[bwDraco]

Pentax has added a custom setting that allows you to set the camera to more reliably keep track of a subject even in the event of an obstruction between the camera and the subject. Obviously, this is only possible because of the new SAFOX 11 AF system and Real-Time Scene Analysis System powered by the 86,000 pixel RGB metering sensor.

You Tube

You Tube

More videos demonstrating the new technologies in the K-3 can be found in the pentaxplus YouTube channel. Read all about these technologies here.

This feature is a big deal to me. I'm a sports photographer for my college, and assuming Ricoh implemented this correctly, this will be a real godsend.

--DragonLord

[Adam]

I'm hoping it'll work as advertised! Regardless the K-3 should be a step above the K-5's AF system no matter how you look at it

[Chaos_Realm]

and lets hope the new auto tracking works better than the k-5 for subjects moving toward you!

[carrrlangas]

The tech sounds great but the example in the video is not a good one...

Regarding the AF on the K-5II, besides the low light locking is it noticeably faster than K-5? I am ready for the plunge

[falconeye]

Anybody noticed this sentence in the DPR preview?

Camera performance is generally very snappy, though we were hoping that the new AF system would be faster.

Looks like the new SAFOX has more AF points and is aided by a new RGB sensor for tracking. But isn't necessarily living on steroids. Will be a very interesting spot to watch.

[StigVidar]

Pentax has added a custom setting that allows you to set the camera to more reliably keep track of a subject even in the event of an obstruction between the camera and the subject. Obviously, this is only possible because of the new SAFOX 11 AF system and Real-Time Scene Analysis System powered by the 86,000 pixel RGB metering sensor.

This functionality is also available in K-30, K-5 II, K-5 IIs and probably K-50 and K-500, too. It seems K-3 is more customizable regarding this, but it does not depend on the scene analysis.

[StigVidar]

and lets hope the new auto tracking works better than the k-5 for subjects moving toward you!

Yes, I too hope so. I cannot find any information about this, but I hope that this could be tested by someone who have a K-3 available for testing.

[jaad75]

Speed depends on lens more than anything else. If they tried the AF with slow SDM lenses that would explain everything.

[jonny1986]

is true that the pentax sdm is slower than hsm but the new af will address probably the undecision and quick of the safox 11.
to have a af system at the same level of canikon we need fast ring motor most of all. probably with sigma hsm we can have a much more performing system. unluck sigma chooses not to produce the 120-300 in k mount.

[Ash]

SAFOX XI sounds like another evolutionary development and will continue to be tweaked in the future. But it should still impress if it is better than K-5 II's SAFOX X+.

[jaad75]

Yes, SAFOX X is impressive already.

[asp1880]

Are the 25 AF points clustered more towards the center in the K-3? Or is it just me?

I've always enjoyed the good AF point spread in the K-5.

Regards,
--Anders.

[Fogel70]

As K-3 use the same matte screen as K-5 there should not be any change on this (or very small), but the examples in the video don't use the real OVF, so the focus points might be more clustered than in the actual camera.

[bdery]

Anybody noticed this sentence in the DPR preview?

Quote:
Camera performance is generally very snappy, though we were hoping that the new AF system would be faster.
Looks like the new SAFOX has more AF points and is aided by a new RGB sensor for tracking. But isn't necessarily living on steroids. Will be a very interesting spot to watch.

Yes, I saw that. It's the one point that currently makes me hesitate between getting a K-5 II while they last, or wait till spring to get a K-3.

[Class A]

Anybody noticed this sentence in the DPR preview?

Their comment could mean that the AF speed isn't where it should be, or it could be a last straw they are clinging to in order to give the nod to the Nikon D7100 over the K-3.

I've given up on DPReview as a reliable source of information after they failed to address the many obvious questions regarding their K-5 II vs D7000 scores. They scored the Nikon D7000 with better build quality than the Pentax K-5 II and much higher performance (despite its miniature buffer size compared to the K-5 II).

You may want to look at the inexplicable scores for the Nikon D7000 and the Pentax K-5 II yourself.

There was quite a discussion back then with DPReview staff involved, with the staff picking up on spelling mistakes and other small errors, correcting them in the review, but not properly responding to the fundamental questions about the inexplicable scoring. Based on my suggestion, DPReview at least added "built-in sensor shift shake reduction feature" as a "pro" in their summary list of the K-5 II review (imaging that not being there in the first place!) but ignored many other important questions and never explained their odd -- to say the least -- scoring.

If Imaging-Resource mentioned a lack of AF speed, I'd be listening. With DPReview it could be anything from dilettantism to unashamed brand favouritism.