Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
05-09-2009, 07:08 PM   #271
Veteran Member
mattdm's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Boston, MA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,964
QuoteOriginally posted by darthku Quote
My first DSLR was the K10D and now I have a K20D. Recently, I bought a used 40D because I was interested in the 70-200 f/2.8 IS USM lens (BTW... that lens is AWESOME). I can honestly say Canon's AF system is just better than the Pentax system. When comparing SDM to USM, SDM takes longer as it kind of does a midpoint search for the correct AF. While the Canon swings to the correct AF without having to do any minor adjustments.
This may be true, but I think it's important to add that the difference isn't that significant. I have a K10D which I typically use with the DA 40mm Limited. I have a friend who is a Canon shooter, and I've borrowed his 30D with 24-70mm f/2.8 L and 70-200mm f/2.8 L lenses.

Now, of course the lenses aren't even apples to watermelons (and no question that's one of Pentax's fastest AF lenses), and granted that's a slightly-older Canon, but basically, the difference in focus speed isn't appreciably different, even in low light. (In fact, my K10D with that lens is significantly more capable in low light than his previous EOS 10D with the Canon f/1.4 50mm.)

None of this is measured, but I've used both enough to be sure of my assertion. If you can measure a difference, it's not enough to matter. The important exception is that the Pentax AF-C mode can't track a kid running towards me to save its life, while the Canon can.

(Those Canon zoom lenses are gorgeous, by the way. Even if I do prefer primes for my own use.)

05-10-2009, 04:47 AM   #272
Veteran Member
palmor's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: North of Boston, MA
Posts: 798
QuoteOriginally posted by mattdm Quote
This may be true, but I think it's important to add that the difference isn't that significant. I have a K10D which I typically use with the DA 40mm Limited. I have a friend who is a Canon shooter, and I've borrowed his 30D with 24-70mm f/2.8 L and 70-200mm f/2.8 L lenses.

Now, of course the lenses aren't even apples to watermelons (and no question that's one of Pentax's fastest AF lenses), and granted that's a slightly-older Canon, but basically, the difference in focus speed isn't appreciably different, even in low light. (In fact, my K10D with that lens is significantly more capable in low light than his previous EOS 10D with the Canon f/1.4 50mm.)

None of this is measured, but I've used both enough to be sure of my assertion. If you can measure a difference, it's not enough to matter. The important exception is that the Pentax AF-C mode can't track a kid running towards me to save its life, while the Canon can.

(Those Canon zoom lenses are gorgeous, by the way. Even if I do prefer primes for my own use.)
I think Canon must have change the AF between the 30D and 40D then because there is a pretty big difference between my K20 and my 40D in terms of AF speed.


John
05-10-2009, 06:11 AM   #273
Veteran Member
mattdm's Avatar

Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Boston, MA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,964
QuoteOriginally posted by palmor Quote
I think Canon must have change the AF between the 30D and 40D then because there is a pretty big difference between my K20 and my 40D in terms of AF speed.
Maybe. The lenses make a big difference too.

But my essential point is that Pentax isn't a decade behind on this or anything. It's a pretty decent system which could use some updating to keep up, but claims that it's blown out of the water seem exaggerated.

And then of course there's the issue of whether the microadjustments at the end to get correct focus actually help, and I've seen pretty convincing reports that they do. (That is, the slower AF gets you something.)
05-10-2009, 06:51 PM   #274
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
QuoteOriginally posted by mattdm Quote
Maybe. The lenses make a big difference too.

But my essential point is that Pentax isn't a decade behind on this or anything. It's a pretty decent system which could use some updating to keep up, but claims that it's blown out of the water seem exaggerated.

And then of course there's the issue of whether the microadjustments at the end to get correct focus actually help, and I've seen pretty convincing reports that they do. (That is, the slower AF gets you something.)
Care to share those convincing reports?

05-12-2009, 07:32 PM   #275
Veteran Member
danielchtong's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 756
QuoteOriginally posted by pingflood Quote
Care to share those convincing reports?
Of all the images in this and other Pentax forums I believe over 80% are AF shots rather than MF.

And those dirt cheap Pentax MF fast primes have all of sudden been armed with SR - something that Canon does not condescend to bother with.



Daniel
05-12-2009, 08:20 PM   #276
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
QuoteOriginally posted by danielchtong Quote
Of all the images in this and other Pentax forums I believe over 80% are AF shots rather than MF.

And those dirt cheap Pentax MF fast primes have all of sudden been armed with SR - something that Canon does not condescend to bother with.



Daniel
I was referring to the reports that Pentax's AF is "more accurate" -- something that's tossed around quite a bit as an excuse for it being slow. I have yet to see anything that indicates it's more accurate than any other system.

Nobody had mentioned shake reduction, which I agree is an excellent thing -- I can see in lens stabilization being more effective on long glass (where the sensor movement would have to be rather significant to keep up compared to shorter focal lengths) but it definitely would be nice to have in-body as well. But this discussion was about AF performance, so not sure why you decided to sling mud at Canon over that issue...
05-12-2009, 10:58 PM   #277
Pentaxian
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 10,043
QuoteOriginally posted by pingflood Quote
I can see in lens stabilization being more effective on long glass
I have no idea what I did with the files, but when the first SR equipped Pentax was released, I took my trusty 600/5.6 over to the shop to test out SR.
I did a series of handheld shots with the 600, with SR both on and off.
The SR pictures were remarkably sharp, the non SR pictures were as one would expect.
I was pretty impressed.
05-12-2009, 11:28 PM   #278
Senior Member




Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 102
QuoteOriginally posted by pingflood Quote
I was referring to the reports that Pentax's AF is "more accurate" -- something that's tossed around quite a bit as an excuse for it being slow. I have yet to see anything that indicates it's more accurate than any other system.
Canon 40D vs. Pentax K20D - from a wildlife photography perspective: Pentax SLR Talk Forum: Digital Photography Review

Prog.

05-13-2009, 09:42 PM   #279
Veteran Member
OregonJim's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon
Posts: 1,329
Interesting review. I've no experience with Canon DSLRs, but I suspect you could replace 'Canon' with 'Nikon' in that review and still have a rather accurate assesment.

I've said before that I don't use AF, but it's not because Pentax is too slow. It's because I got used to MF while using Nikon and now prefer to shoot that way. There were too many OOF shots in medium-to-low light with the D80 and D50 for AF to be worth the lost images. Not quite 50% as the reviewer found with the 40D, more like 10-20% - but still way too high to be acceptable.

Also, the whole concept of having to select a focus point or, worse yet, letting the camera auto-select, seems like unnecessary complication. Either give me one, *really good* focus point in the center, or track my eyeball and set the focus point to where I'm looking. The current AF systems, regardless of brand, are not flexible or accurate enough to replace the traditional manual method, IMO.

Last edited by OregonJim; 05-13-2009 at 09:49 PM.
05-14-2009, 04:22 AM   #280
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
One odd thing is that Canon DID have the eyeball tracking on some film cameras, but it never made it to the DSLRs. I wonder if they're just waiting to re-introduce it as a selling point once they run out of other ideas to convince people to upgrade.
05-14-2009, 07:28 AM   #281
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 975
as far as i remember, they kind of screwed up with that feature, perhaps that's why they gave up on it. for many people it didn't work, or it was unreliable, and those people were frustrated about it (and, as we have seen even here many times, it's sometimes not enough that you can disable it if it's no good for you )
05-14-2009, 09:12 PM   #282
Veteran Member
res3567's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Houston Tx.
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,876
QuoteOriginally posted by pingflood Quote
One odd thing is that Canon DID have the eyeball tracking on some film cameras, but it never made it to the DSLRs. I wonder if they're just waiting to re-introduce it as a selling point once they run out of other ideas to convince people to upgrade.
Yea.

It was called "Eye Controlled Focus"

The A2, ELAN and one of their top tier pro models had it.
05-15-2009, 04:30 AM   #283
Veteran Member




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Borås, Sweden
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,165
QuoteOriginally posted by nanok Quote
as far as i remember, they kind of screwed up with that feature, perhaps that's why they gave up on it. for many people it didn't work, or it was unreliable, and those people were frustrated about it (and, as we have seen even here many times, it's sometimes not enough that you can disable it if it's no good for you )
It worked well enough for many people that I suspect they just bagged it for now and are waiting to bust it out when they run out of ideas for the next prosumer models.
05-15-2009, 08:06 AM   #284
Veteran Member
OregonJim's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Willamette Valley, Oregon
Posts: 1,329
QuoteOriginally posted by pingflood Quote
It worked well enough for many people that I suspect they just bagged it for now and are waiting to bust it out when they run out of ideas for the next prosumer models.
No doubt Canon has patented the idea, which means we're unlikely to see it in the Pentax lineup anytime soon. That's OK with me, though - I'm perfectly happy with MF - somehow it helps me to mentally 'zone in' on my shots better anyway.
05-24-2009, 09:33 PM   #285
Forum Member




Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Moline, IL
Posts: 79
QuoteOriginally posted by aamir515 Quote
I do not post very often but I do visit the forum almost everyday... and boy am i sick of people complaining about AF speed.... we all do research before we buy the cameras and I am sure you all did too and you knew that Pentax is not known for AF speed... so plz, if you bought it knowing that it would not work as good as other dslrs, stop whining and please change your system.... go with the big boys.... leave us alone.... i believe most of us are very happy with the AF speed....
peace...
I hate to poop on your thread, I usually refrain from such a thing.

But let's face the facts here. The Pentax FSLRs from approximately 10 years ago would absolutely SLAUGHTER my *istDL in the AF department, in both speed and accuracy. I recall playing with an SF-1 some years ago, a camera that is now probably more than twenty years old and its AF was roughly equal to my *istD's AF performance in general, though even it was noticeably better in low light. Scratch that - it's leaps and bounds better in low light. I can typically focus with my ME Super faster than the *istDL will in low light, if it even focuses at all.

Based on that, I suspect most of the complaints are along the lines of "WTF is up with THAT, Pentax!?"

Just my .02.

edit: I now see that this thread is older than the internet but I'll leave my .02 anyway. Note to self: dont't reply to a long thread when tired -_-

Last edited by Volvo244T; 05-24-2009 at 09:40 PM.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
af, camera, dslr, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
KX complaints-soft pics-SR issues-etc harleynitelite Pentax DSLR Discussion 4 01-20-2010 10:33 PM
Ebay complaints Jim Ryan General Talk 11 10-09-2009 11:01 AM
K10D complaints/K20D fixes codiac2600 Pentax DSLR Discussion 46 02-12-2008 02:47 AM
sick wildherre Post Your Photos! 6 02-23-2007 04:06 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:31 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top