Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-26-2012, 03:23 PM   #46
Veteran Member
Crosshair's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Istanbul
Posts: 332
Wow.. Did we really need that military example

09-26-2012, 03:44 PM   #47
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,828
QuoteOriginally posted by cali92rs Quote
However, there are people that have sold their cameras because of the lack of precision in the K-5 AF.
That still doesn't discount the general point being illustrated in the discussion here that few users probably take enough time to understand the parameters of how things work with their cameras (or their cars, or their PC..).

Which is fair enough in most cases. Your camera and car and computer should just work nowadays, without being mollycoddled. Technology is there to assist us. But if things don't work as they apparently should, sometimes going geeky and testing/experimenting with the tech is required and helps to get the most out of it. However not a lot of people are into doing that.

Last edited by rawr; 09-26-2012 at 03:50 PM.
09-26-2012, 03:57 PM   #48
Pentaxian
cali92rs's Avatar

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 3,346
QuoteOriginally posted by rawr Quote
That still doesn't discount the general point being illustrated in the discussion here that few users probably take enough time to understand the parameters of how things work with their cameras (or their cars, or their PC..).

Which is fair enough in most cases. Your camera and car and computer should just work nowadays, without being mollycoddled. Technology is there to assist us. But if things don't work as they apparently should, sometimes going geeky and testing/experimenting with the tech is required and helps to get the most out of it. However not a lot of people are into doing that.
I pretty much agree with everything you said. I guess my point is that my last camera, before the K-5, was the Nikon D90. The K-5 beats it in every category except AF. And I feel that the K-5's AF should outclass a camera which is 2 years older than it.
09-26-2012, 04:23 PM   #49
Pentaxian




Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: GMT +10
Photos: Albums
Posts: 10,828
The D90 is a great camera. Nikon sold millions of them with good reason.

But while it has 11 AF points, the D90 only has 1 cross-type AF sensor, whereas the K-5 also has 11 AF points but fully 9 are cross-type. So in a tech sense the K-5 AF does seem to outclass the D90.

Perhaps the D90 has some features (AF area modes, predictive tracking) that do better than the K-5 for stuff that people commonly use their cameras for. Probably the K-5 could do as good as the D90 in most scenarios, just with more user involvement.

09-26-2012, 06:40 PM   #50
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 1,812
QuoteOriginally posted by cali92rs Quote
If you are close enough to your subject, it is small...otherwise, it is not.
...if people aren't personally effected, it is acceptable, or they believe it doesnt exist. However, there are people that have sold their cameras because of the lack of precision in the K-5 AF.
I won't take that personally - neither is the following -
if the face is only a tiny part of the spot focus area within the ( ) to allow something else like a fence in it -
then it has to be only a very tiny percentage of the entire picture - the camera cannot possibly know that one wants to focus on that tiny part of the focus area - so it does its best to focus on what it actually has - so if a fence is included and that fence offers a clearer more defined area to focus on - that's what it will do.

So the Pentax dSLR remains a precision instrument that does thing repeatably (part of the definition of "precision") -

- what is not precise, is our expectation or interpretation on what the camera's focusing system is supposed to do.

An analogy - if a needle point is generally held as small -
but if taken to the microscopic level - it then can be regarded as big/huge/gigantic -
so what is the point of a needle?

If a needle were sold to use normally as a regular needle -
is it really valid to criticize it as big/huge/gigantic -
if under an electron microscope it looks huge?

Last edited by UnknownVT; 09-26-2012 at 06:48 PM.
09-26-2012, 07:35 PM   #51
Pentaxian
cali92rs's Avatar

Join Date: May 2011
Location: Long Beach, CA
Posts: 3,346
QuoteOriginally posted by UnknownVT Quote
I won't take that personally - neither is the following -
if the face is only a tiny part of the spot focus area within the ( ) to allow something else like a fence in it -
then it has to be only a very tiny percentage of the entire picture - the camera cannot possibly know that one wants to focus on that tiny part of the focus area - so it does its best to focus on what it actually has - so if a fence is included and that fence offers a clearer more defined area to focus on - that's what it will do.

So the Pentax dSLR remains a precision instrument that does thing repeatably (part of the definition of "precision") -

- what is not precise, is our expectation or interpretation on what the camera's focusing system is supposed to do.

An analogy - if a needle point is generally held as small -
but if taken to the microscopic level - it then can be regarded as big/huge/gigantic -
so what is the point of a needle?

If a needle were sold to use normally as a regular needle -
is it really valid to criticize it as big/huge/gigantic -
if under an electron microscope it looks huge?
I know what your saying, and my use of the word "precise" was sloppy.

As a compromise, why not make the entire area between the ( ) light up for focus confirmation, instead of a small square which means "the camera has something in focus, but it may not actually be within this square". A lot of people think, "I put my subject within that square and its in focus" but thats not really what it means at all. It's misleading, and I bet that's the reason why a lot of people think they have front or back focusing issues, and then they play around with the AF micro adjustment.
But if you make the entire ( ) light up, it's a lot more clear what the camera is actually doing.
09-26-2012, 10:01 PM   #52
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 1,812
QuoteOriginally posted by cali92rs Quote
As a compromise, why not make the entire area between the ( ) light up for focus confirmation, instead of a small square which means "the camera has something in focus, but it may not actually be within this square". A lot of people think, "I put my subject within that square and its in focus" but thats not really what it means at all. It's misleading, and I bet that's the reason why a lot of people think they have front or back focusing issues, and then they play around with the AF micro adjustment.
But if you make the entire ( ) light up, it's a lot more clear what the camera is actually doing.
Ah... I got you - it's the little red light indicator that's making some think that is the area of the focus sensor -

I know you already said you know it is not, it's closer to the actual ( ) mark in the viewfinder -
as I merely confirmed this for myself by experiment.

I used to assume far worse - when the red indicator lit up I assumed that focus was achieved!! -
this was on the K100D which had noticeably slower AF than the K-x/K-7 generation -
and this was a very imprudent/stupid(?) mistake to make -
as anyone can tell us - the light(s) merely indicate which sensor is active -
one has to wait for the green hexagon to confirm focus.
But I learnt how to use the K100D fairly quickly - after a few missed shots.

With that confession -
how is that different from understanding how small (or big) that central spot focusing area is,
and even actually doing a test to confirm it on one's own individual camera -
rather than just saying the area is too big even gigantic -

Because according to my calculations the central spot focus area is about 1.0% of the total photo frame area -
I personally think that is pretty reasonably small.

Last edited by UnknownVT; 09-27-2012 at 07:38 AM.
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, auto, camera, dslr, flash, focus, nikon, pentax, pentax af, people, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
People Outdoor flash use - people jpzk Photo Critique 18 10-11-2010 04:13 PM
X-Sync Speed of Flash Causing Drowsy Looking People? Hannican Photographic Technique 11 10-06-2010 10:01 AM
Complain about your camera here pingflood Non-Pentax Cameras: Canon, Nikon, etc. 26 03-23-2010 05:58 PM
Shot random people outside with a flash? Zakovva Photographic Technique 21 09-02-2009 02:25 PM
THE SEXY PEOPLE and FLASH ISSUES quenched Pentax DSLR Discussion 31 01-25-2009 09:52 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:11 PM. | 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