[6BQ5]

My Hold AF status is set to OFF.

--------------------

Quick edit here : I uploaded five action shots to my Flickr account taken with my Tamron 70-200mm mounted on my K-3. These are examples where AF-C worked. Unfortunately, for every one of these I have 10+ rejects.

---

Last edited by 6BQ5; 08-06-2016 at 09:12 PM.

[C_Jones]

I have no problem shooting sports or wildlife (birds in flight and other) with Pentax. I use spot AF, AF.C. If I am tracking a subject with my camera/lens, I get the shot. Which is usually the case. This shot is of a soccer game I did in low light last year. I track my subject(s) handheld. ISO, Shutter Speed, and Aperture are also contributors to what type of shot I am going to get when I shoot. The goalie is the subject in the shot below.

[C_Jones]

Here is another one. Same game. Still Pentax/Sigma 150-500 DG OS.

Happy shooting!!

[Winder]

The K-1 C-AF is good enough to get some actions shots if you use good technique and are can shoot enough frames, but its just not going to be consistent enough or accurate enough for real critical work. If C-AF is critical to what you do, then any of the other 3 brands are a better choice. This doesn't mean the K-1 is a bad camera, just that its not the best camera for people who depend on AF speed and accuracy. The Nikon D500 is probably the best bang for the $$$ and I think the new Sony A99II (assuming it ever launches) will be phenomenal.

Ricoh needs lenses with faster AF motors and bodies with less latency and better accuracy. The D-FA* 70-200mm is Ricoh's newest and most advanced lens and the AF speed is no better than the Tamron screw drive 70-200mm.

[6BQ5]

Of all the factors hurting AF performance in a Pentax I think the latency/sensitivity of the system is the most harmful. The second most harmful element is how easily confused the system gets. Who here hasn't had AF hunt and like a kid looking for a light switch in a dark room and hesitate like a nervous teenager asking a hot date out?

I think the lenses can focus fast enough. The screw drive motor has plenty of torque and the SDM and DC motors can zip through the focusing range in fractions of a second. Tracking a subject should require tiny incremental steps.

Is there a website or resource where AF systems are tested and compared in a relatively consistent manner?

[mohb]

The Nikon D500 is probably the best bang for the $$$

It's APSC so how does having better AF cancel out being the same price as the K1.

[Winder]

It's APSC so how does having better AF cancel out being the same price as the K1.

For people shoot sports and fast action, the advantages of FF are not nearly as important as fast accurate AF. A sports photographer is going to need the high burst rate and fast AF. What they don't need is 36MP. Anything from 12-20MP is about perfect for a dedicated sports photographer and 8fps is really the sweet spot. For someone who shoots a lot of action, have to cull through thousands of OOF images at the end of a long day is very frustrating. I don't shoot much action at all, and if I do it is controlled where I can pre-focus. I know a guy who shoots wildlife and guides in Africa who still (last time I saw him) was shooting with the Canon 1D4 because he liked the ASP-H sensor and didn't really care about the noise or poor DR of that sensor. It was all about the AF. He bought an extra 1D4 when Canon announced the 1DX because he didn't want FF.

[carolina_sky]

While I agree that AF is certainly not class leading, as a horse show (hunter/jumper) photographer, I feel I should provide a counterpoint to the reviewer's experience with Pentax AF in horse showw environment. I have no problems using Pentax AF.C with at least 80% hit rate. Furthermore, my hit rate has gone up with each Pentax release, having improved significantly between K5 and K-3 and now again with K-1. While i'm not a pro, I believe that my shots with K-1 and 150-450 are at least comparable to what most of the show photographers can do.

Many examples here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/24843974@N00/

However, my technique is normally a bit different than that chosen by Alex. I usually pre-focus on the jump i intend to photograph them over since I know the rider and horse's head will be pretty much centered over the jump at the apex of the jump. However, I have also used AF.C (with release priority, not focus priority, since a late picture is completely useless, and no focus hold) and experienced high hit rate. The bottom line is that, for horse shows, I can focus perfectly well and get a very high hit rate with Pentax AF system.

Word to Alex: not trying to slam your review, I thought it was good and balanced, and your experience with AF is what it is. Just wanted to explain to the world that Pentax AF is actually more than capable of handling this kind of situation with the right technique and settings.

Two examples, the first head on with the horse approaching the camera at a close distance (actually the trickier situation in my experience)


The second from the side with the horse moving more laterally to the camera (with an obstacle in the foreground for added difficulty):

[C_Jones]

You use similar settings to what I use. I also agree with what you mentioned about Pentax AF performance being efficient.

Nice shots carolina_sky.

[noelpolar]

Like most here I find the K-1 Pentax AF including APC more then adequate with some skill applied.

Having said that, maybe I will one day miss the shot of the three legged rock Unicorn as it jumps over a rainbow and feel cheated that I missed that one shot that would make me famous because I chose Pentax.

Anyway, back to taking my 30,000th shot of my dogs down the beach..... don't want to miss a memorable moment now do I.

[Dan Rentea]

Here is another one. Same game. Still Pentax/Sigma 150-500 DG OS.

Happy shooting!!

With all due respect, if you want to make a point about the Pentax AF-C, please include a few series of 10-12 images in wich the subject is in focus. And if you want to consolidate your point of view, please try to replicate those images at f2.8 - f4 (no one wants to see the background almost as sharp as the subjects). Have you seen sports images taken at f7.1 and f8?

Also, why everybody keeps saying that the hit rate with Pentax cameras has gone up using the pre-focus tehnique? What does this tehnique has to do with testing the AF-C? Of course you will have sharp images with any camera (even with manual lenses attached) when you pre-focus on something, knowing that the subject is going to pass through the point were you pre-focused, but this tehnique has nothing to do with AF-C.

I don't expect K-1 to have what it needs in order to go out with it and shoot action photography for a living, but I also want to see valid points when everybody's arguing with all reviewers about AF-C. For the moment all I saw in this thread was:
- a few unsharp images posted by CypherOz
- 2 random images posted by C_Jones from a soccer game, taken at f7.1 and f8
- a few images (nice images by the way) taken by carolina_sky using mostly pre-focus tehnique
- a few posts related to learning curve when you change the system (which I agree with, up to a point)

If Pentax K-1 would have been a sports camera, then I would have understood the reaction from Pentax users. But it's not a sports camera, and the AF-C is not on par with competition in this regard. As I said on another topic, I don't think someone will have problems shooting weedings professionally with K1, but that's about it when comes to tracking capabilities of K1.

I know that DPreview rushed their K1 review, at least when comes to AF-C, but I tend to agree with the conclusions from fstoppers review, at least after I saw the reviewer comments from this thread.

[tduell]

Also, why everybody keeps saying that the hit rate with Pentax cameras has gone up using the pre-focus tehnique? What does this tehnique has to do with testing the AF-C? Of course you will have sharp images with any camera (even with manual lenses attached) when you pre-focus on something, knowing that the subject is going to pass through the point were you pre-focused, but this tehnique has nothing to do with AF-C.

Just my two bobs worth, but I have a bit of sympathy for that technique.
In my limited experience (BIF), if you can get your first shot in focus, the following shots, using AF-C, are more likely to be in focus, providing you can pan to keep the subject within your set of focus points. Pre-focussing can help with getting that first shot in focus, and it does depends on your AF-C settings

Cheers,
Terry

[Kunzite]

With all due respect, if you want to make a point about the Pentax AF-C, please include a few series of 10-12 images in wich the subject is in focus.

But what if one doesn't want to make a point about 10-12 images sequences being all in focus?

[clackers]

With all due respect, if you want to make a point about the Pentax AF-C, please include a few series of 10-12 images in wich the subject is in focus..

I think it's pretty foolish to keep defending Alex Cooke, Dan.

If he can't photograph horses like members of the forum, that's his problem as a photographer. If he tries to judge an aspect of an unfamiliar camera by just eleven photos, that's his problem as a reviewer.

If you want one of the most difficult sequences imaginable, why are you ignoring Biz-engineer's, done even with the older k-3?

Remember, ducks are amongst the fastest birds in the world - one website has five of them in the top ten species. Link: https://www.pentaxforums.com/forums/190-pentax-k-1/319924-can-anyone-k-1-give...ml#post3624814

[6BQ5]

Very cool duck images ... but can we have a series of images with the duck or whatever subject coming straight towards the photographer?