[Dan Rentea]

Dan please Google "Bunched up Focusing points" there are several links there concerning the spread of focusing points. If you have the time take a quick look at what others have to say...

Please find here, on this forum, the "300mm+ lens" thread. There are a lot of people (Pentaxians included) complaining all over the forum/internet regarding Pentax's af which is not good for action, at least in their opinion. Those guys problem is that they think that they need a 1Dx or a D5 each time they want to shoot a kid or a moving car. Their cameras are leading them, not the other way around.

There are a lot of people shooting sports or wildlife with K3/K1 and have constantly, and I mean constantly gorgeous images in their portfolio. The Pentax's af topics are the same as this topic: there are some photographers that can get very good results with "basic" af and there are others that can't... I'm one of the guys who likes to try it and see if the problem exist and if it does, if it can be solved somehow.

You said that it can be a PITA for the guys who want to shoot sports with 6D Mark II because of the cramped af points. I showed you a few images and I can upload you 20 or 50 pages of wildlife, sports or running kids taken with a lot more basic af than the one from 6D Mark II. I'm not limited by af. I'm more limited by the 4.5 fps.

That being said, 300 or 3000 guys from the "Bunched up Focusing points" thread can say as long as they want that can't shoot properly portraits because of the af points cramped in the middle. They can't convince me of anything as long as me and a lot of others shoot portraits (without using the center af point and recompose) with cameras that have 8, 9 or 11 af points and use lenses like 135mm f2 or 200mm f2.8 that have tiny DOF. I realy don't want to offend you with all my comments, I just want you to realise that sometimes maybe we are the problem, not our cameras.

---

Last edited by Dan Rentea; 08-23-2017 at 12:08 PM.

[hjoseph7]

Given that this thread started with the tone of a rant, I guess it is obvious that a rant it will remain. (Use of ALL CAPS and words like "screaming" are usually good indicators of a rant.)

Summary of rant...you don't like the AF point distribution. It makes it difficult to do your job.

Summary of responses...You either not very flexible and/or don't know what you are doing and/or just want to complain. Here, listen to our suggestions/silence/criticisms/ridicule/laughter...

Conclusion...For years, all of us old enough coped with manual focus, but that was then, this is now. Since there are no focus features that work for you on your current camera or even within the current Pentax brand, a change of camera should be in order. This is true regardless of whether Pentax responds to your complaint.

BTW...Ricoh/Pentax does not monitor Pentax Forums and neither do the decision makers at Canon, Nikon, Sony, Olympus, Fuji, Panasonic, Leica, Mamiya/Phase One, or Hasselblad. Speaking of Hasselblad, $45,000 USD will get you a single AF point at center of field.

Edit: A small suggestion, though you are probably already aware of the feature and found it did not meet your needs. The K-5II supports face detection AF in live view. Add f/8 and you are golden.,


Steve

Steve, think what you want I paid my 20 bucks to become a member of this site and voice my opinions. I'm a "member" not a "Cult member", "Fanboy" or somebody that doesn't want to upset the sponsors. When in the Hell did I mention anything about Pentax in all of this ?

---------- Post added 08-23-17 at 05:58 PM ----------

Please find here, on this forum, the "300mm+ lens" thread. There are a lot of people (Pentaxians included) complaining all over the forum/internet regarding Pentax's af which is not good for action, at least in their opinion. Those guys problem is that they think that they need a 1Dx or a D5 each time they want to shoot a kid or a moving car. Their cameras are leading them, not the other way around.

There are a lot of people shooting sports or wildlife with K3/K1 and have constantly, and I mean constantly gorgeous images in their portfolio. The Pentax's af topics are the same as this topic: there are some photographers that can get very good results with "basic" af and there are others that can't... I'm one of the guys who likes to try it and see if the problem exist and if it does, if it can be solved somehow.

You said that it can be a PITA for the guys who want to shoot sports with 6D Mark II because of the cramped af points. I showed you a few images and I can upload you 20 or 50 pages of wildlife, sports or running kids taken with a lot more basic af than the one from 6D Mark II. I'm not limited by af. I'm more limited by the 4.5 fps.

That being said, 300 or 3000 guys from the "Bunched up Focusing points" thread can say as long as they want that can't shoot properly portraits because of the af points cramped in the middle. They can't convince me of anything as long as me and a lot of others shoot portraits (without using the center af point and recompose) with cameras that have 8, 9 or 11 af points and use lenses like 135mm f2 or 200mm f2.8 that have tiny DOF. I realy don't want to offend you with all my comments, I just want you to realise that sometimes maybe we are the problem, not our cameras.

Yes there are also guys that drive 80 miles an hour on the highway because they are skilled drivers and like to show off. As for me I am not that skilled, but I'll keep my $2000 in my pocket until I can find a camera I want.

[clackers]

Please find here, on this forum, the "300mm+ lens" thread. There are a lot of people (Pentaxians included) complaining all over the forum/internet regarding Pentax's af which is not good for action, at least in their opinion. Those guys problem is that they think that they need a 1Dx or a D5 each time they want to shoot a kid or a moving car. Their cameras are leading them, not the other way around.

There are a lot of people shooting sports or wildlife with K3/K1 and have constantly, and I mean constantly gorgeous images in their portfolio. The Pentax's af topics are the same as this topic: there are some photographers that can get very good results with "basic" af and there are others that can't... I'm one of the guys who likes to try it and see if the problem exist and if it does, if it can be solved somehow.

You said that it can be a PITA for the guys who want to shoot sports with 6D Mark II because of the cramped af points. I showed you a few images and I can upload you 20 or 50 pages of wildlife, sports or running kids taken with a lot more basic af than the one from 6D Mark II. I'm not limited by af. I'm more limited by the 4.5 fps.

That being said, 300 or 3000 guys from the "Bunched up Focusing points" thread can say as long as they want that can't shoot properly portraits because of the af points cramped in the middle. They can't convince me of anything as long as me and a lot of others shoot portraits (without using the center af point and recompose) with cameras that have 8, 9 or 11 af points and use lenses like 135mm f2 or 200mm f2.8 that have tiny DOF. I realy don't want to offend you with all my comments, I just want you to realise that sometimes maybe we are the problem, not our cameras.

Great post.

[stevebrot]

Steve, think what you want I paid my 20 bucks to become a member of this site and voice my opinions.

I believe you have achieved your stated goal and gotten your money's worth and in the process created an interesting dynamic with a few other members on this site. As for Pentax, you did post it in the "Pentax dSLR Discussion" and did make specific mention of your K-5II and features that no Pentax camera has. OTOH, you were very specific that your rant was against makers of dSLRs, so Pentax has no particular guilt in regards to your displeasure that is not shared by Nikon, Canon, Leica, Mamiya/Phase One, and Hasselblad. My mistake. Oops...scratch Nikon off the list. They do make the D500 and it is under $2000.

My suggestion stands. If you have $2000 burning a hole in your pocket, there is a D500, Sony, Olympus, Fuji, or Lumix with your name on it. I am not being sarcastic. One less unhappy forum member means all the less negative energy on the site. I, for one, will be pleased to read your impressions of whatever you get.


Steve

P.S. The sponsors don't give a rip just as long as this site continues to send them business.

[BrianR]

When I want to find out how something AF related works, I look at how Canon does it for the simple reason that it seems to be the best documented and/or complained about. This fellow gives four reasons why we don't see AF points out at the edges (near the bottom if you want to skip to that) and also more general information about phase detect AF: Canon EOS DSLR Autofocus Explained

[stevebrot]

When I want to find out how something AF related works, I look at how Canon does it for the simple reason that it seems to be the best documented and/or complained about. This fellow gives four reasons why we don't see AF points out at the edges (near the bottom if you want to skip to that) and also more general information about phase detect AF: Canon EOS DSLR Autofocus Explained

Excellent, complete, and easily digested. Thanks for sharing!


Steve

[hjoseph7]

When I want to find out how something AF related works, I look at how Canon does it for the simple reason that it seems to be the best documented and/or complained about. This fellow gives four reasons why we don't see AF points out at the edges (near the bottom if you want to skip to that) and also more general information about phase detect AF: Canon EOS DSLR Autofocus Explained

Thank you Brian R that is all I asked for ... By the way the outer point of my K-5 IIs reaches the so-called ruled of third line. So did the Canon 30D the, Canon 40D from 2005 and other cameras. How Nikon managed to spread those focusing points is, a marvel. Go Nikon !

---

Last edited by hjoseph7; 08-23-2017 at 07:49 PM.

[MarkJerling]

I've removed some posts here that were off topic and not in keeping with the spirit of the forum.

[clackers]

How Nikon managed to spread those focusing points is, a marvel. Go Nikon !

?

The reliability drops until on a lens slower than f4, those outer focus points don't work.

You can read the Canon article to see why.

[hjoseph7]

?

The reliability drops until on a lens slower than f4, those outer focus points don't work.

You can read the Canon article to see why.

That single outer focusing point worked fine with me unless I had to shoot "twins", where I would revert to manual focusing. Live View was in its infancy back then it had latency problems and tended to eat up the batteries. Not so good for 8-10 hour shifts.

[clackers]

That single outer focusing worked fine with me unless I had to shoot "twins", where I would revert to manual focusing. Live View was in is infancy back then had latency problems and tended to eat up the batteries. Not so good for 8-10 hour shifts.

According to documentation, on the Nikon D500, the cross points outside the centre actually DO NOT WORK after f4.

You're down to the line sensors.

[pschlute]

Thank you Brian R that is all I asked for

I did point this out in post number 2 !

[camyum]

Why read info on how not to do it?(Canon) I'd rather read, why and how Nikon does it. But all that reading why, wont help achieving better AF on PENTAX-Cameras.

[BrianR]

Why read info on how not to do it?(Canon) I'd rather read, why and how Nikon does it.

Link away please. Thanks in advance!

[hjoseph7]

Even with a Zoom lens or moving forward or backward the subject becomes bigger or smaller but the focusing points remain in the same place. If I could just make the subject small enough so it can just fit under one of those finicky center focusing points... But then, the Perspective changes and the subject no longer fills the frame unless you crop.