K-3 vs K-01 Live View Focus Speed - K-01 Wins!

ScooterMaxi Jim · 03-31-2015, 11:57 AM

I did a quick test in low light and medium light using a relatively slow zoom (f/4) and the OP is correct. The K-01 is a touch quicker than the K-3 in live view. I had assumed that they would be virtually equal. I'm not all that surprised, as Pentax did a lot to improve the responsiveness through the firmware updates.

It is also worth noting that the target area for the K-01 is much larger, allowing for considerably greater leeway than the the tighter focus area of the K-03. This probably explains most of the reason for speed of focus difference. This is based on selected focus at minimum focus area setting - which I'm quite sure most of us here use most of the time. (However, the focus tracking feature is also nice for recomposition.)

Bellachioma · 03-31-2015, 12:36 PM

I just replaced K-01 with K-3 and i can assure that the cdaf of K-3 is absolutely faster and better than K-01.
K-01 is a nice camera, with an excellent image quality, but its AF is acceptable/good only with DA lenses and good light. With the Tamron 70-200 2.8 it's totally unreliable, missing each shot.
K-3 is faster with DA lenses (quite the same of Olympus e-m5/e-p5 that I had until few months ago) and with Tamron it catches the subject though slower. But it works even in low light.

ScooterMaxi Jim · 03-31-2015, 02:00 PM

I did a test with the 50mm f/1.8. The speeds are similar overall, although the variation is not at all the same. The K-01 most assuredly is more consistently fast at very low light levels. However, the K-3 can be quicker at snapping to focus in medium-low light (nails it at the first swing without having to go back a second time). The K-3 is more prone to hunt excessively in very low light.

Much of this has a lot to do with the fact that the exact focus point is substantially smaller on the K-3. This is a huge benefit, and probably worth the difference in overall speed - which actually does go to the K-01 overall.

Those who have both cameras (testing them at the same time) might want to offer their view. However, what you "remember" isn't a scientific way to go about it.

enoeske · 03-31-2015, 02:35 PM

Originally posted by ScooterMaxi Jim

The K-01 most assuredly is more consistently fast at very low light levels. However, the K-3 can be quicker at snapping to focus in medium-low light (nails it at the first swing without having to go back a second time). The K-3 is more prone to hunt excessively in very low light.

I don't have a K-01, but I really find this hard to believe. The K-3 has -3ev af sensors as well as f/2.8 sensitivity. The K-01 has neither of these. I shoot weddings which are very very dark and notoriously difficult on AF. After upgrading to my K-3, I have almost 100% keepers (in terms of focus accuracy), where as my K-5 was closer to 20%. My k-3 is very fast and accurate in low light. It does not tend to hunt.

**clackers** · 03-31-2015, 03:01 PM

Originally posted by enoeske

I don't have a K-01, but I really find this hard to believe. The K-3 has -3ev af sensors as well as f/2.8 sensitivity. The K-01 has neither of these. I shoot weddings which are very very dark and notoriously difficult on AF. After upgrading to my K-3, I have almost 100% keepers (in terms of focus accuracy), where as my K-5 was closer to 20%. My k-3 is very fast and accurate in low light. It does not tend to hunt.

You know that it's Live View that's being talked about, Enoeske? :-)

ScooterMaxi Jim · 03-31-2015, 03:24 PM

Yes, we are talking exclusively of the CDAF comparison.

Just to recap, using a Pentax FA f/4 zoom (screw drive), the CDAF is quicker on the K-01.

Using a current (recently purchased) DA f/1.8 (screw drive), the result is somewhat mixed - with the K-3 sometimes faster in medium low lighting, but the K-01 considerably more consistent and with less hunting in very low lighting (around 0-1 EV).

I also notice that the K-3 has less of the entire field of view in the area able to be focused. However, with the K-3 able to focus to considerably tighter pinpoint - the effective field of focus probably is nearly similar. I should point out that all of my testing was done using center focus.

rmtschanz · 04-01-2015, 09:22 AM

Originally posted by ScooterMaxi Jim

I did a test with the 50mm f/1.8. The speeds are similar overall, although the variation is not at all the same. The K-01 most assuredly is more consistently fast at very low light levels. However, the K-3 can be quicker at snapping to focus in medium-low light (nails it at the first swing without having to go back a second time). The K-3 is more prone to hunt excessively in very low light.

Much of this has a lot to do with the fact that the exact focus point is substantially smaller on the K-3. This is a huge benefit, and probably worth the difference in overall speed - which actually does go to the K-01 overall.

Those who have both cameras (testing them at the same time) might want to offer their view. However, what you "remember" isn't a scientific way to go about it.

Off-topic a bit, but the K-3 will hunt less in low-light if you use the "AUTO" focus point mode, then press the "1<->2" button to shrink down the focus point size. When AUTO mode is shrunk down, it's moveable and larger than the center spot mode.

Stagnant · 04-02-2015, 08:03 AM

DA* 60-250 performs considerably better on K-3, than it did on K-01. Less hunting and quicker to lock the focus in live view. Although in PDAF it works somewhat better.

ScooterMaxi Jim · 04-02-2015, 08:22 AM

Originally posted by rmtschanz

Off-topic a bit, but the K-3 will hunt less in low-light if you use the "AUTO" focus point mode, then press the "1<->2" button to shrink down the focus point size. When AUTO mode is shrunk down, it's moveable and larger than the center spot mode.

I see what you're saying. I never noticed that 1x in Auto is a bit larger than Selectable. The hunting is a little less (just as the K-01 with the much-larger selected area hunts less). Seems like the biggest difference between 1x in Auto and the Selectable is that you can move the selection around much faster (about 5x), but the precision of where you end up is far-less exacting. Depending on the shooting situation, those are good choices to have. For my style of shooting, I would tend to use Selectable, but I certainly can see where AUTO would come in very handy.

Vindemiatrix · 04-28-2015, 12:57 AM

I know this thread is old but I was using a k3 in live view today for about 30 minutes, put same lens on the k01, and I immediately thought about how slow the k01 was compared to the k3. Pure observation but I thought it was very noticeable. I was using the fa 43.

tabjohnson · 12-07-2015, 06:02 PM

Just keep the K01 and buy her a back up for a couple hundred on eBay. Happy Wife Happy Life.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
K 01 conected to ext live view LCD	Cata'S	Pentax K-01	6	02-26-2015 12:53 AM
A tale of 3 sensors K-3/K-01/K-7	Painter	Pentax K-3 & K-3 II	21	11-16-2013 09:38 PM
New Firmware for K-500, K-50, K-5 II, K-5 IIs, K-5, K-30, K-01, K-r, and 645D is out	Adam	Pentax News and Rumors	60	09-16-2013 05:46 AM
K-01, HDMI and live view	Hayflick	Pentax K-01	6	12-20-2012 12:37 AM
Shooting with a K-01 if I hate live view on my K-5?	Codazzle	Pentax K-01	16	12-12-2012 07:28 PM

03-31-2015, 11:57 AM	#16
ScooterMaxi Jim Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Minnesota Posts: 1,520	I did a quick test in low light and medium light using a relatively slow zoom (f/4) and the OP is correct. The K-01 is a touch quicker than the K-3 in live view. I had assumed that they would be virtually equal. I'm not all that surprised, as Pentax did a lot to improve the responsiveness through the firmware updates. It is also worth noting that the target area for the K-01 is much larger, allowing for considerably greater leeway than the the tighter focus area of the K-03. This probably explains most of the reason for speed of focus difference. This is based on selected focus at minimum focus area setting - which I'm quite sure most of us here use most of the time. (However, the focus tracking feature is also nice for recomposition.)

03-31-2015, 12:36 PM	#17
Bellachioma New Member Join Date: Feb 2015 Posts: 15	I just replaced K-01 with K-3 and i can assure that the cdaf of K-3 is absolutely faster and better than K-01. K-01 is a nice camera, with an excellent image quality, but its AF is acceptable/good only with DA lenses and good light. With the Tamron 70-200 2.8 it's totally unreliable, missing each shot. K-3 is faster with DA lenses (quite the same of Olympus e-m5/e-p5 that I had until few months ago) and with Tamron it catches the subject though slower. But it works even in low light.

03-31-2015, 02:00 PM	#18
ScooterMaxi Jim Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Minnesota Posts: 1,520	I did a test with the 50mm f/1.8. The speeds are similar overall, although the variation is not at all the same. The K-01 most assuredly is more consistently fast at very low light levels. However, the K-3 can be quicker at snapping to focus in medium-low light (nails it at the first swing without having to go back a second time). The K-3 is more prone to hunt excessively in very low light. Much of this has a lot to do with the fact that the exact focus point is substantially smaller on the K-3. This is a huge benefit, and probably worth the difference in overall speed - which actually does go to the K-01 overall. Those who have both cameras (testing them at the same time) might want to offer their view. However, what you "remember" isn't a scientific way to go about it.

03-31-2015, 02:35 PM	#19
enoeske Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Surprise, Az Photos: Gallery Posts: 2,136	Originally posted by ScooterMaxi Jim The K-01 most assuredly is more consistently fast at very low light levels. However, the K-3 can be quicker at snapping to focus in medium-low light (nails it at the first swing without having to go back a second time). The K-3 is more prone to hunt excessively in very low light. I don't have a K-01, but I really find this hard to believe. The K-3 has -3ev af sensors as well as f/2.8 sensitivity. The K-01 has neither of these. I shoot weddings which are very very dark and notoriously difficult on AF. After upgrading to my K-3, I have almost 100% keepers (in terms of focus accuracy), where as my K-5 was closer to 20%. My k-3 is very fast and accurate in low light. It does not tend to hunt.

03-31-2015, 03:01 PM	#20
clackers Otis Memorial Pentaxian Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Melbourne Photos: Albums Posts: 16,397	Originally posted by enoeske I don't have a K-01, but I really find this hard to believe. The K-3 has -3ev af sensors as well as f/2.8 sensitivity. The K-01 has neither of these. I shoot weddings which are very very dark and notoriously difficult on AF. After upgrading to my K-3, I have almost 100% keepers (in terms of focus accuracy), where as my K-5 was closer to 20%. My k-3 is very fast and accurate in low light. It does not tend to hunt. You know that it's Live View that's being talked about, Enoeske? :-)

03-31-2015, 03:24 PM	#21
ScooterMaxi Jim Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Minnesota Posts: 1,520	Yes, we are talking exclusively of the CDAF comparison. Just to recap, using a Pentax FA f/4 zoom (screw drive), the CDAF is quicker on the K-01. Using a current (recently purchased) DA f/1.8 (screw drive), the result is somewhat mixed - with the K-3 sometimes faster in medium low lighting, but the K-01 considerably more consistent and with less hunting in very low lighting (around 0-1 EV). I also notice that the K-3 has less of the entire field of view in the area able to be focused. However, with the K-3 able to focus to considerably tighter pinpoint - the effective field of focus probably is nearly similar. I should point out that all of my testing was done using center focus.

04-01-2015, 09:22 AM	#22
rmtschanz Forum Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 77 Original Poster	Originally posted by ScooterMaxi Jim I did a test with the 50mm f/1.8. The speeds are similar overall, although the variation is not at all the same. The K-01 most assuredly is more consistently fast at very low light levels. However, the K-3 can be quicker at snapping to focus in medium-low light (nails it at the first swing without having to go back a second time). The K-3 is more prone to hunt excessively in very low light. Much of this has a lot to do with the fact that the exact focus point is substantially smaller on the K-3. This is a huge benefit, and probably worth the difference in overall speed - which actually does go to the K-01 overall. Those who have both cameras (testing them at the same time) might want to offer their view. However, what you "remember" isn't a scientific way to go about it. Off-topic a bit, but the K-3 will hunt less in low-light if you use the "AUTO" focus point mode, then press the "1<->2" button to shrink down the focus point size. When AUTO mode is shrunk down, it's moveable and larger than the center spot mode.

04-02-2015, 08:03 AM	#23
Stagnant Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Photos: Gallery Posts: 603	DA* 60-250 performs considerably better on K-3, than it did on K-01. Less hunting and quicker to lock the focus in live view. Although in PDAF it works somewhat better.

04-02-2015, 08:22 AM	#24
ScooterMaxi Jim Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Minnesota Posts: 1,520	Originally posted by rmtschanz Off-topic a bit, but the K-3 will hunt less in low-light if you use the "AUTO" focus point mode, then press the "1<->2" button to shrink down the focus point size. When AUTO mode is shrunk down, it's moveable and larger than the center spot mode. I see what you're saying. I never noticed that 1x in Auto is a bit larger than Selectable. The hunting is a little less (just as the K-01 with the much-larger selected area hunts less). Seems like the biggest difference between 1x in Auto and the Selectable is that you can move the selection around much faster (about 5x), but the precision of where you end up is far-less exacting. Depending on the shooting situation, those are good choices to have. For my style of shooting, I would tend to use Selectable, but I certainly can see where AUTO would come in very handy.

04-28-2015, 12:57 AM	#25
Vindemiatrix Senior Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: las vegas Posts: 209	I know this thread is old but I was using a k3 in live view today for about 30 minutes, put same lens on the k01, and I immediately thought about how slow the k01 was compared to the k3. Pure observation but I thought it was very noticeable. I was using the fa 43.

12-07-2015, 06:02 PM	#26
tabjohnson Forum Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Location: Houston, TX Posts: 72	Just keep the K01 and buy her a back up for a couple hundred on eBay. Happy Wife Happy Life.