[clackers]

I am very unhappy with AF. Sometimes I took "great" shot and that small bitch focused somewhere else - on the wall behind ...

Sounds to me like a technique thing, zVratko.

The Oly, the Fuji and the K3 are obviously fine cameras, but do not yet have a socket for a cable plugging into your brain to read your intentions.

What you have is fine if you choose centre point focus only, and do the half-press, recompose routine.

Otherwise all those other cameras can choose something else to happily zero in on.

Not important if you're doing a landscape, very important if you're doing an event with lots of foreground/background objects, people walking around, etc.

For instance, if you do wildlife photography, every camera claiming to have the world's fastest AF system can just lock again and again on the leaf in front of the bird.

[zVratko]

clackers,

Please read one of my previous comments. In many cases it's not about my hands. I'm always using middle,cross AF point and recomposing. But many many times it's focused something else.

Just an example. I was doing dome shots of my friend band. They were standing about 2m in front of that wall. I used middle point (I never used auto selection) which was headed directly on ones head. That head was far bigger than AF point mark in viewfinder. That's why I was so surprised when figured out that sharp was not head, but wall. And this is happening to me more times than I could accept

[savoche]

clackers,

Please read one of my previous comments. In many cases it's not about my hands. I'm always using middle,cross AF point and recomposing. But many many times it's focused something else.

Just an example. I was doing dome shots of my friend band. They were standing about 2m in front of that wall. I used middle point (I never used auto selection) which was headed directly on ones head. That head was far bigger than AF point mark in viewfinder. That's why I was so surprised when figured out that sharp was not head, but wall. And this is happening to me more times than I could accept

Yes, the focus points of the K-5 can be frustratingly big in some situations (much bigger than the indicator itself). The K-3 is a lot better in that respect. I have no idea how it compares to Fuji or Olympus, though.

[ScooterMaxi Jim]

Well, I think zV would be close to equally happy with the AF of any of these three systems given the modest demands he lists. So, it really should come down to the other factors in his case.

I'm also heavily into shooting dogs at home and the dog park, etc. For my needs, the shot isn't worth the effort unless the eyes are pin sharp. No AF system is going to nail that performance unless you are shooting at f/8 with a relatively short lens - and then the extreme DoF generally is not going to be pleasing. The vast majority of my dog shots are MF, and you accept that the keeper rate will be under 20%. I shoot Canon, as well, and while AF is better with that system - again it takes great human shooting talent to get a moving animal's eyes in sharp focus - AF or MF. With sports shooting, ballpark focus is generally fine as rarely are the eyes a key aspect. When the eyes are key in sports, those shots win awards because it is so rare to nail those shots.

This was one of those rare fast-moving dog shots that worked out quite well:

Jerabek's New Bohemian Photo Exhibit - James Robins - Powered by Phanfare

[LeeRunge]

I also have a K-5 and it lacks in AF in low light or for action. I get shot's of my dog's by prefocus manually where they are moving too. I owned a 7d for about 6 months and it was a much better tool for fast moving subjects but had setbacks in other areas like DR and having to buy L glass for weather sealing.

I own the X100s which doesn't compare against the XT-1 for AF but it does have a better sensor than the K5. I get better shots from the X100s than I do from my K-5 consistantly. Fuji's exposure is much better and the EVF has a lot of big advantages. So much that I would prefer it to optical from now on. You can see in a dark room, it's a huge viewfinder (like looking through a FF) and manual focus is super easy compared to optical. You can also see changes in EV or aperture instantly like you would looking at live view while having the camera to you eye which is a big advantage on bright sunlit days.

I would go XT-1 and Fuji primes for your application. Some of the third party makers have manual glass primes in the .95 and .85 aperture range for low light and FF like DOF for Fuji/Olympus as well.

Fuji's honestly have some magic in the sooc jpegs as well. I often don't need any post processing which is not the case for the K-5 which I use only in RAW.

[Clarkey]

My 0.02c. I recently purchased an Oly EM-10 and 70-300mm for comparison. The AF is much quicker than the K-5IIs and it is a great little camera (the EVF is nowhere near as big as the XT1, which is like looking through a FF viewer, but perfectly acceptable) and tracks well. The whole system is light and can easily be carried in one hand.

I took it back though as the IQ was simply not there compared to either the K-5iis or my X-E1. I ended up using the money to buy a secondhand 60-250mm and have ordered the AW teleconveter to match. The 60-250mm is simply astonishing - very good lens,

[zx-m]

Some tough decisions here…it always seems to be that way. From the comments here, it sounds like the AF on the K-5 series is pretty behind the times. I was not aware of this. The discussion here is making me concerned about my K-5ii order…and the camera is not even in my hands yet.

Too bad the Fuji stuff is all $1,000+, once the smoke clears (body, lens (non-kit lens), grip, etc.). Even the X-M1, which seems like a nice choice, still comes out $1,000+ (body, 27mm lens, grip).

[LeeRunge]

Some tough decisions here…it always seems to be that way. From the comments here, it sounds like the AF on the K-5 series is pretty behind the times. I was not aware of this. The discussion here is making me concerned about my K-5ii order…and the camera is not even in my hands yet.

Too bad the Fuji stuff is all $1,000+, once the smoke clears (body, lens (non-kit lens), grip, etc.). Even the X-M1, which seems like a nice choice, still comes out $1,000+ (body, 27mm lens, grip).

If you want something in the 27mm range why not just pick up a X100T? I've got the s model and it's the camera I take with me now. I still use the Pentax gear but more for specific shots instead of carry everywhere. The 23mm on the X100 series is excellent for everything but F2 where it's a bit soft sometimes.

I think you'll find the K5ii to be accurate but a little slow to focus. I have the original K5 and it's got some issues with low light and accuracy in general but the K5ii is improved. The other traits of the camera make up for the AF for me and I sold a Canon 7d with the 17-50 (very fast AF) to keep the K5.

[zx-m]

Thanks, Lee, as this is informative. My k-5ii is set to arrive tomorrow, and I have been reading some so-so commentary on its AF performance. Yes, the X100T is a nice option, one that I have considered. The $1,299 plus tax is getting up there for me. Also, it will not be out until Nov. 30.

You have kept the K-5 in favor of the 7D. Wow. What "other traits" helped you make this decision? For me (with the K-5ii), it seems I will perhaps get a stop gain on my D200 in weak lighting noise performance and the same (perhaps slower?) AF performance, and so I am "shaking" a little about my purchase decision. For years, the major companies have advertised these great improvements in APS-C performance, but there really is not much there. As usual, it takes thousands of dollars to see any significant improvement. This is why I have stayed with the D200.

---------- Post added 09-23-2014 at 11:07 AM ----------

I just looked more carefully at that XT1. Wow, that thing is my dream camera--a well-made, small-ish camera that is not too small or light/flimsy, with a great sensor, that offers interchangeable lenses (yes, compact primes, not just bulky zooms slapped on a dinky body)--and, best yet, offers three grip options, including a battery grip! Wow, that is a shooter's camera. So many DSLRs do not even offer a grip, and this little camera offers three. Too bad it would be about two grand, once the smoke clears.

[Andi Lo]

FWIW after getting D600 my keeper rate (due to much better AF) jumped way up. I actually dont worry about misfocus so much, even shooting at 1.8. I know it will 95% focus under that red dot and not somewhere else like the wall behind the person.

I upgraded from K-x though, so it was a significant generation jump. K-5 should be better then the K-x, but your experience is not unfamiliar to me.

[kadajawi]

Yup. I'm suffering from the same problem. It seems like the focus point in the center is way too big, if at least Pentax had outlined it's exact position that would be a huge help. Better yet put several smaller AF sensors in the sensor, with lights on top of each of them (exactly covering the area). That way we can exactly see what is in focus.

Right now say I take a photo of a tree, and behind it there is something else. I have no clue if it will focus on the tree or on what is behind it, both are roughly where the center AF sensor is.

---------- Post added 30-09-14 at 15:03 ----------

Btw. take a look at the Samsung NX-1. With 200+ PDAF points on the sensor they should be small. There is another 200+ CDAF to make sure it is spot on. The viewfinder is electronic, so it can show you more accurate representation of the focus point it has picked, or enlarge the center so you can see if that is in focus. It is also smaller and lighter than the K-5, does 4K video that should be superb, is much faster and offers a battery grip.

[northcoastgreg]

That head was far bigger than AF point mark in viewfinder. That's why I was so surprised when figured out that sharp was not head, but wall. And this is happening to me more times than I could accept

That's very odd -- so odd that I'm wondering what's really going on there. I do photography at the local zoo with the DA* 300 and the Tamron 70-200, and I easily get 90%+ of shots in focus (the biggest problem I run into is motion blur from the animals moving). However, I hardly ever focus and then recompose. I move the focus point where it's needed and then shoot. I have found that if I focus with the center focus point and recompose, the camera will sometimes refocus the shot (even though its in AF.S and shouldn't do that).

[kadajawi]

That's very odd -- so odd that I'm wondering what's really going on there. I do photography at the local zoo with the DA* 300 and the Tamron 70-200, and I easily get 90%+ of shots in focus (the biggest problem I run into is motion blur from the animals moving). However, I hardly ever focus and then recompose. I move the focus point where it's needed and then shoot. I have found that if I focus with the center focus point and recompose, the camera will sometimes refocus the shot (even though its in AF.S and shouldn't do that).

Same here, same here. It's a game. I guess the other focus points are smaller, and thus more likely to be on target, however I find it very cumbersome and interrupting to change the focus point on the K-5. The *istDS was much better, thanks to the Fn button. Press Fn button + left, change white balance. Press left, change focus point. On the K-5 there is no Fn button, pressing left might change the white balance, or it might change the focus point. It depends on what state the camera is in, and it's switched by holding the OK button. However how do I know which state the camera is in? How do I know what state I left it in an hour ago? Pentax really screwed it up big time there...


As for center focus and recompose... are you using the AF button to focus? Or do you use a half pressed shutter for that? I use the button (and recommend you to do the same), and don't run into that particular problem. It will only focus when I want it to. So I can focus on what I want to be in focus, make a test shot to see if it's spot on, and then just wait for the motive to appear or be the way I want it. The camera will instantly take a photo.

[northcoastgreg]

As for center focus and recompose... are you using the AF button to focus? Or do you use a half pressed shutter for that?

I mostly use the half-pressed shutter for AF. That's obviously not what you want to do if you believe in the focus and recompose strategy. But since I move the focus point where I need it, it's not a big issue for me.

I guess the other focus points are smaller

I'm not sure they're smaller. But for the type of photography I do, I can't recompose the shot. I'm waiting for special moments in order to capture the "character" of the animal, and that means shifting the lens to recompose the shot is not an option, as it takes too much time.

I find it very cumbersome and interrupting to change the focus point on the K-5

I've gotten use it. Nor have I come across a camera that's any less cumbersome than the K-5 (perhaps the high-end Canikons would be better in this regard?).

[kadajawi]

I mostly use the half-pressed shutter for AF. That's obviously not what you want to do if you believe in the focus and recompose strategy. But since I move the focus point where I need it, it's not a big issue for me.



I'm not sure they're smaller. But for the type of photography I do, I can't recompose the shot. I'm waiting for special moments in order to capture the "character" of the animal, and that means shifting the lens to recompose the shot is not an option, as it takes too much time.



I've gotten use it. Nor have I come across a camera that's any less cumbersome than the K-5 (perhaps the high-end Canikons would be better in this regard?).

Try the AF button. Once you've gotten used to it it's a revelation. Doesn't matter if you use other focus points, I did so on my *istDS and still used the AF button.


The 2004-ish Pentax *istDS was much, much better than the K-5. And that was an entry level DSLR from 10 years ago.