Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
08-12-2016, 06:07 AM - 2 Likes   #61
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,914
QuoteOriginally posted by urssu Quote
Hello, See now, that' s the problem with fanboys. They derail the subject. The question was about the AF from Pentax, how it compares to the competition, and fanboys like the upper quotted sir/ maddam (and others; this d
Haven't read the whole thread , but the speed of aircraft is independent from AF tracking speed. As long as AF tracking speed is sufficient for tracking the aircraft , it has nothing to do with the difference of performance between a D5 and a K1. Absolute AF tracking capability is a technical thing, free of emotions, free of fanboy thing and free of no anti-fanboy thing.

---------- Post added 12-08-16 at 15:21 ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by urssu Quote
Read other phtographers (real ones) reviews and you will see.
I have the camera and I track high speed birds. Without lacking politeness, I don't care about general , virtual, void and subjective opinions of people not using the camera. Online review and subjective opinions can inflate without limits, but at the end of the day, they are still subjective, irrational and void of substance. However, being successful AF tracking shooter, is enough to spot misnomers.

08-12-2016, 06:32 AM   #62
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Washington
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 267
QuoteOriginally posted by urssu Quote
Let me rephrase that: Pentax is sluggish in AF terms compared to the competition. I' ve tested it in close to sikilar condition that made me want a new camera. Step forward for Pentax, still not 'spot on' (the AF) .
Read other phtographers (real ones) reviews and you will see.

All the best!
There are many many superb pictures posted here by photographers real or not in Pentax Forums. Is it what photography is all about?? The final product..images?? Where are yours?? Maybe you can share with us with some of your work.
08-12-2016, 07:26 AM   #63
Pentaxian




Join Date: Dec 2011
Posts: 2,747
On another forum I have the experience that the person to bring up the term "fanboy" first in a thread usually is a narcisstic ego-fanboy at least, in 9 out of 10 cases with more than little bashing intent.
Ego-fanboys claim to have seen it all, done it all and know it all better and thus by definition anyone who disagrees with their poorly argued claims in their narrow view has to be a "fanboy". Ego-Fanboys only love and know their own egocentric perspective, of which they are huge fans and will not tolerate any criticism, however convincing it is to the more skilled.

Ex Pentax users (and those who only keep old models but use other options now) are mostly those who can't close the matter but feel the urge to aggressively justify their move ex post by being extremely loud about it.
Same type of ill character as the people who unsolicited whine negatively about the ex partners in public.
08-23-2016, 11:40 PM   #64
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,857
QuoteOriginally posted by redpit Quote
That phrase of Normhead couldn't be put better and is the core of photography in general (at least for me and people thinking like me). I'm mainly shooting airshows and aviation and my favourite themes are aircraft in flight and guess what I shifted from Nikon to Pentax (D7000 to K-5) initially almost by coincidence and then I sold my Nikon equipment and now I'm only shooting with the K-1 (K-5IIs as second body) and the DFA 150-450. My keepers rate? It is always greater than 80% and I could raise it even more but that is not my goal. The goal is what Normhead said. I have thousand of aircraft pictures and although a FF seems like not the proper step forward (in comparison with a K-3II or a 24Mpxl or even bigger crop sensor) I took it only for those 2-3 or 10 times that I know now that I have the experience to fill my frame and let the K-1 image quality power do the rest for me... If you don't get that I don't know how to put it differently. Since images are better than words I will upload some samples from various occassions to explain my rational.

But I went up the stream - took the difficult road from Crop to FF and from getting almost 100% keepers (I'm sure that if that was my target I could get very close to that) to getting 10% of my shots that make the difference. In an medium airshow you have about 500 people shooting with what they've got to the same theme from more or less the same spot... If you think that o D500 would give you an advantage under such circumstances you can get this AF tracking beast... After many years of shooting I've found another truth and I wouldn't exchange my K-1 with any other camera* (imagine that my K-1 is stuck in Manual mode at the moment and I'm still using it for my aviation pictures).

*645Z would be great to try if I could hand held that beast with a telephoto in front of it but that is almost impossible!
Honestly, thinking you need the K1 resolution or picture quality is a view as limited as thinking you need the better AF.

Neither are needed, and a better photographer would manage better shots with much more basic gear than K1 or D5. But this may be quite hard.

Also this is a very specific use of photographic skills, try for the graal of the picture, even if it mean only 2-3 fantastic pictures a year. If you go takes photos of a football match, you need the photo of key action of the key player. If you miss it, then your photo will not sell at all. You may have opportunities for hundred airshows over the years and surely it may not make that much difference what airshow and so on.

For many other usecase, it the key point and why somebody hire a photographer to take the picture rather than buy an old picture on stock photos that may have been take 10 years ago. You need to manage it EVERY TIME. Same when you are shooting a wedding. You need to manage it every time. If you got a fantastic bride shot of the previous wedding and try to sell it again to the next bride, you'll have quite some issues.

People have different priorities and preferences and I fully respect that. K1 has more picture quality (but no better for air flights than D810, and less than A7RII or 5Ds) and D5 has better AF (and even D810 too as per Adam comment). Basically you could have better AF and the K1 picture quality with D810, and that would be also more expensive. You could get better AF but worse picture quality (a D7200 for example) or better picture quality and worse AF (645Z for example).

Depending of the priorities and practice, different tools will give different results, but as I understand here this thread is about AF performance more than picture quality of 36MP sensor...


Last edited by Nicolas06; 08-23-2016 at 11:57 PM.
08-24-2016, 12:09 AM   #65
Forum Member




Join Date: Dec 2015
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 51
QuoteOriginally posted by normhead Quote
The only people who've actually set up measured tests and compared comparable models actually say Pentax AF is pretty good. But in measured comparisons done in a lab, Pentax does well is speed of focus lock and not so well in tracking. But the only actual numbers I've seen say they are in the ball park. Action shooters will experience times when the small differences can make huge differences, in keeper rate, because the Pentax is just beyond it's capability and the competitor is just within it's capability.

So what I'd say would be, if you want better than Pentax AF be prepared to pay for it, just as with any other camera system. The entry level systems do not have the same capabilities as the high end systems.

But from my perspective speed of AF is a small part of the picture. Techniques like prefocusing can get you the absolute best images with a K-1. here's the way I look at it,

I can pay for great AF with 1Dx or 5D Fx

for the Nikon 5Dx 8,499 CAD I get an amazing AF system and 12 FPS, -great pro gear, 20 MP
for the Canon 1DX MkII or a 7,999 CAD , 20.2 MP

So lets say I take a $2499 CAD K-1 and $2500 150-450 at 1/3 the price and I'm in the same photographers pit.

The way I see it, what they have given to get that superior AF and Frame rate is resolution. As simply stated as possible if they are sitting there firing away with their expensive gear worth more than 10k, easily, and I'm sitting there pre-focussing with my K-1, if I can accept the challenge, fight through the "diversity" and nail a couple of images, my resolution will mean I end up with the best image. It may not happen as often, but if you're a guy like me looking for the best image likely to be produced by any photographer at any time , in any location, you will forego the fancy AF for a shot at a really, totally knock out image.

It's all about how you choose to work. If you're working for the Toronto Star covering a Jays game, you want the highest possibility of an acceptable image. You have to produce every day, every game.

If you're a guy like me who sells directly to the public, I have to have the best quality image ever taken of my subject. They don't care if I'm cranking one out every day to earn a salary they just want one picture they can hang on their wall, and say "this is possibly the best image ever taken of ______________ whatever the criteria are.

So what we are talking about here are two totally different modes of operation. East and west and never the twain shall meet. This is much more apparent to us old guys who have used large format, with no AF at all. When we leave the studio, for the type of work I do, we might even take a 4x5 film camera. We know, way less chance of getting the image we want, but if we nail it......

SO you go out there confident in your ability to produce, one of the techniques you've learned over the years is going to get you the shot you want, and Faster AF and Tracking is not an acceptable trade off for less image quality.

A coupe of the guys I shoot with are shooting with 600mm F4 lenses on 1Dx or 5Dx bodies.. You'd be amazed how often I go out with the K-3 and DA*60-250 with the 1.4 on it and at the end of the day have the best images of the group. They have frame rate and AF, I have file size and portability, the ability to quickly move to a position that gives me the best light shooting position.

So forgive me if I'm a little disrespectful of the value of fantastic AF. All I want to know is how do I get the best image. I will accept the days when they get better images because of advanced tech, for a better image every now and then with average type of tech. They bank on their gear. I bank on my skill and understanding.

What kind of guy you want to be is completely up to you, but do I think the guys I shoot with who are carrying $15k worth of gear to get images that aren't as good as mine at least 50% of the time? From my perspective, having a wallet that's always empty and not much income to spend on gear, I think they are idiots.

For me it's all about final image.
What it takes to get it, is for me to figure out how to get it as cheaply as I can.
To me hobby photographers stressing about AF speed are missing the point.
And people who buy fast frame rate and top of the line AF who aren't shooting professional sports are wasting their money.

All I care about between a K-1 and D810 is, if I can figure out how to get the image I want on the K-1, and that I have a shot at having the K-1 image being the best image possible in those conditions. Pixel shift and in camera shake reduction will give me that. End of discussion, at least for me.


For what I want, a K-3 and a good lens, is more what I want than those $15k systems listed above.
Some one will probably jump in and say, "You're just saying that because you can't afford the big system."

Well let my put this out there....

No, I wouldn't buy those systems, unless I were a pro sports photographer.
But I probably will be looking at a K-1 and a 150-450 sometime in the next year. Thanks to some favourable circumstances I'll be able to afford what ever I want. And none of those fast AF cameras is on the list. They don't have what I value. And for 99% of the world, that is true for them as well.

Nothing makes me growl more than some amateur pretending he needs advanced AF and frame rate. What an ego trip.
Most of us are going to settle for something less than the best. SO why are folks concerned about which is better, when most are better than the worst, and none are better than the best? We all choose the compromises that give us a chance at what we want, and super fast tracking and AF are not really even on the table. You have to give up too much to get them.

Some of us choose what we want for totally spurious reasons and then learn to make the most of what we bought. Nothing wrong with that either.

The only question is, given my skill set etc. can I get the best image possible in the situations I find myself with this camera?
If you have confidence in your ability to make lemonade out of lemons, leaning on technology is just an expensive crutch, especially if you have to give up Image Quality in the final image to get it, or on the case of the K-1 and D810, pay an extra thousand dollars to get it. I will always try and learn new skills to make what I have do what I want, before I start leaning on better much more expensive technology. Us old large format are used to this. We know all you need is something to capture the image and a makeshift bellows , a magnifying glass, and few doo dads, card board and duct tape and we'll produce an image. All these modern bells and whistles completey obscure the point. You have to keep in mind what exactly it is you're doing.

And the crazy thing is, the guy with the D810? He can get the images his system is good at that I can't get , I can get the images my K-3 is best at, that he can't get, and we can both go home happy. Buying something expensive isn't smart. Buying the most appropriate thing for what you do is smart. And AF speed for most of us, is a very small part of that equation. Recently I went through A 24 frame wildlife burst next to a guy shooting a 1Dx. One of my 24 frames was the shot I wanted. The fact that he got 36 frames in the same time frame at lower resolution means, in that scenario I win. He didn't get the same angle as me, he didn't get as good a pose as I did, he didn't get the same resolution I idid. He got 36 images, not one of which was as good as the five I kept.

He had the fastest focusing, highest frame rate on the most expensive camera and lens available, but that didn't get him the best image, at least not that day. It's a whole system. Don't get lost focusing on one small part. And realize that practically "small difference" in the end works out to be "no difference" most of the time, it's not about frame rate, it's not about AF, it's about at the end of the day, who has the best image.

"Find the lens you love and buy the camera it fits on."

Really good post 📖📖📖📖📖
08-24-2016, 02:10 AM   #66
Pentaxian
redpit's Avatar

Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Athens
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,518
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
Honestly, thinking you need the K1 resolution or picture quality is a view as limited as thinking you need the better AF.

Neither are needed, and a better photographer would manage better shots with much more basic gear than K1 or D5. But this may be quite hard.

Also this is a very specific use of photographic skills, try for the graal of the picture, even if it mean only 2-3 fantastic pictures a year. If you go takes photos of a football match, you need the photo of key action of the key player. If you miss it, then your photo will not sell at all. You may have opportunities for hundred airshows over the years and surely it may not make that much difference what airshow and so on.

For many other usecase, it the key point and why somebody hire a photographer to take the picture rather than buy an old picture on stock photos that may have been take 10 years ago. You need to manage it EVERY TIME. Same when you are shooting a wedding. You need to manage it every time. If you got a fantastic bride shot of the previous wedding and try to sell it again to the next bride, you'll have quite some issues.

People have different priorities and preferences and I fully respect that. K1 has more picture quality (but no better for air flights than D810, and less than A7RII or 5Ds) and D5 has better AF (and even D810 too as per Adam comment). Basically you could have better AF and the K1 picture quality with D810, and that would be also more expensive. You could get better AF but worse picture quality (a D7200 for example) or better picture quality and worse AF (645Z for example).

Depending of the priorities and practice, different tools will give different results, but as I understand here this thread is about AF performance more than picture quality of 36MP sensor...
My friend Nicolas06 we agree that everybody's priorities and expectations from photography are different, as are the experiences, that is the reason there are so many different systems out there and most of them can offer great results. Through my experiences (that I would need many pages to write down, this is a beer talk as someone very well put it) I ended up using Pentax equipment mainly for aviation photography. I know the pros and cons of my equipment and I have learnt to work around-mask the cons and highlight the pros as everybody does in his work. I'm not a pro photographer and although I have gained some money from photography this is not my goal. If I were either a pro photographer on an assignment or a wedding photographer I would have adjusted my workflow and style respectively to be able not to starve from failing to the tasks. I'm sure though that I could also do it with Pentax equipment too. To be more specific and come back to your sayings and the thread subject, I can ensure you that from an airshow that I like to shoot (and could do it professionally if I had the chance) I can leave the show with more than 80-85% keepers and all the highlights well documented in my photos. But this is more like journalistic photgraphy that I'm not interested in. I have done it many years with my K-5IIs and it's not a big deal if you ask me, I'm not saying that I am a great photographer or it takes special skills. Just practice! As a fellow Nikon photographer (I will tell you more about him later) keeps telling me "We are talking about Photography not maths, even a well trained fool with the proper gear can make it". So moving from my K-5 series to the K-1 I saw a great improvement to the AF performance which is what we are talking about and that is adequate FOR ME. It cannot be measured, its quite subjective its either you are dissapointed from the new AF system or it works for you and for me it works well enough to be satisfied. I said there are many cameras out there that offer better AF than the K-1 but there are no cameras that beat K-1 in every aspect. The K-1 (I don't know if you own one and understand what I mean) is a highly competitive camera offering the best IQ in the K-mount series as Pentax developers very well put it.

Now to go back to my airshow examples, I could shoot all day using "safe settings" e.g. shoot propellers with 1/800 or higher SS and get decent results, a great keepers' rate and just complete the task that would keep my plate full. As I explained earlier (and we agreed that each person's priorities are different) I got the K-1 to take my pics to a higher level and the K-1 has responded exactly as I was hoping for before I got it... Now concerning the D810 superiority vs the K-1 that you consider as given, I don't know where your certainty comes from but my buddy who use the D810 and we shoot side by side is really impressed with the K-1 and admits that at higher ISOs it handles noise better than the 810, giving better results. Moreover him coming from the D3s and D300s he finds that D810 AF lacks the accuracy and speed of these models and quite often he finds that his camera has lost focus during a long burst. I don't understand how it comes and we envy the Canonikons and they also whine about issues with their gear and declare impressed by the Pentax output (that is more understandable as Pentax is not considered big players so you don't have big expectations when you don;t know the brand).

To sum up because I bored you with my long post, I find the K-1 an excellent camera that bulids on the Pentax philosophy offering more for less money. The AF system is not as advanced as the high-end specialized action cameras like D5 and 1DXii but we compare apples to oranges when we compare these cameras. For me the fact that it nails focus easily and can track the subjects I'm shooting is adequate and I enjoy using the K-1 and the impressive IQ it offers. What really matters in the end are the results and I'm getting relults that make me happy. If you can't focus with the K-1 then obviously its not the right camera to own and it means that Pentax is not the right system for you (as prior models had even worse AF system). Don't ask Pentax to make a D5 with the K-1 sensor and sell it for under $2000. I don't say that you do it Nicolas06 but a lot of people in here that is what they want.

Last edited by redpit; 08-24-2016 at 02:16 AM.
08-24-2016, 11:53 AM   #67
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,857
QuoteOriginally posted by redpit Quote
Now concerning the D810 superiority vs the K-1 that you consider as given, I don't know where your certainty comes from but my buddy who use the D810 and we shoot side by side is really impressed with the K-1 and admits that at higher ISOs it handles noise better than the 810, giving better results. Moreover him coming from the D3s and D300s he finds that D810 AF lacks the accuracy and speed of these models and quite often he finds that his camera has lost focus during a long burst. I don't understand how it comes and we envy the Canonikons and they also whine about issues with their gear and declare impressed by the Pentax output (that is more understandable as Pentax is not considered big players so you don't have big expectations when you don;t know the brand).
Complex to say if D810 is better everywhere. It doesn't have pixel shift or astrotracer, that's true. But it has 50 iso mode. I'am not convinced by a noticable high iso performance difference in raw and proper processing software (lightroom/dxo). For AF, I respect Adam opinion that find it better for AFC and I am quite convinced that overall K1 AF is a bit worse than the D810 and that neither are perfect. The biggest problem of D810 is honestly this guy doesn't git K-mount so anyway I don't care that much. i need AF on my FA77 and FA31!

QuoteOriginally posted by redpit Quote
To sum up because I bored you with my long post, I find the K-1 an excellent camera that bulids on the Pentax philosophy offering more for less money. The AF system is not as advanced as the high-end specialized action cameras like D5 and 1DXii but we compare apples to oranges when we compare these cameras. For me the fact that it nails focus easily and can track the subjects I'm shooting is adequate and I enjoy using the K-1 and the impressive IQ it offers. What really matters in the end are the results and I'm getting relults that make me happy. If you can't focus with the K-1 then obviously its not the right camera to own and it means that Pentax is not the right system for you (as prior models had even worse AF system). Don't ask Pentax to make a D5 with the K-1 sensor and sell it for under $2000. I don't say that you do it Nicolas06 but a lot of people in here that is what they want.
I am mostly fine wiht K3 and K1 AF honestly (but not K70 or K5), I don't do much action and with theses camera the AF is more than good enough. I think AF is a key feature through more valuable maybe than lot of MPs or specialized features like pixel shift that apply to a restricted set of situations. But if I was to buy K1 while the AF would not be a strength, it would not prevent me from buying. It is more a problem of size/weight combined with associated high quality FF lenses. I know that in term of price feature set Pentax is as good as competition, focussing on different area but no better because for example it is easier to find used gear on older FF system and that there more third party lenses.

Anyway, I stay first and foremost for small primes and if possible small bodies. So I wait for now. Where I am the most afraid if to see new small lenses released in FF and APSC and theses day we don't get that. I hope that just temporary but the Pentax questionnaire doesn't help at it seems they all about very fast and big large apperture lenses.

I think that Pentax will continue to improve the AF and honestly, this will benefit everybody so that a good thing.
08-24-2016, 01:51 PM - 1 Like   #68
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 11,913
QuoteOriginally posted by amp Quote
Is it really that much slower than Canikon and Sony? At all levels of use and across the range of cameras? ...Is there anywhere pentax beats their competitors?
I'm loath to enter this thread, but ...there are too many ways to define good AF for any brand or camera body to really claim an unconditional 'win' in this contest.

Camera X may have 61 AF points and excellent tracking, but the AF won't work at all at -3 EV lighting. Or the AF may be unreliable under tungsten lighting.

Camera Y's AF may be fast, and work well under low-light, but there may not be the right sort of lenses available to fully support the AF capabilities of the camera body.

Camera Z may have hopeless low-light AF performance, low fps, and poor movement tracking capabilities, so you'd never use it for fast-paced sport or birds in flight, but it may have outstanding face detection built into the AF, so for some people events it may be the best camera to use.

Camera A may have 450 AF points, great tracking, great low-light AF etc, so on paper it is an AF 'winner', but the camera user interface may be poorly designed, so in practice most users simply never use all the advanced AF features.

Etc etc. This kind of discussion could go on forever, unless AF 'success' (or even simply AF speed) is strictly defined and very narrowly tested.


Last edited by rawr; 08-24-2016 at 01:58 PM.
08-26-2016, 01:32 PM   #69
Pentaxian




Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 4,857
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
I'm loath to enter this thread, but ...there are too many ways to define good AF for any brand or camera body to really claim an unconditional 'win' in this contest.

Camera X may have 61 AF points and excellent tracking, but the AF won't work at all at -3 EV lighting. Or the AF may be unreliable under tungsten lighting.

Camera Y's AF may be fast, and work well under low-light, but there may not be the right sort of lenses available to fully support the AF capabilities of the camera body.

Camera Z may have hopeless low-light AF performance, low fps, and poor movement tracking capabilities, so you'd never use it for fast-paced sport or birds in flight, but it may have outstanding face detection built into the AF, so for some people events it may be the best camera to use.

Camera A may have 450 AF points, great tracking, great low-light AF etc, so on paper it is an AF 'winner', but the camera user interface may be poorly designed, so in practice most users simply never use all the advanced AF features.

Etc etc. This kind of discussion could go on forever, unless AF 'success' (or even simply AF speed) is strictly defined and very narrowly tested.
And some camera may get it all for AF. I understand the extremely expensive sport/action flagship of Canon and Nikon are very capable and the lastest 5Dmark-IV look like it has great AFC + face detection and focus by touching the rear screen. But the price may not be same at all.
08-28-2016, 02:56 AM   #70
bxf
Pentaxian
bxf's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Lisbon area
Posts: 1,567
QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
And some camera may get it all for AF.
Somebody please let me know when there is one that is the size and price of a K-3.

QuoteOriginally posted by Nicolas06 Quote
And some camera may get it all for AF... But the price may not be same at all.
And this is worth repeating, because it seems people forget that not every Canikon body has the superior AF tracking of their higher sports models. It would make more sense to include price (and resolution, for that matter) as considerations in our comparisons.
10-14-2016, 10:19 AM - 1 Like   #71
New Member




Join Date: Sep 2016
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3
Key is practice. I'm always in competition my friend who has a Canon 7D mkii which is super fast. Whilst i feel that the Canon is faster bear in mind that the K3 can be found for half the price of the Canon. So practice your technique and remember that not every shot will be a keeper.
Attached Images
View Picture EXIF
PENTAX K-3  Photo 
10-14-2016, 10:29 AM   #72
Senior Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Parallax's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: South Dakota
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 17,367
QuoteOriginally posted by axl rose Quote
and remember that not every shot will be a keeper.
..............regardless of what brand of camera you use.

Welcome to the forum.
10-14-2016, 09:17 PM   #73
Senior Member




Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Washington
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 267
QuoteOriginally posted by axl rose Quote
Key is practice.
100% correct. I shoot with manual focus lenses even birds in flight and for sure I miss more shots if I would have a good AF lens, but I still get good number of sharp in focus pics. I have friends who shoot with top end Canon gear
and they still miss lot of shots. Practice and good technique makes a big difference.

Nice shot of the Greyhound ??
10-14-2016, 10:53 PM   #74
New Member




Join Date: Sep 2016
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3
QuoteOriginally posted by Parallax Quote
..............regardless of what brand of camera you use.

Welcome to the forum.
Thank you.
10-16-2016, 10:33 AM   #75
New Member




Join Date: Sep 2016
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3
QuoteOriginally posted by cleaverx Quote
100% correct. I shoot with manual focus lenses even birds in flight and for sure I miss more shots if I would have a good AF lens, but I still get good number of sharp in focus pics. I have friends who shoot with top end Canon gear
and they still miss lot of shots. Practice and good technique makes a big difference.

Nice shot of the Greyhound ??
Imagine we still used film . Thank you it's my friends whippet,perfect for practice.
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!
70-200mm, af, aircraft, camera, competitors, d-fa*, downloads, exactly, fanboys, focus, hd, k-1, k3, ladies, music, opinions, pentax, pentax autofocus, photographers, photography, pull, saying, series, shots, television, thanks, void, wedding
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What is better about Auto Focus on other brands compared to Pentax? TropicalMonkey Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 15 03-12-2016 11:19 AM
after-market focusing screens (Katz Eye, others) compared to manual film era screens Lititz Pentax DSLR Discussion 2 05-14-2014 06:47 AM
Center AF point accuracy compared to the others GrinMode Pentax DSLR Discussion 4 04-22-2010 10:11 PM
Do you find the KX autofocus speed abit slow compared to its competitors? aaronius Pentax DSLR Discussion 24 02-11-2010 10:36 PM
K100D Dynamic Range compared to others HogRider Pentax DSLR Discussion 2 10-27-2006 07:52 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:15 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