[raider]

Can the K100D and K10D memorize its calibration AF settings for different lenses? say for FA50 it is -50 front focus, and for DA50-200 it is -100 back focus?

[Lowell Goudge]

Since it is purely a firmware update, it is simply ridiculous to not give us a RESETTABLE easy to use menu interface to access this focus calibration ability with memory for a specific number of lenses.

This way it CAN'T screw up AF with other lenses as it would revert back to default. If Nikon and Canon can give it to their customers, please Pentax, stop being the ones to refuse to give us this feature in the current K10D.

Ever since firmware 1.10, every single new feature suggestion doable by firmware has been dismissed, or denied, or ignored. Listening to their customers has gotten the K10D absolutely no added functionality since 1.10 in January!. Simply making already expected features to operate properly obviously doesn't count.

Adding functionality based on requests and getting current K10D owners excited is great especially when the new replacement cameras are a while away.

No reply to this post is expected, but hopefully someone from Pentax at least reads it.

Larry

Have you sent these requests to pentax? I have forwarded a lits of update requests to them over the past 6 months. Some they simply state are not possible, others they reply by "we have forwarded your request to our Research and Development team"

If you don't send it to them, you will not get the changes, Hoping someone at pentax is reading this site, is NOT pro active.

[stewart_photo]

No, focus calibration already exists in the debug mode. All that is needed is a firmware update to provide menu interface with reset. Just like the menu interface was adjusted for the additional uses for the thumb wheels. There's already been a long thread in DPreview asking whether this feature would be desirable in the current K10D, and the vast majority was overwhelmingly yes.

Pentax says they are different because they "listen to their customers". This could be an example of that with just a firmware update. (snip)

Since you missed it, I'll repeat what was said earlier. Considering the necessary changes, and the limited (or no) benefit for most users, it's likely Pentax has simply decided that such an addition is not worthwhile in a camera aimed at this market segment at this time.

Your "long thread in DPreview" represents far less than one percent of the worldwide K10D community, with those wanting a feature like this even fewer than that (you and a handful of others, out of many thousands). So, perhaps the company does listen to it's customers, but you've shown no evidence to suggest even a significant number, much less anything approaching a majority, want this feature.

You insist adding this feature would involve nothing more than a menu added by a simple firmware update. Well, perhaps unlike you, I just don't fully know the complexities of the K10D's internal programming. However, I do know enough about programming in general to seriously doubt your claim. Adding a user adjustable menu like this would, at the very least, require the additional menu, minimal safety features to restore defaults when things go wrong, room to store the adjustments made by the user, hooks in the focusing algorithms to check those user settings, and changes to those algorithms to use these user settings over the default debug settings.

That's a lot of programming code to add to the finite area set aside for this software in the camera's limited memory. Given that, the company now has to choose whether this feature is worthwhile enough to warrant using that limited memory for this over some other more substantial feature, one which might benefit a far greater number of customers. That's assuming, of course, there is even room at this point to add more without hardware changes (a larger memory chip). Now, with all that in mind, we're right back to what was said in the first paragraph above.

And, since this has been discussed to death, I'll bid you (and this discussion) farewell at this point. Take care.

stewart

[mutley]

Can the K100D and K10D memorize its calibration AF settings for different lenses? say for FA50 it is -50 front focus, and for DA50-200 it is -100 back focus?

No, but it already has the software in place to do this. It just needs a firmware update giving us a menu interface to set specific lenses in memory (maybe a limit of 4 or 5 as the camera's memory can handle), and allow all to be easily resettable to defaults avoiding any possible warranty issues.

Have you sent these requests to pentax? I have forwarded a lits of update requests to them over the past 6 months.

If you don't send it to them, you will not get the changes, Hoping someone at pentax is reading this site, is NOT pro active.

Yes, on this subject, and so have many others. I get the distinct feeling that sending requests to Pentax by dealing with their very unknowledgable & unconnected customer service staff is the surest way for any suggestions to be dismissed right away (whatever they respond).

People within Pentax, and those who know people within Pentax reading these discussion forums probably have a minuscule amount of additional clout than us writing them.

So far, from these suggestions the realized result in firmware is absolutely no additional functionality at all (except already expected things made to actually work) since 1.10. This is separate from absolutely no IQ tweaks based on comments, VPN, HPN elimination, or any IQ that is tweakable by firmware.

Nothing.


And, this when it is now apparent that the new models won't be out for a while.

So, Pentax, if we have to wait for new models, or can't afford them so soon anyway, get us excited by adding some new possible functionality, etc. to allow the waiting time to go easier. Also, "listen to your customers" as you are supposed to do more than the competition.

[time-snaps]

Has anyone managed to get the Service menu to run under firmware v1.30?! I am in desperate need to adjust the focus for a 70-200mm Sigma lens!

[time-snaps]

anyone...?! bumpydebump...

[deejjjaaaa]

Has anyone managed to get the Service menu to run under firmware v1.30?! I am in desperate need to adjust the focus for a 70-200mm Sigma lens!

can't you just :

1) go back to 1.10 (or 1.00) w/ hacked ROM (couple of bytes changed to fake the version),
2) overwrite hacked ROM immediately w/ with genuine 1.10,
3) adjust,
4) reinstall genuine 1.30 back (adjustment will stay)

[vldchrl]

yes, this works fine. just use a hex editor to replace the header of 1.10 bin with the header from 1.30 bin. yes, you can overwrite the same version

but my question is: what does AF Area Test [values 0 to 3] represent? because you can adjust the focus offset independently for all 4 or them...

[RiceHigh]

can't you just :

1) go back to 1.10 (or 1.00) w/ hacked ROM (couple of bytes changed to fake the version),
2) overwrite hacked ROM immediately w/ with genuine 1.10,
3) adjust,
4) reinstall genuine 1.30 back (adjustment will stay)

Then you'll not be able to change any setting nor re-adjust unless you downgrade the firmware again!

[amateur6]

Can the K100D and K10D memorize its calibration AF settings for different lenses? say for FA50 it is -50 front focus, and for DA50-200 it is -100 back focus?

Can anyone else chime in on this? I'm late to this particular party, and my experience so far is NO: there's one adjustment (or maybe 4, depending on what those "AF Area Test" do, but I suspect that they aren't related to different lenses) and it sticks, regardless of the lens (tried DA* 16-50 2.8 and FA 50 1.4).

I'm also wondering -- shouldn't my DA* at f22 (top) be sharper than this, compared to my FA at f4.5 (bottom)? And (tripod and camera did NOT move) what's up with the size difference? Did I get one of the crummy ones? EXIF is intact, if anyone wants to help out with this mystery... THANKS.

[Richard Day]

Can anyone else chime in on this? I'm late to this particular party, and my experience so far is NO: there's one adjustment (or maybe 4, depending on what those "AF Area Test" do, but I suspect that they aren't related to different lenses) and it sticks, regardless of the lens (tried DA* 16-50 2.8 and FA 50 1.4).

I'm also wondering -- shouldn't my DA* at f22 (top) be sharper than this, compared to my FA at f4.5 (bottom)? And (tripod and camera did NOT move) what's up with the size difference? Did I get one of the crummy ones? EXIF is intact, if anyone wants to help out with this mystery... THANKS.

Try your DA* at f4.5 as well. At f22 diffraction is occurring. The sweet spot is usually around f5.6 to f8.0.

An example of the effects of diffraction can be seen in this test on Photozone of the D-FA 100 macro.
Pentax SMC-D FA 100mm f/2.8 macro - Review / Test Report

All lenses exhibit this characteristic.

[amateur6]

Try your DA* at f4.5 as well. At f22 diffraction is occurring. The sweet spot is usually around f5.6 to f8.0.

Thanks very much Richard! I'm going to do another round of test shots (actually I just did but I'm still getting a wicked back focus to correct). *sigh*

Of course, the diffraction issue begs the question: can Pentax perhaps take a lesson from the elevator industry and please OVER-engineer instead of UNDER-engineering? In other words, if your f22 has issues, well, you shouldn't really have an f22, should you? Especially true of the 100mm Macro example you linked to -- adding f22 and f32 when your f16 has issues -- that's just bad engineering. Or a case of marketing running the show: "See, we have f32 too!"

I'm not quite as bitter as I sound right now, but when my $200 lens is beating the pants of off my $900 (plus the UV filter; $1000) lens, yeah -- I'm gonna be a little upset. Plus, I was really looking forward to the k20d, but if it's just so much hoopla there, too, well -- I may as well sell all of this stuff and join one of the two dark sides. It's been a year, I've just rolled the shot counter (10k shots on my k10d), and I've gotten to the point where I'm thinking... maybe it's NOT just me.

Oh, and -- how about the size difference? Those are identical crops from what are both supposed to be 50mm. Any thoughts?

[Richard Day]

Thanks very much Richard! I'm going to do another round of test shots (actually I just did but I'm still getting a wicked back focus to correct). *sigh*

Of course, the diffraction issue begs the question: can Pentax perhaps take a lesson from the elevator industry and please OVER-engineer instead of UNDER-engineering? In other words, if your f22 has issues, well, you shouldn't really have an f22, should you? Especially true of the 100mm Macro example you linked to -- adding f22 and f32 when your f16 has issues -- that's just bad engineering. Or a case of marketing running the show: "See, we have f32 too!"

I'm not quite as bitter as I sound right now, but when my $200 lens is beating the pants of off my $900 (plus the UV filter; $1000) lens, yeah -- I'm gonna be a little upset. Plus, I was really looking forward to the k20d, but if it's just so much hoopla there, too, well -- I may as well sell all of this stuff and join one of the two dark sides. It's been a year, I've just rolled the shot counter (10k shots on my k10d), and I've gotten to the point where I'm thinking... maybe it's NOT just me.

Oh, and -- how about the size difference? Those are identical crops from what are both supposed to be 50mm. Any thoughts?

Diffraction happens with ALL lenses, it's a fact of life!

Small apertures are required for increasing depth of field, not for increasing resolution. Nothing to do with the quality of engineering. Understand what it means, this may help:
Understanding Lens Diffraction

Regarding your 50mm question. Most lens focal lengths are calculated with their focus set at infinity, not at close distances, where they will differ somewhat. Try some distance shots, there could still be some small discrepancy, but it will be much less.

Back or front focus is another issue, all your lenses should be fairly close, if one is wildly out, then you should have the lens exchanged or serviced. If all your lenses are out by a similar amount, it points to faulty AF calibration of your camera, again it should be sent for calibration service.

[amateur6]

Thanks again! Apologies, because I've expressed myself poorly in a few spots here...

Diffraction happens with ALL lenses, it's a fact of life!

Small apertures are required for increasing depth of field, not for increasing resolution. Nothing to do with the quality of engineering.

Yes, point taken and understood. By "engineering" I didn't necessarily mean "Make it better", I meant "If this is as well as it can be made, only use the good parts". In other words, don't try to say "this goes to 11" when all you've done is change the numbers. Personally, I'd rather have a lens that's really good through all its range, than one that goes oh-so-high and oh-so-low BUT is still only GOOD in the middle, if you see what I mean.

Take the LL example you provided -- as Mr. Reichmann says, f32 and 45 are "unusable" -- so WHY give the lens either aperture? If the diffraction is so great that it overwhelms the DoF gains, there's no point. The effect may be a fact of life, but the decision to allow the lens to be stopped down that far and sold as "maximum aperture f45" is not.

To be fair, since I'm only working at one distance (also true of the LL examples), it's possible I'm not seeing the whole picture. But to me, it still smacks of mindless marketing-driven specs, which may sell more lenses and cameras to the unwary public BUT does nothing to build the long-term quality and reputation of the brand.

Regarding your 50mm question. Most lens focal lengths are calculated with their focus set at infinity, not at close distances, where they will differ somewhat. Try some distance shots, there could still be some small discrepancy, but it will be much less.

Aha. Gotcha.

Back or front focus is another issue, all your lenses should be fairly close, if one is wildly out, then you should have the lens exchanged or serviced. If all your lenses are out by a similar amount, it points to faulty AF calibration of your camera, again it should be sent for calibration service.

Yes, that's what started me on this whole thing -- however, I'm happy to say that after a whole day of tweaking the Service Menu AF corrections, I was confident enough to do a four-hour shoot last night with NOTHING but the DA* 16-50, and I'm quite happy with the results. Of course, working with a diffused flash instead of straight bar/club lighting made a huge difference, I'm sure...

[deejjjaaaa]

Then you'll not be able to change any setting nor re-adjust unless you downgrade the firmware again!

yes, but you can repeat the process as many times as you want...