[Mapleleaf-Mick]

I think most of the difference is in the algorithms and software. All the camera mfgs. pull apart the competitions products to see what's inside. A sensor can be copied/purchased but the software etc. Must be developed from within. That is where Pentax is behind.

[Qwntm]

I wonder what makes Nikon and Canon's AF system better? What's in their design that Pentax can't do?
I do believe this is where Pentax lags behind.

The answer is the lenses. When you have ring drive state of the art ultrasonic motors in your lenses, then things can get really fast. Without that Pentax will always be a generation or more behind. It's a system.

[Pål Jensen]

I wonder what makes Nikon and Canon's AF system better? What's in their design that Pentax can't do?
I do believe this is where Pentax lags behind.

It is mostly in peoples mind. Pentax will never be better regardless of how it performs...

[BigMackCam]

It is mostly in peoples mind. Pentax will never be better regardless of how it performs...

I'm a huge Pentax fan, but the AF performance of my Sony A99-based Hasselblad HV is in a completely different league to that of my K-3 and K-3II. It's accurate first time, every time, and the tracking - whilst not completely fool-proof - is streets ahead. I wish it weren't so, but it's a fact. I prefer my Pentax cameras in most other areas, and they're my go-to bodies... but AF, whilst still good, definitely isn't their strongest feature.

[Qwntm]

It is mostly in peoples mind. Pentax will never be better regardless of how it performs...

I wish this were so.


I have a Canon 6D that is smoother and faster than any Pentax I've used. And the 6D is considered one of Canon's least capable by todays standards. I've owned the 7D Mark II and even had a Nikon D500 for a few weeks. Pentax isn't even in the parking lot of the ball field.


A lot of other things that people complain about Pentax, I agree with you, but AF is not one of them.


Having said all that, the AF on Pentax's is usable, and if you know what you're doing it's fine.

[D1N0]

We must all be idiots for still shooting Pentax for photography is just about tracking dogs running towards you.

[Pål Jensen]

We must all be idiots for still shooting Pentax for photography is just about tracking dogs running towards you.

I have never missed anything running or flying towards me the last 20 years due to autofocus speed. I have lost images due to not having the right sensor activated or not being able to keep the sensor on the right part of the subject.
Professional photographers were able to nail the subject virtually 100% with AF 25 years ago with AF system slower than what you find in modern Pentax bodies. This AF performance nonsense, mostly performed by noting how fast the lens spins through the helicoid with the lens cap on, is counter productive. AF is now much like metering; good enough to nail the shot. Learn how it works and use it accordingly.
Faster is always better, but my 600/4 spins from infinity to 3 meter in one 1s. Nothing I've ever seen moves that fast and if it was I wouldn't have been able to keep it in the finder let alone in the AF sensor. The fact that something is smoother and faster doesn't mean that something slower isn't fast enough...

It is noteworthy that the 20 year old AF system of the Pentax 645N gave just as many keepers (close to 100%) as the professional canon bodies (in spite of screw drive AF) according to professional wildlife photographers that used both...

---

Last edited by Pål Jensen; 09-21-2016 at 10:58 AM.

[BigMackCam]

I have never missed anything running or flying towards me the last 20 years due to autofocus speed. I have lost images due to not having the right sensor activated or not being able to keep the sensor on the right part of the subject.

That's admirable, but not everyone's experience is the same. Also, it's not just about AF speed - it's AF accuracy, too, and the ability to track effectively.

Professional photographers were able to nail the subject virtually 100% with AF 25 years ago with AF system slower than what you find in modern Pentax bodies.

And for years before that, professional and skilled enthusiast photographers managed just fine with MF. I don't think anyone could honestly claim we're anything but blessed with modern AF systems, regardless of brand. Some are, however, better than others (subjectively, at least, but I think most would argue evidentially too).

This AF performance nonsense, mostly performed by noting how fast the lens spins through the helicoid with the lens cap on, is counter productive. AF is now much like metering; good enough to nail the shot. Learn how it works and use it accordingly.

With all due respect, whilst it may be nonsense to you, it's certainly not for many others. Again, as I mentioned above - it's not just a case of AF speed, but accuracy, as well as the system's ability to track accurately without losing lock on a target. I absolutely agree that we should learn to use what we have to the best of its capabilities, and that by doing so, any current AF system should be good enough in most situations. If, however, one AF system makes it easier to reliably "nail the shot" (or - rather importantly - sequences of shots), then for a large number of users, that is highly beneficial. That's why we have AF, after all - to help us. Otherwise, we'd all just stick with MF and be done.

Faster is always better, but my 600/4 spins from infinity to 3 meter in one 1s. Nothing I've ever seen moves that fast and if it was I wouldn't have been able to keep it in the finder let alone in the AF sensor. The fact that something is smoother and faster doesn't mean that something slower isn't fast enough...

Again with the speed Given the right lenses, there's nothing wrong with Pentax's AF speed. It's great. But I *would* like the repeatable, consistent accuracy I get with my A99-derived Hasselblad. And I'd really like the tracking speed, and the way the AF system seems to hold on to a target moving within the frame.

I'll say again, I really love my Pentax cameras; they're my favourites. I am - for the most part - a "Pentax guy", and if I had to choose between keeping my Pentax cameras or the Hassy, I'd be waving bye-bye to the latter. But the AF in my Hassy is *better*. That's not a criticism of Pentax AF - it's just my experience of using both in similar situations.

[Qwntm]

I have never missed anything running or flying towards me the last 20 years due to autofocus speed. I have lost images due to not having the right sensor activated or not being able to keep the sensor on the right part of the subject.
Professional photographers were able to nail the subject virtually 100% with AF 25 years ago with AF system slower than what you find in modern Pentax bodies. This AF performance nonsense, mostly performed by noting how fast the lens spins through the helicoid with the lens cap on, is counter productive. AF is now much like metering; good enough to nail the shot. Learn how it works and use it accordingly.
Faster is always better, but my 600/4 spins from infinity to 3 meter in one 1s. Nothing I've ever seen moves that fast and if it was I wouldn't have been able to keep it in the finder let alone in the AF sensor. The fact that something is smoother and faster doesn't mean that something slower isn't fast enough...

It is noteworthy that the 20 year old AF system of the Pentax 645N gave just as many keepers (close to 100%) as the professional canon bodies (in spite of screw drive AF) according to professional wildlife photographers that used both...

I agree with you. If you know what you're doing, all the AF systems can help you get what you want. And there's not that much of a big deal between all the brands. (If you don't know what you're doing, then a really really top notch af system can seem like pure magic!)


The only real point though, is that better is always better, and there is unquestionably room for improvement in the Pentax line up. So let's all hope it gets better because it can, not because it really has to.


(Hey want to switch countries for a while? I always wanted to photograph Norway, and our political system is total crap right now.... Idaho/Oregon is one of the nicest parts, so it's not a terrible deal for you... )