[MightyMike]

In the past few weeks I've brought you my results with regards to AF-C on the K-1 II, I analyzed my results for an airshow, my dog running towards me and now I bring you my result for sports, specifically Aussie Rules Football (not Rugby, its faster and has more action).

I used 3 lenses this time, the Sigma 100-300mm F4.0 EX DG, the Sigma 500mm F4.5 EX DG and the Pentax 55-300mm F4.5-6.3 PLM borrowed for half a game.

I took in 3 games in a row from morning through afternoon on a hot day so heat ripples were a big issue. I took 1512 photos all in FF mode even with the 55-300PLM. I used Low focus hold and focus priority (not that it works), I shot at 1/4000th sec. I shot the 55-300 PLM wide open though in hind sight I should have stopped it down to F8.0, the Sigma 100-300mm F4.0 wide open and the Sigma 500mm F4.5 at F5.6 just for extra DOF.

I'd just like to add that though its not my first time shooting Aussie Rules Football it is my first time in almost a year so I'm a bit rustier than I may be later in the summer.

These are my evaluation categories in no particular order
1) Miss Focus, Deleted photo due to a clear and visible loss of focus tracking
2) Alternate focus, Deleted photo due to the camera focusing on the wrong target
3) User Error, Deleted photo most often due to triggering the camera before it was in focus leading to one or more out of focus photos in a row, it also may include a few rare shots where the subject wasn't in the focus point range, pretty much sloppiness on the user end.
4) Kept Bad Photos, Photos that were bad for any number of reasons that were very close to in focus and showed action that was worth keeping, a few of these may even make it into the galleries as they could be ok resized and sharpened. (In the results I divided these up proportionally into 4 of the other categories for an accurate result)
5) Heat Ripples, Pretty self explanatory, the further the action was the worse it got
6) Useless Photos, deleted because there was no action, no value, someone got in the way that sort of stuff.

In the past years my keeper rate has been 40-60% at these events, however not all deleted photos were due to miss-focus, So I'm looking for better results with the K-1 II as it is supposed to be better. In a nutshell I hit 58% keeper ratio over these 3 games so at the top end of what I achieved in the past, however it is my opinion that I deleted a lot more due to heat ripples than in the past and I was being sloppier than I could be.

Game 1, first half, Womens League, Using the Sigma 500mm F4.5 @ F5.6, total of 236 photos taken
1) Miss Focus: 29 (36 including those I kept) = 15.3% (84.7% of the time the camera seemed to focus accurately!)
2) Alternate Focus: 13 (16 including those I kept) = 6.8%
3) User Error: 20 (25 including those I kept) = 10.6%
4) Kept bad photos: 20
5) Heat Ripples: 14 (19 including those I kept) = 8.1%
6) Useless photos: 6 = 2.5%

Keeper ratio (including kept bad photos) was 65.3%, so far I'm pretty happy

Game 1, second half, Womens League, Using the Sigma 100-300mm F4.0 @ F4.0, total of 187 photos taken
1) Miss Focus: 29 (38 including those I kept) = 20.3% (79.7% of the time the camera seemed to focus accurately!)
2) Alternate Focus: 5 (6 including those I kept) = 3.2%
3) User Error: 25 (33 including those I kept) = 17.6%
4) Kept bad photos: 20
5) Heat Ripples: 6 (8 including those I kept) = 4.3%
6) Useless photos: 2 = 1.1%

Keeper ratio (including kept bad photos) was 64.2%, Hard to complain about IMO

Game 2, first half, Division 1 League, Using the Pentax 55-300mm PLM, total of 152 photos taken
1) Miss Focus: 20 (24 including those I kept) = 15.8% (84.2% of the time the camera seemed to focus accurately!)
2) Alternate Focus: 2 (2 including those I kept) = 1.3%
3) User Error: 7 (8 including those I kept) = 5.3% (visible difference!)
4) Kept bad photos: 7
5) Heat Ripples: 11 (13 including those I kept) = 8.6%
6) Useless photos: 7 = 4.6%

Keeper ratio (including kept bad photos) was 69.1%, I loved the speed of the PLM. It should in the reduction of user error photos where I'd fired before the camera was in focus. However the handling was horrible compared with what I'm used to, my Sigma 100-300mm F4.0's zoom ring is buttery smooth and can be moved back and forth with just my thumb over the whole range, the 55-300PLM had to have my whole hand in action from the top left in order to move the zoom ring through its full range and its certainly not conducive to zooming while tracking. I also wasn't pleased with its sharpness overall (compared with what I'm used to) but then I also shot it wide open and probably should have tried F8.0. That said though I may not buy this lens unless its cheap I do recommend it and its focus is beautifully fast!

Game 2, Second half, Division 1 League, Using the Sigma 500mm F4.5 @ F5.6, total of 245 photos taken
1) Miss Focus: 48 (60 including those I kept) = 24.5% (75.5% of the time the camera seemed to focus accurately!)
2) Alternate Focus: 3 (4 including those I kept) = 1.6%
3) User Error: 43 (53 including those I kept) = 21.6%
4) Kept bad photos: 30
5) Heat Ripples: 30 (37 including those I kept) = 15.1% (Probably should be higher)
6) Useless photos: 17 = 6.9%

Keeper ratio (including kept bad photos) was 42.4%, After using a lens that is very fast to acquire first focus, using a slower lens even one as fast as my Sigma 500mm F4.5 resulted in more than normal amounts of user error. Also I do believe the heat ripple ratio should be higher but like I said above I divided those photos I kept that weren't ideal proportionally as I didn't record their issue despite keeping them.

Game 3, Whole Game, Division 1 League, Using the Sigma 500mm F4.5 @ F5.6, total of 692 photos taken
1) Miss Focus: 117 (149 including those I kept) = 21.5% (78.5% of the time the camera seemed to focus accurately!)
2) Alternate Focus: 3 (4 including those I kept) = 0.6%
3) User Error: 71 (90 including those I kept) = 13.0%
4) Kept bad photos: 72
5) Heat Ripples: 72 (92 including those I kept) = 10.4% (Probably should be higher)
6) Useless photos: 35 = 5.1%

Keeper ratio (including kept bad photos) was 56.9%, Again I repeat I do believe the heat ripple ratio should be higher but like I said above I divided those photos I kept that weren't ideal proportionally as I didn't record their issue despite keeping them.

Overall Total, 1512 photos taken
1) Miss Focus: 243 (307 including those I kept) = 20.3% (79.7% of the time the camera seemed to focus accurately!)
2) Alternate Focus: 26 (32 including those I kept) = 2.1%
3) User Error: 166 (201 including those I kept) = 13.3%
4) Kept bad photos: 72
5) Heat Ripples: 133 (169 including those I kept) = 11.2% (Probably should be higher)
6) Useless photos: 67 = 4.4%

Keeper ratio (including kept bad photos) was 58.0%... This is the upper end of what was possible in the past and I do believe I had a lot more heat ripples to deal with at this even over other events so I have to say the K-1II was a success in this regard as it has been in the previous 2 types of tests. Also its pretty clear you can achieve 75-85% in focus in sports so long as you exclude issues of user error, alternative focus targets and heat ripples from the bad focus results as they aren't truly the cameras fault. In the past had I truly concentrated on the task and payed attention to acquiring focus, not shooting action that is too far away, not shooting on a very hot day and not continuing to shoot when you loose focus or when you don't have focus I could achieve a keeper rate at best of 60%, I basically achieved that this time by being sloppy. That should make it clear the AF though not as effective as other systems is quite capable for sports, action, birding and other moving wildlife. (Yes great skill and ideal lenses play a role too, don't try to achieve the same results with a very slow focusing lens)

I hope these series of reports have helped others understand what is possible

Galleries will come later, it took me hours just to evaluate these photos, it will take a while to choose which ones make the final cut and I'm not working on it all the time either.

[clackers]

Thanks, Mike, I really couldn't be bothered doing metrics like you, so kudos!

I've just posted some more AF-C shots of Aussie Rules here - :

Suburban football, Australian Rules style. - PentaxForums.com

I'm fascinated by the concept of Canadian AFL players. We have an American forward doing really well in the number two team in Australia at the moment, and there are a couple of Irish ex-Gaelic players, but no former ice hockey players yet!

[MightyMike]

Thanks, Mike, I really couldn't be bothered doing metrics like you, so kudos!

I've just posted some more AF-C shots of Aussie Rules here - :

Suburban football, Australian Rules style. - PentaxForums.com

I'm fascinated by the concept of Canadian AFL players. We have an American forward doing really well in the number two team in Australia at the moment, and there are a couple of Irish ex-Gaelic players, but no former ice hockey players yet!

Thanks, great series of photos you've posted there. My brother in law was on one of the teams until he had an ankle injury on a bad landing from a jump. He is who got me into photographing the sport, so I try to get in several games a season with other photography friends too. I can't say I follow any person or team but I do enjoy the challenge of photographing them.

BTW I find doing detailed metrics like this tedious, I much prefer just deleting the bad photos and then going through the rest to find the best to be edited and put in a gallery, however I believe such metrics will help give accurate representations of the latest AF-C ability from Pentax.

[jbinpg]

Yes, f/8 with the 55-300 PLM is much better than wide open. However, I believe this lens was optimized for close work rather than distant subjects. Its oof rendering doing pseudo-macro stuff punches above its weight class, likely helped by the rounded aperture blades and ED glass.

[Mikesul]

Thanks, Mike. Clackers is not the only one who would never get around to doing this so Thanks!

[MightyMike]

Yes, f/8 with the 55-300 PLM is much better than wide open. However, I believe this lens was optimized for close work rather than distant subjects. Its oof rendering doing pseudo-macro stuff punches above its weight class, likely helped by the rounded aperture blades and ED glass.

The ED glass helps chromatic aberrations be controlled with fewer elements used and can lead to a smaller design. However WRT to close focus optimization I don't think so, a 55-300 is a telephoto lens, it should be designed for distant subjects, however as a by-product of a multitude of design choices it may perform quite well at close range even if not specifically designed to be optimized for close range.

[jpzk]

Well done "study", Mike !

I assume you've owned a K3, so what would be your "guess" about the final ratios using all of those lenses on a K3 and AF-C? (comparing your results while using the K-1II).
A "wild guess" would be good enough for me ...
Cheers!

[surfar]

Real FOOTball is on tonight.Midnight on East Coast of OZ

Then tomorrow night(Monday morning our time) REAL FOOTBALLs game is ON!

SMOZZIE rules is wubbish!...come in Clacker!

[MightyMike]

Well done "study", Mike !

I assume you've owned a K3, so what would be your "guess" about the final ratios using all of those lenses on a K3 and AF-C? (comparing your results while using the K-1II).
A "wild guess" would be good enough for me ...
Cheers!

I don't recall shooting Footie with the K-5 or K-5II although I may have, However with the K-3 and later the K-1 I felt my keeper rate was between 40-60%, 40% when I'm sloppy and 60% when I'm trying hard... as stated i felt I got pretty much 60% by being sloppy on the K-1 II... lets say a conservative 10% improvement but a possible 20% improvement.

---------- Post added 07-13-18 at 11:33 PM ----------

Thanks, Mike. Clackers is not the only one who would never get around to doing this so Thanks!

Thanks Mike

[pschlute]

Thanks for posting your findings.

[Billk]

Real FOOTball is on tonight.Midnight on East Coast of OZ

Then tomorrow night(Monday morning our time) REAL FOOTBALLs game is ON!

SMOZZIE rules is wubbish!...come in Clacker!

I think you might have played too much rugby league. Although too many headers in soccer/ Association football could produce the same inability to appreciate the poetry of AFL.

[surfar]

to appreciate the poetry of AFL.

Ha ha ha ha ha,we exported people to the southern colony and look what happened!

---------- Post added 07-14-18 at 09:54 PM ----------

Those big tall Smozzie Rulers would make good goalkeepers!

[clackers]

Ha ha ha ha ha,we exported people to the southern colony and look what happened!

---------- Post added 07-14-18 at 09:54 PM ----------

Those big tall Smozzie Rulers would make good goalkeepers!

I certainly don't mind roundball, Surfar.

I've lost many hours sleep the last few weeks watching the Cup.

I even thought this was the Least Hateable English Team in years.

Modest backgrounds, no superstars, young lads without tickets on themselves playing for each other, an example to the Neymars, Messis and Ronaldos.

[surfar]

I've lost many hours sleep the last few weeks watching the Cup.

And a few more soon!

Two creative teams,one of which the Socceroos pushed to the limit.We deserved a little more but just lack 3 players.

Neymars, Messis and Ronaldos.

English Team

Did well for the coach who did a good job.

[MightyMike]

Thanks for posting your findings.

Thanks pschlute