[Marc Langille]

Hi Marc,

Ah I see... well doesn't that put the Canon at an already immediate disadvantage? Your AF will be far faster on the Pentax because AF systems operate wide open at the lenses maximum aperture.. so you're going to see a lot more hits and better focus lock on the f2.8 lens than on the 4.5 given that you're losing approximately 1.5 stops of light.

Technically the new Sigma model should work with the TC on the 40D and I know for sure it works on the MKII and MKIII (had a MKIIn, now have a MKIII). The older models wouldn't AF with a TC even on the MKIIn which was a very weird anomaly that I don't think anyone outside of Sigma understood

In regards to the contrast, this is largely due to your aperture values on the lenses... with the 1.4x TC on the 500 4.5 you're pushing into the realm of f8 which any camera is going to struggle to obtain focus at. However on the Pentax you're only achieving an aperture of f4 with the TC meaning that you've got plenty of light for the AF system to work with. In reality, AF isn't so heavily reliant upon contrast so much as it is the available light the AF system has to work with; if you were to pit the camera systems against one another using f2.8 lenses I think you would see a much better result and more consistency from both systems in the tests.

My bad for not clarifying: I gave up using the TC after the first few days, so the shots are with the 500/4.5 only. I only mentioned the TC used - apologies for the confusion! That includes these shots I posted in this thread (no TC).

I took perhaps 50-60 images with the TC, since MF with many wildlife situations (especially birding) wasn't very useful. I shot over 10,200 images with the 40D.

Wildlife shooting is indeed very taxing, I'd put it right up there in cost with motorsports for sure

Cheers,

Shawn

I've shot NASCAR before, so I have some understanding of your point, but I don't shoot motorsports day in day out - it's definitely quite difficult due to the speeds involved! I wish wildlife would repeat the route time and time again - that would be awesome!

Regards,
Marc

[m8o]

I wish wildlife would repeat the route time and time again - that would be awesome!

They often do... the only issue is timeframe! Could be measured in day, weeks, months, or years (like Wildabeast migration!)

Marc, I haven't been that active on here lately... onto my my newest obsession. I just came upon this thread; thanx very much for taking the time (150 gigs to sift thru, wow. I still haven't went thru my 40 or so gigs from Tanzania last year! About a 1000 RAWS to convert still). I would like to ask you about the double check focus in the K20D you mentioned.

I had thought that had been removed; or could be configured and turned-off? I was sure I had read Chris making statements in that regard in the early days of its release; that while the AF system is the same, the removal of the double check allows it to operate faster w/o too much affect on keeper rate (I'm sure conditions affect that).

So is it configurable and use optional after all?

Thanx much.
-steve

[TiminyCricket]

Nice to see someone here agree that FPS can matter - depending upon what you are shooting of course. Yes skill and anticipation count, but it's hard to anticipate what's going to happen 1/6 or 1/3 of a second later and be ready for it! Sports players, like wildlife, are also unpredictable.

Thank you for the review post.

I too, agree. My only real complaint with the current Pentax offerings is the maximum FPS speed. When I first heard of the K20D coming out I figured it would shoot at least 5FPS, maybe more, if it wanted to keep up with Jones'. When I found out that it couldn't shoot any faster than my K10D I was pretty disappointed. Sometimes you really need that FPS to catch the action!

[mkishphoto]

Deleted upon your request. You are now being given 5 infractions to contemplate why you want to spam rude pms to me. Time out.

---

Last edited by roentarre; 01-14-2009 at 01:59 PM. Reason: He wants me rectify the problem for him

[nostatic]

Early on someone remarked how they wish that "real reviews" were as honest. Here is the key reason that I'll take the OP's word over any review site - he shot actual photos and used the cameras for thousands of shots in real world conditions. Not focus charts. Not brick walls. Not a couple hundred snaps of "test shots."

[TomE]

Consumer Reports, what a lame outfit that is, I wouldn't trust their reports on anything, let alone photographic gear which they know nothing about.

Tom

[paolojackson]

Another "thanks" for the insightful review. Been debating whether I should upgrade to K20d. Also good to learn more about offerings from other companies.

[roentarre]

The inappropriate thread had been given a chance to "rectify" the post.

Would the rest of the responders delete or modify the posts to keep this thread from being closed or deleted? Thanks for the forum members watching out for troubles.

[mkishphoto]

Deleted due to poster's disruptive, rude and aggressive contents. This user is now being banned for 14 days. A chance to redeem himself.

[Ashley]

What a great report. Thanks for posting. It's nice to see a side by side test by somebody clearly knowlegable.

Did you use continuous focus mode much?

[Vormulac]

This is a great thread, I have been shooting a K10 for about a year now and have been extremely impressed at how it holds it's own against the Canons and Nikons that the owners assume are superior (although are unable to produce proof of this assumption). Tomorrow morning I am picking up my K20. I hope I can stretch to the 16-45 instead of the 18-55 I'm familiar with from my K10.

[monochrome]

Thank you Mark: Glad to know I can restrain my K20D lust and just shoot macro low ISO with my K10D. I'm guessing lots of things at ISO 100 will be great with my camera.

Wonderful to read unbiased, independent thinking and real pro's and Con's for both systems.

Paul