[Lloyd_Christmas]

A lot of online reviews, like the one posted above from DPreview, used the 16-85 lens. They were not impressed with the continuous AF performance.
However, if they had used a newer PLM lens like the 16-50 PLM, I think they would have been happier. I know I am.

[c.a.m]

A lot of online reviews, like the one posted above from DPreview, used the 16-85 lens. They were not impressed with the continuous AF performance.

Good point about the DA 16-85 lens. I guess they use whatever lens is made available to them.


To me, the DPReview TV guy in the above video was quite pleased with the continuous AF performance. For example:

"Both cameras had a very good hit rate and both cameras missed a few frames, but the D500 consistently had a higher hit rate."
"The K-3 Mark III [autofocus] seems vastly improved over other Pentax cameras."
"It had a very good hit rate, did a great job, shoots incredibly quickly as well."
"Overall, I was really happy with the improvements of autofocus speed."

However, the reviewer was not as impressed with the 'buffer performance' of the K-3 Mark III, compared to the D500. In particular, they found that the camera's buffer filled after about 25 shots, which they think would be limiting in some contexts where sustained shooting is desired. The relatively slow buffer-clearing speed (i.e., memory-card writing) was also mentioned.

A PLM lens, such as the new DA* 16-50, would probably enhance the AF performance, but wouldn't help the buffer performance. Regardless, I'm not aware of any measured tests that have compared the buffering of the K-3 III and D500 quantitatively under identical shooting conditions. Intuitively, however, one would think that deeper buffers and faster writing to memory cards would be beneficial in general.

As mentioned in an earlier post, credible comparisons between the AF of the two cameras are scarce. It's even hard to find qualitative comparisons which address the end result or outcome: Did the photographer have a successful photo shoot?

- Craig

[gatorguy]

Good point about the DA 16-85 lens. I guess they use whatever lens is made available to them.


To me, the DPReview TV guy in the above video was quite pleased with the continuous AF performance. For example:

"Both cameras had a very good hit rate and both cameras missed a few frames, but the D500 consistently had a higher hit rate."
"The K-3 Mark III [autofocus] seems vastly improved over other Pentax cameras."
"It had a very good hit rate, did a great job, shoots incredibly quickly as well."
"Overall, I was really happy with the improvements of autofocus speed."

However, the reviewer was not as impressed with the 'buffer performance' of the K-3 Mark III, compared to the D500.
- Craig

Simply having a less capable sensor on the D500 with less data being gathered would logically make that camera slower to fill a buffer.
So far in my experience I've not yet determined a need to run off more than 30 frames in a continuous burst. I HAVE, but it wasn't necessary. I'm sure there are use cases, but apparently none that apply to the wildlife I use it for, and definitely not for the more people-oriented stage/gig/event/model shoot stuff I do with it.

In practice I'm far more likely to do a three or four shot burst, pause a second or two, then do another 3-4 shot burst. Repeat as needed.

[c.a.m]

In practice I'm far more likely to do a three or four shot burst, pause a second or two, then do another 3-4 shot burst. Repeat as needed.

I think that the type of scenario you mention is more realistic than the online reviews that artificially shoot a long, sustained burst at maximum frame rate, then draw conclusions about a camera's buffer and memory card performance. Real-world shooting makes more sense to me.

- Craig

[redpit]

You can also check this video with subtitles in case you want a comparison with samples...

You Tube

You Tube

[gatorguy]

You can also check this video with subtitles in case you want a comparison with samples...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3ebmC3vg5k

Thanks for that find. Comparisons are hard to come by aren't they?

Note that this one was based on older K3III firmware, predating the most recent update that further improved autofocus, so the Pentax updated would have opened a wider divide between the two cameras.

In this video the K3III with old firmware was already surpassing the D500.

[clackers]

they found that the camera's buffer filled after about 25 shots, which they think would be limiting in some contexts where sustained shooting is desired.

I think, Craig, we need to remember that part of Nikon's trick is that you can't use a normal SD card to get the D500's highest rates, you have to use a CFExpress or XQD.

Not sure of their pricing.

[c.a.m]

I think, Craig, we need to remember that part of Nikon's trick is that you can't use a normal SD card to get the D500's highest rates, you have to use a CFExpress or XQD.Not sure of their pricing.

Good point, @clackers. Those cards are generally more expensive than comparably-sized SD cards, but I think the prices of the two formats have converged somewhat.


A couple of other points...

The DPReview TV review said that the buffer was filled after only 25 frames at the high burst rate. That's ~25% fewer than the specification and what users have realized in actual practice. It seems to me that they underestimated the performance. Not a conclusive 'test'.

When the D500 entered the market, Imaging Resource measured its burst/buffer rates -- capturing RAW (14-bit, lossless, compressed)+JPEG together crippled the performance.