[enoeske]

I don't always shoot weddings, but when I do, I find several things frustrating about my K-5 auto-focus.

• Its too slow in the very dim light of the wedding reception halls.

• It doesn't lock on to capture some of the moments.

• And sometimes it does lock on but its very front focused in tungsten light.

I know the K-5ii had an upgraded AF system with an f/2.8 sensor and works down to -3ev. This helped it lock focus in the darker light which I need. I believe the front focus issue was also addressed. It sounds like they got a lot of the issues sorted out -- bounce flash overexposure?

There are a few K-3's out there already. I would just like to see some testing in wedding reception conditions; Low tungsten light, people moving about and nailing focus in a timely manner.

[Adam]

I don't always shoot weddings, but when I do, I find several things frustrating about my K-5 auto-focus.

• Its too slow in the very dim light of the wedding reception halls.

• It doesn't lock on to capture some of the moments.

• And sometimes it does lock on but its very front focused in tungsten light.

I know the K-5ii had an upgraded AF system with an f/2.8 sensor and works down to -3ev. This helped it lock focus in the darker light which I need. I believe the front focus issue was also addressed. It sounds like they got a lot of the issues sorted out -- bounce flash overexposure?

There are a few K-3's out there already. I would just like to see some testing in wedding reception conditions; Low tungsten light, people moving about and nailing focus in a timely manner.

The bounce flash issue is supposedly fixed, but this has yet to be verified. Can't wait to see some user reports

[DogLover]

I thought you were making a pitch to be "the world's most interesting photographer."

"I don't always shoot weddings, but when I do....."

[panoguy]

There are a few K-3's out there already. I would just like to see some testing in wedding reception conditions; Low tungsten light, people moving about and nailing focus in a timely manner.

I'll try to get back to you tomorrow! We're having a Halloween Party at our house tonight, and my K-3 arrived this morning. Plus, I'll be walking with the kids during the door-to-doors at night.

[wahid_satu]

I thought you were making a pitch to be "the world's most interesting photographer."

"I don't always shoot weddings, but when I do....."

.... they're selfies.

Sorry I just can't help it.

Carry on..

[enoeske]

.... they're selfies.

Sorry I just can't help it.

Carry on..

pretty close to a selfie...Thats me and my beautiful wife from my wedding the other day!

[tuco]

A chain is no stronger than its weakest link. You might want to specify lenses you are using and hopefully they can be used in the test. Lenses are the other half of the focus speed equation.

[enoeske]

A chain is no stronger than its weakest link. You might want to specify lenses you are using and hopefully they can be used in the test. Lenses are the other half of the focus speed equation.

I use the Pentax 15mm f/4, Sigma 30mm f/1.4, Tamron 28-75mm f/2.8 and the Sigma 85mm f/1.4 mostly. Occasionally, the Pentax 55-300mm if I need the reach. Its typically not that the focusing is too slow, its that it doesn't lock focus in time. It sits there and hesitates for a second to make sure it locks on, but usually ends up front focused. Again, though, this is challenging situations that a lot of shooters don't see very often. Usually near -1ev and tungsten heavy light. Then focus on a dancing (not still) person.

[tuco]

...
Again, though, this is challenging situations that a lot of shooters don't see very often.

With the high ISO we have today, its a situation encountered more often than one might think.

[Pheo]

Tested tonight at a very under-lit dance event. AF is significantly improved, tracks properly, and bounce flash appears to be working right.

[jaad75]

It sounds like they got a lot of the issues sorted out -- bounce flash overexposure?

It was already fixed - I don't understand how come people here seem not to realize that...

[IchabodCrane]

It was already fixed - I don't understand how come people here seem not to realize that...

Maybe because it wasn't working right for some people?

[Class A]

I know the K-5ii had an upgraded AF system with an f/2.8 sensor and works down to -3ev.

I'm confident that the K-5 II would address your AF needs.

Regarding the flash overexposure issue: I don't know a lot about it as I use my flashes with manual settings only, but I understand that it only occurs in rather specific circumstances. So you may not even experience an issue with the K-5 II, should you use it with P-TTL flash.

Apparently Pentax claimed that they cannot fully address the overexposure issue on the K-5 (II) because there is a hardware limitation, but again, you may not suffer from it at all.

There is already a K-3 specific thread regarding P-TLL over exposure and the initial news seem to be good. However, user reports always have to be taken with a big grain of salt, so I'd await further confirmation, if P-TLL exposure were critical to me.

[jaad75]

I'm confident that the K-5 II would address your AF needs.

Definitely. It has one of the best AF-S modes on the market.

Apparently Pentax claimed that they cannot fully address the overexposure issue on the K-5 (II) because there is a hardware limitation, but again, you may not suffer from it at all.

That's not true - I don't know who spreads this legend. Originally it was only a slight overexposure with the K-IIs (curable just by setting highlight correction on, unlike the one I had with my original K-5), both were cured COMPLETELY via firmware updates. I use the original Pentax flashes, but even Metz service confirms Pentax changed the flash metering via firmware.

[Class A]

That's not true - I don't know who spreads this legend.

Most recently this piece of information has been confirmed by Adam.

You may also check the Pentaxforums home page article about the K-3 where a reference to the alleged hardware problem is made by Ricoh Imaging (Pentax) executives.

It isn't entirely clear whether the hardware limitation (if it exists) is confined to the K-7/K-5 or also extends to the K-5 II. AFAIK, no changes to the metering hardware were made from K-5 to K-5 II.

It is great that you don't see any issue, but there is a possibility that you somehow are not provoking the problem. User Noam describes how to reproduce the problem (using a K-5 II with v1.03). User bjdavey confirms the problem with v1.03.

The whole issue does not really interest me because P-TTL isn't great to control multiple flashes and for achieving repeatable exposures. Hence I use manual settings. I have to walk to my flashes for the time being, but soon there will be remote triggers that allow you to set the flash power from the camera. Both Cactus and Yongnuo are working on such systems.

I use the original Pentax flashes, but even Metz service confirms Pentax changed the flash metering via firmware.

That isn't necessarily incompatible with the possibility that there is still some residual issue in certain situations.