Originally posted by camyum I know the thread is going into the AF.C direction, but ...
AF-Problems....10% body... i feel there are also some rudimentary bytes of code on the camera AF side that do some trial and error math (and in result of this af-moving) "a bit" too often.
...
fox, if you would have read would i have written, you would have to ask yourself where the point in your "answer" is.
to me it seems that if a lens is already slow as a snail and the af.c math on the camera side isnt very good its a catastrophe.
If the lens is going to focus very fast its less than half the pain and af.c math can keep the lens in touch with the subject so'n'so.
(But actually pretty good for a Pentax)
I absolutely agree that it(AF.C) still gets pretty messy, especially in Live-View(which is adding a whole other deficit of pentax cameras - no pdaf on sensor...)...
thats why i wrote that 10% of the problems are on the camera side for sure... let it be 30% if you think so(i will not disagree)
But you have to admit that the PLM is a VAST improvement...
Its like it is focussing and hits the focused point at the very moment you place your finger on the shutter button.
(Given the fact you chose AF.S)
That is progress we are allowed to be happy about isnt it?
Just take a look!
or watch:
So there would be a benefit for sure, if PENTAX(Ricoh-Imaging) would start to take that PLM technology a bit further and implement it as Double-PLM in full frame lenses(since the elements in bigger glass are heavier)
And given the fact that Canon charges nearly the same(or less!) for its "Canon EF 70-200 mm 1:2,8 L IS II USM"
as Pentax charges for its "Pentax D FA 70-200mm HD F2.8 ED DC AW",
--> it will be pretty difficult for PENTAX to
rectify or explain a price hike(when implementing PLM), given the fact that Canon not also has lightning fast AF drive implemented since years, it also has to build Stabilizers into its lenses...AND! believe it or not this lens(Canons) is also weathersealed like a tank. (So I feel pretty lucky when I spare myself the usual "But it may make things more expensive"-angst.)
And you also can't deny that a lens that is not capable of keeping up with the AF sensing...
(which is in itself lightning fast like on every other camera IF no higher math gets involved - you see that at )
... will defenitely make good AF.C behaviour far more difficult, since when a subject is moving fast thru your frame, the lens has to be capable of refocusing(driving) to the point sensed by PDAF, and it should do that faster then the moving subject.