about a half second longer for Pentax, and at EV0 it's a full second (about double the Nikon from EV3-EV0). That's where the Pentax quit. No mention of the AF assist light was mentioned in either case.

[Kunzite]

Are we reading the same reviews?
At EV0, the K-7 is faster than the D300, 0.89 vs. 0.93. Under EV0, the D300 is probably using the AF-lamp, since it's gaining speed - 0.85.
Not that I trust those "measurements". And why is the Pentax chart so difficult to read? Coincidence? I don't think so!

[thibs]

Still people reading Pop Photo?

LOL...

[Jodokast96]

Are we reading the same reviews?
At EV0, the K-7 is faster than the D300, 0.89 vs. 0.93. Under EV0, the D300 is probably using the AF-lamp, since it's gaining speed - 0.85.
Not that I trust those "measurements". And why is the Pentax chart so difficult to read? Coincidence? I don't think so!

I don't know, are we? I'm looking at the print review, are you maybe looking at an online one? At EV0, the D3 comes in at .89 while the K7 is 1.98. I don't have a .85 reading for the D300 at all, nor have it gaining speed at any point.

[Kunzite]

Yes, I was looking at the online review - I wouldn't pay 2 cents for PopPhoto. It's strange that the results are different. See for yourself:
- Camera Reviews from Photography Experts
Sony - Camera Reviews from Photography Experts

Thibs, PopPhoto is in my bookmarks - "Jokes and other funny things" category

[Jerry Thirsty]

How many of us really have the ability to fairly compare Pentax with Canikon?

While I don't have extensive experience with Nikon, a few months ago I got an N80 (1990s film SLR) and while I didn't do any real testing, the thing that struck me immediately was that it appeared to focus noticeably faster than any Pentax AF body I have ever used (ZX-5n, MZ-S, Ist D, DS, K10D). It's possible that this might also be due to differences in lens design, or allowed focusing error, but it seemed to do the job. I was able to track my dog running at full speed that I know from experience would have been hit-or-miss with my Pentaxs. Assuming Nikon hasn't cut too many corners in the intervening years, I can't say that it would really surprise me if Nikon AF still has an edge.

[Sailor]

Jer, I don't know if they do, but if I get real inspired, I could do that (having both cameras). Just don't expect it to be too scientific . From experience, I can say that the K-7 is faster to focus (without testing, I won't say a percentage increase in speed), but also locks focus more often in poor conditions so the reduction in hunting makes the focusing really impressive. In fact, the K20D feels broken in comparison - to the point that I prefer to MF with the split screen vs. suffer the painful AF.

Hey, buddy - thanks for the feedback. I appreciate it.

Jer

[ChainbreakR]

I have used a Canon 500D/T1i which I would loosely put in the K20d/K7 class. There is absolutely no comparison (at least I could tell) between the low light focusing abilities of the Canon and the Pentax. Canon was quiet, and achieved focus quickly when the k20d couldn't ever even find focus because of the dark conditions.

I have used a Canon 500D/T1i which I would loosely put in the K20d/K7 class. There is absolutely no comparison (at least I could tell) between the low light focusing abilities of the Canon and the Pentax. Canon was quiet, and achieved focus quickly when the k20d couldn't ever even find focus because of the dark conditions.

I think you need to be more specific, lenses matters a lot and if Canon got focus and the picture was in focus then it's better than the Pentax at that. But if the camera let you snap pictures and those weren't in focus then I don't see what's the advantage.

One more thing both Canon and Pentax K20D rely on flash as assist light and from my experience with K20D if the flash is on I can obtain reliable focus in pitch black. Of course it takes a while to do so and the relevance is very low since I cannot see what I frame and focus on but giving it enough time and the raised flash a K20D will achieve focus in whatever light (or lack of) for a reasonable f stop on the lens (f4-f8). And btw, all the latter Pentax cameras (K-m, K-7 and K-x) have visible better AF in low light than K20D.

Radu

[ftpaddict]

I have used a Canon 500D/T1i which I would loosely put in the K20d/K7 class. There is absolutely no comparison (at least I could tell) between the low light focusing abilities of the Canon and the Pentax. Canon was quiet, and achieved focus quickly when the k20d couldn't ever even find focus because of the dark conditions.

Again, lens choice is very important. My K100D has managed to get a lock in situations where a Nikon D80 was completely baffled. I used 16-45 f/4, the D80 had a Tokina 12-24 f/4.

[Eruditass]

I have used a Canon 500D/T1i which I would loosely put in the K20d/K7 class. There is absolutely no comparison (at least I could tell) between the low light focusing abilities of the Canon and the Pentax. Canon was quiet, and achieved focus quickly when the k20d couldn't ever even find focus because of the dark conditions.

The K20D is in a lower class than the K-7/K-m/K-x class according to Pentax wrt low-light focusing

[Jodokast96]

Yes, I was looking at the online review - I wouldn't pay 2 cents for PopPhoto. It's strange that the results are different. See for yourself:
- Camera Reviews from Photography Experts
Sony - Camera Reviews from Photography Experts

Thibs, PopPhoto is in my bookmarks - "Jokes and other funny things" category

The results don't match up anywhere between the two because the website review has the numbers for the D300s listed. Look, they are identical - Camera Reviews from Photography Experts

Here's what the mag lists:

Image Quality - Very High
Resolution - Extremely High (2350)
Color Accuracy - Extremely High (8.4)
Noise:

ISO 100 - Extremely Low (1.1)

ISO 200 - Very Low (1.2)

ISO 400 - Very Low (1.5)

ISO 800 - Moderately Low (2.2)

ISO 1600 - Unacceptable (3.4)

ISO 3200 - Unacceptable (4.7)

ISO 6400 - Unacceptable (10.1)

Highlight Shadow Detail - High
Contrast - Normal
Image Stabilization (at 250mm) - 2.5-3 stops
AF Speed:

EV 12 - .29

EV 10 - .37

EV 8 - .39

EV 6 - .48

EV 4 - .97

EV 2 - 1.18

EV 1 - 1.29

EV 0 - 1.98

As for paying for the mag, if it weren't on of the choices for the kids fundraiser, I wouldn't either.

[fwbigd]

Both charts on the website is for the Nikon D300s. If you take a look at the chart published in the magazine you would see that the K-7 is a real dog when it comes to low light auto focus speed. Almost a full second slower than the D300s.

The resolution on the Nikon 300s is 2340 as compared to 2350 for the K-7. No wonder the picture quality of the K-7 is listed as NOT HOT. With 2.3 more PM, the K-7 should have blown the Nikon away, but to beat the Nikon by only 10 lines is pathetic.

Don't blame Pop Photo for reporting the truth. Blame the company that brought a less than good camera to the market!

[Kunzite]

I must apologize, for even thinking PopPhoto might not make a mistake this time

Btw, 1.98s at EV0? It looks like they can't draw a chart... or they don't care to.

[mattdm]

Both charts on the website is for the Nikon D300s. If you take a look at the chart published in the magazine you would see that the K-7 is a real dog when it comes to low light auto focus speed. Almost a full second slower than the D300s.

What lens are they using? I haven't made any measurements, but I know for a fact that with the DA 40mm and DA 70mm, the auto-focus in low light is fast enough that I don't need to consider it as an issue, even with moving kids. (Or cats.) Maybe it's just a matter of "even slow is good enough" — or maybe it's just not as awful as reported in real use.

Where the AF sucks, though, is tracking objects moving rapidly towards or away from the camera. No way it can keep up with a kid on a swing, for example — something my friend's Canon 40D does handily.