Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
03-28-2008, 09:30 AM   #31
Veteran Member
ftpaddict's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Yurp
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,669
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by shutterpuppy Quote
I did a little PP using sharpening tools, I think it turned out better IMHO, of course I'm anal about contrast and detail

Barry

The right part of the image looks as if it's sprinkled with salt and pepper.

But there was a surprising amount of detail in an ISO 3200 shot.

03-28-2008, 10:00 AM   #32
Veteran Member
aegisphan's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: New Mexico
Posts: 815
QuoteOriginally posted by deejjjaaaa Quote
please stop bringing the whole camera to make the point - we are talking
about AF subsystem... the whole camera is a different animal with price depending
a lot on other things like sensors, sales strategy/profit margins, etc... you can have K20D in "something average" league and still have AF subsystem, at least one central cross-type censor, on par w/ the best... at least that.

PS: going back to PZ-1 focusing - well, at least just stick that "linear/horizontal only" sensor in addition to "cross type" sensor, allow user to select which one to use.
Unfortunately, if you demand the best AF system, things like sensor, other niffty features (e.g. fast fps, ...) would come along in one package as well. People don't just put in the best of something to pair it up with the rest of "something average".

By the way you're saying, you are placing the AF system of the Canon 40D in the same league as the Canon 1D's? They're not, even though they're under the same brand. The manufacturers do scale these AF performance according to the respective price segment.

What i am saying so far is that, if you want to compare the AF system: Pentax vs. Canikon, you should compare to the AF system of the same segment. Pentax fully knows that their AF can't compete with the 1D; thus they price it accordingly.

Let's say Pentax manage to put the 1D equivalent AF system into the K20D, do you think Pentax would sell that camera at the current price point? Or even at the current D300 point? Even if they want to be competitive, they would price at least the same as D300 as they're clearly the superior. Why would you sell yourself cheap when you're the best within that segment?
03-28-2008, 11:26 AM   #33
Veteran Member
deejjjaaaa's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: steel city / rust belt
Posts: 2,042
QuoteOriginally posted by aegisphan Quote
Unfortunately, if you demand the best AF system, things like sensor, other niffty features (e.g. fast fps, ...) would come along in one package as well.
nope, I did not demand sensors... just AF to start with... once that will be done, we will
proceed further
03-28-2008, 11:28 AM   #34
Veteran Member
deejjjaaaa's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: steel city / rust belt
Posts: 2,042
QuoteOriginally posted by aegisphan Quote
What i am saying so far is that, if you want to compare the AF system: Pentax vs. Canikon, you should compare to the AF system of the same segment. Pentax fully knows that their AF can't compete with the 1D; thus they price it accordingly.
they price it (whole camera) accordingly based on a number of different factors - so again you are trying
to hide AF in the bunch of other things

03-28-2008, 11:33 AM   #35
Veteran Member
deejjjaaaa's Avatar

Join Date: May 2007
Location: steel city / rust belt
Posts: 2,042
QuoteOriginally posted by aegisphan Quote

Let's say Pentax manage to put the 1D equivalent AF system into the K20D, do you think Pentax would sell that camera at the current price point? Or even at the current D300 point? Even if they want to be competitive, they would price at least the same as D300 as they're clearly the superior. Why would you sell yourself cheap when you're the best within that segment?
if you noticed I did reduce my expectations to the only one central sensor, even to the old horizontal-type sensor from PZ-1 in addition to the existing... come on.
03-28-2008, 06:51 PM   #36
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: California
Posts: 426
QuoteOriginally posted by Gooshin Quote
i just got my FA540 flash, i might give AF a try again with that little infared focusing thingy...
It's actually just a red light. We just like to give it fancy name like focus assist spot beam so it sounds cool.

Would be very cool if they could get infrared assist lamps to work. That way, we won't have to see the light and still have the accuracy bonus. Too bad they all have IR filters.
03-28-2008, 11:22 PM   #37
Veteran Member
roentarre's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 11,787
QuoteOriginally posted by shutterpuppy Quote

After PP


Too much sharpening. There are sharpening halos everywhere.

After all, Dan is doing a test on whether there is back focusing or not. Sharpening would not be an ideal thing to do
03-28-2008, 11:28 PM   #38
Veteran Member
roentarre's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 11,787
Dan, you are right about autofocus being accurate and spot on on static subjects in low light. But when it comes to moving subjects, it is going to be a very different story.

You know that I use canon system as well. Canon system does have faster AF but not so accurate autofocus. Still, when I shoot weddings, track some birds (of course nowhere near Tom Lusk's ability at all), I am having more luck with canon gear.

However, I could live with pentax set up and enjoy the system very much. Canon/Nikon are not necessarily better. I prefer the colour from k10d comparing to 1DS mark II !!

I think most of the birding photographers like Tom Lusk do have their points. Even with their skill, better autofocus tracking and less shutter delay are important for in-flight photography.

03-28-2008, 11:39 PM   #39
Forum Member
Oceanic's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Dallas
Posts: 65
*takes out K10 in normally lit bedroom

*points it at wall, points it at object on floor...

*listens to his AF drive rotate his focusing ring from 1.6ft to infinity about 300 times instead of focusing.


hmmmmmm.
03-28-2008, 11:48 PM   #40
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Dallas Texas
Posts: 319
Sorry, Got Carried Away

QuoteOriginally posted by roentarre Quote
Too much sharpening. There are sharpening halos everywhere.

After all, Dan is doing a test on whether there is back focusing or not. Sharpening would not be an ideal thing to do
I sometimes go to topics on post processing techniques and threw this example into the ring where it didn't belong, just my example of what I would do to the pic and may not be everyone's "cup of tea" I used to work at a photo lab and we used to get customers who thought we could get rid of the blurry images or get pics in focus. LOL, this was long before digital photography or Photoshop was around.

Barry
03-28-2008, 11:56 PM   #41
Veteran Member
roentarre's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 11,787
QuoteOriginally posted by shutterpuppy Quote
I sometimes go to topics on post processing techniques and threw this example into the ring where it didn't belong, just my example of what I would do to the pic and may not be everyone's "cup of tea" I used to work at a photo lab and we used to get customers who thought we could get rid of the blurry images or get pics in focus. LOL, this was long before digital photography or Photoshop was around.

Barry
I did not mean any malice, Barry.

I certainly understand customers' unreasonable request very often. I would love sharpening done to all my images as well. Just in a different way. Micro sharpening with selective edges are more my cup of tea as the prints get a nice look to it instead of sharpening halos
03-29-2008, 12:02 AM   #42
Inactive Account




Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Dallas Texas
Posts: 319
Roentarre,
I understand 100 percent. I'm still trying to figure out how to work "Neat Image" and other noise reduction software, confusing as hell. I heard I might not need it with the K100D compared to the s8000fd Fuji I used to own.
03-29-2008, 02:14 AM   #43
Veteran Member
ftpaddict's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Yurp
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,669
Original Poster
Shutterpuppy,

Don't worry about it, ok?
Neat Image is not as complicated as it first seems. Results will be outstanding, once you are familiar with the controls.

I also see you have chosen to use my sigpic. Thank you for liking it! The quality has degraded a bit, since you've uploaded it as your sigpic. It might be easier if you just use the URL from my signature. That way the quality will be retained.
03-29-2008, 02:59 AM   #44
Senior Member




Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: London
Posts: 219
As a K10D owner, in my (admittedly limited) experience, to answer the OP 'Nothing, it's just awfully trendy to knock Pentax'.
03-29-2008, 04:59 AM   #45
Inactive Account




Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sault Ste Marie, Ont, Canada.
Posts: 563
No it isn't.

As a Pentax and Canon system user, I can say without any doubt that my Canon 20D (note, not the 30D or even the 40D) is much faster then my Pentax K10D in the autofocus dept. How do I know this? From extensive experience in the field.

My main focus is wildlife photography. During the Summer, I am out most days taking photographs of anything furry, feathered, or scaly. I mostly use my Canon 20D with a Bigma mounted on a Bushawk gunstock. My main focus is birding on these outings. I tend to shoot a lot of BIFs (Bird in Flight). I rarely use continuous focus, preferring to use single focus the majority of the time. I tend to get more keepers this way. The autofocus system combined with the HSM of the lens, allows me to do this quite easily and quickly.

Most of you know, I also have a K10D. I don't have a 500mm wildlife lens for it yet, but I did buy a Tamron 70-300mm lens. I took this combination out on several occasions, and was immediately frustrated on how much more difficult BIFs were to capture. I didn't get much success in using my techniques honed on the Canon gear. Oh I did get some keepers, but nothing compared to the Canon rig (don't even start with predictive focus/trap focusing...something night impossible on small fast and unpredictable subjects). Thus I can easily conclude that Pentax AF isn't as good as the Canon AF for wildlife/sports/action photographers. Yes, I even tried continuous AF on both cameras, and trust em, the Pentax lagged even further then on single AF.

Now, the Pentax AF is great on static subjects, even action/sports/wildlife if you can predict where the subject is going. I did find that taking photos of birds whose slight patters are erratic, was an exercise is frustration though. I suppose if I didn't have anything else to compare, I would have copped. However, I do, and I don't use my Pentax for this aspect of photography by choice.

Likewise, one can argue that the Bigma has HSM on the Canon mount, which does equate to faster physical AF, and that would be true. My Tamron lens with no built in motor cannot compete with an HSM or USM lens. Don't even compare them, it would be a waste of your valuable time. I don't have any experience with Pentax's motored lenses, so I can't say yay or nay on the subject, preferring to have real world experience before I make an opinion on gear. Also, I don't have any experience on the K20D to make any subjective judgments on weather the AF is improved.

Don't get me wrong, I like my Pentax. I find the AF good for most things. However, the sole reason why I am still hanging onto my old Canon 20D is for wildlife photography. Birding taxes the AF system to the extremes and will highlight the deficiencies in any AF system (note that I said system as the AF is camera + lens, not camera body alone).

Why is it that people in here seem to feel the need to defend Pentax on all counts. It is rather bothersome to take that stance. Pentax, like all camera makers, have their pros and cons. Nobody yet has come remotely close to making the perfect camera. When you buy into a system, you know that you also buy into the good and the bad of that system. Frankly, yes the Pentax AF isn’t anywhere near as good as some of the other manufacturers (I am basing my experience on the K10D). This is a fact of life, get over it. The fact that the AF is good enough for most forms of photography is negligible if your main focus is on fast moving objects, which is why you still get people complaining about it. Simply stating a fact does not mean people are attacking a brand.
Reply

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, camera, fa, focus, iso, light, pentax, photography, zx-30
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
What's wrong with my A 28/2.8? Rense Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 01-10-2010 06:16 AM
Was I doing anything wrong? jct us101 General Talk 10 09-14-2009 08:01 PM
Pentax Optio M30 problem - movies recorded in wrong tempo! Mjölner Pentax Compact Cameras 0 07-11-2009 02:34 PM
Did I buy the wrong lens? Should I have waited? Pentax F 35-70mm 3.5-4.5 Stefan Carey Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 15 07-08-2009 10:32 PM
Pentax F AF 1.7x Teleconverter optical formula is wrong on Bojidar Dimitrov site konraDarnok Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 10-25-2008 05:23 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:25 AM. | 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