[skyer]

What can I say about the AF.C of K-3?
I AM IMPRESSED!

Have you seen a test of Nikon D4s' AF.C on a running dog? (video and photos - http://froknowsphoto...p-area-af-test/)
So, if not taking into an account 11 fr/s, then it looks like that K-3 is not any worse than a top Nikon regarding the AF accuracy and speed! Maybe it's even better!
As it is known, the testing of Nikon D4s was on a running dog with 70-200 at f4.0. I guess the dog dindn't run faster than 50 km/h. I decided to make a test harder and made a test on moving cars with a speed about 60-80 km/h with 80-200 at 2.8 and 3.5.
I suppose, the objects on my photos look even sharper. Partly it may be because of a soapy image sensor of D4.

Anyway, you may decide for yourself (I was focusing on license plates) - http://yadi.sk/d/zOiaJ52YKYSJB

[Adam]

This is like comparing apples to oranges. People who use the D4s are very, very pick when it comes it AF performance, because it can make it or break it for them. The K-3's AF system is certainly more than capable enough for most users

[JinDesu]

One thing to consider is that a car provides a easier focusing target (flat fronts, contrasty elements, larger in comparison) than a dog.

The k-3's AF-C and tracking is an improvement over the previous generation Pentax cameras, but I think it's a leap to say it's better than the D4s

[normhead]

What if he's right? It's one thing to suspect there's been an error, but it's also a mistake to categorically declare him wrong. Based on this one probably mistaken comparison Pentax is in the lead. Now if someone wants to do a test to prove otherwise than we'll have something to talk about. In the mean time, my line is "according to some guy the K-3 is faster ". I'm not changing until some other guy with some other test done better or differently says different. Pop-photo tested the speed on the K-3, maybe they'd have something to say about this.

[MJSfoto1956]

I will say this: the K-3 AF is very good.
It is at least as good as my D800 -- one of these days I'll do a test between the two to see who the "winner" is.
Until then, whether it is better than X is not important to me since I don't do sports.

YMMV

Michael

[normhead]

Quoted from the B&H website...

My favorite aspect of shooting the Pentax K-3 was its autofocus. Compared to the high-end cameras that I usually use, I found the new SAFOX 11 AF on the K-3 to be fast but, moreso, quick and to the point. That may be a hard-to-clarify distinction but I suppose an automobile analogy like “stopping on a dime” may be the closest cliché. Really impressive was the way it jumped off the pole and slammed on the brakes without skidding (to abuse the analogy). Its 27-point AF system has 25 central cross-type sensors and is optimized for shooting with fast lenses and is sensitive in low light. A 9-point AF zone can be selected and moved around the frame as needed and, in conjunction with the camera’s Real-time Scene Analysis System, AF tracking performed nicely when following even fast-moving subjects. In addition, the SAFOX 11 module is encased in a shock-resistant and airtight housing to protect it from the rigors of low temperatures and rough handling. In manual-focus mode, focus peaking assistance is supported for precision.

This author also seems to think the K-3 has something to offer compared "to the high-end cameras that I usually use". I know the AF system is good. The question is "how good is it?". I'm not selling it short. The thing is, people have been selling the Pentax system short for years. Even when the testing sites were showing very little difference between the K-5 and other systems in good light. like less than a 1/0th of a second. Pentax fell way behind in low light, and that is the vary area Pentax has addressed over the last 3 years. Those who felt there was some huge deficiency in Pentax AF before, will probably be the last ones to clue in to the K-3 now. They have a bias to protect.

I've waited for those who criticized the Pentax for it's low light focusing ability in the past to start wowing now that current pentax bodies will focus in light that other camera can't even lock focus in, no matter how long you give them. There's been no wowing. Wat wid dat? There are definitely some folks who only "wow" non Pentax product.

[DSims]

Quoted from the B&H website...



This author also seems to think the K-3 has something to offer compared "to the high-end cameras that I usually use". I know the AF system is good. The question is "how good is it?". I'm not selling it short. The thing is, people have been selling the Pentax system short for years. Even when the testing sites were showing very little difference between the K-5 and other systems in good light. like less than a 1/0th of a second. Pentax fell way behind in low light, and that is the vary area Pentax has addressed over the last 3 years. Those who felt there was some huge deficiency in Pentax AF before, will probably be the last ones to clue in to the K-3 now. They have a bias to protect.

I've waited for those who criticized the Pentax for it's low light focusing ability in the past to start wowing now that current pentax bodies will focus in light that other camera can't even lock focus in, no matter how long you give them. There's been no wowing. Wat wid dat? There are definitely some folks who only "wow" non Pentax product.

It's hard to give up on old ideas. It takes work to begin with, and then afterward we have to re-arrange our world view - even if only a small part of it. And for many of us there's a cost, whether in time, emotionally, financially, or in some cases even in our relationships. So it's easier to put blinders on.



I highly suspect the D4S has the better overall AF system. Those who have one, plus many others who've invested in Nikon systems, want it to win. They want their expenditure to be justified. Likewise, those who own or are considering a K-3 would love it to win - even if only in some areas - because they can afford one!

Getting the objective truth, as much as possible, takes work. I think DPR does a very good overall job here, for example. I know one of the reviewers on staff, and he's both diligent and trustworthy. DPR puts in a lot of time and effort highlighting the strengths of brands with lesser market share, while still giving the big boys fair treatment.

---

Last edited by DSims; 03-14-2014 at 03:39 PM.

[Parry]

I will say this: the K-3 AF is very good.
It is at least as good as my D800 -- one of these days I'll do a test between the two to see who the "winner" is.
Until then, whether it is better than X is not important to me since I don't do sports.

YMMV

Michael

Your photography is World class by the way.

[john5100]

I will say this: the K-3 AF is very good.
It is at least as good as my D800 -- one of these days I'll do a test between the two to see who the "winner" is.
Until then, whether it is better than X is not important to me since I don't do sports.

YMMV

Michael

You always have excellent yet constructive things to say about Pentax. I liked your rebuttal of that Art Of The Noise guy who had never used a K3 and still gave his video review.

Cheers,
John

[normhead]

Getting the objective truth, as much as possible, takes work. I think DPR does a very good overall job here, for example. I know one of the reviewers on staff, and he's both diligent and trustworthy. DPR puts in a lot of time and effort highlighting the strengths of brands with lesser market share, while still giving the big boys fair treatment.

So? Has DPR ventured an opinion? Personally I see the D4s as a complementary system, not a competing system. A good low noise sensor, that stay useful in high ISO situations...compared to a fast good light system, that gives you high resolution, a very good frame rate and good telephoto and macro magnification. Neither is strong at what the other does well, so it's kind of an odd comparison. As Adam says it's Apples and Oranges. Would a D4s owner even care if it was bit slower or faster focusing than a K-3. As long as it's good for what you buy it for, what other cameras with other features do is pretty much irrelevant. If I was to buy a D4s, I wouldn't even test it against my K-3 to see which focussed faster. I'd run a burst, and it would be good enough or not good enough, on it's own terms. The K-3 would have nothing to do with it.

[monochrome]

I will say this: the K-3 AF is very good.
It is at least as good as my D800 -- one of these days I'll do a test between the two to see who the "winner" is.
Until then, whether it is better than X is not important to me since I don't do sports.

YMMV

Michael

This should be a sticky at the top of the K3 Forum. The poster could have left off "since I don't do sports" and it should still be a sticky.

Would a D4s owner even care if it was bit slower or faster focusing than a K-3. As long as it's good for what you buy it for, what other cameras with other features do is pretty much irrelevant. If I was to buy a D4s, I wouldn't even test it against my K-3 to see which focussed faster. I'd run a burst, and it would be good enough or not good enough, on it's own terms. The K-3 would have nothing to do with it.

Similar statement.

[DSims]

So? Has DPR ventured an opinion? Personally I see the D4s as a complementary system, not a competing system. A good low noise sensor, that stay useful in high ISO situations...compared to a fast good light system, that gives you high resolution, a very good frame rate and good telephoto and macro magnification. Neither is strong at what the other does well, so it's kind of an odd comparison. As Adam says it's Apples and Oranges. Would a D4s owner even care if it was bit slower or faster focusing than a K-3. As long as it's good for what you buy it for, what other cameras with other features do is pretty much irrelevant. If I was to buy a D4s, I wouldn't even test it against my K-3 to see which focussed faster. I'd run a burst, and it would be good enough or not good enough, on it's own terms. The K-3 would have nothing to do with it.

No - in fact they're so far behind on their K-3 review that it's not even out yet. But that's part of my point - if someone cares it can be a lot of work. If someone doesn't care he may just spout out whatever's convenient.


Those who care more about facts and well-formed opinions are often teachers.

Those who care more about costs to themselves are often salesmen.

[derekkite]

What can I say about the AF.C of K-3?
I AM IMPRESSED!

Have you seen a test of Nikon D4s' AF.C on a running dog? (video and photos - http://froknowsphoto...p-area-af-test/)
So, if not taking into an account 11 fr/s, then it looks like that K-3 is not any worse than a top Nikon regarding the AF accuracy and speed! Maybe it's even better!
As it is known, the testing of Nikon D4s was on a running dog with 70-200 at f4.0. I guess the dog dindn't run faster than 50 km/h. I decided to make a test harder and made a test on moving cars with a speed about 60-80 km/h with 80-200 at 2.8 and 3.5.
I suppose, the objects on my photos look even sharper. Partly it may be because of a soapy image sensor of D4.

Anyway, you may decide for yourself (I was focusing on license plates) - http://yadi.sk/d/zOiaJ52YKYSJB

Here is mine. DA*300, works pretty well. The choke point for the K3 is the speed of the lens focus mechanism.

https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/172-pentax-k-3/241586-my-k-3-af-experienc...ml#post2582837