[lol101]

Hi again, IQ is the most important feature for me too, thats why I still use 4x5 and 8x10 sheet film and drum scan it for 95% of what I do.The DSLR's are still just experiments for me even though I've been playing with them since the Nikon D70.Shooting with the Canon 5D for a year, I got just as many mis-focused auto focused shots with the 5D as with the K20DIf it was a shot I really cared about manual focus it was and is.I'm still up in the air on IQ between my K20D and 5D, I don't think either one looks good beyond 16x20 IMHO

Obviously, digital is not yet up there with LF and even MF for ultimate IQ and manual focusing is not a problem with those.

I use MF gear sometimes for landscape (I have a Brooks Veriwide 100, a 6x10 roll film camera with a Super Angulon lens on it that I will never let go) but for pure convenience, when I travel or do portraits of friends and family, AF is becoming essential for me.

Does it come from a failing eyesight or from the "digital viewfinder shrinkage" syndrom, I don't know, but I am far worse at focusing than the worst DSLR out there!

I don't take all those AF "problems" too seriously but since I have experience with different brands, I thought I would give my opinion on the subject, based on my comparative observation of the limited samples I possess.

Bottom line for me, I would really like a Pentax camera with Canon's AF on it but I can manage fine with my K20 without it and it's the camera I feel most comfortable with.

Only for "action" or "reportage" occasions (weddings) where I know I will take pictures "on the fly" in unknown conditions do I systematically take my Canon gear now.

When I get out to "take some pictures", I take the Pentax cam.

I am a big fan of your pictures by the way

[flyer]

I have the 50-135 SDM and compared to the 70-200f4 IS, I can tell you that the AF speed difference is absolutely evident. The 50-135 is what I would call a slow AF lens, even by Pentax standards.


The focusing speed difference between the two 50s is indeed not worth talking about.

Again, from my experience, the problem is not speed but inconsistent accuracy.

Maybe I am just unlucky.

Tu devrais peut-être essayer un autre Pentax pour voir si le degré d'imprécision de l'autofocus est le même. Peut-être que le système est mal calibré sur ton appareil. Ça vaut la peine de vérifier. Pour la précision de l'AF, les miens sont au poil.

[Maxington]

I'm not surprised at this test, a friend works at a camera store and I played around with a Sony A350 while I waited for him to finish serving a customer, and the AF on it, even in low light, was fast and accurate, obviously superior to my K20D.

The Live View setup on the A350 is slick as well, instant phase-detect AF. Except the viewfinder suffered, and suffered BADLY as a result. You end up looking down a dark tunnel to a postage stamp!

The biggest Sony-killer in my opinion is the PRICE of the new Sony lenses, they are off the charts expensive. I'm sure there are some better deals around with the older Minolta lenses, but a quick pricing of the Sony lenses sure doused any envy I had with the Sony system.

I'll accept the shortcomings of Pentax simply because of value for money. I couldn't afford a weather sealed f2.8 zoom system from anyone else!

[pentkon52]

I'v heard of a Sony Alpha 350, but what's a s**y alpha 350.

Dave

[*isteve]

Pentax's AF works fine.


People who claim that Pentax is slower but more precise than Canon must have got different gear that I have...

I think I must have. I had to use the debug menu to adjust my K10D, but having calibrated my K20D for all my lenses I can assure you my accurate focus rate is exceptional. Dont really find it that slow either. Mind you I have never used the 50 F1.4 - it has such poor contrast wide open its a very poor AF test. You'd be better of with the D FA 50 macro.

Fact is no AF conclusions are remotely meaningful unless you compare multiple lenses. The lens is at least 50% of the equation. I have no idea how much damage has been done to Pentax by reviewers sticking to the kit lens when doing reviews, as in this case.

I have also had plenty of chances to use a 40D and though I admit its faster in poor contrast/low light conditions, I got a lot of focus misses too.

[Art Vandelay II]

Hi Art Vandelay II

Re your amusing observation:



I sure hope your 'friend' never accidentally discovers your assessment of his 'pride & joy' on this forum, or else 'sparks might fly' between you, resulting in a massive 'fall-out' ........lol !

Best regards
Richard

My buddy was cool about it when I told him; he even agreed with me. He was just happy I confirmed it. He's a lot like me; neither of us really give two craps what name is on the front; cameras are just a tool, like anything else. Whatever gets the job done for the best price is the route I go. I feel no sentimental value towards plastic, metal, batteries, image sensors, and various other electronics all packed into a black camera body. It kind of reminds me of the never-ending mac/pc debate. I prefer macs, but I feel no loyality to them what so ever. The second someone makes a better product for a lower price I'm gone.

[lol101]

Tu devrais peut-être essayer un autre Pentax pour voir si le degré d'imprécision de l'autofocus est le même. Peut-être que le système est mal calibré sur ton appareil. Ça vaut la peine de vérifier. Pour la précision de l'AF, les miens sont au poil.

Hi (or bonjour!)

J'ai aussi un Ds et un K10 et le K20 est le meilleur des trois avec de tres bon résultats mais encore trop de petites imprécisions a mon gout.

Rien de dramatique mais il est clair que Pentax pourrait bénéficier d'améliorations en la matière.

Ceci étant, je m'en vais faire deux ou trois photos cette après-midi et je prends le K20!

And now , back to some understandable language!

Cheers!

[lol101]

I think I must have. I had to use the debug menu to adjust my K10D, but having calibrated my K20D for all my lenses I can assure you my accurate focus rate is exceptional. Dont really find it that slow either. Mind you I have never used the 50 F1.4 - it has such poor contrast wide open its a very poor AF test. You'd be better of with the D FA 50 macro.

Fact is no AF conclusions are remotely meaningful unless you compare multiple lenses. The lens is at least 50% of the equation. I have no idea how much damage has been done to Pentax by reviewers sticking to the kit lens when doing reviews, as in this case.

I have also had plenty of chances to use a 40D and though I admit its faster in poor contrast/low light conditions, I got a lot of focus misses too.

I tried with the 50's (Canon's 50f1.4 is no better in terms of contrast than Pentax's one) but the biggest differences are found when comparing the 50-135 to Canon's 70-200f4.

Quite frankly, I am a bit surprised that you say your Pentax AF is very accurate, yet you had to calibrate all your lenses to your K10 using the debug menu... not my definition of an accurate AF, especially since I cannot do it on my K10 with the 50-135.

In addition, when I do formal testing, I don't see any definite bias (ie BF/FF issue) so how can I calibrate anything?

I don't want to make too much noise about this because as it is, I don't even consider it to be a real issue. I just try to double or triple the pics I take with my Pentax gear, refocusing in between to be reasonably sure I get a good one .

[*isteve]

I tried with the 50's (Canon's 50f1.4 is no better in terms of contrast than Pentax's one) but the biggest differences are found when comparing the 50-135 to Canon's 70-200f4.

Quite frankly, I am a bit surprised that you say your Pentax AF is very accurate, yet you had to calibrate all your lenses to your K10 using the debug menu... not my definition of an accurate AF, especially since I cannot do it on my K10 with the 50-135.

In addition, when I do formal testing, I don't see any definite bias (ie BF/FF issue) so how can I calibrate anything?

I don't want to make too much noise about this because as it is, I don't even consider it to be a real issue. I just try to double or triple the pics I take with my Pentax gear, refocusing in between to be reasonably sure I get a good one .

I calibrated all my lenses but only 4 FA lenses and 1 sigma needed adjustment. This is to be expected. Only one needed more then a small adjustment.

Canon dont even offer this ability. If you think all Canon lenses are exactly calibrated then dont read any Canon forums.

So I dont know what you are doing wrong here but I simply am NOT getting any OOF pictures out of my Pentax unless I do extreme shooting, such as using AFC on fast stuff which is more of a personal tracking issue than the camera. WIth AFS I almost NEVER get an OOF shot, and I look at all of them at 100%.

[OniFactor]

good luck with Sony service. You smile very fast turn to cry

Try deal with Sony when you has Minolta or some older Minolta lenses

seeing as how Sony sends people with Minolta DSLRs that exhibit the first frame black annoyance to precision camera for free, and still scrounge around for parts to convert the FILM Maxxum 9 to update it to use SSM, i'd say Sony does a pretty good job at covering their legacy, since they don't HAVE to do any of that.

oh, plus all the people who have had any issues with any of their lenses are easily resolved.. yeah, don't see any issues with their service.

[lol101]

I calibrated all my lenses but only 4 FA lenses and 1 sigma needed adjustment. This is to be expected. Only one needed more then a small adjustment.

Canon dont even offer this ability. If you think all Canon lenses are exactly calibrated then dont read any Canon forums.

So I dont know what you are doing wrong here but I simply am NOT getting any OOF pictures out of my Pentax unless I do extreme shooting, such as using AFC on fast stuff which is more of a personal tracking issue than the camera. WIth AFS I almost NEVER get an OOF shot, and I look at all of them at 100%.

Well, since your gear focuses perfectly, it must be me then...

I have been known to be the main factor in most bad pictures I have taken in the last 20 years anyhow...

[Confused]

Hi Steve

Re your sentiments:

I have no idea how much damage has been done to Pentax by reviewers sticking to the kit lens when doing reviews

I can kind of see where you are coming from on this one, but to be entirely fair to the 'hacks' concerned, would you seriously have expected Pentax NOT to submit the standard Mk 1 18-55mm for review, knowing full-well about it's deficiencies ? Perhaps the company ought to have sent a cover-note excusing the original kit-lens, whilst supplying something more befitting the task ?
If the offending optic was not quite up to the job, Pentax really should have replaced it a great deal earlier with it's Mk 11 successor, rather than playing fast & loose with their reputation !!!

Best regards
Richard

[*isteve]

Hi Steve

Re your sentiments:



I can kind of see where you are coming from on this one, but to be entirely fair to the 'hacks' concerned, would you seriously have expected Pentax NOT to submit the standard Mk 1 18-55mm for review, knowing full-well about it's deficiencies ? Perhaps the company ought to have sent a cover-note excusing the original kit-lens, whilst supplying something more befitting the task ?
If the offending optic was not quite up to the job, Pentax really should have replaced it a great deal earlier with it's Mk 11 successor, rather than playing fast & loose with their reputation !!!

Best regards
Richard

Maybe they should but I think AP can have whatever it wants for a review and chooses to test the "kit" option to provide a comparison. However the hacks concerned should be a little more honest with their readers and try all cameras with a few lenses to push the envelope, and point out that the "faults" with the camera may be at least in part down to the lens. These are SLRs after all, how many K20D users do they think will stick to the kit lens?

After all, Pentax will give a magazine like AP anything they ask for.

However, I really can't take magazine reviews seriously. If you honestly think they are not heavily influenced by those that buy advertising space in their pages, think again. Its just a business.

[flyer]

Maybe they should but I think AP can have whatever it wants for a review and chooses to test the "kit" option to provide a comparison. However the hacks concerned should be a little more honest with their readers and try all cameras with a few lenses to push the envelope, and point out that the "faults" with the camera may be at least in part down to the lens. These are SLRs after all, how many K20D users do they think will stick to the kit lens?

After all, Pentax will give a magazine like AP anything they ask for.

However, I really can't take magazine reviews seriously. If you honestly think they are not heavily influenced by those that buy advertising space in their pages, think again. Its just a business.

Here is one that doesn't seem like it 's been bought by Nikon or Canon:
AVHub - ProPhoto - Product Reviews - Pentax K20D

[Lance B]

I can only comment on my experiences with the K20D and that I find that the AF works quite satisfactorily.
There were tests done by a magazine some time back(can't remember which) of the K10D that showed that in good light the K10D was about the same AF speed as the competition(maybe a tad slower but not of significance) and only really lacked speed in dimmer light. As the K20D supposedly uses the same AF, then we can assume that the K20D is certainly no worse than the results obtained by the K10D in that test. Now, IMO, the K20D is actually a tad faster to AF than my K10D. I am not saying better than the competition, but better than the K10D.
Another observation for me is that the FA lenses *seem* to be faster to AF due to the noist they make, whereas the SDM seems slower due to it's quietness when in actual fact the SDM lenses are faster. The noise of the FA lens's AF acts like an audible verification process whereas the quietness of the SDM seems to mask this verification and the SDM lenses therefore seem to be slower, which is clearly not the case.
Here are a few shots taken at Taronga zoo with the K20D and DA*300 f4 in AF C mode. At the time of taking these photos, these Red Panda were moving quite quickly and the light was quite dim. I had to use ISO800 and a relatively large aperture of f5.6 to obtain a reasonable shutter speeds of 1/200 or 1/100sec so as to reduce motion blur, but the thing was that this was rather dim light. In otherwords, if these shots were at ISO100, they would have been f5.6 and 1/25sec and 1/13sec respectively but the AF C worked brilliantly:

K20D + DA*300 f4 @ f5.6 1/200sec, handheld, SR on.



K20D + DA*300 f4 @ f5.6 1/100sec, handheld, SR on. You can see the movement of the Panda by it's foot.