Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Closed Thread
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
07-08-2016, 03:51 PM - 2 Likes   #106
Veteran Member
falconeye's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Munich, Alps, Germany
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 6,863
QuoteOriginally posted by Kunzite Quote
Unfortunately, things degenerated into a war between Pentaxians and a certain Rishi (who is aggressively defending his tests).
To Rishi's defense.

He has been contacting me on several occasions, including questions about standardized AF testing.

I consider him to be one of the most open minded and competent people over there at DPR. Of course, he is able to fail just like everybody else.

But I wouldn't accuse him of incompetence or tentative testing. I think in the end, this thing all comes to tone and language. The probable cause if people got banned, I guess.

About the test itself ...
In the tracking (riding in curves) test, the K-1 lost focus because the target left the focus area. That may be considered unfair and I agree. OTOH, some other cameras have their AF area spread a wider area, so the comparison is still valid. And in BIF, it is indeed difficult to keep a subject centered. Moreover, the target corossed the center area several times and K-1 did not re-aquire focus then. Unlike some other cameras which do.

Overall, the test is valid. It is not drawing an image representative of the K-1 AF capabilities if above behaviour is worked around. But valid it is.

One last word ...

Some well known bloggers started to make fun of over-loyal Pentaxians defending the brand on every occasion. Pentaxians have to tone down their voice quite a bit on other fora if they want to be perceived as serious photographers. I say this as a Pentaxian myself, although shooting another brand as well.

07-08-2016, 04:16 PM - 5 Likes   #107
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
jlstrawman's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Des Moines, Iowa
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 546
QuoteOriginally posted by starbase218 Quote
I'm outta here.
Thank you very much.
07-08-2016, 04:40 PM - 2 Likes   #108
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Wangaratta, Victoria
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,554
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
To Rishi's defense
But there is no defence if the images and text have been altered in any way (without suitable acknowledgement).
To do so is absolutely dishonest.
07-08-2016, 05:30 PM   #109
Pentaxian
D1N0's Avatar

Join Date: May 2012
Location: ---
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,444
QuoteOriginally posted by starbase218 Quote
LOL, I am playing provocative? Right....
yeah that's basically your modus operandi

07-08-2016, 05:32 PM   #110
Pentaxian




Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Romania
Posts: 9,475
I think some of us overdid it, and were too aggressive, too personal. Rishi as well, tried too hard to defend his position and became aggressive. That's what I mean by "war".
Unfortunately, even people who weren't aggressive were attacked.

I disagree about the test being valid; after all, K-1's AF coverage isn't that bad, compared with similarly priced cameras. Not in the generic context of an AF-C/tracking test.
07-08-2016, 05:51 PM - 2 Likes   #111
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Middle of Everywhere
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,172
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
To Rishi's defense.
He does not need a defender... To be frank, he comes off as angry... IMHO.

OTOH... Guess I'd be angry too, if I'd survived the long march/frog-walk to a PhD in BioSci, only to find myself wasting away in a minor sub-division of the Amazon marketing colossus. Even though I've got a title that should permit me to rule by authority, here I am dying as I'm forced to field and defend my 'team' against valid questions from a vast unwashed army of third-tier brand loyalists. I did my job. I repeatedly proved features never intended to exist, in fact, do not exist, only to discover these sloths beavered around and are using creative variations on these in combination with other features to produce great things. That's not all... What's especially maddening, the challenges from these barbarians spotted fatal flaws that caused the team to completely withdraw and issue a rewrite of the earlier Pixel Shift evaluation. In addition, they actually strong armed the re-test of the main product's AF section when it was shown to be severely flawed and rewrite parts of the report because the original write-up produced by one of my employees was snarky, tactless and misleading. Finally, in order to accommodate, I was forced to adjust my budget timeline/priorities and burn a ton more money than their cr@ppy product deserves. I could go on, but Imagine that...!

Somewhere Rishi mentioned this stuff kept him from sleeping at night.

If the job had been designed and executed correctly in the first place, there's no reason he should not be anticipating his bonus and sleeping like a baby.

My 2 cents... M
07-08-2016, 05:56 PM - 2 Likes   #112
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
monochrome's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Kirkwood (St. Louis) MO
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 20,612
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
To Rishi's defense.

He has been contacting me on several occasions, including questions about standardized AF testing.

I consider him to be one of the most open minded and competent people over there at DPR. Of course, he is able to fail just like everybody else.

But I wouldn't accuse him of incompetence or tentative testing. I think in the end, this thing all comes to tone and language. The probable cause if people got banned, I guess.

About the test itself ...
In the tracking (riding in curves) test, the K-1 lost focus because the target left the focus area. That may be considered unfair and I agree. OTOH, some other cameras have their AF area spread a wider area, so the comparison is still valid. And in BIF, it is indeed difficult to keep a subject centered. Moreover, the target corossed the center area several times and K-1 did not re-aquire focus then. Unlike some other cameras which do.

Overall, the test is valid. It is not drawing an image representative of the K-1 AF capabilities if above behaviour is worked around. But valid it is.

One last word ...

Some well known bloggers started to make fun of over-loyal Pentaxians defending the brand on every occasion. Pentaxians have to tone down their voice quite a bit on other fora if they want to be perceived as serious photographers. I say this as a Pentaxian myself, although shooting another brand as well.
Had DPR presented the commentary as you have represented it, rather than using an inflammatory title - I suspect the writer was trying to be cute - charged words and snarky Kindle comments none of this would have happened. It's all so predictable.

A known-to-be professional group of reviewers makes ill-advised word and title choices (one hopes these choices weren't intentional) following the regular DPR tradition; the usual Pentax posters respond in kind; meanwhile (side-bar) rational posters make reasonable observations about the language, which DPR episodically changes; non-Pentax users pile into the discussion, inflaming passions all the more; the cranks enter late, throwing firebombs; eventually the heat subsides, ruining a generally fair and positive review and irreparably damaging the product reputation; and at the end the Senior Fellows drop by to admonish the loyal subjects for their misbehavior - this happens every time. Someone has to stop the cycle.

As a first step I suggest DPR reviewers submit their text to a dispassionate editor before publication, with an eye toward removing inflammatory titles, references and snark. The writers are in the control position.

Last edited by monochrome; 07-08-2016 at 06:10 PM.
07-08-2016, 07:12 PM   #113
Forum Member




Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 75
Is there any C-AF advantage to using the K1 in crop mode? How does AF compare between the two modes? Has anyone tested? I am wondering how the system would cope if the test was replicated using a 135mm lens in crop mode and comparing the final image quality?

07-08-2016, 08:55 PM   #114
Senior Member




Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: United States
Posts: 150
QuoteOriginally posted by rod_grant Quote
But there is no defence if the images and text have been altered in any way (without suitable acknowledgement).
To do so is absolutely dishonest.
That sounds compelling to me.

---------- Post added 07-08-2016 at 10:56 PM ----------

QuoteOriginally posted by biz-engineer Quote
Interestingly, I've provided evidence about the K1 AF performance with a number of actual AFC, bike tracking photos from the Pentax K1.
I've questionned the honesty of DPReview AF evaluation and contacted Ricoh marcom.
The reaction of DPReview was that I've been banned completely from DPReview.
If they are so sure about their Pentax K1 AF evaluation, why do they need to ban someone from posting annoying results?
What was your name in the dpr forum?
07-08-2016, 10:21 PM   #115
ogl
Pentaxian
ogl's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Siberia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 7,294
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
To Rishi's defense.

He has been contacting me on several occasions, including questions about standardized AF testing.

I consider him to be one of the most open minded and competent people over there at DPR. Of course, he is able to fail just like everybody else.

But I wouldn't accuse him of incompetence or tentative testing. I think in the end, this thing all comes to tone and language. The probable cause if people got banned, I guess.

About the test itself ...
In the tracking (riding in curves) test, the K-1 lost focus because the target left the focus area. That may be considered unfair and I agree. OTOH, some other cameras have their AF area spread a wider area, so the comparison is still valid. And in BIF, it is indeed difficult to keep a subject centered. Moreover, the target corossed the center area several times and K-1 did not re-aquire focus then. Unlike some other cameras which do.

Overall, the test is valid. It is not drawing an image representative of the K-1 AF capabilities if above behaviour is worked around. But valid it is.

One last word ...
It's not valid, because they can't create the same light condition and don't use the same lenses. They compare apple with oranges.
Imaging resource uses the same SIGMA lens with different mount for testing cameras.

DPREVIEW -
They could compare the cameras of the same brands - for example, K-1 and K-3II.
They could compare K-1 in APS-C mode with APS-C cameras of N, C and S of the same price level.
They could compare K-1 with FF cameras of the same price range.

And they should keep the same light condition, condition of test and the same DOF

Everybody know that D5 and 1Dx have better AF than K-1 without tests. It's different league and to make conclusion based on comparison with the best reportage cameras in the world is simply SILLY.

Last edited by ogl; 07-09-2016 at 12:30 AM.
07-08-2016, 10:31 PM - 1 Like   #116
Pentaxian




Join Date: Feb 2015
Photos: Albums
Posts: 3,683
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
The probable cause if people got banned, I guess.
Got banned precisely when I suggested putting Ricoh imaging in the loop to do a plausibility check on DPReview AF test results. Ricoh Imaging have a AF test bench in their labs , I suppose. I don't consider a "bike test" to be scientific in any way. There are other much more reliable ways to evaluate an AF system. In engineering, we setup tests that measure the closed loop bandwidth of a servo, stability parameters such as gain margin, phase margin, transient response, ripple, and German engineers also do this, if you have the knowledge of control systems, you know it. If Rishi's supposedly PhD, I hope for him that he can find a better job than doing bike tests for cameras, unless he is doing this as a second job.

Last edited by biz-engineer; 07-08-2016 at 10:40 PM.
07-09-2016, 12:25 AM - 1 Like   #117
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Sweden, Umea
Posts: 871
About an agressive tone from pentax users, the tone was quite nice with sugestions about what was wrong in the test.
Dpr respons was agressive to the point of mocking people.
"We know more about testing cameras than you! Your knowledge about pentax af is wrong"
And everytime the fact that they used center point witch was on the bikers knee came up they ignored it.
Not a single line saying "ok, something went wrong in the test. We will redo them with proper focus point and setting"
It was more like "we spent time and redid the test. HAPPY NOW!!!!!!"

They keep dismissing peoples test with. Distance too long. Wrong aparture. Gloating when someone posts a series with some out of focus pictures and ignoring those that have 90% hitrate.
While they are refering to d500 test etc where they are using a f4.0 eqviviliant aparture. (They are still ignoring people bringing this fact to the surface)
They even referd to rx10iii a 1" sensor with a crop of 2.7 taking a series at f4 anf 110mm. That dof is much greater than ff at 200/2.8.

Very unproffesional from dprs side and one starts to beleave that they do this to generate hate from pentaxians to get them argue and generating hits on their site.
07-09-2016, 12:58 AM   #118
Veteran Member




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Australia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 376
When I was a young bloke getting 'kicked out of a joint' was a badge of honour. Be cool and wear it with pride.
07-09-2016, 03:00 AM   #119
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Gladys, Virginia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 16,441
QuoteOriginally posted by falconeye Quote
To Rishi's defense.

He has been contacting me on several occasions, including questions about standardized AF testing.

I consider him to be one of the most open minded and competent people over there at DPR. Of course, he is able to fail just like everybody else.

But I wouldn't accuse him of incompetence or tentative testing. I think in the end, this thing all comes to tone and language. The probable cause if people got banned, I guess.

About the test itself ...
In the tracking (riding in curves) test, the K-1 lost focus because the target left the focus area. That may be considered unfair and I agree. OTOH, some other cameras have their AF area spread a wider area, so the comparison is still valid. And in BIF, it is indeed difficult to keep a subject centered. Moreover, the target corossed the center area several times and K-1 did not re-aquire focus then. Unlike some other cameras which do.

Overall, the test is valid. It is not drawing an image representative of the K-1 AF capabilities if above behaviour is worked around. But valid it is.

One last word ...

Some well known bloggers started to make fun of over-loyal Pentaxians defending the brand on every occasion. Pentaxians have to tone down their voice quite a bit on other fora if they want to be perceived as serious photographers. I say this as a Pentaxian myself, although shooting another brand as well.
I think the review has been sanitized and isn't offensive now, like it was in the beginning. There really was a mocking tone about it, suggesting that while it might be possible to use this camera for a few things, most of the features were gimmicks and the auto focus was terrible. The reality is that the K-1 is a nice camera, better for still photography and with decent auto focus, but one that isn't going to keep up with top end Canon/Nikon cameras. If you want a video camera or a sports camera, then the K-1 isn't the right camera for you, but then again, neither are the 6D or the D610.

I guess I really do want to know how the 6D and D610 (which are the cameras in the same price range) fared in auto focus tests. I couldn't find anything at all on the 6D review about auto focus testing. On the D610, there are two bursts of 6 shots shot with a 70-200 f4 lens, I assume shot at f4 which showed 4 out of 6 sharp shots and in the D610 review, the comment is made that the center 9 cross type auto focus sensors are really the only ones worth using for tracking -- more similar to the K-1 than it is different.
07-09-2016, 05:16 AM   #120
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Connecticut, USA
Posts: 875
QuoteOriginally posted by monochrome Quote
...

IMHO they set up a straw man at DPR. They ran action tracking tests which they knew K-1 would fail, failed it, then said the entire AF is Poor.
Oh come on now. Isn't this the same test they run for all cameras? I don't follow their reviews closely, but I was reading that other cameras did not do well with this test too.
Closed Thread

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!
af, browser, canon, conclusion, dpreview, dslr, equipment, evaluation, favor, full frame, full-frame, guys, images, k-1, k1, nikon, opinion, pentax, pentax k-1, people, post, results, time, waste
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Rupert banned from DPReview rfortson General Talk 20 02-23-2009 12:22 PM
Well I got banned from dpreview palmor Photographic Technique 70 07-20-2008 10:28 PM
Another one banned from the Pentax Dpreview forums... milarmon General Talk 52 06-09-2008 10:56 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:10 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