[jersey]

In the end camera is just a tool to make images with. One should choose one he likes, for whatever reasons, and stop telling others what they should use. If one wants to use P&S on auto he should use it that way. If this is what makes him willing to and making great photos then why not?

[eddie1960]

In the end camera is just a tool to make images with. One should choose one he likes, for whatever reasons, and stop telling others what they should use. If one wants to use P&S on auto he should use it that way. If this is what makes him willing to and making great photos then why not?

I have a friend who has done over 500 album covers over the decades and many various media promos and held art shows. he has shot a lot of paying work on an IR converted canon point and shoot while it is always nice to have the latest greatest I would rather have more talent and just decent gear

[tibbitts]

...

I don't understand that, I've tried Fuji, I use Pentax (K1) and very seldom have an issue with AF-S.

Generally, I press the shutter button (half or full), the camera focuses, lock focus and take the shot, I don't have to care about it, it just works.


So I really don't know what people are talking about.

I have very little experience with any cameras other than Pentax, and don't have a K1 or K3. However based on the Pentax bodies I've used (K100, K200, K5, K5ii, K70.) I would have said the same thing you did when I started out with my first AF body, a K100, and only the 16-45 and 50-200mm lenses. But since becoming more knowledgeable about digital photography in general, and adding more bodies and lenses (both Pentax and 3rd party), now my experience is that Pentax AF is definitely finicky and often simply isn't accurate, despite the range of adjustments that are available. PDAF has limited adjustment capabilities on all my bodies; limited in both range and to only one setting per lens. Until recently I would have said that CDAF was accurate under almost all circumstances, but then I found a combination (K70 and 10-20/3.5 Sigma) where it isn't even close, even at the longer focal lengths where I wouldn't expect problems.

[martin42mm]

I really must try out this new-fangled autofocus sometime......but as long as my eyes are still OK, it can wait a bit longer.....

[Wheatfield]

So, we have a reasonable YouTube presentation that attracted comments from a Pentax/Fuji shooter. While exclaiming how good the X-T4 is for their purpose, the commentator doesn't say much about any of the negatives.

The X-T4 is a commendable camera, for sure, but even a quick online search would reveal numerous issues. Here are several that I found earlier when I was interested casually in the X-T4. These are not pervasive problems, but also not just one-off comments from users. They're not necessarily show-stoppers for potential buyers, but things to be aware of.

• Too-small hand grip that can cause discomfort, especially with larger lenses
• Disappointment with the build quality
• Mushy shutter button
• Problems with the battery grip connection
• Autofocus issues
• AF issues with certain wide-angle lenses
• Mechanical build quality of some lenses
• Problems induced by at least one firmware update (lost images on SD card; camera freezing).

Looking at the relative costs of the cameras and comparable lens kits would reveal interesting findings -- an X-T4 kit is not necessarily cheaper than a K-3 Mark III kit and could be $1,000-2,000 more. Despite the seemingly relative high price of the K-3 Mark III camera, an overall kit could be quite a bit less expensive than a similar one based on the X-T4.

The Fuji is heavier with certain lens or focal-length combinations (e.g., DA* 50-135, XF 50-140mm). Fujifilm offers numerous excellent, lightweight prime lenses, but longer focal lengths are compromised in weight or maximum aperture.

So, the message for myself is to not put too much weight or credence on one person's anecdotal evidence.

- Craig

One thing in Fujis favour is the lenses. They truly are a cut above and are definitely better glass than the DA primes.

---------- Post added Feb 22nd, 2022 at 03:27 PM ----------

and I was moving from a K7 so I was used to bad

I had a K5 at the time. My K5 was worse than my K7.

[BruceBanner]

I recently read some comments about a video about the Pentax K3 mark III.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYkmUeusVvs


One of the comments , from a Pentax user who also now use Fuji wrote a comment about Pentax (not the exact comment) such as:
"with Fuji you don't have to care about auto-focus, everything works seamlessly"
"with Pentax you have to take care of the auto-focus" (doesn't work on its own?)
"the mirrorless hype is no hype, it IS a huge advantage"


I don't understand that, I've tried Fuji, I use Pentax (K1) and very seldom have an issue with AF-S.

Generally, I press the shutter button (half or full), the camera focuses, lock focus and take the shot, I don't have to care about it, it just works.


So I really don't know what people are talking about.

That was yours truly

I have sitting at home a K-1, 645D, K3III (on loan from Pentax) and a Fuji XT4 (and used to have a KP). I feel very comfortable talking about all these systems. I have done a review on the XT4, K3III and recently a 645D vs K-1 comparison on my channel. I do try to be fairly balanced around all these subject matters.

For Fuji, my camera pretty much lives in AF.C Wide/Tracking mode. What this gives is a smallish square box that you can half press the shutter on and it tracks if that object/subject moves (like a cat) or I move (recompose for the shot), a bit like the Pentax AF Tracking mode in LV but on steroids . I hardly even use the joystick or single AF point on the Fuji. Never use manual focus, and I don't wholly see the point in using AF.S if AF.C works so well.
With mirrorless I suffer no front or back focusing issues, find myself rarely chimping to confirm focus (I might chimp for the composition, lighting etc, but never focus). I dunno what to say, it is just a piece of piss to use a camera like this. I get the shots I want super quickly without fuss. I don't even feel like a photographer anymore

I also have a button assigned on the XT4 to toggle Face Detection on/off and that too is super helpful. Shooting the camera like this just takes all the headache out of AF. Within the first hour of owning the XT4 (and not knowing how to set it up properly or any of that sort of thing), I was able to grab these running shots of my kid towards the camera, Face Detection on, 56/1.4 at f1.4 (so 85/2 FF equivalent); https://www.flickr.com/gp/95230640@N04/j0b2zq This kinda thing is incredibly hard to do with Pentax. Live View supports no AF.C so no Face Detection here, it's down to a bundle of AF points and keeping it over the face and its hard to predict where the subject will be when they run. And even if you do keep AF points in the right place you then are dealing with the Pentax slow AF to keep up. Bernard I think has done many tests that show a camera like the K-1 struggles with keeper rates on subjects coming towards the tog (with speed). I think the K-1ii greatest improvement to AF was for things moving away from the tog, not towards.

I've now done a few weddings with Fuji and Pentax together, but moving forward I will be shooting exclusively with the Fuji (and pick a second body). I will continue to use Pentax in the genres I feel that system is strongest with, landscape or anything with an emphasis on slow controlled stuff.

It's clear to me that the industry has went crazy in the last 5yrs specifically on AF. Fuji is probably actually the weakest of the bunch. The new OM-1 seems to be pretty swell. The tech trend has been to help the tog get the shots they want with ease, without soft focus. Fuji is more than enough assistance for me, but I can understand those doing sport coverage properly and wanting some Face/Eye tracking on a better level, to track a specific player as they move among other players and for it to keep lock on them even when they face away etc, that some higher end Canikony cameras would be better. But it feels very specific, for general purpose I think even the budget Fuji is more than enough AF for most.

My comments to Snappiness/James was really just that I could sympathize with how he was feeling with his slight buyers remorse feeling with the K3III. It's a lot of coin to put down for a 'same ol same ol' Pentax experience in many ways. In fact in my K3III review I show how nothing has really changed at all since the K-1 release in terms of LV features or AF performance in that area. Shame.

When I bought the XT4 I at least felt as though my $2k was on something really quite indifferent to my previous DSLR Pentax experiences. I regularly shoot with it and know from years of experience that I would simply have missed that moment or this had I tried to use Pentax, either focus, recompose was too long, or moving an AF point around would have been too slow, etc etc. Sorry... just calling a spade a spade here.

I now feel a much better rounded out tog with a Fuji in the toolbag. It has become my 'documentary/capture the moment' camera. I still adore my Pentax gear and will continue to use them for the right situation as they still run rings around Fuji in many regards, but just not AF.

Everybody's needs in a camera are different. The fact you're happy with AF.S tells me a little about your shooting experience and needs. I'd say if you get what you want from your camera then definitely do not worry about what anyone else says. But you do need to be sensitive to the needs of others and understand that we all use our cameras for different purposes. AF.S is not going to be the best option for birding or sport shooting for example, but its fine to snap a thing here or there casually. When you do higher pressure stuff like weddings you just appreciate all the latest AF tech to help you increase the keeper rates and stay competitive in that industry. Moments matter, they get you the next job.

https://www.youtube.com/c/EddySummersPhotography/videos

[dudu]

I recently read some comments about a video about the Pentax K3 mark III.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HYkmUeusVvs


One of the comments , from a Pentax user who also now use Fuji wrote a comment about Pentax (not the exact comment) such as:
"with Fuji you don't have to care about auto-focus, everything works seamlessly"
"with Pentax you have to take care of the auto-focus" (doesn't work on its own?)
"the mirrorless hype is no hype, it IS a huge advantage"


I don't understand that, I've tried Fuji, I use Pentax (K1) and very seldom have an issue with AF-S.

Generally, I press the shutter button (half or full), the camera focuses, lock focus and take the shot, I don't have to care about it, it just works.


So I really don't know what people are talking about.

Just as Pentaxians are Pentaxians and others have their passions and hold on to them like a stadium.

[Serkevan]

I never use the actual shutter button to get my focus, only to take the shot.

I do the same. But it's *mostly* because, if I try to use the shutter button to focus, the K-1 will most likely mess the focus up.

I'm with Jersey here - I understand why people like high-end MILC AF. You don't have to work for it nearly as much. In my case it's not even close to being enough to overcome all the other issues I have with MILCs. And the other DSLR systems (F and EF) don't spark as much joy as Pentax does... so the decision is easy to make.

[BruceBanner]

On mirrorless Systems, Fuji, Sony, just set AF-C and tracking with spot Focus and all will be done automaticly. No need to think or follow the subject or even use AF-S. That is the difference, on Pentax Tracking does not work good at all, not even on K3lll. But AFS, spot no problem. I use K1-ll and Sony A7IV, sold K3III just becsuse of tracking issues. But for all not moving subject K1-ll is the King in IQ, colors, exposure etc. In AF and tracking mirrorless rules. Two different systems working different and with plus and minus on both.

Amen.

---------- Post added 02-23-22 at 10:01 AM ----------

So, we have a reasonable YouTube presentation that attracted comments from a Pentax/Fuji shooter. While exclaiming how good the X-T4 is for their purpose, the commentator doesn't say much about any of the negatives.

The X-T4 is a commendable camera, for sure, but even a quick online search would reveal numerous issues. Here are several that I found earlier when I was interested casually in the X-T4. These are not pervasive problems, but also not just one-off comments from users. They're not necessarily show-stoppers for potential buyers, but things to be aware of.

• Too-small hand grip that can cause discomfort, especially with larger lenses
• Disappointment with the build quality
• Mushy shutter button
• Problems with the battery grip connection
• Autofocus issues
• AF issues with certain wide-angle lenses
• Mechanical build quality of some lenses
• Problems induced by at least one firmware update (lost images on SD card; camera freezing).

Looking at the relative costs of the cameras and comparable lens kits would reveal interesting findings -- an X-T4 kit is not necessarily cheaper than a K-3 Mark III kit and could be $1,000-2,000 more. Despite the seemingly relative high price of the K-3 Mark III camera, an overall kit could be quite a bit less expensive than a similar one based on the X-T4.

The Fuji is heavier with certain lens or focal-length combinations (e.g., DA* 50-135, XF 50-140mm). Fujifilm offers numerous excellent, lightweight prime lenses, but longer focal lengths are compromised in weight or maximum aperture.

So, the message for myself is to not put too much weight or credence on one person's anecdotal evidence.

- Craig

If you took the time to look at my own channel and watch my Fuji XT4 review you will see I do pick up on many of these issues. XT4 is far from perfect. It feels like a turd in the hand!
But here, we/I was just talking specifically about AF and how revolutionary it felt coming from Pentax, that is all. I'm not in a single YT comment going to do a full pro and con list, to expect that is a bit much.

[c.a.m]

If you took the time to look at my own channel and watch my Fuji XT4 review you will see I do pick up on many of these issues. XT4 is far from perfect. It feels like a turd in the hand!

But here, we/I was just talking specifically about AF and how revolutionary it felt coming from Pentax, that is all. I'm not in a single YT comment going to do a full pro and con list, to expect that is a bit much.

I've watched a few of your YT presentations (before this thread was opened), and enjoy your presentation style. I can't say that I would agree with all of your conclusions, but that's fine. Sorry, I didn't watch the X-T4 review.

As for the YT comments in response to the video, which prompted this thread, AF was the main subject. However, a number of other areas were touched on, including the "MILC hype," IQ, burst rate (FPS), and buffer. The price of the K-3 Mark III was also mentioned, suggesting that you wouldn't take it even at AUD $1000 (I presume because you've now got the X-T4 and the K-3 III wouldn't bring any additional value). There was also an implication that the X-T3 (yes, 3) is better than the K-3 Mark III. The X-T4 was promoted as a wonderful camera, so I think it's fair to balance the pros with a view of real or potential cons. Also to be fair, the YT comment did highlight several positive things about the Pentax.

I wouldn't discount your praise of the X-T4's AF performance; you're obviously enamored with it and getting the shots you expect -- that's great. I don't think you're impressed with the AF of the K-3 Mark III, which isn't a universal conclusion. The suggestion to the YT author that he made a "bad purchase" seems a bit excessive IMO.

- Craig

[BruceBanner]

I've watched a few of your YT presentations (before this thread was opened), and enjoy your presentation style. I can't say that I would agree with all of your conclusions, but that's fine. Sorry, I didn't watch the X-T4 review.

As for the YT comments in response to the video, which prompted this thread, AF was the main subject. However, a number of other areas were touched on, including the "MILC hype," IQ, burst rate (FPS), and buffer. The price of the K-3 Mark III was also mentioned, suggesting that you wouldn't take it even at AUD $1000 (I presume because you've now got the X-T4 and the K-3 III wouldn't bring any additional value). There was also an implication that the X-T3 (yes, 3) is better than the K-3 Mark III. The X-T4 was promoted as a wonderful camera, so I think it's fair to balance the pros with a view of real or potential cons. Also to be fair, the YT comment did highlight several positive things about the Pentax.

I wouldn't discount your praise of the X-T4's AF performance; you're obviously enamored with it and that's great. I don't think you're impressed with the AF of the K-3 Mark III, which isn't a universal conclusion. The suggestion to the YT author that he made a "bad purchase" seems a bit excessive IMO.

- Craig

I think the XT-3 is actually better than the XT-4 for AF. I have not tested this myself, it's likely a XT-3 will become my backup body for event work at some point. As always the devils in the details, I think the AF issue for the XT-4 lies predominantly in video mode, it wobbles and hunts a little (though you can minimise this with some AF limiter applied). I think something went a bit haywire when they introduced IBIS with the XT-4 and somehow that has gotten in the way of the AF performance a little and thus many regard the XT-3 to having that AF edge when comparing the two cameras. No IBIS though is limiting. Thankfully, for a lot of event work you probably should set the shutter speed to a safe 1/500 and forget about it, and with the appropriate lenses for the day would likely not be relying or needing IBIS anyway. It's only for the cooler arty shots you might appreciate those slow shutter speeds with IBIS support.

And again, devil is in the details, I think I'd rather a K3III with my 55-300PLM for some casual bird snapping vs my XT-4 with my el cheapo XC50-230, here the Pentax shines and is definitely a winner. The only issue is you just might get soft focus shots, which has been my experience. It is definitely very frustrating to capture a good wildlife moment and then chimp or get back to the PC and realise it is not in focus as well as it could be, knowing that in the past how the lens can perform on this occasion it did not. I'm sad to say this is a common experience with Pentax and gets you down over time. Whereas with the XT4 my experience has been this is a thing of the past, AF Tracking or AF point, put it over the thing you want, take the shot, pin sharp every time. Like I say, I no longer chimp for focus checking anymore, it's a huge weight off my shoulders for the kind of work I do. But I have no idea how the XF70-300 performs on Fuji, I'm not much of a birder. So AF is such a complex subject because it really depends on intents and purposes. For people work, weddings, events, family, documentary... Fuji is more than enough for me and indeed is supposed to be the lamest in the MILC world.

Rewatch Snappies video tho, he's the one bringing up the buyers remorse, he is not sure if he will keep it (and he's only had it a short while), he's on the fence and I think that has been a very true experience for a lot of K3III owners. The last thing Pentax really needed to give us right now was a camera that divides even Pentaxians!

AF wise for the K3III, I think we can all agree there is little to no improvement on the LV side of things since K-1, I pretty much show that directly in my video. Once we get to the OVF AF I am actually of the rare opinion it could be the worst of all Pentax cameras, and my own private testing confirmed this. I did not want to bring it up directly in my K3III review because you don't slam a company that hard whom you love and loaned you a camera (in good faith). But with my three amigos on the K3III, to calibrate and Fine Adjust them, I could not use the Dot Tune Method because the Green Hex (focus confirmation) would kick in from -10 all the way up to +10 (on all three lenses). It literally considered heavily out of focus shots to being acceptably in focus and would trigger the shutter. In reality my FA43 or FA77 needed something like +7 for optimum Fine Adjustment, yet at -10 it would trigger the shot (green hex comes on). That's like 17 AF Fine Adjustment points off from being ideal, and that is truly a crummy out of focus shot being triggered. Focus Priority is virtually pointless as the scope of what the camera deems acceptably in focus is just so large. It's practically Release Priority... :/

Where everyone gets the 'omg the AF is so much better' hype is what I believe to being put down to mistaking the improvements in AF speed, buffer and fps. You get a higher keeper rate now due to increased buffer and fps, for the first time Pentaxians are experiencing the benefits of spraying and praying. But quick AF doesn't mean better AF, it matters not to me if the AF is quick but decides that what is clearly out of focus is in focus and 'good enough' and triggers the shutter. It's quick but inaccurate, and coupled with just DSLR native front and back focusing issues leads to very erratic results. Consistent it is not.

But of course this is just my findings, my K3III unit. Variance may well exist throughout the bodies.

All in all I stand by my comment. Fuji filled the holes Pentax seems to struggle with, but I will not replace my toolbag with Fuji thingies. Pentax still in 2022 kick ass on the dynamic range, IQ and rendering. These are predominantly my landscape cameras where I can battle AF less and am triggered less

[c.a.m]

And again, devil is in the details, [snip]

Thanks for your additional detailed comments.

Once we get to the OVF AF I am actually of the rare opinion it could be the worst of all Pentax cameras, and my own private testing confirmed this. I did not want to bring it up directly in my K3III review because you don't slam a company that hard whom you love and loaned you a camera (in good faith). But with my three amigos on the K3III, to calibrate and Fine Adjust them, I could not use the Dot Tune Method because the Green Hex (focus confirmation) would kick in from -10 all the way up to +10 (on all three lenses). It literally considered heavily out of focus shots to being acceptably in focus and would trigger the shutter. In reality my FA43 or FA77 needed something like +7 for optimum Fine Adjustment, yet at -10 it would trigger the shot (green hex comes on). That's like 17 AF Fine Adjustment points off from being ideal, and that is truly a crummy out of focus shot being triggered. Focus Priority is virtually pointless as the scope of what the camera deems acceptably in focus is just so large. It's practically Release Priority...

I am somewhat surprised that you experienced such awful AF performance on the K-3 Mark III. That hasn't been my experience with my K-3 III.

I'm wondering whether the AF Fine Adjustment might have caused a significant problem, and it sounds like the calibration process was a challenge.

The FA 43mm Limited is actually one of my best-performing lenses in terms of AF accuracy and precision, as indicated in this article: K-3 Mark III and Firmware 1.31: Requires New Autofocus Fine Adjustment - PentaxForums.com

In response to another thread on the Dot Tune calibration method, I compared it to my baseline method: Dot Focus microfocus adjustment - Page 3 - PentaxForums.com

In short, AF Fine Adjustment is a necessary evil for DSLRs, and the process to calibrate a collection of lenses is a tedious job. Dot Tune can work, but it has its limitations as described in my post at the link. MILCs have a clear advantage in this regard.

After calibrating my AF lenses, I've been totally satisfied with their accuracy and repeatability. I believe I'm getting better AF results on my K-3 Mark III than with my previous Pentax cameras such as the K-3 II and K-5 II. I don't do much action photography, but the tests and shoots I've done have given pretty good results. I've only casually used the subject recognition capability, but it seems to work okay. I believe other users have been fairly impressed with the K-3 III AF in various situations.

- Craig

[BruceBanner]

Thanks for your additional detailed comments.




I am somewhat surprised that you experienced such awful AF performance on the K-3 Mark III. That hasn't been my experience with my K-3 III.

I'm wondering whether the AF Fine Adjustment might have caused a significant problem, and it sounds like the calibration process was a challenge.

The FA 43mm Limited is actually one of my best-performing lenses in terms of AF accuracy and precision, as indicated in this article: K-3 Mark III and Firmware 1.31: Requires New Autofocus Fine Adjustment - PentaxForums.com

In response to another thread on the Dot Tune calibration method, I compared it to my baseline method: Dot Focus microfocus adjustment - Page 3 - PentaxForums.com

In short, AF Fine Adjustment is a necessary evil for DSLRs, and the process to calibrate a collection of lenses is a tedious job. Dot Tune can work, but it has its limitations as described in my post at the link. MILCs have a clear advantage in this regard.

After calibrating my AF lenses, I've been totally satisfied with their accuracy and repeatability. I believe I'm getting better AF results on my K-3 Mark III than with my previous Pentax cameras such as the K-3 II and K-5 II. I don't do much action photography, but the tests and shoots I've done have given pretty good results. I've only casually used the subject recognition capability, but it seems to work okay.

- Craig

I should have pointed out this anomaly with the K3III and the Fine Adjustment/Dot Tune method issues was 'limited' (ho ho ho) to just the three FA Ltds. When tuning my 55-300PLM the green hex scope (what it considered acceptably in and out of focus) was far more narrower and thus did not present the same problems. I have used the Dot Tune methods fine on all my Pentax cameras and especially my FA Ltds (as they are my most used lenses), it was never a problem until the K3III. It just seemed that the green hex was very easily triggered during focus acquisition and late to turn toggle off, what that camera system deemed acceptably in focus could be ridiculously badly focused, it actually made for a very hard fine Adjustment experience. Some of my Fine Adjustment shots were hilariously bad, I had to laugh
I think my findings echoed that other Singapore YTer user who was loaned a K3III and FA77, he was not at all impressed with the focus (and mirrored my own experience).

AF is a big subject, there is a lot of settings to tweak that can make a really big difference in the field to keeper rates. On my own K3III unit I did not find AF to being any better than its predecessor cameras (and like I said possibly even worse), I imagined many shots I was getting with the K3III to being exactly like what I would get with my K-1 or KP should it too have the fps and buffer perks;

https://youtu.be/00lFQQdVue0?t=470

Still tho, you can get great captures and results.

But none of this really takes away from the OP. When I shelled out $2k for my XT4, I never had buyers remorse, more like "why didn't I do this sooner!", it was a very different AF experience and still is. Go the little Fuj

[gatorguy]

AF is a big subject, there is a lot of settings to tweak that can make a really big difference in the field to keeper rates. On my own K3III unit I did not find AF to being any better than its predecessor cameras (and like I said possibly even worse), I imagined many shots I was getting with the K3III to being exactly like what I would get with my K-1 or KP should it too have the fps and buffer perks

The K3III is the prissiest of all my Pentax cameras. None of the others have typically needed fine focus adjustment with good Pentax glass. My new camera has needed it with several including the Sigma Art 35 and 18-35, even the DFA16-50 PLM and HDFA85. Until I had I was admittedly disappointed in the focus capabilities. But since doing so ( and definitely not your green-dot method) they've become absolutely spot-on and fast to focus with the K3III, except for the Sigma 18-35 which probably won't ever be 100% reliable. Nature of the lens. Heck, it's a one-time thing anyway so hardly much of a chore. Pick an otherwise boring afternoon to do it.

Bonus find: The Katie even resurrected my *55's SDM that hasn't worked for over a year. The camera seems to be a bit speedier with all my older SDM glass for that matter even if the DFA 100 still hunts, and by design as a macro IMHO.

In a nutshell my own experience has been very positive with regard to the K3III's autofocus even if it didn't start that way. Not perfect but better than any of my other cameras and it's still early in development. Good enough to be my tag-team partner with the K1 on model and portrait shoots. Set up with zone focus it nearly always finds my subject's eye, reliability (not speed) roughly on par with the Nikon Z5 I used for a shoot, noting that neither one "sees" eyes from much distance. Beyond a few feet it's actually face-focus from what I can tell.

I don't know if most K3III owners frequently use burst mode. I generally do not, even on wildlife. I've used it, but it kinda feels like cheating to me. It's also one of those things you have to dedicate time to learning technique with birds darting in and out of brush with no clue for me where next. I haven't been that motivated yet.


As a related MILC note, I found the viewfinder blackout on the Z5 to be hugely annoying when doing bursts. I can't imagine trying to depend on it for an unpredictable quick moving subject, ie a bird or football players. No doubt the new multi-thousand dollar cameras are better in that regard, Another niggle: With more than one face in view eye focus wasn't reliable and too often slow to use on the Nikon. It was either move the focus spot manually to the eye I wanted (on the K3III in live you can tap the screen which is much faster for me) or go spot focus/recompose like I've done for years on my DSLR's. To be honest manually moving a focus point around is a pain and not worth th minor benefit. I've seen far more experienced photographers than myself with the latest mirrorless still rely on focus and recompose.

In my own case keeper rates have always been more than acceptable with my Pentax gear, and from what I remember they were good with yours, tho I don't recall you ever having an interest in sports or birding or at least posting images of it. Most of what I'd seen in your very good photos were relatively static subjects. The K3II has required (a lot) more time getting dialed in, but now that it is the focus performance has been great whether places or people or planes or birds. It's got a serious test coming up at Sun 'n Fun in a few weeks, and I fully expect it to pass with flying colors.

Now getting to the OVF I'm pretty surprised you had a problem with it. In my case it's the only crop camera from Pentax I feel confident with manual focus without the split-screens I put in my K50's, K-s2's and K-70's. It's definitely brighter which is nice with fading or very early light.

I don't at all doubt you've had a poor experience with your particular Pentax camera. Yours is not a universal one. Many of us are finding major improvements from previous Pentax bodies even if there are a few irritants. Luckily we're still on a very early firmware, and Pentax has signaled a dedication to the K3III. It will only get better from here. I think GPS-less astro in the next update will turn at least a few eyes in Pentax direction. DSLR innovation isn't dead yet.

So I'll hang in there with Pentax for awhile. There's no perfect camera, just one that connects with us. Better the devil I know.

[BruceBanner]

In my own case keeper rates have always been more than acceptable with my Pentax gear, and from what I remember they were good with yours, tho I don't recall you ever having an interest in sports or birding or at least posting images of it. Most of what I'd seen in your very good photos were relatively static subjects.

Thank you for the kind words. In truth I don't consider my work very good at all, average at best, but I also don't really consider myself past the first 5yr mark of 'serious shooting'. I have still much to learn. What people saw however was what I wanted them to see. I wasn't in the habit of sharing duds.

This is the thing that seems to fall deaf on most Pentaxians ears. It's all about keeper rates (when you start doing photography for work). No one is saying you can't do sports with Pentax, wildlife with Pentax (tho lens choice can be limiting..), it's about the ease and if you walk away from the session with a high keeper rate from which to choose the very best moment.

Before digital photography, there were still fantastic sport and wildlife moments captured and printed. But what no one is talking about is the high failure rate and duds along the way. A great deal of luck was in those shots.

What technology has done has stripped away the element of luck. For example, at a recent wedding I was doing the 'confetti shot' (when the newly weds leave the ceremony and confetti tossed in the air from families and guests). Typically I would be ahead of them and backing up whilst continuously shooting. I was using my Fuji at 7fps and sustained it for about 5 seconds or more. Upon reviewing those images you would be surprised at how few keepers there actually were. To find a single shot where the couple look their best (and in focus), the guests on the edge of the frame smiling, no eyes closed or too weird expressions, no large chunks of confetti in front of the lens and obscuring half the frame, or confetti challenging the AF system for attention! And so on...

I decided after that experience 7fps was not enough, I should have used 10 or more.

Now had I shot that moment with K-1 I would have been in real trouble, but the K-1 might have just been lucky enough to have taken the shot and for everything to come together like how I would have liked. But the odds were more in favor for the Fuj managing this feat better. It was a pure numbers game.



As a business, the more you can add the very best moments captured for the client/advertising, the more likely you will get hired in future. It's competitive. And this is why there are so few wedding Pentax togs, or sport Pentax togs, or wildlife and so on so forth. It's just not the best tool for the job. These guys want to get paid, and there are so many elements to a days shooting that checking or chimping camera to confirm focus is just not something you want to have to contend with.

Tech moves on. MILC has come a long way in 5yrs. I don't know what Pentax has been doing in that time but it doesn't feel like it has gone anywhere near the kind of advancements and enjoyed the same improvement curve MILC has. Definitely MILC was crappy to begin with, but I think the market has well and truly spoken, the perks of MILC are too strong to ignore and so each iteration keeps getting better and better. My introduction to MILC was the XT4, perhaps I have been spoilt as I think the EVF is pretty decent and the overall MILC experience (along with video) being pretty decent first experience stuff (and those earlier issues that all MILC tech seemed to have had much minimised). We can't even really do a 'OVF vs EVF' battle anymore because in the MILC world that tech experience is far and wide. Experiencing MILC on a X-S10 or X-Pro 2 vs Sony A1... night and day difference.

It feels like to this tog at least, those that want OVF now are being stubborn or purist, similar to those still wanting to shoot film when digital exists. And I am ok with this! Film is different, the OVF is different. And there are many shooting scenarios where all the perks of MILC and EVF do not matter! I am a champion of choice, always and want to see Pentax stick around.

Sadly tho, it does seem like Pentax's future market is shifting and I am no longer their client. I'm not even opting to leave Pentax, they are leaving me. When I bought the K-50, it was a bargain, feature rich entry system compared to other entry level DSLR's. K-1 was not only the cheapest full frame system I could buy at the time but was feature packed! The only downside was that AF stuff, fps and buffer. If you could live with that... what a camera, what a deal! KP... omg... best $900 I ever spent. 15,000 shutter actuations and 3yrs later, sold it for $650. Best $250 I ever spent!

But now... eek! Pentax is pricey, and Fuji is actually the budget brand. I'm just not a winner at life, I seek out value the most, otherwise I'd already own 2xA1


If I have one gripe with Pentax it is that they do not get the respect in the industry as much as they probably should, but that is down to the bread and butter operations of their cameras being always significantly behind the rest. I think the company and future of Pentax would look quite different if their K-1 was on a D850 level of AF, fps, buffer. The KP at a D500 level and that the new K3III something entirely new, something no company had yet achieved with the DSLR (because they all left and went MILC). But the truth hurts and in 2022 Pentax they still haven't caught up to where their competitors last left off with their DSLRs. *insert hard to swallow pill here.

Pentax are weird, they are great innovators, but it doesn't feel like it has much to do with the mirror per se. Pixelshift, Astrotracing and now even GPSless Astrotracing, brilliant nerdy stuff But it won't help them if they cannot fix the core problems with their cameras and get it to a place that actually were to prevent DSLR users of days gone by abandoning them. And moving forward... who now is choosing DSLR tech over MILC. They are becoming niche of a niche, which is fine and I support that, but it's not me, my job demands better tools and my comfort experience matters not, nor will my pockets be deep enough to even entertain future Pentax offerings. K-1 was $2300AUD when i bought it in 2018. It sits now at $3300AUD! K3III $2800! I am scared for the pricetag of a K-1iii... and that's when I know I am checking out.

It was fun whilst it lasted.