Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
01-03-2011, 10:17 PM   #136
Veteran Member
paperbag846's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2010
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,396
Go Nikon if you want the best AF.

01-04-2011, 10:41 AM   #137
Site Supporter
Douglas_of_Sweden's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Stockholm
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,347
QuoteOriginally posted by paperbag846 Quote
Go Nikon if you want the best AF.
Really?!

QuoteOriginally posted by Douglas_of_Sweden Quote
Some hard numbers. The journal FOTO, the oldest photographic magazine in Sweden, tested the K-r in their 2011 January issue. Here is the autofocus speed compared to what they consider similar Canikon models (with similar lenses, all 18-55 kit zooms):

Penta K-r at 18, 35 and 55mm: 0.30s, 0.35s, 0.39s (shutter-delay 0.08s)
Canon 500D at 18, 35 and 55mm: 0.28s, 0.31s, 0.31s (shutter-delay 0.13s)
Nikon D3100 at 18, 35 and 55mm: 0.31s, 0.45s, 0.47s (shutter-delay 0.13s)

The Pentax and the Canon is so close that taking the shutter-delay into account, the K-r is the faster camera at 18 and 35mm. Nikon is clearly behind both Canon and Pentax. This is a journal I trust to be unbiased and to take tests seriously (even to the degree that I'd think this is average values, not single measurements). Pentax K-5 will be tested in the next issue, against comparable models.
01-04-2011, 11:16 AM   #138
Forum Member




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Manila, Philippines
Posts: 97
I think at the entry level (D3100, 500D, K-r) the performance of the different brands is comparable or statistically similar. The FOTO test shows that: the entry level Canon lens has a micro-motor drive, ditto for Nikon. These aren't Silent Wave or Ultrasonic lenses.

It's pertinent to note that the shutter release lag of the Canon 1D Mk IV is 40 milliseconds. That's 0.04s or about 1/3rd of the quoted figures for the entry bodies (at 10X the price).

It's like comparing Honda and Audi. If you compare a Honda Accord and an A4, you might actually believe Honda makes the faster car. But Audi also makes the R8......
01-04-2011, 03:04 PM   #139
Pentaxian
Digitalis's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Adelaide.
Posts: 8,539
QuoteOriginally posted by paperbag846 Quote
Go Nikon if you want the best AF.
I wouldn't say Nikon has the best AF but it is heavily customisable, and has plenty of AF points. Which is something pentax should take note of. Canon is pretty snappy too, however I was using a K5 and the sigma 100-300mm f/4 at a soccer game and the sigma is extremely fast focusing, and I really didn't notice much of a difference in AF between my pentax and my Nikon D3s with the AF-S 400mm f/2.8G ED VR sure the nikon locked on quicker when using AF tracking, but the rate of keepers from either camera was pretty much equal.

01-04-2011, 11:33 PM   #140
Inactive Account




Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: New York
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 388
I found a nice article on auto-focus. Digital Photography I tend to side with it. Point being if you are not doing sports or quick sudden movement photography, manual focus is better most of the time. I can catch fast moving stuff with manual focus myself but I can see why for some it may pose a problem. I can't say much about Auto-focus on Pentax, I can in a couple days when my K20D arrives with the 18-55mm WR lens I ordered. I used Nikon before this and mostly Manual focused(99 percent of the time).

It comes down to Manual being more accurate since its your eye telling it when to shoot and not a computer.
01-04-2011, 11:41 PM   #141
Forum Member




Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Manila, Philippines
Posts: 97
I used to believe this.. and have a split-image viewfinder in my K20D.

But there are lots of subjects (not just sports) where manual focus is very challenging. For example, portraits with fast lenses like the 50/1.4 or 85/1.8 wide-open. Your subject moves just a bit, and focus is thrown off, no more sharp image due to shallow DOF.

Chasing kids around at close range is another use case where fast AF is useful.
01-04-2011, 11:55 PM   #142
Inactive Account




Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: New York
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 388
Oh yeah, its useful in certain situations, that 1% is me being lazy at family things or out with friends...maybe its more like 5% haha...I do prefer manual though.
01-05-2011, 02:58 AM   #143
Veteran Member
Jodokast96's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Erial, NJ USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 2,133
It's not even about the subjects a lot of the time. A lot of us just can't see well enough to manual focus. Even with my glasses it's more than a challenge.

01-06-2011, 01:36 AM   #144
Pentaxian
Arpe's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: New Zealand
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 4,331
QuoteOriginally posted by Douglas_of_Sweden Quote
Some hard numbers...

Penta K-r at 18, 35 and 55mm: 0.30s, 0.35s, 0.39s (shutter-delay 0.08s)
Canon 500D at 18, 35 and 55mm: 0.28s, 0.31s, 0.31s (shutter-delay 0.13s)
Nikon D3100 at 18, 35 and 55mm: 0.31s, 0.45s, 0.47s (shutter-delay 0.13s)
Of course it depends upon lenses used too.

I believe the Pentax AF is fast, maybe as fast as the others (no experience for me). But I understand the TRACKING focus to be lacking in Pentax, so keeping up with the changes required typically when shooting sport. That's the crux of the matter FOR ME.
01-06-2011, 03:51 AM   #145
Senior Member
kari's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Photos: Albums
Posts: 149
I think the tracking AF capability is heavily dependent on the lens. With the 18-55 I don't have any problem tracking birds flying towards me with the K-x, but the 55-300 is too slow to keep up.
01-06-2011, 08:25 AM   #146
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 14,969
QuoteOriginally posted by orly_andico Quote
I used to believe this.. and have a split-image viewfinder in my K20D.

But there are lots of subjects (not just sports) where manual focus is very challenging. For example, portraits with fast lenses like the 50/1.4 or 85/1.8 wide-open. Your subject moves just a bit, and focus is thrown off, no more sharp image due to shallow DOF.

Chasing kids around at close range is another use case where fast AF is useful.
Kid photography is tough whatever you use, because they are so random in their movements. "Predictive" auto focus doesn't work particularly well when there is no predictability with regard to movements. I doubt even a D3x could track my son when he is on the move...
01-06-2011, 08:57 AM   #147
Banned




Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Alberta
Posts: 218
QuoteOriginally posted by orly_andico Quote
I used to believe this.. and have a split-image viewfinder in my K20D.

But there are lots of subjects (not just sports) where manual focus is very challenging. For example, portraits with fast lenses like the 50/1.4 or 85/1.8 wide-open. Your subject moves just a bit, and focus is thrown off, no more sharp image due to shallow DOF.

Chasing kids around at close range is another use case where fast AF is useful.
I can't but think how we older photographers managed to take portraits and moving objects in perfect focus using our manual focusing film cameras and lenses,and also ending up with more keepers.I even believe National Geographic still have at least one photographer who still shoots film only and shoots appx.3-5 thousand rolls per assignment.
01-06-2011, 10:26 AM   #148
Veteran Member
MrPetkus's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 388
I'm fairly deft at manual focus fan and use the KatzEye and magnifying eyepiece. However, in low-light/low-contrast scenes (especially when using a wide aperture) I have difficulty resolving the image. In those conditions I need AF if I expect to receive any satisfaction upon uploading the pics into Lightroom.

QuoteOriginally posted by Abstract Quote
I found a nice article on auto-focus. Digital Photography I tend to side with it. Point being if you are not doing sports or quick sudden movement photography, manual focus is better most of the time. I can catch fast moving stuff with manual focus myself but I can see why for some it may pose a problem. I can't say much about Auto-focus on Pentax, I can in a couple days when my K20D arrives with the 18-55mm WR lens I ordered. I used Nikon before this and mostly Manual focused(99 percent of the time).

It comes down to Manual being more accurate since its your eye telling it when to shoot and not a computer.
01-06-2011, 11:32 AM   #149
Forum Member




Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: California.
Photos: Albums
Posts: 96
QuoteOriginally posted by johnmflores Quote
Would it be sacrilege to mention video as a means of capturing rapid toddlers, with stills for the quieter moments?
Makes sense to me. Video for the high energy moments and stills for when the young ones wind down.
01-06-2011, 01:18 PM   #150
Pentaxian
jsherman999's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,228
Lots of focus errors in the MF film days...

QuoteOriginally posted by kryss Quote
I can't but think how we older photographers managed to take portraits and moving objects in perfect focus using our manual focusing film cameras and lenses,and also ending up with more keepers.I even believe National Geographic still have at least one photographer who still shoots film only and shoots appx.3-5 thousand rolls per assignment.
This is a common refrain, and if you look through the archives of professional and art photographers from those days, you see a lot of brilliant, sharp images that were taken with MF lenses.

However - look through a lot of old photographs taken by enthusiasts (like most of us,) and you'll see a lot of soft shots due to focus errors. I was just looking through an album of selected shots published by a local paper in the 1970's and 80's, shots taken by some staff photogs and many submitted by SLR-owning readers, and there was a lot of softness, a lot of Bf/FF. I think these shots were acceptable for the paper because they were close to the norm in those days - exact focus was not expected in everyday photography like it is today.

I see the same thing in family photo albums. The shots taken by my grandpa and uncles in 1974 with their spotmatics just are inconsistently in focus. The lenses themselves were great, they were shooting with Takumar primes, etc.

IMO, the 'we somehow got by in the MF days' argument is literally accurate - but 'getting by' at the enthusiast level back then would leave something to be desired today - IMO, from what I've seen.



.
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!
camera, dslr, horse, pentax, pentax body, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
using Canon/Nikon lenses with Pentax body? WMBP Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 27 09-17-2010 10:34 PM
Pentax lenses with Canon EOS body NRV Shooter Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 2 03-16-2010 06:47 PM
Tamron to Canon body adapter kibipod Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 3 09-10-2009 07:49 AM
in body IS......(wait for it).......ON A CANON!!??!! bigben91682 Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 5 08-23-2008 10:01 AM
canon lens to pentax body adapter hll Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 4 11-17-2007 01:06 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:22 AM. | See also: NikonForums.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