[redpit]

I just found this thread. Great and interesting test Mike, thank you for your time and effort!

As a photographer who mostly uses AF-C I can say I totally agree with your findings. Pentax AF-C is quite capable although shooting side by side with many friends using Canonikons (I don't know anyone with Sony yet) we all know that it's not as efficient as the AF-C systems of recent action cameras from these brands. The photographer is the most important factor when we are talking about photography, but when we talk about action or sports photography where the time window for getting the shot is too short, then the man behind the camera becomes a crucial factor!

All these years I have found many ways to work around the AF-C restrictions of my Pentax cameras. I don't know how things (exactly) are in other brands and I don't care to be honest, as I'm pleased with my equipment! I have tested/shot cameras like the D500, D850, D750, 7DI, 7DII and 5DIV in various airshows and I have seen their advantages in some aspects. To put it simple here, a novice photographer with a D500 and a 200-500/5.6 will get three times more keepers than me with my K-1 and the DFA 150-450 and far better % of keepers as well. Does that say something? To me not really!

As time goes by everyone set his priorities, develops his style and adjusts to his equipment specifics, whether he understands that or not. I'm mainly an aviation photographer but I have long left behind the spray and pray technique. I shot small bursts of 2-3 or 3-4 pics on the special parts of a demo and save buffer and constantly reframe waiting for the next special moment (to my eyes). Next to me I hear shutters sound like machine guns and I can almost feel the heat from the XQD cards overheaitng

So someone has to ask, when we all get the pictures we want what is all this fuzz about? We are talking about the most appropriate tools and the most appropriate features to make a job, in other words the tools that make it easier for the photographers to take the shot. I used to shoot with MF mirror lenses on my film cameras and later on my K-5 for so long that I have some experience that helps me get better images now with the AF equipment. If for some reason suddently all AF systems fail in an airport, I'm sure I will still get some excellent pictures on MF, even on M mode too. This is a tacit knowledge that can't be gained with the most advanced equipment and shouldn't be overlooked, especially from young photographers who think that they will get a D850 put in front of it a 500/4 and will get pictures like those they admire on the web or magazines. If you don't learn photography first and you don't practise much, you will have some random success mainly by luck.

But people look for the easy ways and tools that make things easier, especially nowadays. Does that make me an eccentric photographer that still tries to get the images he wants with an underdog like Pentax when there are companies out there offering cameras like D5, 1DX, D850, 7DII, A9 etc etc? The simple answer is no, I'm not just a stubborn guy that persists due to some kind of perversion to use Pentax and a slow camera like the K-1 for aviation photography I have my reasons and my style and I enjoy photography with my equipment! And most important of all I can get the pictures I always wanted to! Could things be better for me the K-1 user? Yes with a bit deeper buffer and a slightly better FPS (about 30 and 5,5FPS would be great), but I'm sure in the future I will have those features and not in the D850 price levels. Do I pay a price for not using the most advanced action cameras? Yes, more effort to get the same results under demanding conditions. An example is last year in a big airshow under bright sunlight (so ideal lighting conditions, apart from some excessive heat waves) a propeller driven plane made 2 very low passes over the runway flying at about 12-15 feet with a background of trees, so an ideal situation for some panning shots... I focused on the plane as it coming low and threw a long burst as it was passing in front of me. Even with a small aperture like f16 the airplane was OOF when it endered the busy background I had time to check that (review my pics), prefocus on the runway above which it flew during the first low pass and switch to MF. During the second pass I got a few nice photos, but not all were keepers as the plane was approaching and moving away and the distance was changing... When reviewing the photos with my pal next to me shooting D500, more than 90% of the AF-C low pass were sharp images. He got them effortless Why don't you buy a D500 too is the reasonable question! Because I didn't tell you the story of the same evening that we were shooting planes backlit under evening light and then we had to bring up the detail from the dark parts in PP Anyway, you got my point. There is NO perfect system/camera/lens! Even the D850 which has been incorporated as the perfect action (and all around) DSLR, isn't so perfect and in most cases I fail to see the IQ advantage over my K-1...

I wrote a lot, sorry I was carried away (probably because it is a rainy morning here today), but hopefully there is a point in my words to some of the fellow PF members.

---

Last edited by redpit; 06-26-2018 at 05:01 AM.

[rawr]

Pentax autofocus is a subject that never seems to die.

We've gone through different phases of identifying Pentax camera deficiencies (not so great high ISO pre K-5, lack of a FF pre K-1 etc), but those issues were solved. It would be good one day soon for a Pentax body to arrive that can finally end any debate about the competitiveness of Pentax AF. And also end the video debate ...

[normhead]

Pentax autofocus is a subject that never seems to die.

We've gone through different phases of identifying Pentax camera deficiencies (not so great high ISO pre K-5, lack of a FF pre K-1 etc), but those issues were solved. It would be good one day soon for a Pentax body to arrive that can finally end any debate about the competitiveness of Pentax AF. And also end the video debate ...

I probably wouldn't buy it, but it would be nice just to quiet the nay sayers.

[MightyMike]

I just found this thread. Great and interesting test Mike, thank you for your time and effort!

As a photographer who mostly uses AF-C I can say I totally agree with your findings. Pentax AF-C is quite capable although shooting side by side with many friends using Canonikons (I don't know anyone with Sony yet) we all know that it's not as efficient as the AF-C systems of recent action cameras from these brands. The photographer is the most important factor when we are talking about photography, but when we talk about action or sports photography where the time window for getting the shot is too short, then the man behind the camera becomes a crucial factor!

All these years I have found many ways to work around the AF-C restrictions of my Pentax cameras. I don't know how things (exactly) are in other brands and I don't care to be honest, as I'm pleased with my equipment! I have tested/shot cameras like the D500, D850, D750, 7DI, 7DII and 5DIV in various airshows and I have seen their advantages in some aspects. To put it simple here, a novice photographer with a D500 and a 200-500/5.6 will get three times more keepers than me with my K-1 and the DFA 150-450 and far better % of keepers as well. Does that say something? To me not really!

As time goes by everyone set his priorities, develops his style and adjusts to his equipment specifics, whether he understands that or not. I'm mainly an aviation photographer but I have long left behind the spray and pray technique. I shot small bursts of 2-3 or 3-4 pics on the special parts of a demo and save buffer and constantly reframe waiting for the next special moment (to my eyes). Next to me I hear shutters sound like machine guns and I can almost feel the heat from the XQD cards overheaitng

So someone has to ask, when we all get the pictures we want what is all this fuzz about? We are talking about the most appropriate tools and the most appropriate features to make a job, in other words the tools that make it easier for the photographers to take the shot. I used to shoot with MF mirror lenses on my film cameras and later on my K-5 for so long that I have some experience that helps me get better images now with the AF equipment. If for some reason suddently all AF systems fail in an airport, I'm sure I will still get some excellent pictures on MF, even on M mode too. This is a tacit knowledge that can't be gained with the most advanced equipment and shouldn't be overlooked, especially from young photographers who think that they will get a D850 put in front of it a 500/4 and will get pictures like those they admire on the web or magazines. If you don't learn photography first and you don't practise much, you will have some random success mainly by luck.

But people look for the easy ways and tools that make things easier, especially nowadays. Does that make me an eccentric photographer that still tries to get the images he wants with an underdog like Pentax when there are companies out there offering cameras like D5, 1DX, D850, 7DII, A9 etc etc? The simple answer is no, I'm not just a stubborn guy that persists due to some kind of perversion to use Pentax and a slow camera like the K-1 for aviation photography I have my reasons and my style and I enjoy photography with my equipment! And most important of all I can get the pictures I always wanted to! Could things be better for me the K-1 user? Yes with a bit deeper buffer and a slightly better FPS (about 30 and 5,5FPS would be great), but I'm sure in the future I will have those features and not in the D850 price levels. Do I pay a price for not using the most advanced action cameras? Yes, more effort to get the same results under demanding conditions. An example is last year in a big airshow under bright sunlight (so ideal lighting conditions, apart from some excessive heat waves) a propeller driven plane made 2 very low passes over the runway flying at about 12-15 feet with a background of trees, so an ideal situation for some panning shots... I focused on the plane as it coming low and threw a long burst as it was passing in front of me. Even with a small aperture like f16 the airplane was OOF when it endered the busy background I had time to check that (review my pics), prefocus on the runway above which it flew during the first low pass and switch to MF. During the second pass I got a few nice photos, but not all were keepers as the plane was approaching and moving away and the distance was changing... When reviewing the photos with my pal next to me shooting D500, more than 90% of the AF-C low pass were sharp images. He got them effortless Why don't you buy a D500 too is the reasonable question! Because I didn't tell you the story of the same evening that we were shooting planes backlit under evening light and then we had to bring up the detail from the dark parts in PP Anyway, you got my point. There is NO perfect system/camera/lens! Even the D850 which has been incorporated as the perfect action (and all around) DSLR, isn't so perfect and in most cases I fail to see the IQ advantage over my K-1...

I wrote a lot, sorry I was carried away (probably because it is a rainy morning here today), but hopefully there is a point in my words to some of the fellow PF members.

WOW! Its like I was reading a biography about myself, though perhaps some minor differences, we see things the same way and do things the same way. You've added great advice to this thread with your references to some techniques, Its appreciated.

---------- Post added 06-26-18 at 09:26 AM ----------

Pentax autofocus is a subject that never seems to die.

We've gone through different phases of identifying Pentax camera deficiencies (not so great high ISO pre K-5, lack of a FF pre K-1 etc), but those issues were solved. It would be good one day soon for a Pentax body to arrive that can finally end any debate about the competitiveness of Pentax AF. And also end the video debate ...

I probably wouldn't buy it, but it would be nice just to quiet the nay sayers.

I believe it would be a great celebration, I fear Pentax users all over the internet will be annoying all other brands users by shoving the news in the faces of all those who previously bashed Pentax for weaker AF. I for one would buy it, but then I'd use it and be happy with it, I'd show off its abilities to other Pentaxians but not other brands users as that is not my style.

[redpit]

WOW! Its like I was reading a biography about myself, though perhaps some minor differences, we see things the same way and do things the same way. You've added great advice to this thread with your references to some techniques, Its appreciated.

Thanks Mike! It’s nice we are many out there (I know one more Pentaxian photographer that we are friends and shoot together aviation quite often)

[MightyMike]

Thanks Mike! It’s nice we are many out there (I know one more Pentaxian photographer that we are friends and shoot together aviation quite often)

I too know at least a couple other Pentaxians who are into aviation... seems to be in some of our blood.

[reh321]

It would be good one day soon for a Pentax body to arrive that can finally end any debate about the competitiveness of Pentax AF.

AF is a system effort. Right now, some bodies do AF faster than others and some lenses do AF faster than others. In order to reach the situation you wish for, upgrades in both lenses and bodies will be needed.

[swanlefitte]

AF is a system effort. Right now, some bodies do AF faster than others and some lenses do AF faster than others. In order to reach the situation you wish for, upgrades in both lenses and bodies will be needed.

Is that completely true? Will the 55-300 plm work faster on a k1 then a k50? I am sure a screwdrive works better with a stronger motor but the plm?

[reh321]

Is that completely true? Will the 55-300 plm work faster on a k1 then a k50? I am sure a screwdrive works better with a stronger motor but the plm?

When people are asking for better AF out of a body, they are typically talking about the algorithm, not the AF motor. My understanding is that the PLM lens works better on the KP than on the K-50 because the KP uses it smarter.

[rawr]

AF is a system effort.

Very true, of course. One step at a time, and a balanced effort - upgraded AF hardware and software in the body, matched with upgraded lens hardware/software.

[krazykat]

I just found this thread. Great and interesting test Mike, thank you for your time and effort!

As a photographer who mostly uses AF-C ...

Great post, thanks for this!

[redpit]

Great post, thanks for this!

You're welcome! Ι'm glad you liked it.

[jabobby]

MightyMIke, thank you very much for all this great info and I really appreciate the time & effort you spent doing the test. And the time you put into responding to all the interesting remarks that you inspired. And you have good timing to add many more posts for the K-1 give away.
Best Regards, Bob

[MightyMike]

MightyMIke, thank you very much for all this great info and I really appreciate the time & effort you spent doing the test. And the time you put into responding to all the interesting remarks that you inspired. And you have good timing to add many more posts for the K-1 give away.
Best Regards, Bob

No problem jabobby, The time and effort went into putting the photo streams together and writing the report. Taking the photos was pure joy! I sure hope someone wins a K-1 this month

[awscreo]

In terms of afs - I just filled a whole SD card full of shots in Boston, and in good light dfa 28-105 haven't missed a shot. It starts struggling in the evening, but it's still manageable. Overall a good experience, just had to keep my shutter speed at 1/250 or lower than 1/30 (shutter priority was very useful for that) due to my combo showing effects of the shitter shock (can clearly be seen in few shots that I forgot to set proper shutter speed, at 1/125 and lower shots aren't nearly as crisp as they are at 1/250).