Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
10-08-2013, 01:24 PM   #1
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Boston, PRofMA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,053
are AF sites actually smaller?

If anyone has a preproduction unit, could you do the black cross on the wall test and see how big the sensors are?

They look huge from this photo of the AF sensor:


10-08-2013, 02:20 PM   #2
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Cracow
Posts: 457
25 cross points are fitted on the same area as 9 before...
10-08-2013, 02:28 PM   #3
Pentaxian
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
This is exactly what I'm wondering about. Sure there are more focus points, and we all assume focus points don't overlap one another, but is that true? I can live with K-5 focus speeds, but the massive size of the K-5 points causes a lot of mis-focused shots with AF grabbing something in the background. If the only improvement with the K-3 focus is to shrink the AF points to half or less their current size, then that would be enough for me to buy a K-3.
10-08-2013, 02:35 PM   #4
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Cracow
Posts: 457
I don't know what you people do to have that issues... Never had a single problem with that - with accuracy and low light focusing - yes (before I bought the IIs), with AF-C - of course, but focus points size? It's just a matter of proper technique and knowledge how big they really are.

10-08-2013, 02:39 PM   #5
Pentaxian
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
It doesn't take that much imagination to work out why very large AF points are a problem in certain situations no matter how good your technique is. Hint: your target is smaller than the AF cross point, with extra difficulty if your target is moving around, and extra extra difficulty if they are moving around against a contrasty background.
10-08-2013, 02:40 PM   #6
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Nelson B.C.
Posts: 3,267
QuoteOriginally posted by jaad75 Quote
I don't know what you people do to have that issues... Never had a single problem with that - with accuracy and low light focusing - yes (before I bought the IIs), with AF-C - of course, but focus points size? It's just a matter of proper technique and knowledge how big they really are.
Not my experience.
10-08-2013, 02:44 PM   #7
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Cracow
Posts: 457
QuoteOriginally posted by twitch Quote
Hint: your target is smaller than the AF cross point.
And? Are you going to fill your frame with it? If not, why put it on the photograph? There is nothing to focus on, big enough in the same distance?
10-08-2013, 02:45 PM   #8
Banned




Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: NY/Germany
Posts: 1,183
QuoteOriginally posted by jaad75 Quote
I don't know what you people do to have that issues... Never had a single problem with that - with accuracy and low light focusing - yes (before I bought the IIs), with AF-C - of course, but focus points size? It's just a matter of proper technique and knowledge how big they really are.
The problem definitely exists. In fact, the focus area is even outside of the point's indicated boundaries. I can guarantee I'm shooting in more demanding situations than you are, and there is an issue with their size more than anything else.

10-08-2013, 02:49 PM   #9
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Nelson B.C.
Posts: 3,267
QuoteOriginally posted by jaad75 Quote
And? Are you going to fill your frame with it? If not, why put it on the photograph? There is nothing to focus on, big enough in the same distance?
I guess the idea of focusing on the eye of something wouldn't work for you. There are many many situations where people want to focus on a specific thing that is smaller than the focus point on the K-5* AF system. In fact, considering how large it is, probably the majority of shots. Sometimes it doesn't matter much, a deep DOF and a subject without much depth, but many times it does.
10-08-2013, 02:51 PM   #10
Pentaxian
twitch's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 4,571
QuoteOriginally posted by jaad75 Quote
And? Are you going to fill your frame with it? If not, why put it on the photograph? There is nothing to focus on, big enough in the same distance?
Not sure why you are picking a fight, I'm not interested in one. There are many people with similair experiences to me, maybe read some of those threads.

from one of those threads....

Last edited by twitch; 10-08-2013 at 03:05 PM.
10-08-2013, 02:55 PM   #11
Pentaxian
JinDesu's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: New York City
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,626


7D sensor - Also APS-C (well actually a little smaller than APS-C), with 20 AF points. And supposedly the 7D has pretty small AF points and really really good AF.

QuoteOriginally posted by jaad75 Quote
And? Are you going to fill your frame with it? If not, why put it on the photograph? There is nothing to focus on, big enough in the same distance?
I suppose you don't do full body portraits? Or attempt to shoot that little bee in a flower, and expect to crop to fill? Heck, do you even crop at all?
10-08-2013, 03:05 PM   #12
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Cracow
Posts: 457
QuoteOriginally posted by derekkite Quote
I guess the idea of focusing on the eye of something wouldn't work for you.
The idea works for me very well - it's just a matter of subject size, distance and DOF combination. On the APS-C camera if the eye is so small that you can have troubles to focus precisely on it, it probably means, that DOF is so deep that you don't have to be that precise.
QuoteOriginally posted by twitch Quote
There are many people with similair experiences to me, maybe read some of those threads.
People tend to have many problems with many simple things...
10-08-2013, 03:26 PM   #13
Veteran Member
krebsy75's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Chester County, Pa.
Posts: 804
twitch: I get pretty good results focusing with the 11 point system. I suspect you're using it in more demanding situations than I am. In other words, I don't dismiss what you are saying. I just haven't really experienced it myself. I'm more of a casual shooter.
10-08-2013, 03:28 PM   #14
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Nelson B.C.
Posts: 3,267
What if the eye is on a dog, with a longish nose? What I ran across all the time is a bird on water that isn't smooth. There are dozens of contrast points in that shot within a depth of 6 feet either way. This is the way I use my camera; many of those shots are simply identification shots, not for show. If they aren't in focus on what I want, they are useless.

It really depends on what you shoot. The problem is simple. The AF points are too large as well as unpredictable when there are multiple contrast points within the AF point.

There are styles of shooting where it doesn't matter. There are styles where it really does. And it is more than technique. I can get birds in flight with my long manual focus lens, 1 in 50 shots on a good day. If you wonder about my technique, I was out shooting with a friend who at the time had a D7000 with their very nice 300 2.8 lens. He didn't get clear shots of the owl, but I did in manual focus. My K-5 is better, maybe one third to one half will be reasonably sharp as long as the light is very good and there is something contrasty to shoot. When following a target I have to move it around the focus point area to get it to catch, and then hold it there. I didn't try the K5II, which I understand was better. I'm hoping this body will be better again.

I'll be buying this body if it lives up to it's promise for that reason alone. The other improvements are just gravy.
10-08-2013, 03:50 PM   #15
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Boston, PRofMA
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,053
Original Poster


This is what I mean...the current AF points are huge and don't match the display in the viewfinder. Ever wonder why Pentax keeps releasing f/1.8 or slower lenses? I think the inaccurate AF was a big part of it, though cloaked in marketing speak of "we want smaller lighter lenses".

Someone a while back who had a lot of Pentax f/1.4 lenses said the AF system just wasn't accurate enough (he was a practicing pro who did a lot of narrow DOF natural light stuff, not Benjikan's studio stuff)....you couldn't lay the focus point on an eye in a portrait and expect focus exactly at that point...it'd be FF/BF a bit instead. That pro switched over to Nikon and was a lot happier.
So it really depends on what you shoot and what lenses you have.
I've personally had the "focus on background randomly" issue w/ my old K10D just shooting an event where I lay the focus point on people's faces.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
af, dslr, k-3, k3, pentax k-3
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Why Pentax lenses are smaller than ones from Nikon or Canon? kitestring Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 32 09-13-2013 12:54 PM
Religious Sites are Worst for Malware boriscleto General Talk 4 05-01-2012 04:07 PM
What are good buying sites...apart from Ebay? pickles Pentax Film SLR Discussion 14 05-08-2011 04:38 AM
Are SOFT FOCUS lenses actually useful? PentaxForums-User Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 45 01-01-2010 08:36 AM
Which DA lenses are actually full frame capable? Noisychip Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 18 05-02-2008 08:42 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:27 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top