[Kunzite]

Lol @ above.

I agree with monochrome; actually IMO DPReview's test is designed to make cameras "fail", and differentiate them with (pointless) numerical scores.
What I'd be more interested regarding the AF, is to find out what it can do - not what it can't. I guess that needs more experimentation from my part... and reading user advises in forums like this one

[monochrome]

I don't agree. There are many times Pentax cameras either freeze or simply miss focus.
I don't see posters showing a simple bike riding weaving back and forth setup going toward the lens on either PF or DPR using similar tests.

Other brand cameras can do the very same test without a hitch

No, no they don't use an f/2.8 zoom @f/2.8. They use for instance a 300/4 in brighter skies.

I'm not arguing about Pentax AF. I assert the test is flawed and therefore conclusions based on the test have no merit.

[monochrome]

Only pentax is bad the worst ever I tell you. I have never seen such a bad brand in my life. And all other brands are absolutely the best brand ever. Believe me I know. If you don't believe me just read my book! It is the best book ever, It has facts, my facts are the best facts ever. Read it!

"Because Science!"

Lol @ above.

I agree with monochrome; actually IMO DPReview's test is designed to make cameras "fail", and differentiate them with (pointless) numerical scores.
What I'd be more interested regarding the AF, is to find out what it can do - not what it can't. I guess that needs more experimentation from my part... and reading user advises in forums like this one

I don't see intent here. It is just a poorly designed test that cannot be replicated evenly over time and across brands.

[Kunzite]

That their own test is not repeated with the same parameters (within reason), I agree. I believe Pentax would still "fail" if they only fix the test parameters.

I'm talking about the approach, rather than intent - they're trying to put the AF system into difficult situations, rather than help it achieve results.
It's quite obvious in the indoor "investigation" of the AF tracking function; the camera must recognize and track a face, from different angles, partially covered, etc.

[Wolfeye]

Bias and malice is everywhere. Like Savoir-faire.

[newmikey]

I don't see posters showing a simple bike riding weaving back and forth setup going toward the lens on either PF or DPR using similar tests.

Other brand cameras can do the very same test without a hitch

I don't think I've ever felt the need to shoot a simple bike riding weaving back and forth and coming right at me. I suppose the owners of those other brands are just a hell of a lot more creative than I am and they're all out there shooting bikes.

[adjutant]

Only pentax is bad the worst ever I tell you. I have never seen such a bad brand in my life. And all other brands are absolutely the best brand ever. Believe me I know. If you don't believe me just read my book! It is the best book ever, It has facts, my facts are the best facts ever. Read it!

The level of apologizing and shutting down of people with contrary opinions on these forums is staggering. I honestly expected Pentaxians to be more honest with themselves about what their favorite camera brand does well and doesn't do well. If you really loved you camera, you would think that you'd want it to get better at some of its shortcomings rather than plug your ears and yell "la la la I can't hear you." You can criticize and love something at the same time!

[skierd]

Some people can't recognize satire. Sad!

[monochrome]

The level of apologizing and shutting down of people with contrary opinions on these forums is staggering. I honestly expected Pentaxians to be more honest with themselves about what their favorite camera brand does well and doesn't do well. If you really loved you camera, you would think that you'd want it to get better at some of its shortcomings rather than plug your ears and yell "la la la I can't hear you." You can criticize and love something at the same time!

The level of denial and disinformation presented as arguments against posters who question the efficacy of some reviewers' testing procedure is shocking. I honestly expected PentaxForums' members to present informed, fact-based arguments to support their positions. If you really loved your critical thinking you would deeply investigate the original posts before shouting, "Because Shut Up! Shut Up! Shut Up!" at members. You can have an informed opinion or a prejudged bias, but cordiality is always preferable.

FWIW, the review was fair, accurate and the tone was professional. Nevertheless, that particular set of AF tests is flawed, non-scientific and thus the conclusions for ALL brands are unreliable, on their face.

[D1N0]

The level of apologizing and shutting down of people with contrary opinions on these forums is staggering. I honestly expected Pentaxians to be more honest with themselves about what their favorite camera brand does well and doesn't do well. If you really loved you camera, you would think that you'd want it to get better at some of its shortcomings rather than plug your ears and yell "la la la I can't hear you." You can criticize and love something at the same time!

O right! somebody throws their stupid morals at me. I just love that.

[BigMackCam]

Folks, please let's stop arguing / criticising each other. I'd prefer to leave the thread open. Thanks in advance

[BigMackCam]

It seems to me K-70 is better...

K-70 is better than KP, do you mean?

The KP has less progressively less noise as you move further up the ISO range, and the luminance noise doesn't seem so... luminous Performance between the K-70 and KP is, nonetheless, fairly comparable up to around ISO 12800, but the KP has a clear advantage after that. See comparison below at ISO 25600...

[BigMackCam]

I see K-70 has less noise and cleaner picture. ISO3200 and 6400 are enough to compare. To use ISO25600 - I don't see any sense.
But...K-70 has better ISO25600 than KP.

Hmmm. That's not how I see it, but perhaps it's a subjective thing. Have you tried downloading the RAW samples for both K-70 and KP at similar ISOs, and tried cleaning them up in Lightroom or similar? I find the KP's images better there also. But, YMMV

[Rondec]

It seems to me K-70 is better...

Honestly, I would have a hard time picking between the KP and K-70 at iso 3200. Look awfully close to me. I can't imagine a real world situation where you could see a difference between this sort of image quality. The KP does seem to pull in front at higher isos.

[mecrox]

Well, up early this morning and it looks as if it will be a lovely day. Here's an idea, I'm going to spend today with my magnifying glass seeing which camera offers slightly less blotchines at very high ISOs even though I have never used such high ISOs and have no intention of ever doing so. Wait a moment, those chaps look as if they have a straitjacket with them, and they are walking towards me ...